Board of Commissioners - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you. you you you Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. you you

For a written transcript of this meeting, or if you need reasonable accommodations, including this communication in an alternative format due to disability, please contact the clerk to the commission's office at 404-612-8232.

All right, good morning. Call the meeting to order. This is the first regular meeting, actually the only meeting of the Board of Commissioners in July. Today's July 15th, it's 10.01 AM. Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Chairman Rob Pitts.

Present.

Commissioner Bridget Thorne. Present. Commissioner Bob Ellis.

Present.

Commissioner Dana Barrett. Present. Commissioner Marvin Arrington, Jr. Vice Chair Khadijah Abdul-Rahman. Mr. Chairman, you have a quorum.

Thank you, Madam Clerk. All right, please rise for the invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

Let us pray. Almighty God, we give thanks for this day for your grace and your mercy. We pray now your blessing upon this assembly. Give them your health and strength. It is in your name we humbly pray.

Amen. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Does this have an echo? No? It sounds like it, all right. Continue, Madam Clerk.

On page two, consent agenda. 260376, adoption of the consent agenda. All matters listed on the consent agenda are considered routine by the county commission and will be acted by one motion. No separate discussion will take place on these items. If discussion of any consent agenda item is desired, the item will be moved to the first regular meeting agenda for separate consideration.

All right, anything on the consent agenda? Nothing, commissions, no? All right, entertain a motion. Motion to approve by Commissioner Thorne, seconded by Commissioner Ellis. Please vote.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, four yays, zero nays. On page five. First regular meeting agenda, 260390, adoption of the first regular meeting agenda. Mr. Chairman and members of the board, we have one amendment to today's agenda. On page five, item to be revised, 260392, presentation of proclamations and certificates. This item is revised to include a proclamation recognizing Gilbert Young Appreciation Day, sponsored by Vice Chair Abdulrahman and Chairman Pitts.

All right, anything else? Any other items?

All right, motion to adopt by Commissioner Thorne, seconded by Vice Chair Abdur-Rahman.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, four yays, zero nays.

I vote yes.

Five yays, zero nays with Chairman Pitts. 260391, ratification of minutes. First regular meeting minutes, June 3rd. Second regular meeting post-agenda minutes, June 17th. And second regular meeting minutes, June 17th, 2026.

All right, motion to approve by Commissioner Barrett, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, five yays, zero nays. Continue. 260392, Presentation of Proclamation and Certificates. The first proclamation is recognizing National Probation and Parole Week sponsored by Commissioner Barrett with full BOC support.

All right, if I could have everybody from the parole office, or the probation office rather, from the juvenile court come down please to join us. I do want to say that our, before we get started on the proclamation, that our juvenile court does such great work for the community. They're so caring. I've never had any interaction with anybody in the juvenile court administration that isn't just really genuinely concerned about children and families and doing Their work with that in mind, so I'm very pleased and proud to have you all here today it is my honor to bring this proclamation and I know the rest of the board Certainly, I don't speak for them, but I know everybody agrees with me on this so I All right, welcome again, everybody. Here we are, and the proclamation reads, whereas National Probation and Parole Week provides an important opportunity to recognize the vital contributions of probation officers and to raise awareness of the essential role they play in the juvenile and criminal justice systems, And whereas community supervision serves as an essential alternative to incarceration by holding young people accountable for their actions while accessing treatment and rehabilitation programs and maintaining meaningful family connections. And whereas the probation department of the Fulton County Juvenile Court provides community supervision and uses evidence-based practices to reduce recidivism, strengthen families, and foster safer, healthier communities throughout Fulton County. And whereas the success of community supervision in Fulton County is a direct result of the skill and dedication of its probation officers and the collaborative efforts of community partners, treatment providers, and the public, And whereas Fulton County's probation officers are dedicated professionals who carry out their duties with integrity, compassion, and professionalism, often under difficult and potentially dangerous conditions, now therefore be it resolved that the Fulton County Board of Commissioners commends the Fulton County Juvenile Courts Probation Department and probation officers for their commitment to supporting youth, strengthening families, and building safer communities, and does hereby proclaim the week of July 19th through the 25th, 2026 as National Probation and Parole Week in Fulton County.

On behalf of the Fulton County Juvenile Court, I would like to sincerely thank the Board of Commissioners for this proclamation, recognizing our probation department during probation and parole week, especially Commissioner Barrett. Her steadfast support of the work that we do, when we extend an invitation to her, she immediately says yes. Our juvenile probation officers do far more than supervise cases. They serve as mentors, advocates, accountability partners and sources of hope for young people and their families. Every day they work to help youth make better choices, connect families with resources and create opportunities for this lasting change. This recognition is a tribute to their professionalism, compassion and unwavering commitment to public safety and strengthening our community. Thank you all for honoring their service and for your continued support and important work being done on behalf of Fulton County children and their families.

The last proclamation is recognizing Gilbert Young Appreciation Day sponsored by Vice Chair Abdul Rahman and Chairman Pitt.

Mr. Gilbert Young and all of the individuals supporting Mr. Young, who is a Fulton County resident, would like you to come forward. Come on, please, sir. You can come stand next to me, sir. All right. Oh, let's get that. Let's get that. I know you will. And Dave, okay, I want to make sure you are always, thank you, Dave. Gilbert Young, what can I say? I'm going to get into this from my professional side, but Mr. Young is also one of my constituents. And so I'm so excited and with immense pride as you see his work of art that's being held by my colleague, Commissioner Thorne, whereas Gilbert Young is a renowned artist, muralist, art conservator and activist who has spent his lifetime utilizing the canvas as a vehicle for social justice, human connection and a profound celebration of the black experience. And whereas Gilbert's artistic mission is to illustrate black life as a positive form locked in holy matrimony with mankind, and whereas Gilbert is a native of Cincinnati, Ohio, and relocated to Atlanta, Georgia in 1995, where he became artistic director for the International Paint Pals Art Competition in conjunction with the 1996 Olympics. And whereas Gilbert earned international distinction in 2008, as the only artist to paint a portrait of a sitting United States president, titled History Plus Hope Equals Change, which is personally signed by former President Barack Obama. And whereas Gilbert has been named the State of Georgia Artist of the Year, received a Presidential Lifetime Achievement Award, and designed the Salute to Greatness Award for the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolent Change. And whereas this year, Gilbert celebrates his very young 85th birthday, Yes, that is something to clap about. Thank you, thank you. With the debut of an exclusive three-dimensional sculpture titled, He Ain't Heavy, modeled after his iconic painting of the same title. So it is with immense pride that now therefore be it resolved that the Fulton County Board of Commissioners recognize the very young Gilbert Young for his many contributions and dedication to the arts and does hereby proclaim Wednesday, July 15th, 2026 as Gilbert Young Appreciation Day in Fulton County, Georgia. Would you please put your hands together for such a wonderful constituent. And Mr. Young, before you speak, I'm going to ask Dave Manuel because he knows your history as well.

And this is such an iconic moment.

So Dave Manuel, would you please tell everybody who you are even though they don't know who you are? You're the king.

I'm David May. I'm the director of Fulton County Arts and Culture. And I just got a word from Chairman Pitts to be very, very brief. So let me say this. Mr. Young has been an inspiration to not only Fulton County, but the entire United States community. His passion, his commitment, his work, his personality has endured, and we're so honored that he lives here in our county, still working. I think his gallery is on Northside Drive. If you ever get a chance, go by there and see. You'll sit down and talk to him. He's very personal, and I'm just excited to be here to mark this moment for one of our great, true artists. Thank you again.

Well, thank you very much. About, I think it was 78 years ago, I told my grandmother that I was going to be a gay artist, I was going to be famous, and I was going to be rich. Well, two out of three is not bad. I appreciate you guys giving me this award. I was wondering to myself, what does it mean? And here's what I thought of. It is the most humbling experience to get an award for something that you love to do and something that you could do anyway. And to be here in this auditorium, in this day, receiving this award is such a great honor and such a humbling experience. I thank you for keeping one of my dreams alive, and that is notoriety. Thank you.

On page six, public hearings, 260393, public comment. Citizens wishing to participate in public comment will be allowed to appear in person or may choose to participate virtually via Zoom video conferencing by registering on the county website, www.FultonCountyGA.gov. Priority for public comment will be given to Fulton County citizens and those individuals representing businesses or organizations located within Fulton County. Speakers will be granted up to two minutes each. The public will not be allowed to yield or donate time to other speakers. The public comment portion of the meeting will not exceed 60 minutes. In the event the 60 minute time limit is reached prior to public comments being completed, public comment will be suspended and the business portion of the BOC meeting will commence. Public comment will resume at the end of the meeting. Mr. Chairman and members of the board, we will start with the speakers here in Assembly Hall. We have received 11 speaker cards. Will the first six speakers please come forward? L.A. Pink, Leonard Adams, Eric Tatum, Eloisa Cominchi, Maria Guardio, and Steven Dingle.

All right, speakers, you have two minutes. Strike that. When you have 15 seconds left of your two minutes, I'll say 15 seconds, and that will be your clue to begin to conclude your remarks. First speaker.

Absolutely.

Well, we are back. And Rapis, I just wanted to bring some awareness to you because The same thing that you have said for integrity. Remember when you said integrity is what you guys hold? And that very word is now being used to take you out of office. Because there is no integrity in what we just witnessed with your race. There is no integrity in what happened with you, M.O. Ivory. None. But as Fortenstein turns and we continue to just upchuck corruption, you had said years ago, a couple of years ago, that you were doing an investigation for the code of corruption that we had brought to your attention. Whatever happened to that? Because when you said that we were going to get to the bottom of it, now you go out of office and we are not to the bottom of it because the code of corruption have now attacked you. You have said after you lost that it's black girl magic. Are you sure it's not black girl witchcraft? Because what we're about to witness is if Mo Ivory come in here, she already said she's going to take everything to skyrockets with the taxes. We got Dick Anderson. He can't stay out the news. This is some more Fulton Steen files. We continue to just get corruption at the corruption with Fulton Steen. When are we going to put integrity on the ballot? When is that going to just be okay to say that we are clear of that? I know you don't wanna challenge your race, but it needs to be challenged.

15 seconds.

I ain't even gonna take the rest of your time. Challenge it.

good morning leonard adams atlanta resident on the west side business owner on the west side uh 299 joseph lowry uh good morning uh first of all i want to say um keep up the good work you guys are are doing this gentleman's work and that's the job that needs to be done we also need to groom some younger folks to be able to pass this baton of social justice down I'm Leonard Adams. I'm the founder of Quest Community Development Corporation, a 25-year-old nonprofit that specialize in providing housing for the unhoused, those that are living with chronic conditions of mental illness and substance addiction and developmental disabilities. For the last 25 years, we've been serving this very vulnerable population, and we would not be able to serve and build the housing options that we've been able to build over the last 25 years if it wasn't for resources through Invest Atlanta, particularly the TAD allocation district funding that we use in the Westside TAD. It is one of the only source, if not the only source, that's been able for us to use to be able to house individuals with no income to extremely low incomes. So I urge you today to support the TAT extension and be a partner at the table with the other partners that's supporting it at this time. Thank you.

Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Eric Tatum, and I'm one of the candidates for the chairman of this Fulton County Commission. I'm a lifelong Georgia resident and practicing attorney. I'm here today in support of the resolution introduced by Vice Chair Abdur Rahman and Commissioner Ellis regarding the City of Atlanta TADs. Tax allocation districts are a legitimate economic development tool when used as intended. The issue before us today is not whether the TADs should exist, but whether they are being used in a way that benefits all of Fulton County. When a temporary economic development tool becomes a permanent subsidy, it is no longer fulfilling its original purpose. Every public investment must be judged by whether it delivers on its promise and treats taxpayers fairly. For years, the residents of Fulton County have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in the Atlanta TADS with the expectation that those investments would have a defined purpose and a defined lifespan. Extending these districts without meaningful scrutiny, ask the other 14 cities of this county to continue sacrificing valuable resources while receiving diminishing returns. We are one county with 15 cities, one shared infrastructure and one shared future for prosperity. Economic development should strengthen the entirety of the county, not just one jurisdiction, asking the others to carry the load. There's also an important legal principle at stake. These tabs were created with a specific lifespan and any extension deserves rigorous review and an updated baseline that respects both the law and the taxpayers who have funded it. If we're willing to ignore the limits written into law whenever they become inconvenient, then those limits cease to have meaning. Today, I respectfully urge this commission to vote yes on the resolution. Accountability is not anti-Atlanta. It is pro-Fulton County. Let's ensure our investment benefit all residents of all 15 of our cities.

15 seconds.

Again, my name is Eric Tatum. I look forward to serving as the chairman of this commission. God bless you all and God bless Fulton County. Thank you.

Good morning, my name is Dr. Eloisa Clementich and I'm President and CEO at Invest Atlanta. I too just want to take a moment to say thank you. Thank you for the partnership that we've had thus far. We could not do what we're doing and the impact we're making in communities if it wasn't for your support. All I would ask is that we consider this is a partnership and have the opportunity to continue to engage in communication. This item before you was not a request from Invest Atlanta or the city. I would just say that there is an opportunity for us to discuss what the future looks like. We want to come to the table. We want this to continue to be a partnership. And all we're asking is the opportunity to have conversations with you about what the future looks like, how we can ensure delivery of all of these projects to the benefit of all Fulton County residents. So my request today is just that you hold and provide us the opportunity at both Investland and the city to create a win-win situation for all of your residents in Fulton County and the city of Atlanta. Thank you for your consideration.

Good morning, Maria Gaudio. First, election law states that ballots should not be opened or counted until 7 p.m. the evening of the election day. Fulton County has been taking ballots from early voting and opening them every night and counting them at the hub illegally. This has been done, I understand. It's reported by a IT guy named John Ross behind the Plexiglas in what they call the bubble. Somebody told him to do that. It could have only been a combination of Nadine Williams and Sherry Allen. This is highly illegal. Ballots are not to be opened or counted every night two weeks before Election Day. This is so egregious. These two black widow spiders need to be removed while this is investigated. They need to be alleviated from their duties. They saw it going on, if not ordered it to go on, every day during early voting. This is why we don't, another reason we don't have free and fair elections, besides the voter rolls that are never cleaned up. Why are voter rolls never cleaned up? So those dead people and people who have left the state and made-up people can be accessed and ballots made for them. They have plenty of time to do it two weeks before Election Day, and they can set the election any way they want. Nadine Williams and Sherri Allen need to go while this is investigated. Thank you.

All right, good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, and the Board. My name is Steven Dingle. I'm a constituent of Fulton County District 6, and I'm here in the spirit of collaboration. Right now, Southwest Atlanta, where I reside, we're at a crossroads. I know my city council district is in, we do have a tad regarding the mayor's neighborhood reinvestment initiative. That's irrelevant in the sense of how we wanna see our community move forward. I'm working personally to build coalition with the city of East Point, the city of College Park, the city of South Fulton, as well as Southwest Atlanta, because we're all one community as well as one Fulton County. And I wanna see us do well and thrive together. um regardless of how you all vote today that is just a mechanism for how we're going to work but either way the city of atlanta and southwest atlanta specifically is going to work to move forward i hope to have all hands on deck and when i mention those other cities and municipalities i know district 4 doesn't have a representative right now but i'm sure we all see the mess that's happening in college park at east point And due to the fact that those cities touch my city, and I know we're one community, I want to see us all do well together. I know you all don't necessarily have authority over those elected officials and how they behave, but there is some conversations that maybe we can have together to see those cities in our county move forward. So I'm just in here, as the spirit of collaboration, Vice Chair Abdulrahman, I would love to have you more at the table at Southwest Atlanta discussing moving forward, regardless of tax allocation districts or not, commissioner aaron we have a great relationship so i'd love to see you more at the table as well and push southwest atlanta forward but like i said i live on the border of south fulton east point but i'm in southwest atlanta i just want to see all municipalities move forward together so i appreciate you all for your service for your time and i'll connect with you all via email and keep you on the loop as these neighborhood and community meetings are happening as well so i appreciate you all

Last speakers in Assembly Hall, please come forward. Cleary Mahaffey, Mike Johnson, Stephen Emily, Elizabeth Lewis Bailey, and Lenard Slade.

Hi, my name is Clary Mahaffey. I'm a resident of the city of Atlanta in Fulton County. I come before you, we have before you the opportunity to prevent a grave injustice. You know, I grew up in a suburb dominated by Republicans. I watched they defunded schools time and time again. I was homeschooled because my, because the public school, local public school didn't have the money for disability accommodations. I was lucky enough to have a family that could afford that privilege, but not everyone does. In fact, most people don't. I left the suburb the moment I had a chance, the moment I was an adult, to move down to the city of Atlanta. I lived in a roach-infested apartment in West Midtown, and I saw, within 10 years, I saw organic restaurants begin to pop up. You know, all the local places shut down, and soon my rent doubled, I was forced out, and now that building doesn't even exist anymore. I watched the same process happen time and time again. Rich developers come in, they say pretty words about justice, displace working class folks, and replace them with folks with no ties to the community. Why are we giving these developers money to keep doing this? The current form of the TADS claims to set aside funds to prevent gentrification, but this represents less than 1% of the funds set aside, funds taken from our public schools, public schools that could do so much more with that money, so much for the kids here in Fulton County. Please do not rob the future, please do not rob our future to displace the likelihood of residents and working class families. I beg you.

