City Council - Regular Meeting

Okay. Good, good evening. I would like to welcome Pastor Billy Lo with City Church who will lead us in tonight's invocation. Thank you. Let's pray. Heavenly Father, thank you so much for another great day for beautiful weather. Lord, thank you for the city that we live in. God, as we always pray, we pray that you would protect our uh first responders and we thank you for them and we pray that you would give this council wisdom and discernment as they make decisions that would honor you. Lord, we pray all this in Jesus name. Amen. Amen. Can I also thank you for coming in week after week. It's very nice to see you. It's very much appreciated. Thanks. Thank you.

I would like to call the regular meeting of the Milton City Council for Monday, April 27th, 2026 to order. The city encourages you to review tonight's agenda carefully. Each citizen who chooses to participate in public comment must complete a comment card and submit it to the city clerk prior to the agenda item being called. While the Milton rules allow a speaker to turn in their comment card up until the clerk calls the agenda item. Once the agenda item is called, no more comment cards can be accepted. Will the city clerk please call the role and make general announcements?

Good evening, mayor and council be happy to call roll for the April 27th, 2026 regular meeting. I would like to remind those in attendance to please silence all cell phones at this time. As the mayor mentioned, if you would like to make a public comment, you are required to complete a public comment card prior to that agenda item being called. All speakers will identify themselves by name, address, and organization before beginning your comment. If you are representing an organization, a notorized affidavit is required stating you have the authority to speak on behalf of that organization. If you have not done so, please bring your p public comment cards to me now. Demonstration of any sort within the chamber is prohibited. Please refrain from any applause, cheering, booing, outbursts, or dialogue with any person speaking. Anyone in violation may be asked to leave. Mayor and council, as I call roll this evening, please confirm your attendance. Mayor Payton Jameson

here. Council member Brian Dolan here. Council member Doug Haney here. Council member Carol Kirkley here. Council member Jan Jacobus present. and council member Phil Kramer here. For the record, Council Member Juliet Johnson is absent. Mayor, you do have a quorum. Would everyone please rise for the pledge of allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Next is approval of the meeting agenda. Uh, do we have any executive session tonight? I do not. Okay. Um, I'll have a motion to approve the meeting agenda. May

I'll make a motion to approve the meeting agenda as proposed. Second. Okay. I have a motion from Council Member Cranmer and a second from Council Member Haney to approve the meeting agenda. All in favor, please place your votes. Select one by two. All right, that motion passes unanimously. Okay, next is general public comment. Do we have any general public comment? We do, mayor. We have two and we have one to be read into the record.

Okay. General public comment is a time for citizens to share information with the mayor and the city council and to provide input and opinions on any matter that is not scheduled for its own public hearing during today's meeting. Please remember, this is not a time to engage the mayor or members of the city council in conversation. When your name is called, please come forward and speak into the microphone stating your name, address, and organization for the record. If you will please call the first city or public comment. Thank you, mayor. And I will remind everyone that you do have five minutes. I will give you an warning at one minute and then I will announce when time has expired. Mayor, I invite Lisa Collie to the podium, please.

Good evening. Lisa Collie, 14680 Freemanville Road. Um, I live immediately adjacent to the city-owned property at 14620 Free Freemanville Road. For nearly 20 years, the old red barn on the city's property has posed a significant safety hazard. It is positioned directly in the line of sight on a blind curve, severely limiting visibility for northbound traffic exiting our driveway and for vehicles approaching from the south. This creates only seconds of reaction time for motorists endangering our family, visitors, and all drivers on Freemanville Road. We previously notified prior owners of this dangerous condition. The barn in its current location constitutes an ongoing safety hazard in dangerous condition on public property. Item 26-121 on tonight's consent agenda proposes spending nearly $8,000 in in funds to refresh and stabilize the barn in its present hazardous location. I strongly oppose this. Refreshing the barn where it obstructs visibility does not address the more important serious safety concerns and would be an irresponsible use of public resources. In my opinion, in my opinion, the responsible approach is to first relocate the barn to a safer area on the property outside the line of sight and then refresh and stabilize it if desired. To my knowledge, the barn has not been discussed by the historical society, nor is it an official city landmark. Yet it it was being referred at as a Milton landmark and placed on the consent agenda without prior public discussion. When we built our home, our children were three and seven. One of the concerns with moving here was pulling out of the driveway considering the black line of sight. Every single day I