15 seconds.

I beg you, do not extend these unjust TADs. Thank you.

Good morning. Good morning, Commissioner Harrington. My name is Leonard Watkins. I'm the chairman of the NPUL that represents Vine City English Avenue. I'm here to speak about the TAD. You know, just like the fourth time since I've been chairman that I had to come speak. So all I want to say is this. You know, every year for the last 20 years, every time you see a commercial about Atlanta, the first thing you see, first name you hear is MLK. That's the first name you hear. You make millions, if not billions of dollars off Martin Luther King's name. At least. So why is it that Martin Luther King's district and where he lives doesn't get the same infrastructure and the same money as other places? I can literally go down less than a mile from my house and less than a mile from his house and see buildings and infrastructure improvement, but I can't get infrastructure on Sunset Avenue where he lives? Shouldn't Atlanta have the most dynamic MLK Avenue in the world, the birthplace of Martin Luther King? Isn't that what TAD money is for, infrastructure? You can literally drive down MLK, less than a block from Martin Luther King's house, and see the lack of investment. Mr. Ellis, you know that. We don't come and complain about anybody else getting money. But the minute we start getting improvement over there and you start improving infrastructure, people want to come and start talking about taking a tad. So I'm asking you to take a look and to start keep investing over there to get my kids at the HBCU everything that Kennesaw gets, everything that Georgia State gets, everything that Emory gets because we've earned it. The last thing I wasn't gonna speak on is this. There are fair elections, period. Whenever a predominantly black African American, I got it. 15 seconds. African American county starts voting their own way, people wanna start talking about election fairness. The elections are secure and have been. So stop the lies, period.

Next speaker.

How y'all doing? My name is Steven Imel. I live in Old Fourth Ward. I didn't write a speech today because I've been talking about the TADs for a while, and honestly, I'm kind of tired of writing about them. The NRI that the mayor put on top of the TADS is a joke, a sham. It's not developed with community in mind. It was developed as a way to pass the TADS. It wasn't a way to bring people in. It doesn't include community voices and neighbors. It sets up new systems to allow the mayor and other people to appoint people to those commissions to hide the process and make sure that they don't have a voice. The TADs may do some good, but objectively, they do not bring the community into that good. They do not allow the community to participate and have a voice and a say in what happens to the places that they call home, the places that they live. And it just simply is not equitable. It doesn't produce good outcomes in the long term. I am asking today that y'all, the piece of legislation in front of you that says that you oppose the TADs as written by the city, that you approve that legislation. I believe that the city needs to come back to the table and start again because the NRI and the TADs as written are not good legislation. Thank you.

Do I just start? Yes. Okay, hi, my name is Elizabeth Louise Bailey. I'm a resident of Atlanta, Southwest Atlanta, Fulton County. So I came here to oppose the TADS. I hear a lot of people talking more broadly about Fulton County, saying that this money should be distributed evenly throughout places. I think a lot of Atlantans, our issue with the TADs are, how is this money being spent? How are our taxpayer dollars actually helping the communities that it pretends to serve? By taking taxpayer dollars and putting it into a private-public partnership that we don't have oversight over, that is a problem. So through a quick Google search, I was able to see that Atlanta Public Schools since 1999 has lost close to $1 billion in funding. This is especially relevant since, as we all know, they are closing or repurposing 16 Atlanta Public Schools. This is due to maintenance needs. That is money that could have very well been spent to help serve the students in the communities. Five of these schools are in TAD districts that are closing. How is that helping Atlanta public students? I would argue that it is not. Really overall, like I believe in public education that has to be funded. We cannot continue to increase property taxes and not directly give that money to the public school district that deserves it. I believe in public education. I believe that you all do too. Please do not extend the TADS. Thank you very much.

Good morning, commissioners. Mike Johnson, South Fulton. The purpose of me coming down here today, I'm not really sure exactly what you guys may or may not be able to do to assist in my immediate concerns or issues. But my immediate concern or issue is dealing with one of the candidates that's seeking the seat to be held here on the Fulton County Commissioner Board District 5. That person is Helen Zenobia Lewis Willis. I don't know what type of check and balances you guys have in place to keep this particular individual from abusing our tax dollars in the unfortunate event that she do become the next commissioner, which I am doing everything in my power to stop. We have been faced in South Fulton with continued abuse where P cards to the whole nine yards. I'm hoping that the city of the fourth and county commissioner have stronger checks and balances where I see the manager Sharon D. Subedan has chose to turn a blind eye. I'm hoping someone here do more than a quid pro quo. Allow someone to abuse the taxpayer's dollars for a raise. Yes, she did receive a $300,000-plus contract extension here within the last couple months. I got a serious problem with it. I really do hope if this individual are to make it to this board that each of you guys know exactly who it is seeking to be sitting on this particular board. In my personal opinion, she should be disqualified based on the... The ethics and the violations that have continued to happen.

15 seconds.

Yes, sir. The violations that continue to happen, and I'm going to sing it to the rooftop to anybody that'll hear. Did GBI or someone else need to be involved with this? Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, members of the board, we have five speakers on Zoom.

Good morning, commissioners. The first person to speak is Robbie Caban.

Hello. Good morning. My name is Robbie Caban. I'm a Fulton County taxpayer. I've advocated for Fulton County Animal Services, a taxpayer-funded facility, over a decade. We are again formally requesting an independent forensic audit of Fulton County Animal Services lifeline animal projects, taxpayer-funded contracts, expenditures, contractor performance, data, and county oversight, not another internal review. Every commissioner has received emails documenting the lack of prevention, follow-up, and enforcement, or lack of enforcement. Cats and kittens are multiplying scavenging with no coordinated field TNR trap neuter release response. Puppies were apparently being sold from vehicles out of Camp Creek, called in, multiple calls, no response, no animal control officer called back under the Fulton County Sheriff's Division. In fact, we were told by dispatch that may not be illegal. I repeatedly reported dogs that is now being rehomed. The responsible person for that dog states that for nearly two years, the dog is not fixed, not registered, and has no documented rabies vaccination. This is all detailed in emails to you and the county manager. This is nonsensical. Fulton County taxpayers are paying millions, millions, millions to operate overcapacity shelter systems where healthy animals are being euthanized. But under taxpayer dollars, while animals outside the shelter continue multiplying, the supply will never end if we do not prevent. There's a conflict of interest. You cannot euthanize, transport, or fundraise your way out of overpopulation, animal overpopulation. Prevention has to be priority. I also loaned Fulton County Animal Services personal humane traps worth $150 each. They have not been returned, and despite repeated requests, I cannot get a response from the shelter director, Audrey Shoemaker, who's a Lifeline employee. The detailed documentation is in your emails. Please read it. Please respond. We are requesting an independent forensic audit, an independent... 15 seconds. ...reform task force, because the board is compromised and people have stepped down, and they have emailed you and said so. Thank you.

The next person to speak... Excuse me for a second. The next person to speak is J.W. Grenadier.

Hello?

We can hear you.

You can hear me? Okay. Good morning, Fulton County Commission. My name is Janice Wall Grenadier, and I am the founder of Judicialpedia.com, my jurisprudence and nonprofit that is dedicated to judicial education and access to justice and national prayer across America, where we have prayed in front of 25 Supreme Courts. I am speaking today because deed theft and property fraud are not isolated problems. Across the country, homeowners have raised concerns about forged documents, questionable assignments, record-keeping errors, and foreclosure practices that can leave families feeling they never received a full and fair opportunity to protect their homes. Atlanta has a unique opportunity to lead. The documents created out of Georgia with docs and others are being used by the major law firms such as Troutman Pepperlock and financial institutions like Wells Fargo Bank and others. And the businesses that influence real estate and foreclosure matters are based there. With the leadership comes an opportunity to promote transparency accountability and public confidence in our legal system the government especially the senate banking commission in 2022 did a letter to jamie dimon robo signing is illegal it was illegal in 2000 yet yet our government instead of holding the banks and lawyers accountable they bailed them out financially and it appears from the reporting over 5 000 bankers got 1 million dollars or more in bonuses while americans all across the united states lost their homes on fraudulent documents created in Georgia through docs and other places. I am not asking the city council to decide private legal disputes. I am asking you to recognize that protecting property rights in the government's oldest and most important decisions need to be enforced. We need to protect our families. We need to protect our citizens. God bless Georgia and God bless the United States of America. Thank you.

The next person to speak is Janet Hill.

Good morning. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Good morning. This is Ms. Hill, again, an advocate for deed theft in Fulton County. I wanted to just remind the commissioners that you have a responsibility under your oath of office to obey the laws and obey the Constitution. I want to highlight a timeline of how egregious these deed theft crimes are. In 2010, there was a congressional report that shows that over 33 million properties were forged by robo-signing. In 2012, a company owner in Georgia was indicted with criminal charges for perjury, forgery, and wire fraud. In 2022, the U.S. Senate in Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs signed a letter acknowledging this robust signing is still ongoing. And that includes our current senators, Warnock and Ossoff. In 2022, there was a DOJ federal settlement that was for, focused on this ongoing foreclosure fraud and related crimes, where the state of Georgia received $800 million to address this issue, and it's still ongoing. In 2023, to this date, there have been multiple de-theft crimes, actions, and notices by the federal FBI. We want our property- 15 seconds, ma'am. We want our stolen properties returned. We want prosecution, and we want you to personally stop taking advantage of persons.

Next person to speak is Alonde LeGrand.

Good morning. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Yes, good morning. My name is Alondra LeGrand. I speak before you as the Chief Operating Officer of Stop D-Def Organization. I'm the co-founder of People's Coalition of Stop D-Def and the director of the nonprofit No Family Left Behind. D-Def is not just a property crime. It is an economic crime against families, neighborhoods, and our nation. It destroys generational wealth, This places homeowners, destabilizes community, and widens the wealth gap so that many have spent generations trying to overcome. Its victims are overwhelming minorities, seniors, working families, the middle class, and everyday people who have done everything society asks of them. They worked hard, they paid their mortgages, raised their children, and hoped to leave something behind instead of many of them left fighting to prove they own what already is theirs. While families struggle to survive in this economy, private developers and bad actors too often profit from fraudulent transfers, legal maneuvering, and delayed justice. Too often, they have access to teams of attorneys, financial resources, and institutional support that ordinarily homeowners simply cannot match. When courts fail to recognize fraud or when public agencies fail to act despite evidence, The consequences reach far beyond one family. They send a message. That disputes and can be rewarded with truth, weight, and time, and weights in line. This impact is already being felt across New York City, my city, throughout New York State, and increasingly across America. This is not about real estate. It's about justice. It's about preserving homeownership. protecting communities and restoring public confidence in the rule of law equally to everyone. Enough is enough. We must have an accountability.

The next person to speak is David Garcia. David Garcia. The next person to speak, excuse me. Next person to speak is Jen Simmons. Jen Simmons. Next person to speak is Lola Potter. Lola Potter. The next person to speak. I do believe that is it.

Thank you.

Continue, Madam Clerk.

Continuing on page six, County Manager's Items under Justice and Safety, 260394, July 2026, Justice System Update.

Good morning, commissioners. Steve Narocki, strategy office. If we could please pull the justice system update up. And while we're pulling that up, Mr. Chairman, if all right with you, we did want to start with the hiring update for the sheriff's office. I know that's a dedicated item on the agenda later, but start with that because it is part of our justice report. Then move to the update on the five point plan for jail reduction initiatives. And then after that, if there are any questions with the rest of the report on justice updates, I'm happy to answer that. So if I'm right with you, Mr. Chairman, that's the order we'll take this in?

Yes.

Okay. Could we please go to slide 15, and I will turn it over to Mr. Ken Herman to walk us through that. Ken.

Thank you very much, Steve. Good morning, commissioners. Kenneth L. Herman, Jr., chief HR officer. On your screen and before you this morning is an updated data set of the activities that we're seeing within the sheriff's office on hiring of sworn detention and deputies within the jail units. for the month of, oh wait, sorry, I think that's the wrong one. There's an error. Steve, I thought we, that July number is incorrect. Yeah, we sent a corrected.

Is there a corrected version? We did update this slide on Monday or Tuesday of this week.

But while we get the correct slide, let me just make the corrections, commissioners. For July, while I had hope, that 25 number was accurate. After some additional research of the data, that 25 number included a number of administrative transactions that also occurred on the July 1st effective date. with other hires. There were administrative transactions as a change in a supervisor, someone got promoted, and some other issues. So that's why that number is incorrect. The true number of hires, of new hires in the jail is a total of 10 for the month of July so far. So I apologize that the incorrect data set still made it to the public presentation. While that is still slightly below what we're anticipating for hires on a monthly basis to hit our quarterly number of 50, it is a great improvement to where we are. From what I'm seeing in the system, while these 10 are solid hires that started on the first, the data also suggests that there are nine individuals that are slated to start today. So once they fully get in through our hiring system, we should be on track to be right above the 15 per month that we need to address in order to hit the 50 per quarter, which is what our goals are. So fingers crossed that we can continue on that trend. And I know with what our vendor, the Walls Group, and the sheriff have done to make some modifications to the hiring process and adding additional staff. I know the sheriff added two investigators to help move the process through. We're hoping that the third quarter will be the first quarter that we achieve close to the 50 hires. Additionally, commissioners, the second chart is more of a detail as to what we're actually receiving from the WALS group themselves. And again, if you track to the month of July, you'll see that WALS, that eight new hires directly from WALS candidates is a good trend. Again, it's the highest that we've seen. come through their pipeline, and we're hoping that that trend continues for the balance of the third quarter. Before I pause for questions, at the last meeting there were some questions that the board asked me to go back and research, and I have that data for you. One of the questions was, Before we engage with walls, what was the average hiring timeline for the sheriff's office? So what the HR department did, we went back and looked at the hiring timeline for 2025 for sworn officers in the jail unit. And we came up with a number. And how we came to this number is from the time the person applied for the job to the time that they were actually working at the jail. sorry, appointed into the position, and we came up with a number of 126 days. That was the average prior to walls for the entire 2025. And if you recall, at the last meeting I told you that we were trending at 136 days since WALS. But I did a little bit more digging and I saw that if you separate out just total hiring and just focus on the WALS candidates, some good news that I can give you commissioners, and I gave the sheriff this morning, that just for the walls candidates from the beginning of this year to where we are now they're averaging about 87 days which is about 17 days beyond the county's benchmark of 60 which is a good thing so we're getting a lot more throughput from the walls candidate through their process and interacting with the sheriff but we still see opportunities to make improvement there Additionally, there were some questions about when the sheriff actually approved the issuance of the bonus to his staff. And based on a timeline that I was able to gather from my emails and communication with Mr. Schultz, the chief of staff in the sheriff's office, The Board of Commissioners approved the retention bonus and the sign-on bonus and the transportation allotment to those officers on February 4th. There's a lot of conversation between the Sheriff's Office and HR and Legal where we modified the bonus form to include the 36-month requirement, and the final communication apparently went out to the officers Circa 3.30 of March 30th went out to all the communication to all the eligible officers relative to the bonus being available and how they needed to sign the retention bonus forms to get that. and last there was a question about what were some of the rationale or reasons given by the sheriff for disqualifying applicants that he has received from walls and i shared with the board of commissioners that detailed letter that the sheriff provided but just in general so at the time of when the sheriff provided that information he had received 195 candidates from walls of which 105 had been disqualified. And the reasons given by the sheriff for disqualifications is candidate disengagement, meaning that the candidate withdrew from the process. Unstable or problematic employment history, where in the sheriff's opinion, too many jobs meant that the person wasn't a stable candidate for the role. a failing of polygraph, a failing of drug testing, a secondary review or a deeper dive that showed that criminal history did exist, and several candidates also lost the opportunity due to the physical agility. And since then, the sheriff has modified his physical agility requirements to allow more candidates to get through, but also intends to work with them through the process. So maybe that's accounting to why we're seeing higher numbers coming in for the first quarter, I mean, the first month in the third quarter. I'll stop there and take any questions that you may have, commissioners.

Commissioner Ellis.

I think I was looking for, so these are the accurate numbers, is that correct? Correct.

Yes, this is the corrected slide.

Okay, question on, well are they or are they not? We still have a TBD noted in that July separation bucket. That's correct.

That was just, we did not have those numbers when we had to submit the board package last week.

Okay, but below, okay, all right, okay. So the net new we have is, our goal is 200, correct? Correct. It's July 9th, and we're at 25. Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you for providing the average days of hiring. Those, just so I understand it, those are for folks, average hiring time for folks who are specifically doing this type of work, right? Not in the sheriff's office.

Yes, we only focus on deputies and detention officers that work within the jail units.

Okay. It might be interesting to also understand... what those measurements are for, in the Sheriff's Department, outside of these jail detention rules. Can we determine that?

Yes, I can go back and include the entire population in my assessment.