took my kids to school, I would have to stop at the end of my driveway and roll the window down to listen to make sure there was no oncoming traffic. That was the only way to be certain nothing was coming. When my children were a driving age, as a mom, my fear was my kids, being boys especially, would pull out of my driveway not using the same extra caution. Thankfully, there have been no incidents so far, but the danger remains every single day for anyone approaching from the south or pulling out of my driveway. I respectfully request that this item be removed from the consent agenda so it can be discussed and reviewed in public before any resources are committed. I would like to understand where the proposed funding is coming from. Additionally, I'm concerned as an ad adjacent property owner that I was not notified in advance. And furthermore, given the city's recent safety and action project, which included a high resolution LAR scan of public rights away along roads such as Freemanville, why was this incredibly dangerous situation for drivers not identified? Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Please call the next speaker. Mayor, I invite Emma Porter to the podium, please. Good evening everyone and thanks for having me. Um my name is Emma Porter and I'm here regarding the parcel tonight uh the agenda involving the property and subdivision of property 15585 Thompson Road. Uh, I respectfully ask for the council to delay border. Will you please state your address for the record? Oh, my address? Yes.

Uh, it is 11020 uh Longboat Key Lane, Florida. Thank you.

Um, yeah. So, uh, going back to um the agenda proposal of subdivision of the property 15585 Thompson Road. Uh, I respectfully ask for the council to delay or table any action on this item until ongoing legal matters concerning this property are resolved. There is an active dispute involving settlement obligations, property rights, and compliant issues connected to this parcel. A petition for contempt has been filed in Fulton County Superior Court and a hearing has now been scheduled for May 11th at 11:00. I am arranging immediate service of process on this relevant party. Approving subdivision activity while these matters are pending risks creating further conflict uh additional uh additional litigation and potential prejudice to parties whose rights are still being adjudicated. I am not here to make personal attack. I'm here to request fairness, caution, and due to process. When ownership, interest, settlement, enforcement, or compliance questions remain unresolved, the prudent course of is to pause action until the court has opportunity to address these matters. At minimum, I respectfully request that my objection has been entered into the official record tonight along with the notice that litigation is pending and the official rec uh and the contest issue remains regarding this parcel. Again, I respectfully request that this matter will be deferred until the court process can be forwarded and we can move along with this property.

Thank you. Thank you so much for your time. Hey. Hey. Please uh read the next public comment.

Mayor, the next public comment is read into the record from Mr. Tim Enllo at 1375 Bethany Road. The first Confederate Memorial Day service in Columbus was held on the site St. Luke Methodist Church on April the 26th of 1866. The program was under the suspect of the Ladies Memorial Association which was organized in the early spring of 1866 for the purpose of holding a memorial service each year honoring the Confederate dead. April 26 anniversary of the surrender of General Joseph E. Johnson was selected as a suitable date for Memorial Day. The Secretary of the Ladies Memorial Association of Columbus wrote to the Southern Press proposing that the entire South joining the custom of an annual Confederate Memorial Day and suggesting April 26 as the date. The custom was inaugurated throughout the South and the date suggested was adopted. Since then, Confederate memorial services have been held in Columbus annually on that date. Mayor, that concludes uh general public comment.

Okay. Uh I will now close public comment and we will move on to consent agenda. Will the city clerk please sound the items? Mayor, that first item is approval of the April 13, 2026 regular city council meeting minutes. It's agenda item number 26117. Our next item is approval of the financial statements and investment report for the period ending January 31st, 2026, agenda item number 26118. Our next item is approval of a construction services agreement with 108 fire and safety LLC for the purchase purchase and installation of stationary self-contained breathing apparatus bottled field systems at fire station 42 and 43. Agenda item number 26119. Next is approval of a payment processing agreement with CSG Forte Payments Inc. to provide payment processing services for the parks and recreation department's civic rec system. Agenda item number 26120. Our next item is approval of a construction services agreement with Prime Contractors, Inc. for the refresh and stabilization of the Kennedy Greenspace property barn located at 14620 Freemanville Road. Agenda item number 26121. Our next item, approval of a memorandum of understanding between the city of Milton and Crab Apple Green LLC for the planning and execution of soccer watch party events. Agenda item number 22 26122. Our next item is approval of a service agreement with Avalon Motor Coaches LLC to provide bus transportation for Milton summer camp field trips. Agenda item number 26123. Our final consent agenda is approval of the subdivisions, plats, and revisions.

It's a minor plat for 15585 Thompson Road. The development is is again 15585 Thompson Road, landlock 473, District 2, Section 2. It's a minor plat. The purpose of this split is to subdivide the existing principal parcel totaling approximately 8.15 acres into two new parcels consisting of approximately three acres and 5.5 acres with again a total of 8.15 acres and a density of 0.24 units per acre. It was first presented at the April 13, 2026 regular meeting deferred to tonight's meeting. It's agenda item number 26124. That concludes consent agenda. Mayor,

thank you. Do you have a motion on the consent agenda? Mayor, I do have just one question for the city attorney, but the pending litigation with regards to that Thompson Road, would that have any bearing on our vote this evening, even though the city's not accompanied to that legal matter?

That's right. And so, so the answer is is obviously the legal proceedings are going to be what the legal proceedings are and the various representations made by the parties in that case. And again, I've not received notice of that except what I just heard from the public comment speaker. But at this point, based upon the documentation the city has received, um to the extent that that there is a disagreement over ownership or to the extent that there has been some sort of a um I'm not even I'm not even going to speculate on what it is, but to the extent that there is a disagreement, how about that? over ownership of the property. The city of Milton has received what it looks like are bonafideed legitimate information. I think we have the right to proceed to the extent that someone has acted inappropriately. I didn't really hear anybody say that specifically, but to the extent that has occurred, that'll between be between those private parties.

Okay. Thank you. And I'm sorry, one more question. Steve, maybe I'll field this one to you. With regards to the Kennedy property, my understanding is this is really a stabilization effort. This isn't the long-term plan or strategy for the barn. rather just maintain the current structure, the integrity of it while we figure out a long-term plan. Is that accurate? Completely. Thank you. But one more point I want to make as well that that I know that the speaker that came up wanted to make sure that they were they had made sort of a record of their position and I'll just I'll just note for the record I think they have made their position. That was an objective. I think that objective has been accomplished.

Okay. I have one more question about the the barn on the Kennedy Greenspace property. Is it in the right ofway? Do we know? I mean, I passed it every day for 10 years. Um, and I'd like to confirm that before I answer that question. Um, I can't imagine it is. Okay. Okay. Uh, any motion on the consent agenda? Right. I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda as read. Second.

Okay. A motion from councelor Cranmer and a second from councelor Cookerly to approve the consent agenda. All in favor, please place your votes. Okay. That motion passes unanimously. Okay. We'll now move on reports and presentations. Will city clerk please sound the item? Mayor, that item is the presentation of the city of Milton fiscal year 2025 annual audit. Agenda item number 26125. our deputy city manager, Bernardet Harville.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. We are here this evening to discuss the close of fiscal year 2025, including the conclusion of the annual external audit and the filing and public posting of the audited financial reports. State law requires that Milton has an external audit of its financial statements annually. The auditor is responsible for providing reasonable assurance that the city's financial reporting is free from material misstatements and is therefore in compliance with financial reporting standards. State law requires that the audit is complete and financial statements are filed and publicly available within 180 days after the end of the fiscal year. For Milton, that deadline is March 31st annually. Milton chooses to publish an annual comprehensive financial report or ACTUR, which is an enhanced version of the financial statements to meet this annual requirement. The acter includes a letter of transmitt management's discussion and analysis and a detailed statistical section in addition to the basic financial statements creating greater transparency and insight into the city's finances. Additionally, Milton also publishes a popular annual financial report or pa which is the more userfriendly version of the annual financial reports on the city's accomplishments each fiscal year. Tonight we have Will Dersis who is our financial our engagement director on the fiscal year 2025 audit from the audit firm Maldin and Jenkins with us to go over some of the highlights from the audit process as outlined in the auditor's discussion and analysis report which was included in tonight's packet.