And then do one with and without. I'm specifically interested in this sort of non-detention population to see if... see if the sort of same issue exists, you know, maybe indicative of two different screening practices for different types of individuals or not. So things like, you know, I guess in that reasons why somebody would be disqualified would be things like They have existing criminal indictments against them, that kind of thing?

Correct.

Okay. All right. Just curious on that. All right. All right. Thank you.

Commissioner Thorne.

Thank you. So the net new hires is 25. Could be less due to separations that we're not aware of?

Correct, Commissioner.

And our goal should be 50 as of July 1. So we're... Halfway to our?

No, our goal.

Oh, per quarter's 50. Per quarter's 50. So it should be 100.

Yes.

So we should be at 100 net new hires, and we're not. Correct. Yeah, I appreciate the amount of detail that you've provided us. In a meeting with the sheriff yesterday, he expressed a dislike for Wall's group. Do you understand any of his frustrations? Has he spoken to you directly about that?

That is new information to me, Commissioner.

Okay, and then he also said that the success that the Walls Group had in recruiting in Philadelphia is completely different than our situation here in Fulton County. Are you aware what those differences might be?

Yes. When this issue came up about a month or so ago before the Board of Commissioners asked, the Walls Group did do, let's say, a side-by-side comparison of what they encountered in Philly and what they're dealing with here in Fulton County. And they did identify some key areas where if there were some modifications to our process or our process was more detailed than Philadelphia, that led to either a slowing of hiring or a bottleneck in the process. Specifically, they pointed out that the reference checks that the sheriff's office does was not one that is done in the Philadelphia, which led to more candidates being weeded out and a bottleneck. Additionally, the employment verification was also something that they thought was problematic that they saw versus Philly, versus what we do. Again, the sheriff conducts a very detailed and comprehensive, I think a 10 to 15 year look back of someone's employment history. That was not something that was done within the Philadelphia area. They suggest that the Philadelphia interview process relied heavily on what Walz did on their interview side, but they're seeing that the sheriff is duplicating that effort on his side. So we're interviewing candidates doing our verification and the sheriff's office is going back and doubling up on that. So it's a duplication and effort and redundancy. And those are some of the major things that they pointed out to. And then another one was was the The polygraph was not required in Philadelphia. The sheriff has held on to that process. Oh, and then the one thing that they did point out to at the time in their report that has now been rectified was the number of investigators. They said Philadelphia had five to eight investigators doing their background check. The sheriff only had two. But to my knowledge, I think the sheriff has added an additional two to help with the throughput. And those are some of the major things that were pointed out by Wal's group as to the differences between Philadelphia and the Fulton County engagement.

Okay, because we hired the walls group as commissioners because we saw the need the crisis that exists in our jail situation and the need for more detention officers. But the sheriff, I'm glad he doubled his number of investigators to try to speed along the process. That's very helpful. But are there any other actions the sheriff is doing as far as recruitment to really expand his recruitment, change his process, despite having the Walsh Group?

Well, the biggest change, of course, has been the removal of the physical agility. That was weeding out a number of individuals from the process, and we acknowledge that even for the current officers, physical agility is a one-time examination and never tested again. So is it something that is really a determinant as to whether or not that individual would be a great detention officer or a great deputy? So he has removed that requirement. So that's a big step to allow more individuals through the process and also shortens the period of time as well.

But I think he added the lie detector test recently, like in the past. Are you hired a full-time polygrapher?

He may have hired a full-time polygrapher, but I think the polygraph has always been part of his process. So he might have added another polygrapher on top of what he might have had, correct?

Okay, so the Walls Group was recommended by our monitor. We're trying to get out of the consent decree. So we're trying to do and appease the monitor. In the event that the sheriff decides that he just doesn't wanna work for the Walls Group, do we have any other avenues? Does he have any other avenues to help this desperate situation that we're in in hiring detention officers?

That I do not know, Commissioner, but I'll tell you right now, if that decision is made by the sheriff and communicated to the leadership team of Fulton County, the first avenue that we will definitely stand back up is AHR will stand back up and start again to provide the sheriff with candidates just like we've historically done. And I'm sure also working with legal and the monitor to try and find another vendor because we believe the vendor has a lot more nimble process than what we have and could get a lot more throughput and interactions. But definitely if that decision is made, AHR will stand up and then once we find out if we go another vendor route, then the other vendor will be selected.

Okay, thank you for that. I appreciate your presentation today.

Thank you. Commissioner Barrett.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On the discussion about what was different from Philadelphia to Fulton County, you know, while I certainly appreciate you, you know, giving us the list Justifications that the walls group has provided as to why the numbers are not. Up to what we would have hoped that's great, but I think the point in I was in the same meeting yesterday with the sheriff's office and. I think what they were getting at is that the environment was, the underlying environments are different. Not the maintenance of the jail, I'm not talking about that, but rather that Philadelphia, and you can correct me if this is not right, but what they were saying is that Philadelphia is unionized, for one, and so the benefits and the union protections are sort of more appealing and sort of bring candidates to them in a way that we don't have as a non-unionized state. jail and on top of that and maybe the bigger advantage that walls group had in the quality of applicants that they were getting in Philadelphia is that prior to this engagement they had a restriction on residency that if you were going to be a detention officer in their jail you had to live in Philadelphia And that had been lifted. And so there were a host of qualified candidates from further afield in the Philadelphia, the greater Philadelphia metropolitan area, who became available and were interested in working there. So there was sort of a pool of more highly qualified candidates because of that scenario. You know, whether or not that's accurate, I think, is, you know, I'm certainly open to hearing your thoughts if you have any on it, but I think at the end of the day, what they are saying, or what the Sheriff's Office was putting forth, was this idea that we were sort of led as a board of commissioners, in part by the consensus decree administration that they were able to bring in these massive numbers of people in Philadelphia and would be able to do the same thing here. And I think what the Sheriff's Office was getting at was that the conditions are not the same. And again, not the building, but the environment, the area conditions are not the same in terms of availability of more qualified candidates. So just for clarification on that. The other question I had is on the chart, on the second chart, the top line, the all-time walls pipeline, that was brought to our attention in the meeting as well as being inquiries, not applicants, is that correct?

From my understanding, this is interactions that walls have with applicants. Now, inquiries, applicants, I don't know if they've never defined the difference between the two, and that's something maybe I can go back. But in there, and this chart is a subset of a much more bigger chart that details from all the different aspects where individuals are weeded out. So I can go back to the walls group and see if there's a need to clarify that top line as to whether it's a inquiry or an actual application. And if it is, then I'll make that modification.

Yeah, I think, I mean, again, this is just what they said in the sheriff's meeting was that they have already asked for that modification. That was their understanding, so I would like some clarification on that. I think it's more relevant for us not how many people asked about the job or looked at it or partially filled out an application, but actual applications because, you know, lots of people might... be curious about a job and not do anything beyond that. So I don't know if that, I find that top line to be somewhat irrelevant anyway, but I do think it is misleading a little bit to the public to, you know, with the sense that there are, you know, 10,000 people who apply for these jobs when I don't think that's, at least based on what they told us in the sheriff's meeting, that may not be accurate. So I just, I'd like to know, you know, a pipeline is a broad term. So I'd like to have a more narrow term and a more real number, I think. If it is applications, then great.

just change the wording and done uh if it's not then let's just get some clarification on the right numbers i will verify that commission and have it updated if necessary for the next presentation thank you so much all right vice chair i'll do rock one thank you chairman um for the listening public uh let me let me say this because i was not i was not going to weigh in on this The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, thinking you're going to get different results. That's the definition of insanity. To take Philadelphia and use it as the litmus for Fullerton County and to try to draw a comparison, well, theirs was successful there and ours is not successful here, and also to clarify, because we want to clarify, at the end of the day, the jail is in crisis. Mr. Herman. We could send 500, Wallace could send 500 applicants over there. I would like a yes or no answer to this question. Ultimately, it's the sheriff who determines who's going to get hired, who's suitable for this jail. Yes or no?

Yes.

You said yes. Yes, he is.

Say it with your chest. Yes. Yes, he is the one who makes the final decision.

So this is why I'm bringing this to the attention of the listening public, of the taxpaying citizens. You want to hold new applicants to a higher threshold than you hold to your staff, allegedly. What do I mean by that? There are people that are in an employer right now in Fulton County Sheriff's Department that could work in nobody else's Sheriff's Department. He knows it and I know it. but that's his choice because he sees the value. However, we know that we have had issues with, we had actually temporary staffing there that had all kind of different dings or whatever, but they were allowed to work at the jail. Law enforcement, correctional, Anything dealing with that field has taken a ding nationally. People have had to re-look, re-event how they look at the model employee. So to hold these individuals to a higher scrutiny than the people that you already have on staff there It don't take a rocket scientist to figure that out, for one. For two, there was a need. Walz, if I'm not mistaken, and any of my colleagues up here can correct me, was one of the ones that the Department of Justice say it was a decent vendor that they had done work with. Now, if I'm wrong, somebody please tell me. The independent monitor says so. OK. So if that's the case, the Department of Justice, the independent monitor basically said Walz was fine. The Department of Justice don't care who don't like who. They don't. They don't care nothing about personal preferences. They care about professionalism. They care about that there's a consent decree. I want to bring it back to the taxpaying citizens of Fulton County. The sheriff needs employees. This board is trying to help him to get employees. If he decides in the middle of the process that the employee needs to drive a blue car instead of a red car in order to have the job, and some may see that as being facetious, what I'm saying, but that's what we're telling our taxpaying citizens. that you have a need on one hand, we are trying to, as a body, I don't care nothing about personal preference, I don't care about who like who, I don't care about any of that. I care about the taxpaying citizen of Fullerton County. What are we doing as a board to help the sheriff get employees? I think the sheriff needs to have a realignment of what he needs as employees. Because to hold these people that are coming from walls to a higher scrutiny than he holds his staff, his working staff right now, is hypocrisy at its best. End of discussion.

All right, Commissioner Barrett.

Thank you. I think that the main area in which that was the case was the physical agility test. Is that correct?

Well, the physical agility was a point of recommendation for modification or elimination because it's a one-time test done.

Right, so that would back up what the vice chair is saying, correct? That if the current staff is not constantly taking a physical agility test once a year or something like that, then the new people are held to a higher standard. But I think he's removing that, correct?

He has removed that, yes. Okay.

The other question I just forgot to ask when I was in the queue earlier was just, there were in the list of reasons why people were not ultimately hired who were sent over, completed packets sent over from the Walz Group. Some of those reasons, we could certainly argue about the polygraph or whatever, but some of them were valid reasons. If someone had a criminal background and that wasn't caught by the Walz Group, that's pretty important. If they were not passing a drug test, things like that. So I'm just wondering, in particular on the criminal background check, if Walls has been able to correct their assessment of that, because that feels like, why would you even be sending somebody through who had a criminal background? So it seems like there's some work to do on their end to tighten up who they're sending over. Would you agree with that, or am I missing something?

And when we were having that discussion about that particular category of rationale, what came out was that walls had done up until what they could do based on the level of access they have to the the various databases that they may have to. But if I remember correctly, the sheriff team said, well, when the sheriff office now comes in and you're sitting across from a sheriff deputy with a badge and it's a little bit more serious and individuals are a lot more truthful and they have a lot more deeper dive into a person's background. So that's why they're able to catch something that walls may have missed. But I do know that they also have modified some of the requirements of walls to ask some very specific questions, again, to pry into and identify those criminal history disqualifiers well in advance before they come to the sheriff's office.

Okay. Listen, I also meant to say when we first started this conversation that I think, you know, it does sound like we've had a lot of issues. Obviously, the numbers show that, that we were hoping to have almost 100 people hired. At this point, we don't. That said, it does seem like with the July numbers and with the changes that we're talking about that have been made on both sides, the Sheriff's side, Wall's side, that we are making progress and moving in the right direction. So just for clarification, do you feel like... in the next quarter we will be on track to have 50.

I'm optimistic that if we stay on track with this 10 hiring for the first week, the first pay period of July, and we even do half of that for the second pay period of July, and we keep that trend to September, we would have achieved our first 50 new hire quarter from the Walls Group as originally contracted. And then, of course, at the same time, we now have to figure out Well, how do we also keep the separations to a minimum or nil that you don't negate, you know, the 50 that you just hired is negated by 50 who have left as well.

And I think when I was asking questions about this last time, I asked about the reasons for the separations, and I think you were going to get that in some form or fashion, is that correct?

Yes, so we got a preliminary report from the sheriff's office late yesterday afternoon in my conversation with the sheriff this morning. He wanted us to have a dialogue about it because it was something that he did not see before it was released. We're convincing him to utilize the county's or HR's official exit interview information where we know he's validated it when we worked with our public service partners to develop our exit interview. So we have a standardized interview and that's something that he's meeting with his team on hopefully today and then we'll share the link and get that information and he has committed to even going back to those individuals that have separated to see if they're willing to provide that insight. And my staff is also committed to do that as well. So hopefully we could have that information or some tidbits of that information based on responses, again, for the next report. But that was a conversation that the sheriff and I had this morning.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Ellis?

Yeah, just a couple points. We contracted with a group who was able to get how many people hired and brought into the jail in a very expedient amount of time? How many people? That are working in the jail with the allied contract? Oh, allied.

Yeah, what's the total number, Steve?

It's about 100 FTEs. 100 FTEs, right. And that got stood up in fairly rapid order. I believe when we ran the job analysis and so forth and the study and so forth, and I think this was confirmed in the monitor's report, that the sheriff's office is actually top-heavy and has hired... more people in non-officer administrative positions, is that correct? That was a finding in our staffing report that was completed. I think the monitor did acknowledge that in the report. I cannot recall. But anyway, it's acknowledged somewhere in one report, one way or the other. And the reason I say that is like, look, there are people out there to hire and so forth. I mean, all this stuff, I mean, People can talk about whatever they wanna talk about, but I've never seen so much excuse-macing on the subject coming around through different third parties as opposed to the person that has responsibility for executing this. We've committed significant funds there. There are people that appear to be out there. Other folks have been able to execute this, third parties would be able to execute in areas outside of this. So this should be something that should be executable and should be happening. And for whatever reason, it's not. And that's not kind of our responsibility to go figure all that out. He's got operational responsibility for hiring. There obviously was a problem in the practice of hiring. That's part of the reason why we got in this consent decree. This is a third party who's come in and said, you need to change your practices, engage somebody. They have been engaged. Bottom line is, we just need to see results. And I'm hopeful that what you're describing, we're gonna start to see that within the next few quarters. And I think that's what we should be concerned about, because we've set up the infrastructure and the funding mechanisms for it to occur. Now it just needs to occur.

Commissioner Errington.

Thank you. I guess I'm wondering, I remember in a previous meeting you said there were 400 hires of detention officers, right?

I think 400, the number 400 is the goal, the overall goal, 200 in this year and 200 next year to get a total of 400 detention officers needed to meet the staffing requirements in the jail.

Okay, and so this chart includes detention officer hires and deputies, or this chart is just for deputies?

Well, it includes deputies and detention officers that are assigned to the jail. Some deputies start their career in the jail, some start in the courts, but we're tracking those individuals that are assigned to the jail units based on their budgetary allocation within the HR system and detention officers.

Okay, so jail unit hiring 19 January, that includes detention officers and deputies.

It was a combination of detention officers and deputies that were holdovers of applicants that were coming through the pipeline before walls was fully engaged and started to provide us with candidates.

Okay, and then this is the updated one that shows the 10, not the 25 now. Yes, correct. And so that 10 includes detention officers as well as deputies.

It was eight detention officers and two deputies that get to the 10.

Okay. That are all in the jail unit. And you anticipate, you said there are another nine coming on today? Or is that nine included in the 10? No.

Or that's in addition to that 10? That nine is in addition to the 10 based on what we're seeing. But I could not come to the board and say that nine is fully on board because they're not in the HR system, which we're using as our baseline. But that's what we're hearing from Walls and the sheriff, that they have nine getting ready to start either to, well, documentation getting ready to be entered with a start date of today or next week. And one thing for the board that, you know, one thing that we have done to make sure that there's no limitations, no impediments to the sheriff office, typically we only allow departments to bring individuals on board on a bi-weekly basis that coincide with our pay, our start, our pay periods. to allow more individuals throughput. The sheriff's office specifically, we have now changed that and modified it just for the sheriff's office that he can bring individuals on board weekly so that there's no telling an applicant, well, you have to wait two weeks to start or anything like that. But that's our way of reacting to ensuring that we move as many impediments out of the way to get these positions filled from an HR perspective.

Okay. And do we know how many I guess of the separations are going to other Fulton County departments like the police or the DA.

No, these are full separations. If they were moving to another department, it would not be captured on our separations report. It would be showing up as a transfer. These are full separations. They have moved on to other opportunities outside of Fulton County.

Okay, so do we know the number of transfers?

I can go in and pull that information if it exists for that period of time, Commissioner.

I think that would be helpful to know as well. The left hand needs to know what the right hand is doing. If, in fact, we are losing sheriff's officers because they're joining the police or going to be an investigator for a DA or solicitor, I think we should be keeping track of that as well. All right, I think that's all that I have for this term.

Did we have any other questions? We're good. Thank you, commissioners.

Is the sheriff here? No?

All right, thank you, Ken. Could we go to the next slide, please? We'll do an update here on our jail population reduction initiatives and I'll just go one by one and give a brief update of the progress we've made over the past month. Starting first with increasing our ankle monitor utilization, we are continuing to see a very positive trend in the utilization. We are now up to 709 monitors, ankle monitors in use as of June 30th and this marks an overall net increase of 108 monitors since March. So good progress there. Next, looking at implementing the automated text reminders. We are nearing completion on this. The clerk's office, Superior Court, and Tyler are just finalizing remaining configurations and process mapping, and this is leading to an expected launch in August. And as a reminder, the first, I don't wanna call it a pilot, but the first group that they're gonna target will be individuals with Superior Court criminal cases, so going after the highest impact. Next, looking at establishing the bond review calendar. Again, very good progress here. First bond review calendar is scheduled for August 30th, which will be presided by a magistrate judge as part of a standing Monday calendar that they have every week. We are gonna start, or they are gonna start with 10 to 15 individuals for the first several weeks, and then just depending on volume and making any adjustments, we would hope to eventually ramp up to 20 to 30 individuals per week. for these bond review calendars. And as a reminder, the criteria for the bond review calendars, it's individuals with a bond of 10,000 or less who have been incarcerated for 90 to 120 days and have a case that would be unindicted. Moving next to our consolidated motions and trial calendar. And again, a reminder here, this consolidated calendar is to attack the more severe crimes, which would equate to individuals which are the longest serving in jail. By quarter four of this year, the consolidated trial calendar, which was monthly, but in Q4 will drop to every other month, and so this initiative would involve funding an additional senior court judge, as well as the rest of that court ecosystem, so courtroom staff, and then proportional increases to both the sheriff, or excuse me, the public defender and the DA's office, as well as sheriff's office for security. And we are collecting, or I should say we are about to finalize what that funding need would be and would anticipate bringing a request to the board post mid-year budget review. Looking next at standing up our diversion hub. And I just wanna clarify from last month, because I know this did get a lot of discussion and debate, From a warrant perspective, the way we're approaching this is the hub would create a space for officers to bring individuals who would have otherwise been sent to the diversion center but could not because they have an existing warrant. And examples of these kind of lower level warrants would be misdemeanor probation issues, technical probation violations, missed court dates leading to a failure to appear, and then pretrial service warrants. And so the plan would be the officer brings the individual to the hub, Our partners with the Georgia Justice Project would work with an on-call state court judge, and that judge would resolve the warrant if they deem it appropriate. And then that hub staff within the hub, if the individual consents, would take them then to the diversion center where they could be connected with programs and services to meet their needs. this individual would remain in the custody of that arresting or that officer that has brought them to the hub. And this would, during that warrant resolution process, again, we're ideally gonna be using an on-call judge, so this process could take 30 to 60 minutes for that resolution process. But that 30 to 60 minutes is less time than it would take to book the individual out of the jail. And so right now for next steps, that standing order is currently being drafted. We're hoping to wrap that up in the next couple weeks. It would then need to go before a state court judge for their adoption by the bench. And then the other area that we are working on right now is the actual physical space of the trailer. It's currently being used by Superior Court's pretrial supervision program, but we have plans in place and have started the space and move planning to relocate those individuals within pretrial services to 515 Fairburn, where we do have vacancy, and other Superior Court programs like Accountability Court is currently being located. So that is in progress right now. And then just getting back to, or I'll shift to the other component of the diversion hub, it'll again serve as a, and this is kind of how we initially started talking about this topic, it's a last chance diversion if an officer did not bring the individual to the diversion center, but it is a divertible charge, it gives just that final opportunity for the officer to take them, take the individual to the diversion center and avoid a bookend at the jail. And then the final item we have here, and again, this is a newer item that I addressed last month, it's use of third party labs by the district attorney's office to help overcome the backlog of evidence processing with the GBI's crime lab. We are looking at three primary types of evidence, and you'll see there on the slide, ballistics, drug testing, and sexual assault. The DA has provided dollar amounts that she's predicting or she's estimating that would be needed both for the remainder of this year and then if you annualize that, as well as what that jail population impact would look like. I do wanna clarify though, the figures represent all of her criminal cases right now, not specific to the jail. I found that out after I had submitted this package, so I am gonna circle back with the DA and just try to understand of the dollar amounts that are being requested for each of the labs and for the impact, what do we anticipate that impact being specifically to our jail population? And with that, I can take any questions.

Commissioner Ellis.

Thanks, Vice Chair. Thanks, Mr. Narocco. Just a few questions. Where we, so we had this in the state legislature, we had this, the passage, I believe, of support for a new Superior Court judge. I know there was questions about, you know, kind of, would the funding mechanism come with it, and all that sort of stuff, but where are we at with that, and then sort of what procedurally could happen with that? And this sort of speaks a little bit to this, you know, the fourth bullet down there. I know it's a different thing, but

Thank you, Commissioner Ellis. So the legislation that created the additional Superior Court judge was contention upon funding in the state's FY27 budget. Unfortunately, that judgeship was not funded in the budget that was passed by the General Assembly this session, but we are working... to revisit that as they take up the amended FY27 budget, which is typically one of the first things, they sometimes call it the baby budget, that the General Assembly will take up in their upcoming session. So we view that as still live, and we'll be pursuing that funding in the next session.

So was it, for it to occur, was it contingent upon state funding or would there be some sort of option for us to fund that independent of state funding?

The legislation did not contemplate the county funding it. It was, as I recall, and Jasmine, please correct me, it was contingent upon the state funding. I'm not aware of Superior Court judgeships in other jurisdictions.

It shouldn't be, but I just remember, I thought I remembered some discussion at that time, which would be odd.

I think we were brainstorming any possible option, but that is not what ultimately was in the legislation.

Okay, all right. So it's in abeyance until, you know, whatever their secondary review of their budget takes place.

If we were to be able to successfully advocate for that in the amended FY27 budget, that's our next opportunity.

Okay. We've got a couple of these things anticipated launch August. Are these like, we're pretty darn sure they're gonna be happening in August?

The bond review calendar, yes. I was given a date that it's August 3rd, so that first Monday. The text reminders, it's a target. Target, okay.

All right, so firm on the bond review. Yes, sir. Okay, all right, 8-3, you said, okay. And then this consolidated trial of motions calendar, that still needs a lot of work.

We've identified who we believe would be the players in that. Again, the senior judge and then filling out the court staff. We just need to fund those positions.

But you have to hire for and all that sort of stuff, right?

Right.

Correct. So this has some lead time for it to really play out and happen and have any sort of impact. But bond review calendar, start in 8-3, that's a no. Text reminders, target. Consolidated trial, needs more work. On this, the stand up arrest, so forth, maybe you said that in here, like we're thinking we could have this sort of operational potentially by when?

Our unknowns right now are when the adoption of the standing order would be taken up by the state court bench and then approved. And then it's just gonna be that physical move of the pretrial services team.

Okay, I see, by end of 2026. Yes. Okay. Yes. All right. All right. So this is creeping along as well. Do we call how many bookings we have into the jail roughly? I know it varies, but just a rough annual average of that? How many total bookings? Yeah.

It's roughly... 1,800, maybe up to 2,000 per month, so then multiply that by 12?

So upwards of 24,000. So, you know, impact on this, under 1,000, in terms of what, you know, potential impact on that, if it's fully launched. And then on the last prong, Is this just for, I guess, is this just for private lab testing or? It would be the full package.

So typically any entity that is doing the testing is also required to supply expert testimony in the trial. Okay, all right.

So that's what we mean, we're talking about expert testimony relative to the testing. Yes, sir.

Okay, not other forms of expert testimony. Specific to what they tested.

Okay. And as it stands right now, The GBI provides that service to all courts around the state. 100, yep, every judicial district. At no cost to them.

Correct.

All right, okay. So this would be other labs. How would those be identified, sourced, approved, validated, et cetera?

The plan that we discussed with the DA, so she is currently using labs for each of these primary types. Again, drugs, ballistics, and sexual assault. So there's already existing contracts that she has with these labs. What we would do is set it up as sort of like a, similar to the ankle monitors, as a draw down fund. So as she is going to these labs, she has these available dollars to use for the third party labs.

Okay. Are those, are these labs more, Do other jurisdictions kind of use this stuff too? Are these like state contracts that are? That I don't know, sir.

I don't know the specifics of the contract mechanism that the DA has with these labs. Okay. But certainly can find out.

Okay. And then this population impact, up to 2,000 current drug cases eliminated. I guess I'm... I'm having trouble a little bit just sort of translating this into like what that ultimately looks like and means for impact within kind of our jail facilities.

Correct. And again, I found out after this was submitted that this is for her entire caseload and not jail. So I need to go back and get that refined.

Okay. But would this suggest that when you say up to 2,000 current drug cases eliminated, this would mean that whether they're incarcerated or not, would this mean that there'd be 2,000 cases that would be- Disposed of. Disposed of annually that wouldn't be disposed of?

It would go outside the normal bounds of how long you would anticipate a case to be disposed if you got the drug labs back, or not just drugs, if you got the labs back within an appropriate amount of time. And I'll say it's not just the DA meeting with Chief Judge Lambeville, Judge McBurney. They are very strong advocates that this will improve court processing.

And wasn't there some additional funding and so forth that was done for the sexual assault kits over the past two to three years?

I'm not familiar.

I'm talking about more like at a state level and some other grants that were provided for that?

Yes, she has the Socky Grant, which I think is for the rape kits.

Okay, which is the same concept that we're talking about here, right? It's sexual assault slash rape falls in that. Okay, that grant is sort of specific to that kind of funding for that.

Yes, sir, they're cold case rape kits, as I recall.

Okay, but this one may not necessarily, I mean, this sounds like that's more specific to other, okay. Okay, all right, thank you.

Commissioner Arrington.

Thank you. This information is great. I just want to remind you that I think that the best way, particularly for the warrants, is for people to be able to call and check and see if they have a warrant. As a criminal defense attorney, that's one of the number one questions that I get people calling, asking. hey can you check and see if i have a warrant and so i think people want to resolve their warrants and hopefully we can work with our justice partners to develop a system that allow people to resolve their warrants without having to be arrested and taken to diversion

yes sir um excellent point commissioner errington and this is actually something good news a plan is being developed right now to what you're speaking to another standing order has been drafted and is currently being reviewed by state court that would uh the key difference here is where what i'm talking about here has an interaction with a police officer and so that's why they would take them to the hub and get this resolved Another standing order is being drafted where if an individual just receives a notice or their attorney receives a notice that there is now a warrant out for their arrest. If it falls within a certain list and type of warrants and if they meet other criteria like they don't have violence, more serious charges like DUI, a process would be in place where they can request a set aside form. They'd sign this form and this would pretty much automatically reset their court date so that they would not be penalized. And then they would update this new court date. So maybe not exactly like you're saying, Commissioner, where I think last time you're saying it'd be ideal if there's like a hotline they could call into. This would be determinant on the individual receiving a notice, but then they could follow our process if they meet the criteria.

As long as there's a system, the outcome is the same. Yes, sir. So the way or the methodology is not as important as the outcome. Thank you.

All right. Do we have any other questions or any other parts of the... Does that conclude your...

Well, just one more thing, ma'am, and I think, Vice Chair, you'll appreciate this. Can we jump to slide 19? It would be a disservice if I did not call out two very major milestones with our Diversion Center, and I don't wanna steal your thunder, Vice Chair, but we have hit two major milestones. Looking at overall diversions since the Diversion Center opened back in January of 2025, we have just through the first six months of 2026 equaled the same number of diversions that we had for the entirety of 2025. So excellent progress there on our utilization. And then the other milestone I wanted to point out, you can see we've now hit a new high watermark of 324 diversions for the month of June, equates to roughly an 11-day average daily census. So kudos to you, Vice Chair, and to the rest of the board for continued progress with use of our Diversion Center. So I just wanted to call that out for you, ma'am.

Well, thank you. I appreciate that. It makes me think of that saying, build it and they will come. So thank you for that information. I appreciate it.

If there are any other questions on either the justice update or facilities, we're happy to address. Otherwise, that was the end of my report.

Colleagues, do we have any other questions, concerns? Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Next item.

Continuing on the bottom of page six under open and responsible government, 260395 finance. Presentation review and approval to the July 15th, 2026 budget soundings and resolution.

Madam Vice Chair, we have one item that's before you today. It is a change to the annual hardware maintenance support list. It's for an increase with Maximo in order to be able to add the Public Works Department. to the utilization of Maximo for maintenance, management purposes. No additional funding is required. This is just incremental spending authority.

Okay, we have a motion to approve by Commissioner Barrett, second by Vice Chair Abdul-Rahman. Please vote. And the vote is open.

And the motion passes, four yeas, zero nays. 260396, request approval of resolution authorizing the county attorney to petition the Superior Court of Fulton County for an order authorizing the immediate and temporary collection of the 2026 taxes.

We have a motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdulrahman, second by Commissioner Thorne. Commissioner Barrett.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. I was just hoping we could get a detailed explanation, please.

Essentially, commissioners, we're presenting this item today so that we can move forward with the tax billing process. We had hoped today that we would be coming to you to request approval of the proposed millage rate and authorization of the advertisement of the five-year levy, setting of the required public hearings, and we normally include in that full process a request for a temporary collection order if necessary. At this point, we did not receive the information that we need in order to finalize a proposed millage rate, a five-year levy add, in order to move that process forward. So in consultation with the Fulton County Tax Commissioner and with the County Attorney's Office, we decided to bring forward the request for the petition for the temporary collection order so that we can continue to move forward. This will allow us to stay on track for a, actually for a August 15th bill date, October 15th due date. The process would be the board approves the authorization for the petition, the county attorney's office files the petition, we have to have it advertised and posted, a hearing set with the Superior Court, and then a judge would then issue a ruling on that petition. If we are successful in that, then the tax commissioner would take it from that point and do all the things that he has to do to calculate and prepare tax bills. The tax bills that go out would be temporary tax bills until such time as the digest is fully finalized and every taxing jurisdiction would then be required to set a millage rate and we would still have to go through that process of advertising a proposed millage rate, advertising that five year levy, holding public hearings if the millage rate is higher than the rollback rate. in order for the tax commissioner to be able to complete the digest prep, take it to the Department of Revenue for finalization, and then a final or a supplemental tax bill would be issued. It could be an additional tax that might be owed if the values end up being different or the millage rate ends up being different or it could be a refund to the taxpayer if an appeal is heard in the interim and the value is lowered. So that is where we are today. is that the digest has not been finalized. The tax commissioner's office did not receive the file that they need to complete the estimate packages to send to all the taxing jurisdictions. So this temporary collection order will allow us to move forward on the 26 values as they are using the 25 millage rate.

It's my understanding from the conversations I've had about this since it's bubbled up for us that the petition that we will submit will cover all of the jurisdictions that we bill for, correct?

I'll allow the county attorney to weigh in on that, but my understanding is that it will allow the tax commissioner to move forward, and it would also then allow any other taxing jurisdiction that bills themselves to also use that digest and bill accordingly.

So as to the other taxing jurisdictions, we don't necessarily need to work in concert with them, but our office has reached out and the tax commissioner has reached out to the other taxing jurisdictions that he collects for. And we have let them know that this action is going forward and invited them to join with us and contribute affidavits if they want to. If not, they have the ability to move forward independently to establish their own ability to proceed under our tax collection order.

And the jurisdictions that we, there are several cities that we don't collect for, that our tax commissioner does not collect for, do they have to file their own petition?

I don't believe so, but we were mainly focused on making sure that our tax collection order was put in place as quickly as possible. I can research that and circle back with you on that.

Yeah, I mean, I think regardless of whose responsibility it is, I mean, all of the citizens we're talking about in any of the 15 cities are Fulton County residents. So I think we want to make sure that all of the jurisdictions are completely aware and educated on this process. They understand what's happening, what their options are and what they have to do. Because at the end of the day, we're going to get a lot of questions from our citizens if we are not getting the message out clearly to the cities and to them, frankly. So correct me if I'm wrong here, but it is possible based on this process that some of the jurisdictions may have to essentially have a second corrective round of billing. I think you said that, yes?

Yes, because these would be temporary tax bills. So once the digest has been finalized, there will need to be a reconciliation process. And it could be an additional amount owed or it could be a refund. In particular, if a individual property owner filed an appeal and that appeal was resolved in between the temporary billing and the point in time that the digest is finalized and certified for final billing.

Well, but also correct me if I'm wrong here, but if one of the jurisdictions, any one of the jurisdictions does not use the 2025 millage rate, if they change their millage rate up or down, then they would also have a correction. So for everybody in that jurisdiction would get a corrective bill.

Yes, once the digest is finalized and all of the final millage rates are established, then yes, there would be that reconciliation process and the property owner would either receive a supplemental tax bill or they may receive a refund, even if the millage rate changes, just depending on which way the millage rate goes.