Thank you Bernardet. Uh good evening mayor and council. Uh as Bernardet mentioned, my name is Will Deris and I'm a director with Maldin and Jenkins. Have been a part of the city's financial audit team uh for about 10 years now. Uh my presentation this evening is based on our uh auditor's discussion and analysis. And with that said, we'll get started. So page two, this discloses um some more information, a graphic depiction of Malden and Jenkins. a profile of our governmental practice um our our practice as a whole as well as the engagement team leaders for this year. Page three, this discloses some additional information, some other services and service lines offered by Malden and Jenkins. On page four, uh this goes over the independent auditors report. uh my responsibility to our responsibility as external auditors which ultimately is to express an opinion as to whether or not the city's financials are fairly um presented and provide reasonable rather than absolute assurance. Um, I'm pleased to share we have issued an unmodified audit opinion which can be thought of as a clean opinion. And again, that just means the city's financials are considered to fairly state um the results of operations and uh the state of things as of September 30, 2025. As Bernardet mentioned, the city issues an act which does go above and beyond the state uh requirements. So kudos to the finance team for for going above and beyond. And then on page six, this discloses just some of the an overview of the financial statements. We won't get into all the details or or into the weeds in any way, but um just to hit on a few of the uh the highlights of the

governmentwide reporting level, which is the full acrruel and fully consolidated picture of all the city's funds and then accounting for uh the city's long-term assets and liabilities under a full acral version of accounting. Um, as of September 30, the city reports assets of approximately 295 million offset by liabilities of approximately 58 million. And that results in net position or equity uh of about 237 million. Majority of that equity though is uh in the form of investment in the city's capital assets, roads, bridges, infrastructure, land, buildings, any right to use assets um offset by any liabilities, payables or other items that might encumber those assets. Uh that's about 133 million. Then there are restrict some of the resources are restricted by external parties, grantors, uh legal means. That amount is about 40 million. Um, when it's all said and done, the city's unrestricted net position, which is considered available for spending, available for use, is about 63 million at the end of September. The statement of activities, uh, which is the income statement for the city's financial statements, uh, reports a positive change in net position of approximately 62 million, uh, for the fiscal year ended. And then page seven and getting into page eight um are some graphs of some more visual depictions on the city's general fund. Its primary operating fund um as you imagine or as you know property tax that's uh the that represents the majority of revenues collected within the general fund. business tax and sales tax following and or sales tax and then business tax represent numbers two and three so on and so forth. And as for expenditures, public safety about 19 million that

represents um a little over 50% of total general fund expenditures followed by general government of about 6 million and then public works of about 3 million or so. And on page nine, um, just some more graphs, uh, a six-year trend of the general fund revenues and expenditures. Uh, the relationship, as you can see, typically revenues outpace expenditures, but not every single year. And then the net change in fund balance for the city's general fund has experienced some steady growth and a steady increase in the past four years since about 2022. Page 10 discloses the footnotes that accompany the financial statements uh which you can think of as just additional narrative um kind of behind the that go beyond just the financial schedules themselves. Oops. And page 12, this discloses the city's compliance reports. Uh the city being a local government within Georgia uh is subject to government auditing standards and uh therefore issues uh an opinion or issues a compliance report under yellowbook. And then because the city incurred and expended uh greater than $1 million worth of federal awards this year, single audit was also required. So we did a a single audit um for one major program of the city and a single audit report is a part of the act. some additional and final required communications um that I must mention to you all charged with governance. Uh on page 14, we had no uh disagreements, major um conflicts or disagreements with management during the course of our audit. At the conclusion of our audit, we request certain written representations from management uh concerning the um corroborating the completeness and the accuracy of the

financial statements. Uh we receive those with no problems. We're not aware of any other consultations management has had with with other accountants on on any audit matters. Um there were some adjustments proposed and posted uh by management to the financial statements and to the city's general ledgers. Um during this year we did have one uncorrected misstatement. Uh the city propos proposed and passed on one adjustment that ultimately was not recorded this year. Um to the effect of that would have been to reduce or restate uh net position of the city's financials. And then the uh the other side of that would have increased the city's expenses this year, but that entry was not deemed material and therefore was passed on by management. And then lastly, we at Malden Jenkins are independent of the city and its related organizations in all in all respects as you know or as you can imagine a uh independence is kind of the cornerstone of an effective audit. Page 16 U discloses one item that we did have a uh as a significant deficiency this year. That's uh to say a finding and significant deficiency that's less severe than a material weakness, not to that level. Um but it but it does constitute a finding and that was um that management had determined there were approximately $ 1.5 million worth of expenditures uh related to um ongoing uh construction and progress that had not been picked up in the past several years. And so uh an adjustment ultimately was made to record all that activity this year. Um but but that amount did uh necessitate um a financial related finding. And then we have one management point just a recommendation that's been a repeat point for the past

several years um for management related to cash bonds outstanding owed to developers as they complete those projects. So, we just want to uh remind everyone to continue to enforce its policy to encourage developers to complete those projects um so you're not holding on to to those funds for which you're liable um for an unnecessary amount of time. And then lastly, other matters for communication to the board to management. Gazsby, which is our standard setting um board, they keep us very busy. There's always new uh pronouncements going into effect. Um Gatsby 103 will be effective for next year. And then there's some others um that that you can read about in in the back of this packet which uh which some of which may some of which may not have impacts to the city's um audit and to its uh financial statements in future years. But with that said uh that'll conclude my presentation to you all this evening and uh I'm happy to take any questions or uh discuss anything anyone would like to discuss.

Thank you. Any questions council? No question mayor. Um thank you. Great presentation. The one finding that you had for the 1.5 million, is there a reason we didn't catch that last year in years past if that's been ongoing? We had a change in our finance leadership and some changes were made during that time and we've changed them back to the way we were doing it previously, which is what found that missing information. So, from here on out, we're back to our old practices and we won't have that issue. Got it. Thank you. No problem. Exactly what Bernardet said. That's what a lot of people say. Exactly. Well, thank you very much. Appreciate it. Very good. Thank you.

Okay. There are no first presentation, public hearing, or zoning agenda items. We will now move on to unfinished business. Will the city clerk please sound the item? Mayor, that item is consideration of an ordinance to amend chapter 4 of the city of Milton code of ordinances regarding alcoholic beverages and associated fees and appendix A. It's agenda item number 2611. Our city manager, Mr. Steven Koff.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Tonight I am here to discuss a series of modest amendments to the to Milton's alcohol code which is chapter 4 of Milton Milton's uh code of ordinances tonight. I'll start with a brief overview of the purpose of these amendments and then walk through the individual topics. At the conclusion we'll be seeking council action. As always please feel free to stop me at any point if you have any questions or need additional clarification. The recommended amendments before you are not a rewrite of the alcohol code, nor are they intended to change the city's overall approach to alcohol licensing. Instead, the amendments are intended to make targeted improvements to the code. They they include creating a more businessfriendly and fair fee structure, providing better clarity in certain areas such as distance requirements, cleaning up language that is outdated or could be confusing, and creating opportunities for cross promotion among small businesses in Milton and their products. This item first appeared before the council on April 13th under first presentation. Tonight, we'll start with distance requirements and a brief understanding of their purpose. Distance requirements exist to help ensure alcohol sales are located in appropriate areas and sensitive to nearby schools, churches, and other community uses. These statemandated requirements are not the same for every type of alcohol license. The distance standards differ depending on whether alcohol is sold by the package for off-site consumption or served by the drink for on-site consumption. So what's the current issue and why is this before you tonight? The issue is that the current language is not structured very clearly and it doesn't differentiate clearly between package