Okay. Yeah. So I just want to make sure that we're, and this may be a communications thing too, that we're doing the best job we can to communicate not only to the cities, but also to the citizens, because I guarantee you, we're not going to get any questions from someone who gets a refund, but the people who get an additional tax bill, I think are going to be probably pretty upset so and I think this may have some impact on whether legitimate or not that they're gonna have concerns and questions and I think the escrow account questions are gonna come up for people and all of those kind of things so just want to make sure we're communicating but so we're right now we can't confirm that the cities have been contacted is that accurate

My understanding from Gladys Bradfield in the tax commissioner's office that she has contacted the jurisdictions that he bills for.

Okay, but not the ones that we don't bill for.

I would need to ask that explicitly.

Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, I'm looking at our, you know, external affairs because I know you guys, part of your role is to, you know, be in contact with the cities. So, yeah. Yeah.

Commissioner Barrett, thank you. We did discuss that at our most recent meeting. We certainly wanted cities to be aware of this development before today's public discussion on it, and I think that's what the CFO is referring to. Just a quick note on communications. The next step from today, presuming that the board approves this, would be for the county attorney then to move forward with seeking that order in court. And then after that we would begin more public communication because that would be the next step for the tax commissioner to be able to issue bills. But certainly the communication with our partners in our cities and our school systems is very important along with the communication to the public. As you mentioned, the millage rate process would be different in this, that it could occur after property owners have received their tax bills, which is not the typical process. So we would want to clarify. Certainly people's input still in the millage rate setting process is important and valuable and would be considered by those governing bodies, even though those property owners may have already received a tax bill for this year.

Okay, thank you. And the other question I had, and you may or may not want to stay there, but first of all, I want to thank Mr. Conley from our assessor's office for a really thorough and clear explanation of how we got here. And the wording of the resolution that is before us indicates that there was a higher number than normal of land packages that were not processed, which is why we find ourselves in this situation, correct?

Yes, ma'am, essentially.

And so for the folks who are impacted specifically in those land packages, those parcels that are impacted, they will also potentially have some confusion depending on, I know some of the properties are not, it's not an individual residential owner, but some may be, or an individual commercial owner, that kind of thing. But Mr. Connolly has said that he would provide some further information to us on um where those properties are throughout the county so that we know for our citizens in our districts who might be affected and are prepared to handle those questions as well because they may be getting their notice of assessment well they will get their notice of assessment far later than others and that could also potentially cause some confusion so just um want to again thank mr connolly for that and if there's anything else that you feel like we as commissioners need to know about that part of it i think that would be helpful as well And that could go to anybody who wants to speak on it.

You finished Commissioner Barrett? I am. Okay. Commissioner Ellis.

Yeah, I'm gonna be supportive of the TCO and the resolution moving forward for us to seek the TCO, but I just wanna just verify a few things again. We'll file this once, and then this can be utilized by any taxing jurisdiction, regardless of whether we bill for them or not. Is that correct, Dr. Ferdinand, to confirm that to you? He has confirmed it to me, notwithstanding that Sue's still checking.

We've just looked at the statute, and any municipality, even if we don't collect, can proceed under our order.

Okay, so they have the ability to do that. All right, I'll just say up front, where we're at right now is really an unacceptable point. I mean, this is highly disappointing. The two parties that are involved in this, I might cast some blame one way or the other, but you got one job and it didn't get done. And that's a failure that impacts all of us as well as all of our jurisdictions. I think communication is critical to these other parties. I've had some of this communication directly myself, so I do understand that it doesn't seem like there has been a high level of, much of any communication to many of these other jurisdictions from whether that's supposed to come from the tax assessor's office or the tax commissioner's office. I'm not sure which, but it's critical that that happen, and that happen post-haste, because people do need to understand that so they've got the ability to plan and execute and run local government, right? So I would ask that that be given the highest degree of priority. And included within that, some sort of, we don't have a digest, but for planning purposes, some sort of view of what is the value of the billings that are going out? And what does that mean for these taxing jurisdictions? We don't have that today. I know we have some sort of speculation around that. That'll be whatever, roughly. 4% growth or whatever it is. But we need more visibility in that to plan as do these other jurisdictions. That's critical. That information needs to be worked, provided to us and every other taxing jurisdiction post haste. And the last thing I'll say is that we need a digest. post haste. And all the work that needs to be done on that needs to get done. It should have been done, it needs to get done, and we need to digest post haste. This, as I'm hearing you right, you know, kind of, this could all play out in where, you know, if a jurisdiction doesn't change their millage rate, there's one bill, that's it. People might get a secondary bill if they appealed and all that, but they would get that anyway, independent of this process. So, you know, The secondary billing would be associated with if somebody moves it up or down, right? Secondary billing or a refund would be, some sort of secondary transaction would be whether it moves up or down.

Yes, if the millage rate changes or if the value changes as the result of an appeal settlement.

Okay, all right, just so we're clear on that. And then we're gonna be going through our normal process of millage rate setting but that will occur at some future point in time once we receive a digest. And at this point in time, we have no estimated timeline for receipt of that digest.

We do not.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Thorne.

I agree that communication hasn't been the best. I represent all of Johns Creek and I got an email last Monday morning that they were setting having hearings for their millage rate at 11 o'clock. I quickly contacted the mayor to make him aware that we have this issue and that we were gonna pass this TCO. He was unaware. I told him to call our tax commissioner to get clarification because he was asking me questions and I by no means am an expert on this in advisement. So I think there was lack of communication between, I know for sure with Johns Creek, I checked with Alpharetta. Alpharetta does their own billing. They say they're used to it. They're okay with whatever happens. I think the mayor was out fishing on a fishing boat when I called him. He didn't seem very concerned. But I do want to point out that there are three criteria when they submitted our tax digest. The sales ratio, the COD, and the PRD. and that was submitted the second week of June, and it passed the Board of Assessors 100%, and to come back a full month later that hey, no, the tax commissioner isn't gonna accept this I would like to understand the communication process between those two entities a little bit better. My understanding is that there are only 292 properties affected. Some of them are just minor changes, curb cuts, land divisions, that type of thing. But there's a big holdup with Esri, the system that they use. Only one user can use it and that's since the cyber security incident that we've had. We may need to start looking at a new vendor, so I'm hoping with IT that that might be. I don't know if they've discussed that with you at all.

Yes, Commissioner Thorne, Kevin Kerrigan, CIO. So we've had those conversations. Adding users within the Esri platform is easy to do, and we've had conversations with them, and we can add those users, and we've worked with them to take those steps now.

Okay, because that would be great if we could get this.

And that's really not related to the security incident, by the way.

Okay.

Sorry, go ahead.

Okay, thank you. I appreciate that clarification on that. But yeah, just make sure we're doing everything we can to help the assessor's office get these assessments in a timely fashion. And I do agree with the confusion with the TCO that we're gonna get a lot of questions. When am I getting a second bill? I have sympathy for the school board who has a budgeting process that goes July 1 to July 1. They're blindly having to set budgets and they have all the simplifications with these new tax breaks for seniors. They don't know how their tax digest has been affected by that. And I'm supportive of this TCO because I think they need the money coming in. or else they'll run out of money and they will have to apply for a tan and then they'll have to pay the extra for a tan so just for the school systems to save money i'm supportive of this tco even though it is a workaround and i hope in the future we don't have to do this commissioner barrett

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Just one other thing. First of all, I'm also supportive, because obviously we need to get this done. But it was brought to my attention that potentially one of the things that is problematic for the tax assessor side is the technology that they are using. And I'm not sure if it's kind of what you were mentioning, Commissioner Thorne, or additional. But I think it's... i guess that's a question slash comment that the technology may not be the latest and greatest available for tax assessors offices i don't i'm not an expert on this either but i just want to make sure um that we are not that there's nothing we can do administratively um whether it be technology or additional staffing or whatever it might be to prevent this from happening in the future so it's not going to help us today um but i think you know if they're i i'm and mr conley's here we if you wants to weigh in on it, but I believe there's possibly some actual issue with one of the systems that they're having right now that's slowing them down, that they're still trying to debug and figure out what the problem is and what have you, but whatever we can do to speed that along for them, but then also just looking to the future of what can we do administratively, systems-wise, to try to address not only what they're doing in their office, but the cross-departmental communication and sharing of data.

Commissioner Barrett, I'll try to respond to that. Yes, there are some system issues. It is a full court press right now between the tax assessor's GIS team, the IT GIS team, the vendor, the strategy office, to resolve those issues. So it's a full court press on that particular piece. We have already had some conversation, at least I'll say I have had some conversation with Mr. Conley about what he may need, and he has submitted a mid-year ask, so you may see something come back soon. at mid-year really kind of looking forward to 27, for the 27 process. But right now we're trying to resolve the technical issues that have slowed the process and the progress for the 26 digest. And so there will probably be more to come as we try to, looking forward, ensure that we don't have a repeat.

okay and then just for clarification i have commissioner thorne mentioned um i think she said 292 parcels i think is that what you said commissioner thorne it's land packages yeah so my understanding was it's land packages which represents about a thousand parcels and again many of them not residential areas and things like that but still it is it is a significant number just to be just to want to get clarification on that commissioner ellis

Again, similar to the conversation we were having relative to the sheriff's hiring, I don't wanna hear excuses. We had a plan which we adopted, a timeline which we had all agreed to, and it got missed. I've listened in to meetings, heard stuff and all that, And I hear a lot about how sausage is made and all that sort of stuff, but bottom line is, one job to do, there were enough tools there to get the work done, and it didn't get done. There's no blame on this for, you know, we can't blame a system. you know, just like we can't blame a building over at the jail, we can't blame this technology, we can't blame a system. We got people doing this to manage it, and this is their job to do it, with oversight from elected officials and another board. This is unacceptable where we are, and it needs to get addressed post-haste, without excuses, but with aggressive action. And I'm hoping, you know, I'm hoping we see a digest at our next meeting. I don't know what's possible or not possible, and I'm really just tired of hearing about it. I wanna see something that's done, enacted upon, and the work is completed like it was supposed to be done, and we meet, going forward, we meet these deadlines. This is an outright embarrassment that this has happened, and I'll just leave it at that.

Well, first of all, Mr. Conley, did you want to say anything? Did you?

Okay.

So, okay. I was just, if you wanted to, I'm not. Yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you for being present. I want to say this because I have received several emails and they run the gamut from someone being granted a freeze, and then they got a bill that was totally different from what happened, and so I'm assuming that this may be as a result of it. This is a hiccup that happened, and I'm gonna apologize to all the taxpaying citizens of Fulton County. Not gonna throw anybody under the bus, because at the end of the day, Fulton County is a big deal, But when we have a hiccup, it bears an apology. We're sorry it happened. We will do everything in our power to make sure it doesn't happen again. But as an elected official that has been entrusted, I think the buck stops with us and that's just my interpretation, that's my opinion. So I just want to go on record apologizing to the Fulton County taxpaying citizens for this hiccup. Our hands are on deck, we have a full court press to get this resolved. So please forgive us for this hiccup, it happened. We would do everything in our power to make sure that it does not happen again. But I just wanted to, before we move to the next item, to offer a sincere apology on behalf of this board. Clerk, sound the next item, please.

We have a motion on the floor.

Oh, I'm so sorry. We got into that conversation.

Please vote. And the vote is open. And the motion passes, five yays, zero nays. On page 7, 260397, registration and election, request approval of a statewide contract and the total amount not to exceed $8,958,784.66 to provide temporary staffing services.

Okay, favorable motion by Vice Chair Abdulrahman, seconded by Commissioner Barrett. Commissioner Thorne, you have the floor.

Thanks for being here today, Nadine. I just have the questions. We're using Abacus and we used to use Dover. Is there a reason we're not using Dover anymore?

Good morning or good afternoon. We just decided to go with Abacus for different reasons. They've done a great job. We just decided to use that vendor.

To have one vendor, okay. And then with this department temporary staff, you have 298 employees listed here. Are some of those couriers?

Yes, so some are couriers, the people that work in the warehouse, our call center, regional coordinators, et cetera.

So there was a public comment here made today about couriers picking up ballots every day of early voting, breaking the seals, physically counting, not tabulating, but physically counting the ballots. Are those temp workers that are involved in that process?

There are temporary workers involved in that process. The process is perfectly legal. I know there's been some ridicule on public comment, some stuff online. Before we decided to implement that process, we checked it with legal. And there is misinformation, unfortunately, floating. But it is legal. It is confirmed. And it is safe, even in the hands of temporary workers, which are supervised by permanent staff.

And when they pick up those ballots, are there two couriers per?

Yes, there's a chain of custody form. There's two couriers that sign off. They come here into the EPC, I'm sorry, EPC, Lord, it's years ago, into the elections hub. And there's no chain of custody broken. There's always two persons or more.

Okay, is there anything else you'd like to kind of clear up or misinformation-wise?

I will provide the Board of Commissioners a memo in regards to this process just to detail it out. And we'll probably work with External Affairs to also put it on Fulton Facts to stop the misinformation.

Yeah, that would be great, because I know you addressed it in your last board, I think it was your last board meeting last month, why you are collecting them, counting them, and re-scanning them, and replacing the ballot images, so it'd be good for us to have a written...

Right, I will send that over to you with the factual information, and again, we're not the only county that does this process, it's completely legal.

Yes, I understand we did 18,800 or so re-scans this last election.

I don't recall the number, but I will provide that in a memo that I sent to the board. That would be good.

And then when we started, if you could give us a history too of when we started this process, because I understand we started it in 2024. And who's giving you the directive is Secretary of State's office too, would be good. Sure, will do. That would be great, thank you.

Commissioner Ellis.

Thanks, Vice Chair. Thank you for being here, Ms. Williams. Just a few questions. What did we spend for temp staffing in the primary and primary runoffs?

Are you asking for the total cost?

Yes.

I don't have that total in front of me, but it should be a little lower than this, but I can email that information to you.

Okay. Yeah, that would be useful to know. And we're using, these are different parties than we use in the primary? Different staffing firm?

No, we use Abacus in the primary. The bids that we receive are for the entire year. We had Dover and Abacus for the primary, and now we're just consolidating to Abacus.

Okay, in the, this is a total not to exceed amount of 8.95 million. This is within the scope of what your budget allows right now, is that correct?

That's correct. We are not asking for additional funds since it's within the budget that the BOC approved.

Okay, and then it looks like there's sort of it's split 6.6 for the general and 2.4 for runoff, so would those be up to amounts too? Kind of like we were just planning.

Yes, because we don't know what the runoff will entail.

Right, but it'd be up to, we shouldn't go above the 6.6 for the general portion and all that. So if there is no runoff, there'd be 2.4 million that wouldn't be spent.

That's our prediction.

No, I mean, I'm just saying that The, I mean, there would be a minimum of, you know, 2.4.

Yes.

Right, that would be available, okay. All right, and, but you're saying you think the, the cost for temp staffing in the primary was greater than this amount?

I said lower.

Lower, okay, all right, I thought you said greater, okay, all right, thank you for clarifying that. Do you think significantly lower, or?

Um, I don't recall.

Okay. All right. I won't allow you to speculate, but if you could provide that, that would be, that'd be helpful. It's not going to.

I'll email it to you today.

Okay. Thank you.

Ms. Williams, uh, there, there was, um, I'm sorry, Commissioner Ellis, will you finish? Ms. Williams, there was accusation during public comments. And I just want to openly say to you and the chair of the elections board that we can all agree to disagree, but we don't have to call people out their name. And I will never ever be silent, no matter who says that, whether I agree or disagree, I've been called everything but a child of God, but it's not what I'm called, it's what I answer to. And so I say to you, on behalf of me, I can't speak for the entire board, that that was distasteful, unnecessary, and I do not agree with it. And at the end of the day, unfounded accusations are what they are, unfounded accusations. And this board does not move on unfounded accusations. So I just wanted to say that openly, since it was done openly and there was some reference to public comments, I think it bared saying that. So I apologize on behalf of that. But more importantly for you and the chair of the BRE, that was uncalled for. Thank you. It's greatly appreciated. All right. Thank you.

Commissioner Arrington. I was just going to say, I couldn't agree more. We can disagree without being disagreeable, but there's no reason to call anyone out of their name or anything like that. And maybe this is what Commissioner Thorne asked you earlier, but the allegations about someone opening ballots for 18 days, it would be great if you were able to speak to that now. If not, I guess I can wait on the memo.

So what they're referring to is we have a process where at the advanced voting locations, we pick up the poll manager or remove the ballots from the scanner, put them in a sealed container, we bring them back to Elections Hub. The reason why we did that is because if the building were to burn down, the election would be lost. If everything stays there, the memory card and the ballots, everything would be lost at that point. We'd have to restart the election. So in order to be proactive, we take the ballots out. They are sealed in a container. They come into the warehouse, and they're boxed up and stored in a cage that we're getting into, a cage that we currently have and a new cage that we're getting installed. So they're not tabulated by any means. They're just sealed and placed in a cage. What we do do is count them. um to make sure that did you if if we have 200 ballots from from the daily count that we got 200 back for chain of custody that's for chain of custody purposes there's no tabulation there's no looking at the votes it's literally a proactive measure to ensure that the election is secure and safe and that's all that is and again we're not the only county that does this but every time Fulton County makes a change, somehow allegations start, and we will combat that with information to this board, and like I said, on Fulton Facts. Thank you.

Commissioner Thorne.

I was just going to see if you could kind of elaborate on that process. When you bring them back to the hub and you physically cut the seals and physically count them, are there poll watchers there to watch the process?

It's not a polling site, so no, there's no poll watchers, but the process is open to the public. It's noted on the website, so if anybody wants to see the process, they're welcome to do so.

And it's done in the tabulation, the fishbowl room, or where is it done?

No, it's done in the caged area of the elections hub.

So the caged area. I believe when I came there to watch the intake or observe the intake of the early voting equipment, because our early voting equipment comes in on Friday and sits there until Tuesday until it can be tabulated. Nobody was allowed back in the, not even a, Board of Registration elections member was allowed to go back and see where the ballots were stored. So if you are re-scanning them back in the ballot cage, is there a change to the process? Like can the public go back there and see that?

So what we're doing is the process is up in the front on the cage side by the glass area and there will be stored in that area as well once we get that cage installed which should happen in the next week if a public person wants to see every box that's literally stored they can have they can feel free to come look at those boxes i think that's a a good change because uh

people are unaware that over 12,000 ballots were scanned and ballot images replaced.

So when I scan them in the poll... Again, you're speaking of two separate things. There is re-canvassing and there is the separate. But I will put that in a memo because it's two different processes that the misinformation is mixing up together. But I will explain it in a memo to y'all to make it simple to understand. But you're mixing up two different things.

The re-scanning is not the same thing as... Yeah, the counting on the first, the chain of custody... see it's resealed by somebody in the warehouse could be a temp worker and then when you have to do the re-canvas you're taking those ballots if they're off like say if you had 200 ballots but you're at 199 so there's there's the

Picking up of the ballots, that's one process from the advanced voting locations. There's no tabulating, there is no scanning. They are just counted and stored. Then when we are about to certify the election, in order for us to have to recertify an election, what we do is double check that the numbers balance. If you have 200 ballots tabulated, you should have 200 physical ballots. If we find that that number is off and we cannot determine where the discrepancy is, then it's re-scanned. That process, we call poll watchers, we do it in front of the vote review panel, we will start calling candidates to do that process. The original ballot images are not deleted, they are stored. Again, there's two different processes and they're mixing up the two with the misinformation that was stated today and the misinformation that was posted online.

Okay, yeah, because as a candidate who was on the ballot in the primary and you re-scanned almost 19,000 ballots and replaced the ballot images, I was not made aware of that. So in the future, like this coming election, candidates will be made aware of a re-canvas of a precinct?

Yes, we will send that out. And again, you're mixing up the terms, but we will send that out in a memo.

Okay, whatever, whenever you have to rescan because you're missing one ballot and you have to rescan them and replace those ballot images so that if I go and vote in a precinct, my original scan that i did could be replaced by a future scan that's done if you want to see your original you can put in an open records request but again it's not deleted okay yeah well that's good that the original ballot scans aren't deleted so that's some good clarification to have too thank you

So Ms. Williams, my takeaway from this is we need some education. We need some voter education. We need, I think Commissioner Arrington speaks to a lot definitions of what a process is, what accounting is. because counting and a process, scanning and a process is two different things. And so I think my takeaway is we just need a little bit more education so people will know what's going on. And I'm a firm believer if you're educated in the subject matter, then there's less tendency to give out incorrect information. But if you're not educated in it, then sometimes things happen. And so if nothing else, I will even look for District 6 for us to maybe hold some town halls so your department can come out and explain some things because I don't ever want Fullerton County to be in a bad light because of a process that can be explained. But I'm gonna await the information that you're going to give this board. Commissioner Thorne, you wanna speak again?

Yeah, I just want to speak to the process because this is, because I've certainly gotten bombarded with it for months now, and I even heard about ballot images being replaced in 2024, 12,000 of them. and the questions that were arising and the bubbling that was arising. So I think the concern is that we just have to be transparent as possible, contact all entities. When those ballots come in, yeah, we're physically counting them, we're cutting the seal that the manager sealed them at the precinct, we're cutting that seal, we have to make sure that we are transparent and that that cage like nobody has access temp workers nobody has access to that cage and the people who are counting them aren't looking at the results because they're in the past that ballot cage nobody even a board of elections member couldn't even see where the ballots were being stored they were forbidden from seeing where it was stored i was there when

For clarity, I believe you access to the 2020 ballots and those were in the possession of the- No, no.

It was when I went down for a presidential primary just to observe and we weren't allowed, but yet a temp worker was there outside the ballot cage protecting it and the temp workers had access, but a board or registrations member did not have access to it. So there is the concern that ballots could be altered or switched, so that's why we just need ultimate transparency. Love to see the new cage area that we're gonna have to even broadcast that, that look, we're taking these extra steps to make sure that the ballot, which is your receipt, is secured and it can't be altered or tampered with by a temp worker or anybody that is in that warehouse at that time.

Well, like Commissioner Khadijah stated, we would welcome you to come to a poll worker, our Elections Academy. That's why we started that academy for a reason. It's open to the public. So if you get any constituents that want to learn about the process, they can sign up, learn what it is, what we do, so they can stop receiving misinformation. But I will send a memo to the board. And again, we will also send you the Elections Academy schedule. And if you would like to attend, you can do so.

Yeah, I think I have had my staff attend those and it's very, very elementary, the details of tabulation and counting and logic and accuracy testing. If you wanna go into detail on that, that would be great. But I would love to even attend your poll manager training classes if that's at all possible.

I will put that before our board and I will let them know.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Williams. Next item.

I have a motion.

Oh, I'm so sorry. All righty. And the vote is open. I know Chairman Pitts, I'm still presiding. Please vote.

And the motion passes, five yeas, zero nays. 260398, Real Estate and Asset Management, request approval of statewide contracts and the total amount not to exceed $75,000 to provide tires, tube, accessory, and repair services.

All right, motion to approve by Commissioner Thorne. Is there a second? Seconded by Vice Chair Abdul-Rahman. Please vote.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. 260399, request approval of lowest responsible bidder for standby fencing installation and repair in the amount of $200,000.

All right, a favorable motion by Vice Chair Abdirahman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. 260400, request approval to utilize cooperative purchasing in an amount not to exceed $555,776.55 for the purchase, delivery and assembly, and installation of new seating in the Superior Court juror assembly room.

All right, motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur-Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne. Please vote.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. On page eight, 260401, request approval to utilize cooperative purchasing for HVAC products, installation, and services in the amount not to exceed $783,777.44. All right, motion by Vice Chair, Dr. Rockman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

And the vote is open.

And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. 260402, request approval to increase spending authority for HVAC equipment and parts in the amount not to exceed $30,000.

All right, motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur-Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Ellis. Commissioner Barrett, you have the floor.

Just a quick question. Does this budget that's being, this is just to increase the budget, or not the budget, but the spending authority with this particular vendor, but does this cover the HVAC issues in the jail as well, or is this just the other buildings?

Good morning, Commissioners. Tim Diamond, Debit Director. It's to keep parts on hand across the portfolio to be able to respond.

Okay, because it is, first of all, the 10th floor has some ongoing AC or HVAC issues, but I also visited Rice Street again about a week and a half ago, and there were significant AC issues there. So I just want to make sure that we're we're increasing this enough to address the pretty serious issues we're having now in particular there. I know there was no AC in the kitchen when I was there and several of the units. So just wanting to make sure that we're not gonna have to keep coming back to the drawing board here.

Yep, understand. And we'll follow up with staff on both those issues.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. 260403, arts and culture, request approval of the fiscal year 2026 contracts for services program funding recommendations totaling $2,857,643.

Motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur-Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Arrington. Commissioner Barrett followed by Commissioner Thorne.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Overall, of course, I have no issue with the organizations that have been chosen to receive the arts funding, but I do want to understand better the logic around the $142,430 being taken out of the $3 million pot to cover, it sounds like last year's, some last contracts from last year's arts grant program that weren't, the paperwork perhaps wasn't done in time or something.

Good afternoon, Commissioners. David Banyer, Director of Fulton County Arts and Culture. Yes, there was a backlog last year in terms of we identified a few recipients that did not get it processed in time, and so that was the issue. why that money was pulled over to this fiscal year?

I mean, conceptually, I'm missing something here because I'm sort of not okay with that. The logic for me being there was a certain amount of money appropriated last year that was divvied up among the various organizations paperwork notwithstanding. And then there was another $3 million allotted this year, minus the $200 specifically to the veterans, et cetera, or veterans-related programming. But there should have been a full $3 million given to this year's recipients. So I'm confused about why the funding for the backlog wasn't moved from some other contingency fund to cover the difference because there should have been three million that's the resolution we passed there should be three million divvied up for twenty twenty six recipients not not three million minus a hundred and forty two thousand so I for me this is a problem and it should be rectified and I'm sure for anybody who's looked at the list of recipients and I understand we have a lot of requests but we had a lot of people who met the qualifications and almost everyone got less than they asked for so you know, for some of the smaller recipients, another thousand or two goes a long way. Uh, so I'd like to see this rectified. I don't want to hold up the process, so I don't know how we rectify this, but to me this is not, it doesn't make sense. So can someone on the finance team explain why this was done this way?

Commissioner Barrett, I've not seen any information relative to payments to recipients from the previous year. the department could have reappropriated, I mean, they could have moved funds from other places within their budget. I haven't seen anything on, so I don't know what the underlying reason was, why the vendors weren't paid last year. I don't know if it was that they didn't submit an invoice for us to pay against, or if they didn't perform, or they didn't have the documentation relative, I don't know, I haven't been involved in any communication around this, so I don't know what the underlying reason was from last year. But I know that they could have looked in other places within their budget to cover that difference if they carried those invoices over and paid them this year.

There were a couple of issues, so the invoices from some of the recipients were turned in late, and then there was a new verification process that kind of delayed the whole process of approving those grants.

I hear you and I hear you, but at the end of the day, there was a certain amount of money allotted in 2025. It was awarded in 2025. It was not given to the recipients in a timely manner for whatever reason. I'm not throwing shade about why it didn't happen, but it didn't. And then there was 3 million that we approved for recipients of the 2026 grant program. $142,430 of that was held back from the current recipient pool. That is incorrect and needs to be rectified. really care whether it's from somewhere in your budget, not that I don't care, but it doesn't matter to me whether it's from somewhere in your budget or somewhere in a contingency fund, but this $142,430 should be appropriated to some people within the 2026 pool of recipients. That's where I stand. So can we get that fixed? Is that something that can be done? And if we don't approve this today, what happens?

I will work with the budget team to take a look at their budget to see and to understand what the issue was. The only other way to, if they do not have other resources in their budget to cover, then the board would have to consider moving money either through the mid-year review process or as an emergency out of our contingency But as I said, I haven't had any insight into this, so I will need a little bit of time to get caught up. As to what it will do to awards this year, I mean, if the board wanted to move forward with what's been recommended, then if they have another set that they would recommend based on that difference, once the funds are available, they can move forward with those.

Wouldn't this just be a budget sounding?

It could be a budget sounding, that's what I was saying, either through the mid-year process where we find the resources and move it in through that process or out of contingency.

So what you're saying is, if this is approved as written today, it does not preclude us from awarding another $142,430 to existing recipients, is that correct?

If the additional resources are identified, I believe they have probably the next list of recipients that would make that.

Well, many of the recipients, as I said, didn't get the full amount. So it may just be a matter of divvying it up to existing recipients, but it should be.

Yes, whichever way they would do that.

But I just wanna make sure that if this is approved as written, that that still can be accomplished.

Yes, it can.

Are we sure? Going once.

Commissioner Barrett, yes, we will work with the Department of Arts and Culture to, if the board approves the funding today, we will work with finance and determine whether it's best to reallocate additional dollars to the existing pool of applicants, which may be the best path forward. Otherwise, we would need to go back to the allocation committee and provide a second list of recipients, but we can provide both options to the board.

Okay, I mean, I'll support it because I don't want to hold the money back from the current recipients any longer than necessary, but I do feel like this has to be addressed. Otherwise, it's not in alignment with the resolution passed for the three million.

All right, Commissioner Thorne.

Yeah, I am a little disappointed in my district. Actually, all of North Fulton, we're kind of received the least amount of money, although District Five, you're right in there with us as well. But my awardees, it went down 35% this year in the amount that we got. As always, District Four, Atlanta, They have the biggest amount. They had over a million dollars awarded to them. What is Atlanta's arts budget? Because I know they fund these entities as well.

The city of Atlanta? I don't know the exact amount, but I think it's a little bit over two million.

Over two million. So in Fulton County, in the city of Atlanta, we have 76 entities that get both that we're funding. Fulton County taxpayers are funding. And a lot of these organizations have annual budgets of over a million dollars and their executives are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars. So from a taxpayer perspective, I would like to grow the arts. I would like to expand the arts. I would like to give to organizations that perhaps could use that little boost.

Grassroot organizations.

Yes, more grassroots. I would like to see more events up in North Fulton County. A lot of our arts members up there are even unaware that we have grants provided down here. And the cities have very, very small budgets, or no budget, really, for the arts in other parts of the county. And it just seems like we are focusing so much on Atlanta. In the future, I would just like to see us grow a little bit more in South Fulton, District Five, District One, District Two, those areas. that we don't seem to be allocating hardly any money towards it with such a big pot that we have. I also had some questions about how these grants are vetted. I heard some rumors that there was a certain demographic or racial element in vetting these organizations. Can you speak to that?

Okay, so with your first question, we've already started moving forward. We've started doing this about three or four years ago where we identified 144 art agencies or individual artists in North Fulton. We even partnered with Center Vision to make sure that when you go into the movie theaters in those priority areas, which is District 1, 2, and 5, that you will see a 60-second pre-reel reel that highlight the CFS, the funding, the application, and the process. We did those in theaters targeted for those individual districts. We also work closely with our library system to make sure we get out the information. One of the things we want to add this year is when you have town hall meetings, we want to make sure that either I'm there or a representative from Arts and Culture is there with a table to set up to give hands-on information. So that's number one. Your other question is, We can't really control where artists are located. We try to make sure that we distribute all our information across all 15 cities. We make that effort to make sure that people apply. In terms of the application process, we have a review panel, and then we put together an allocation committee with some of the Arts Council members that represent your district, and they go through a process. My department... of Contract for Services is involved in that process. I oversee it, meaning that I'm on the Zooms. I listen in to ensure that it's a fair process. And then when they come up with the amount, we always ask for more money than we actually have in the budget. So we create a formula to distribute the funds. And that comes through the allocation committee and the review panel. And that's pretty much been the process for years to come. We tightened it up, but that's been a process that has worked, and it's a fair process.

Yeah, because art is such a subjective thing that it'd be great if it was more transparent on the review panel. How are they reviewing these applications? If there could be an element of how much government funding outside sources they got the previous year, because you want community buy-in. You don't want to fund a government fund. basically program that 50% or more of their funds are coming from applying from a grant on a federal level, applying at the state level, applying at us, our level, and the city level. So if we could have some type of element that the community is behind this organization, or it's a grassroots arts organization that's trying to get off the ground and maybe needs just that little bit of boost that the taxpayer dollars could get them to grow them to be a substantial organization. instead of just continually funding these big mega organizations that have professional grant writers that are just getting government money right and left. That would be my thought, if that could be part of the review. I think from a taxpayer perspective, I love supporting the arts. I would donate to the arts. I try to work with Alpharetta Arts and donate. But I want to know that other people want to donate as well and not just rely on government funding.

And we're working with, we're partnering with some agencies that also assist us in identifying grassroot organizations that we can get in front of. And you're right, some of the bigger centers, they have specific departments that are geared toward grant writing. But this grassroot organizations, they're very, very small. And so we come alongside them with several different workshops throughout the year to coach them through filling out the application process because it can be intimidating. So we are making extra effort to partner with agencies that identify smaller organizations so that this funding that we do can really support their efforts as well.

And as you know, someone you're very familiar with who's on the board had his music festival got declined due to an immigration form or something, a lack of providing that. Is that something new to the process, or is that something that's been there for a while?

I think he's been here for a while, but I've spoken to Neil in terms of his music festival in North Fulton, and we're going to support it through our department. It's the first year that he's going to put it together, so we really want to see the impact that it make the first year, and we feel that if it's successful the first year, it could be an annual event, so we're working closely with him to identify how we can make this work up in North Fulton.

Okay, I'd appreciate that, and if you could keep me in the loop on that, I'm sure I will be in the loop no matter what, but if you can keep me on the loop specifically what you and your department wants to do, and I'll see how I can fill in as well.

Trust and believe you'll be cc'd on Neil's comment as well as our response.

Okay, thank you, thank you very much.

All right, Vice Chair, I'm Durock Fon.

Thank you, Chairman. Executive staff, this process that Dave Manuel did, is that something new that he did, or is that a process that other departments have done as well as far as reallocation? Or is this something that just he did on his own and is foreign? Or is this a common practice depending on the department?

Madam Vice Chair, do you mean reallocating his budget money? Yes. Well, yes, every department has the ability to move money around within their available budget. In some cases, you know, they may have an invoice that comes in from the previous year that did not get paid out of last year's budget that they have to pay out of this year's budget, and they realign their budget to make that happen. In this case, it appears like they weren't even at the point of having an invoice to pay at the end of last year. And as I said, they could have looked to another source within their budget to cover those costs that came through. But they chose to reduce out of the current year's contracts for services allocation.

Thank you, Mr. Whitmore. I think for the listening public, it is very unfair to come in here and raise hell about $142,000, but you don't have that same energy. For the sheriff's office, you don't have that same energy. For the DA's office, you don't have that same energy. For other departments, so as opposed to me saying it behind your back, I'm going to say it here. this is politics 101. mr manuel did something that we pay him to do which is run his department to the best of his ability and take an amount of money and spread it out the best that he can and i take issue with this very thinly veiled, you took $142,000, but you all said nothing about a Sprinter van, a Mercedes-Benz Sprinter van that the sheriff paid for with taxpayer money. Don't play politics. These department heads from Fannie, from Madam D.A., to Shea Alexander, to Dave Manuel, they have a routine of what they do. And if we're gonna start micromanaging them and questioning them on every little bitty thing that they do for political points, then that's a sad commentary at Fulton County. Let me tell you why I'm heated up about this. When I travel, in and out of the United States of America. Fulton County is lauded as number one in a lot of cases when it comes to arts and culture. We do a bipartisan process here, All of us are behind it. Do we have some things we need to work on? Yes. But to get in the lane, see, this is what I call staying in your lane. And if you're not going to stay in your lane, then you do it to everybody. You don't just do it to Dave Manuel. You do it to the sheriff. You do it to the clerk. You do it to the solicitor. You do it to the Madam DA. They reapportion and do what they need to do based on their needs. Dave Manion, if I could give you $5 million, it still would not be enough. But I will never come down here and second guess what you did for some people that needed services, had services, may have gotten in information late or whatever. I don't know because guess what? I'm a legislator. I don't run your department. And I take issue with this thinly veiled, oh, this 142 hours, it shouldn't be done this way. You don't say that to nobody else. So yes, I am heated. But being the person I am, I'm not going to say it behind your back, Chairman. I'm going to say it here. You are not perfect. What you did, you needed to do based on what was situated in front of you. And we wish we could do more for arts and culture. So let's not play a political game, executive team, that we don't have departments that reallocate. They reallocate for a reason. And so I'm off of my pivotal soapbox, but this is nasty politics at its best.

Commissioner Arrington.

Dave, District 5 should never be last. What's going on? No, so I do want to say I agree with Commissioner Barrett about the 142,000. I'm hopeful that we can find some contingency funds to make sure that we make this year's contribution 3 million as prescribed. Additionally, what I also want to say is that although the money may be distributed in different ways and different things, typically, there are more arts organizations in the city of Atlanta but a lot of times these organizations someone may live in College Park and then go perform in Atlanta or go perform in North Fulton and so it benefits the entire community regardless of where the non-profit office is located or which district the nonprofit office is located in, right? You know, I know you had some of the different groups come down here and perform. And so, you know, it may be a group that's located in North Fulton or South Fulton. Does that mean that they can't perform art in the city of Atlanta? They can't come to the Fulton County Atrium and perform? No. We had Val Ethnic there, right? I mean, they came from East Point to perform in Atlanta. So, thank you for what you're doing in arts and let's find the 142 000 so we can make sure that this year's contribution is the full three million for this year's groups commissioner barrett mr chairman um with all due respect vice chair abdu rockman's repeated mocking of me is a decorum violation

So what are you asking me?

I'm calling a decorum violation. I'd like you to rule on it, please.

Then we can vote on it. All right, Commissioner Barrett has stated her belief that the comments by Vice Chair Abdulrahman was a violation. So let's vote. I can rule myself or we can take a vote, so I'm choosing for us to take a vote.

Upon the order, Chairman. Yes. We don't need a second to that?

What?

To what she's asking for? Is there a second required for it?

Madam Parliamentarian.

We're pulling it up to confirm, but I don't recall there being a requirement for a second. I believe it is your decision as to whether you rule on it or just put it up for a vote.

Okay, all right, let's vote. You wanna research it?

Can I have one moment to talk about it?

I mean, I've got discussion. I was unsure, I didn't know who Vice Chair was talking about. I thought I heard her reference in the Executive Committee. So I don't know.

With all due respect, Commissioner Arrington, I was talking about everybody. I wasn't talking about just Commissioner Barrett. I was talking about the executive team. I was talking about Madam DA, Sheriff, and everything. And I do have freedom of speech. And so if somebody is offended by what I said, then that's on them. I don't think it's a decorum violation because at the end of the day, it is my opinion. And so here again, I've heard worse said down here and complete silence. But go ahead.

I stand by what I said.

Mr. Chairman, if I may interject.

I'm so sorry. I need to apologize. It does require a second before you are at the juncture where you would consider deciding yourself or putting it up for a vote. So a second is required according to the ordinance.

Okay. So we'll be factual here now. When I have a choice of... ruling that it was or putting it before the body for a vote? I chose to put it before the body for a vote and the parliamentarian has ruled that it requires a second. Is there a second? Just a minute. Go ahead.

To be clear, the mocking of the way i spoke when i addressed this issue is what i am referring to that was done twice within the vice chair's comments if no one else agrees that it is a violation of decorum to mock a fellow commissioner then so be it i will withdraw my request i will withdraw my motion but at the end of the day that's not how we should treat each other i am sorry that you don't like that i am you know determined to support the full 3 million being delivered to the recipients of art grants in 2026. I would disagree that I don't also vehemently oppose or stand for other things across the board and have done so for the four years. So I'm not quite sure what that's about. And I would also argue that the arts community and Mr. Manuel know that I have been a very big supporter of him and of the arts community throughout my entire time here. And in no way is this a dig on him or his ability to do his job. It is a It is a problem with the way this was implemented that I think can be addressed, and I am doing everything I can to just make sure that 3 million gets delivered. That's it, that's all. And if you mistook my commentary or my questions, Mr. Manuel, on the way this money was dispersed, please forgive me.

Okay, do you withdraw your motion?

Yes.

All right, motion is withdrawn. The motion on the floor is to approve. Motion is approved by Vice Chair, Dr. Rachman, seconded by Commissioner Arrington.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, five yays, zero nays.

All right, colleagues, it is 1-0-6. I've got two requests of recess for lunch, so. We'll entertain a motion to recess for lunch and executive session where we may consider issues that deal with real estate, personnel, and litigation.

And the motion passes. Six yays, zero nays.

All right, good afternoon. We will resume the regular order of business without any objections. Madam County Attorney, let's take items from executive session.

Yes, Mr. Chair. Is there a motion to approve an increase to the current CGL maintenance contract in the amount of $410,104?

Motion to do so by Commissioner Thorne, seconded by Vice Chair Abdur-Rahman. Please vote.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays.

Is there a motion to approve a contract with Precision Fence Works in an amount not to exceed $365,039.85 for fence installation?

Motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur-Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

Vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays.

Is there a motion to approve Jail Shower Cleaning Service by Cotton Commercial USA Incorporated through December 31st, 2026 in an amount not to exceed $209,000?

Motion to approve by Commissioner Harrington, seconded by Vice Chair Abdur Rahman.

And the vote is open.

Is there a motion to, oh, I'm sorry. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. Now, is there a motion to approve the request to approve exchange of real property with Atlanta-Fulton County Recreation Authority?

Motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdi-Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays.

Is there a motion to approve a change order with CGI Technology Solutions Incorporated in the amount of $1,500,000?

Motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays.

Is there a motion to approve the request for representation in item nine of the executive session agenda?

Motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur-Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Arrington.

And the vote is open.

And the motion passes, five yays, zero nays. Is there a motion to approve the request for representation in item 10 of the executive session agenda?

Motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Barrett.

And the vote is open.

And the motion passes, four yays, zero nays. Is there a motion to approve the request for settlement authority in item 13 of the executive session agenda?

Motion to approve by Commissioner Errington, seconded by Vice Chair Abdur Rahman.

And the vote is open.

And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. No further action items from executive session.

Thank you, Madam County Attorney. Continue, Madam Clerk.

Bottom of page eight, under Health and Human Services, 260404, Community Development, requests approval of the 2026 Summer Youth Job Training Program Evaluation Committee's recommendations in the amount of $250,000.

Motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur-Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Barrett.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. On page 9, 260405, Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities, request approval to enter a contract with the Georgia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities for the acceptance of a $9,481,532 in grant funding for the planning and design of the Behavioral Health Crisis Center in North Fulton.

I have a motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

Chairman Pitts, thank you. We today are seeking approval for what would be the second contract with the State Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities for a behavioral health crisis center in North Fulton. We would like to take this opportunity to provide a general overview of the project. We have a short slide deck that we would like to present today. If I could have the presentation for the Fulton County Behavioral Health Crisis Center, please. Next slide, please. So again, this is a $9.4 million contract with the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities for a second behavioral health crisis center in North Fulton. As you know, the board committed all of the funding for the construction of the very first behavioral health crisis center at Oak Hill, which has been in operation for over a year now. We're entering our second year and have served over 1,300 constituents through that facility. Today, this is, again, the second contract. What is important about this investment is that we are also going to commit the land value and the land actually of $6.6 million for this project. Dream has done an outstanding job with vetting the suitability of this facility, which will be located adjacent to the brand new Health and Human Services North. at 4700 North Point Parkway. This of course will bring much needed crisis care to the citizens of North Fulton. They will not now need to travel to Central Fulton for crisis care. if they choose or need that type of service we anticipate this facility will serve five to seven thousand constituents annually and it is in alignment with the state's bed board study which indicates we need an additional 72 crisis beds in region three where Fulton County is located by 2025 and expanding that to 87 by 2032. Latrina Foster and her team lead the contract management with Grady who is our current vendor for our facility at Oak Hill and she will come forward and provide some of the technical expertise regarding what this facility will offer. So I'll turn it over to Latrina to cover the next slide.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Next slide, please. So here you're seeing a copy of the floor plan where we plan on implementing a Behavioral Health Crisis Center that has 24 crisis stabilization beds, as well as 16 temporary observation chairs, as well as our 24-7 walk-in crisis service center. So this footprint is very similar to what we have at Oak Hill. We have changed a few of the dynamics within the temporary observation unit, whereas at Oak Hill, we have 16 observation chairs. In this particular location, we will have a combination of chairs and beds for individuals that stay up to 24 hours where if they needed to take a nap or sober, they will have the ability to do so. Also with this footprint, we have the flexibility to ensure that we have one living room to accommodate all the individuals at Oak Hill. We have two living rooms and that was just based on the design of the building that we extended off of. So with this being a brand new build, we have a little bit more flexibility to ensure that we are in compliance and that we implement lessons learned from the Oak Hill project as well. In addition to that, with the floor plan that you see before you, the state did give us a stamp of approval in March of 2026. However, we met with the state earlier this, no, in June, and they did have some recommendations around the floor plan for a behavioral health crisis center that is built in 2026 or beyond, and that is to ensure that with your Seclusion and restraint rooms, they are closer to your temporary observation room as well as closer to your crisis stabilization unit. That way if an individual needs to transfer from the temporary observation room, into the crisis stabilization unit, you're able to minimize the number of incidents that may occur as an individual is escalated at that time, you'll be able to transition them into a seclusion and restraint room a little bit faster. Next slide. This is just showing you where the current HHS facility is located in blue. And then if you look up, you will be able to see where we are proposing the new Behavior Health Crisis Center in North Fulton is located within the same campus of the HHS North facility. Next slide. Once again, as I said earlier, the state did approve our initial conceptual drawings. We are still collaborating with Sizemore based on the recommendations that I did just discuss with you on reference to the seclusion and restraint room. We did go back to Sizemore for them to incorporate those changes within our conceptual. which they have, and we will be meeting with the state on August 18th to present the new conceptual with their recommendations incorporated within those conceptuals. From there, Sizemore will transition to enhanced schematics, which we are looking to have those completed by September of 2026. In September of 2026, or early October of 2026, we are looking to release a request for a proposal for a design build. And with that, we are anticipating that we will be able to do a notice to proceed in january of 2027 which would bring us to a substantial completion date of this project in the first quarter of 2029. next slide thank you latrina i was going to say this is right thank you

So the next slide is just giving you an overview of the funding strategy. Before you today is the contract, but as you know with construction, there is no perfect timing between when we need the funding and when we can draw the funding down from the state through a monthly reimbursement. So the finance team has done an amazing job with figuring out a solution to how we can bridge the gap so that we do not have any stoppages with the construction process. So what you see here is that solution, which will be the use of a drawdown bond in collaboration with the Fulton DeKalb Hospital Authority, which will provide the interim funding for the project. As we have worked with Sizemore and the state, we believe this project will come in around $24 million. They have committed to an annual investment of 9.4 million. So every year we will come back to the board seeking approval for the next year's $9.4 million of funding. So the state is committed well aware of the cost of the project, that the full construction cost will be $24 million, and we will receive funding for the project in annual increments of $9.4 million. We will be bringing back under the finance umbrella on August 19th the funding mechanism, which is the drawdown bond for your consideration. So I'll stop there, and I believe the county manager has some additional remarks.

Just one comment. Sometimes I think we make these things look too easy, and they look like, well, gosh, here's two or three charts. I just want to say, starting with Latrina Foster, if we had not had the vision for this years ago, probably almost 10 years ago, to create a network of providers, gain credibility with DBHDD, meet expectations, come to you for funding, we would not be here because that built the foundation. Secondly, I think without Dr. Rochelle's leadership that really has every week looked over these major HHS projects, these two being critical, but of course HHS North and others, we would not be here because it takes tying all this together and again showing DBHDD that not only can we do one, we could do two. And then I think as well, sometimes again, we say, well, the finance team thought this up. It was really quite a challenge ultimately to figure out how we would meet the cashflow requirements of this build with what their standard approach is, which is 9.4 million a year. So all of that had to be synchronized and dealt with in terms of a bond offering. And I think each meeting that we went to, because Latrina had credibility, Dr. Schell had credibility, Sharon went with us, and Ray Turner had credibility, we were able to get this done. And the last thing I want to say, just to put a fine point on it, there's a huge amount of benefit to the community that we all know absent having this, these folks either end up, because the definition is a threat to themselves or a threat to someone else. they can either end up in jail or they could end up harming themselves or someone else. So this is truly at the front line of behavioral health and improvement in Fulton County. And what I want you to lastly know is when you put these numbers together, if you thought of this as just a grant, not just 9.4 million a year, it's the equivalent of two $100 million grants. So if you just did the net present value of that out into the future and thought about, well, what does this mean? If you remember just a few years ago, our grants from the state were in the tens of thousands of dollars, right Latrina? So to go from that to two $100 million grants, if that's the way that they were actually awarded versus on a year-to-year basis, we would really know how significant this is. But I wanna say it's been a complete team effort and then a huge thanks to Commissioner Kevin Tanner, who I think has wanted us to succeed from day one. Thank you.

Thank you, Dick. Next slide. A question that we often get is what can we provide to constituents today? And so we just want to reiterate that we do have an app called the Fulton Cares app and constituents can download this app for themselves or a loved one and not only access all of our behavioral health services, but all of the services that are provided by Fulton County through the generous funding by the board. So we'll stop here and take any questions, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Commissioner Arrington followed by Commissioner Thorne.

Thank you. This looks real good. I'm glad to hear about it. But I want to give us another challenge because the existing behavioral center is in the city of Atlanta. And now we're getting one for North Fulton. We need one in South Fulton. So we need to go get $300 million. We're another $100 million because we need to make sure that we have equity throughout the county. No problem with the service center in North Fulton. But if we're going to have one in Atlanta, if we're going to put one in North Fulton, we need to be making plans to put one in South Fulton as well. We have the same behavioral health issues that people in Atlanta and North Fulton have as well.

Thank you, Commissioner Harrington. We'll certainly take that back, and we will be presenting in August the feasibility study and the findings and request for approval to move forward with the HHS South facility, which is separate from the behavioral health project.

And so what is the one you're doing in August?

So the HHS North that we opened that has the array of senior services, outpatient behavioral health.

I thought you said South.

Yes, we are bringing in August the feasibility study findings and funding recommendation for South Fulton.

Okay, and then is that a facility where the new South Fulton Behavioral Health Disability Crisis Center?

So your request for a similar facility to this would be in addition to what we're bringing back.

Okay, so there wouldn't be space at the other center to house this, or it just needs to be in a separate building?

Yes, sir.

But as you recall, that's how we got to this. We created or we found the site at 4700 North Point. Got well down the path of building that once COVID passed. And then we, working with the state, found this opportunity. So if there is an opportunity, that's the way I could see it going. And that space where we're going to put HHS South is 40 plus acres.

Awesome. Thank you. Commissioner Thorne?

Yes, I can tell you that 4700 has been really, really nice to see, well done, the work that's all been done there. I enjoy having my office there. I enjoy interacting and watching it as it's blossoming and coming on board. Latrina, I just wanna thank you for all you've done. I know in the community, in the mental health space, they are so well respected. not only in Fulton County, but in Forsyth County. Like they wish they had what we have. And our investment in behavioral health is outstanding. So I really kudos to your leadership. And I wanted to kind of give a shout out to Representative Jan Jones while we were at it. I believe this was taken off the table at the last minute and she had to fight to get it back in the budget. So I just want to appreciate her efforts now that she's stepping down from her role as being a legislator. This was kind of one of her last critical pieces of bringing this center to North Fulton as well as the one that we already had. So that's it.

Commissioner Ellis.

Yeah, I'll add my kudos for great work, you know, just to say, you know, we've come a long way, baby. I mean, this thing, when we were with things back in 10, 11, 12 years ago to where we are today, to the point that the manager made from, you know, really, you know, we're, I won't say persona non grata with the state, but we had no relationship with the state, and, you know, to see this come through to where, you know, they're going to be providing the full funding. I mean, it'll be a state center. It carries the Fulton County name, right? But it'll be, you know, part of the state network and, you know, folks in Cherokee, Gwinnett, and, you know, all over, you know, if we have beds available, they'll be using it just as well, which just like that's playing out right now in neighboring counties and, you know, our central location. So, you know, it's part of a full network as well. So, yeah, this is a... It's a big lift, and a big lift to get this thing built over the next few years too, so more to come, right? But you can take a break for the rest of the day. That's all. Thank you. Was that to me or Dr. Rochelle? You.

Thank you, thank you.

And I failed to mention, I don't know why I was, I meant to mention it when I was talking about Dr. Rochelle's effort, but obviously DREAM, Joe, Tim, Sam, I mean, there's a host of people that appear on this weekly call, but they have just done a terrific job, and as Latrina could tell better than anybody, it was difficult getting through that first design work, because there were so many things changing, so kudos to Dream as well, my fault for not saying.

All right, the motion on the floor is to approve.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. Thank you. 260406, Public Works, request approval to increase spending authority for fire hydrants and parts in an amount not to exceed $238,570.

All right, motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur-Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. 260407, request approval to utilize cooperative purchasing for forestry compact track loader and mulching head in the amount of $172,970.77. Motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdur-Rahman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

And the vote is open.

And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. 260408, request approval to utilize cooperative purchasing to provide cleaning and maintenance of sewer lines, storm drains, and pipelines. An amount not to exceed $664,879.85. Motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdirahman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne. And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. 260409, request approval of an intergovernmental agreement with the city of Milton, Georgia for water main relocations in an estimated amount of $2,231,606.

All right, motion to approve by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. 260410, request approval to close out the contract membrane system for the Bear Creek Water Reclamation Facility expansion in an amount not to exceed 48,163 cents.

Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Vice Chair Abdur Rahman.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. On page 10, 260411, request approval of a contract item agreement with Georgia Department of Transportation to resurface Roswell Road, estimated cost of $174,000.

All right, a motion by our Vice Chair, Dr. Rachman, seconded by Commissioner Thorne.

And the vote is open. And motion passes, four yeas, zero nays. 260412, request approval of an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Alpharetta, Georgia to clarify the roles and responsibilities for maintenance of the roadways and water infrastructure within the continuum development.

Motion to approve by Commissioner Thorne, seconded by Commissioner Ellis. I'm sorry, Commissioner Eric, did you want to be heard?

Yes, I want to ask, what are the roles? I mean, I don't know how we clarify them unless we know what they are. Good afternoon, Commissioner.

Good afternoon. I'm Patrick Parson, I'm the Interim Deputy Director, Wastewater Reclamation. I'm representing David Clark for the Department of Public Works.

Okay.

And basically what this 54 acre project up in Milton and what happened was typically we would put the water lines within the curve because of the current utilities that's already there. We had fiber office there. gas, so we had to install those particular pipes in the road. Now, that caused an issue. Now, who's going to maintain if something were to happen to the water lines? It's the county's responsibility to, if anything happened to those pipes, we go in and fix them. but the city typically take care of the roads. So we had to, instead of having, we wanted to get ahead of it. We did not want to have any confusion about it. Something would have happened to those, our lines in that road, who's responsible for fixing them. Fulton County is responsible for fixing the water lines, and the city of Alpharetta is responsible for putting the road back, the asphalt, the sidewalks back together. We wanted to be clear on that, and that's why we had this agreement.

Okay, that sounds good. I guess for me, just being unfamiliar with the process, I mean, if the water lines are under the road, Then who's responsible for cutting the road to get to the water lines? Fulton County. Okay, because that's the only way we can get to them. That's correct. All right, but then after we cut the road to get to the water line, then it's their responsibility to repave the road. That's correct. Okay. And then the reason this is different or this wouldn't apply in South Fulton is because Fulton County is not responsible for the water in South Fulton. So this is tied to our water responsibility in North Fulton. Thank you.

All right, motion is to approve. I'm sorry, Commissioner.

So do we need a similar agreement with all the cities in North Fulton or just Alpharetta?

This continuing project just so happened, typically we put the water lines out of the way in the curve. Just so happened that we could not do that in this particular project because utilities were already there. Yes.

All right, motion is to approve.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. Commissioner's action items 260413, request approval resolution to support affordable housing in downtown Atlanta by approving a grant from funds previously set aside to aid in the construction of a 149 unit affordable multi-family development and for other purposes. Sponsored by Commissioner Barrett.

Motion to approve by Commissioner Thorne, seconded by Commissioner Barrett. Vice Chair, Dr. Rahman, followed by Commissioner Barrett.

Clerk, I want to, for 26-0413, 26-0414, and 26-0415, I want to co-sponsor.

That's fine with me. I'm happy to have you as a co-sponsor. Okay, so on 260413, the one before us right now, this is for Folio House. It's a pretty cool project, actually. We already approved phase one of this as a board, which was the old historic Atlanta Journal Constitution Building, or Atlanta Constitution Building, rather, and this is the affordable housing piece of that project. So it's on the currently vacant and adjacent lot right there. It's not displacing anybody. It's great for downtown. And so we're combining historic preservation with affordable housing. It's close to transit. It's gonna create employment opportunities. It's a really good project all in all. And it's the same type of project we've been passing kind of meeting by meeting right now where it's coming from the Westside TAD increment that's already been allotted for this. And I'm happy to answer questions if anyone has them, but I would appreciate your favorable vote.

Motion to approve by Commissioner Thorne, seconded by Commissioner Barrett.

And the vote is open. And motion passes, six yays, zero nays. 260414 requests approval resolution to approve a grant to create economic opportunity and support local small businesses to aid in the restoration and preservation of historic downtown Atlanta storefronts and for other purposes. Sponsored by Commissioners Barrett and Vice Chair Abdul Rahman.

I have a motion to approve by Commissioner Barrett, seconded by Commissioner Thorne. Commissioner Barrett.

Thank you. This resolution is to approve the release of $50,000 of our Westside Tad Increment. This one is really around supporting local small business, but also has a historic preservation aspect. This is the Muses building in downtown Atlanta. There are several vacant stores there. This will help get those populated. And then there are some existing small businesses there. So the vacant spaces will be made available with first priority to local small businesses at an affordable rate. And the cool historic part is that one of these storefronts is 66 Peachtree, which was the location for the Crystal Palace Barbershop, which operated from 1902 to 1972 and was owned by the notable black businessman Alonzo Herndon. And then 50 Peachtree Street was the flagship department store of the George Muse clothing company. It was built in 1912 and expanded in 1920. So I'd like to share those really cool things when we're doing them, and I would appreciate your favorable vote.

All right, motion to approve by Commissioner Barrett, seconded by Commissioner Thorne. Once again, please vote.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, five yeas, zero nays. 260415, request approval of a resolution to approve a grant to support the creation of 194 new high quality jobs to provide opportunities for area students and graduates to enter high growth careers to capitalize a 32.9 million investment by Mercedes Benz and further private investment in Fulton County and for other purposes.

All right, a motion to approve by Commissioner Barrett, seconded by Commissioner Thorne. Commissioner Barrett.

Thank you. This resolution is for the release of $125,000 of our Westside TAD increment. This creates 194 jobs and provides opportunities to retain Georgia's high-tech talent here in state. This was a part of a sort of a collaborative bid by the state of Georgia, city of Atlanta, and Select Fulton to win this project over Westside. I think it was three other states, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Michigan. And so the package we put together included this grant and we're just excited to be a part of it and excited to have those jobs here in Fulton. So again, would appreciate your favorable vote.

All right, motion is to approve.

And the vote is open. And the motion passes, six yays, zero nays. 260416, request approval resolution to increase economic opportunity on the west side to support the creation of affordable commercial space for local small businesses by approving the release of funds previously set aside to assist in neighborhood stabilization to catalyze private investment and for other purposes. Sponsored by Commissioner Barrett.

You have a motion to approve by Commissioner Arrington, seconded by Commissioner Barrett. Commissioner Barrett, you have the floor.

Yeah, Mr. Chairman, with all original intention put aside, I'd like to hold this for now. It's come to my attention that there are some questions about this one, so I'd like to go back to the drawing board, get some more information, and bring it back at a future meeting, if that's okay with everybody.

Is that a substitute motion to hold? Sure. All right, the motion on the floor is to approve. Substitute motion to hold. Is there a second? Second. All right, properly moved and seconded. Let's vote on the motion to hold.

And the vote is open on the motion to hold. And the motion passes, five yays, zero nays. 260417, request approval resolution establishing a policy of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners regarding participation in tax allocation districts, declaring the board's opposition to the proposed extension of existing City of Atlanta tax allocation districts and for other purposes. Sponsored by Commissioner Ellis and Vice Chair Abdulrahman.

Right, I have a motion to approve by Vice Chair Abdurrahman, seconded by Commissioner Ellis. Commissioner Ellis, Commissioner Barrett, Commissioner Errington. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

If you'll indulge me, this may take a little bit long to kind of walk through, but I think this is an important topic that we need to address, so I'll try to be as succinct as possible. First, I want to talk about what this resolution does and doesn't do. This resolution would declare this board's opposition to the proposed extension of existing city of Atlanta tax allocation districts in a recent piece of legislation that was passed by the city of Atlanta City Council. It would establish the policy conditions which must be met for our consent to any new extended or recreated TADs. It would establish monitoring requirements for our existing TADs. and procedures and directions upon when TAD's closed to ensure that funds are being properly remitted back to us that are in abeyance and post the TAD closure. Um, the, uh, what it doesn't do, it, uh, doesn't oppose any effort by any municipality to, um, uh, you know, for any, you know, type of economic development they want to do, affordable housing, you know, et cetera, you know, anything of that nature. It doesn't offer any opposition to anything of that nature. It doesn't end our participation in TAS and it doesn't stop us from entertaining, um, you know, positions on new TADs going forward. I'm going to take a little bit of a minute just to talk about, you know, TADs, how they function, remind us of, you know, the state laws that are applicable to them, as well as our current participation in existing TADs. TAFs as they generally function, they're a form of economic development tool that cities have at their avail. It's not the only tool that they have. Cities and most cities around, when they get engaged in economic redevelopment efforts, they employ tools like general obligation bonds, use our general fund, use special taxing districts, do referendum for bond packages, similar to the way that we did, took to the voters, our library package for new libraries and so forth. You can use sales taxes. Sales taxes can be repurposed, et cetera. So there are a number of tools which cities have at their disposal for economic development, so forth and all that. And also as a reminder too, we don't handle land use, planning, that sort of stuff. All that stuff rests with the individual cities. TAD is an existing economic development tool. It works in a defined geographic area for a set period of time. The growth in the property tax revenue generated by that new development set aside, reinvested back into that same area rather than flowing to, importantly, rather than flowing to schools, the county, and city services as they normally would. So simple way to think about it. You got a neighborhood with some blight or some things, some areas where people feel there's opportunities for significant redevelopment where property values are low and no developer wants to invest. The city draws a line around it, says any new tax revenue generated by growth inside that line is gonna be used to fund roads, infrastructure, and incentives to attract those developers. Bond packages can be struck up against that increment, and the idea is that the investment jumpstarts growth that wouldn't have happened otherwise, and when the district expires, that now thriving district tax base is fully returned to fund public services, paying everyone back for the patience that they exhibited while that TAT has been in existence. The catch is that during the life of these TADs, often 20 to 30 years, property owners everywhere else outside of that footprint are effectively subsidizing that district. Their tax dollars fund schools, jails, libraries, health services as usual, while this new tax revenue from inside a TAD goes back into the TAD instead of helping to pay for those same services. The more TADs they are, the longer they run, the greater the burden becomes on everyone outside of them in the form of either increased taxes or paying more taxes than they otherwise would have or decreased services or delay in the expansion of services or some combination of all of those particular things. TADs are permitted via state law and that state law allows for local governments to set these things up and create them as I described, but what they also do is they have limits on them, right, for the protection, and those limits are specifically designed for protection of all those other taxpayers, so that you're not placing an undue burden, so it has a limited time construct, and it has a limited volume construct. It sets forth in state law that you can't create a new tax allocation district when the taxable value of the property in this new one, as well as what you have in all existing tax allocation districts, exceeds 10% of that current total tax base within that particular city. And then upon creation, you have to apply to the State Revenue Commissioner for the termination of that particular tax allocation increment base using the taxable value as of that creation date. And importantly, you're required to file a redevelopment plan once that resolution to go into a TAD is adopted. Fulton County has been a strong participant in tax allocation districts for a significant period of time. There are currently 12 TADs that we participate in. Four of those are outside the city of Atlanta, and quite frankly, they are fairly, they are very de minimis. The most significant ones we participate in are in the city of Atlanta, and the total cost to us, or cost, the tax increment otherwise would be coming in to fund Fulton County services is roughly in the magnitude of about 53 million or so. in 2025, we don't know what the numbers are in 2026. That contribution has grown significantly over the past 12 years or so. It's up about 232%. I mentioned kind of the current outlay. Over that period of time, roughly about 413 million. Just sort of think about the significance of that. You can correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Manager, but that would be more significant than any capital project Fulton County has ever done, bar none, correct? Yes, sir. And that's just over 12 years, and we typically bond something over about 30. So you can trace it back and just sort of get and understand the magnitude to which Fulton County has contributed to projects within the city of Atlanta and a lot of the stuff that has taken place. So that's kind of the backdrop of of what these are, so why is this here and what's the response? Why is this here and why is this framed up this way? Because there was a passage of something by the Atlanta City Council on June, this neighborhood reinvestment initiative, which which approved the extension of six of the eight tax allocation districts in Atlanta for 30 years. And there were no It offered a framework to seek to get at different things such as affordable housing, infrastructure improvements, neighborhood stabilization, displacement, a framework for that. But it offered no specific redevelopment plans, no specific projects, no cost estimates were ID'd within this particular resolution. and the provision required to consent by Fulton County government and Atlanta Public Schools. So as it's written, it requires a response from us at Fulton County to determine how the city of Atlanta should proceed or not, and I think it's important that we provide that direction today. So this resolution would, would declare our opposition to this proposed extension and would decline our participation in it. And I wanna walk you through why I think it's important and hopefully that everybody on this board that this will be unanimous vote going forward in support of this particular resolution. And, you know, as I noted, we're not opposed to TADs. We've willingly participated in them. We're going to willingly probably entertain these in the future. And probably there will be some new ones that we may or may not participate in. And so we're not opposed to economic development. But we all swore an oath to uphold the Georgia constitutions and the laws of the state of Georgia. And this as it's written, and what's been approved by the city of Atlanta, Atlanta City Council, is not in compliance with Georgia law. I mean, that's at the core, that should be a core basis for us to decline this, regardless of any sort of review of kind of the underlying merits of an individual project or whatnot. It should really just almost sort of start in there, but I'm gonna elaborate and talk about that as well as just a couple other points that have been raised because this has been a point of significant public discussion. The measure SS had presented is not in compliance with state law. If you look at the current position of the city of Atlanta, There's, according to their records, and I think it will probably be higher once we go through the next Tide Tax Digest, you know, because that has been the pattern over the past few years. The level of, there's a 10% threshold. Atlanta is at 16%, you know, as of 2025. is an extension the same as a creation? The answer to that is yes. And certainly I think any logical person would look at what the state passed and say, hey, they put the 10% threshold in there, not for gamesmanship, but for protection for taxpayers and a reasonableness test and a limit test. So you're over the threshold. In addition to kind of just looking at the face of the law and what it says, We have an opinion from state legislative council, which states that, that an extension of a TAD is a creation of a new TAD. It requires a redevelopment plan. And therefore, any of these extensions would be deemed a new TAD. So if you're over the threshold, this is not a legal mechanism to pursue. that Louie Bennett receded that legal opinion. It's also gone to the city of Atlanta, I believe, as well as APS. Our county attorneys reviewed it, and she's found it to be a valid legal opinion with clearly reasoned and rational legal arguments. Is that correct?

Yes, I would agree with that.