sales minimum different distance requirements and on-site consumption minimum distance requirements which is how the state distance requirements are structured and the inconsistency between that and the Milton code invariably leads to confusion by staff when we're trying to determine which standards apply. The solution is is actually quite simple. We propose restructuring the code so it clearly differentiates between the two types of licenses. Package sales for off- premise consumption and by the drink sales for on- premise consumption. That simple change will end the confusion which is significant. I just want to reiterate that no distance requirements are changing. We're just better structuring the ordinance so that it reflects the state code. It's more intuitive and easier to apply. These changes will not have any financial impact and will lead to more efficient and effective operations. As the changes are entirely inward-f facing, there will be no impacts on the lency or the community. So long as it pleases the council, you'll be voting on the full complement of amendments tonight, but it would probably make sense to section these off for questions or comments as as each one presents itself. So this it would be a good time to address any questions or comments related to distance requirements and what's being proposed before I move on to the next topic.

That's good. Any questions? All right. No. Forward.

All right. We will move on to new alcohol license applications and more specifically how the city assesses fees. As you all know, all new alcohol licenses applications go through the process that you've all become quite familiar with, including advertising and a public hearing before this body. And all alcohol licenses expire annually on December 31st. Renewal applications, which come in each year, are handled administratively. Today, we are only here to discuss new alcohol applications. So, what's the current issue with new alcohol license applications and how are fees applied? Under the current code, new alcohol license fees are assessed beginning the month the application is filed, not the month the business actually begins selling alcoholic beverages. That can create an unintended burden for new businesses. In some cases, applicants come to the city several months before they plan to begin alcohol sales because the state requires local the local process to commence before it will start processing the state license. As a result, a business may end up paying local license fees for a period when it's not yet open, not yet selling alcohol, and still waiting on final state approval. So, what's the solution to this one? Similar to the previous issue, the solution to the fee issue is fairly straightforward. The proposed new process is to assess new alcohol fees beginning the month when the applicant expects to begin selling alcoholic beverages rather than the month in which the application is filed. For applicants who apply several months before opening, this means their fees would not begin until the month they actually plan to start alcohol sales. This better aligns with the fee better aligns the fee with the period

when the business is actually receiving the benefit of the license. Overall, this provides meaningful relief for new businesses as they prepare to open. There may be a small financial impact to the city because fees would no longer be based on non-operational months, but that impact is expected to be minimal, partially because many new applicants seek a temporary license, which we'll be talking about next. This is an administrative change. It benefits new businesses without changing the standards for alcohol sales or creating any impact on the community. Do I have any questions on this aspect of new licenses and the assessment of fees? So, we'll move on to temporary alcoholic beverage sales. Alternative to the scenario that I just described, many new applicants do not have the same lead time luxury and often request a temporary alcohol license while those approval approvals are pending. A temporary alcohol beverage license is a short-term conditionally authorized license issued by the city manager to an applicant seeking a full al alcohol license. The review and investigative process is sped up. the applicant while the the the the process is sped up, the applicant can begin serving alcohol while still waiting on the advertising requirements in the leadup to the public hearing before the council. For many new businesses, that can be an important part of the startup process because it is allows it allows them to open and begin generating revenue while final approvals are still pending. At the same time, temporary licenses preserve very important safeguards. It may only be issued after the applicant has submitted a complete application, paid the required fees, passed all the required inspections, and obtained any necessary use permit approvals. It remains conditional, may be revoked by the city manager, and does not

guarantee approval or of the per permanent license. So, what's our current issue? It's also a feebased issue, but there are also recommended changes that we that we'd like to recommend um about what we call the fee, why we assess it, and consequently what is charged. First, the structure can create a a very business unfriendly fee structure. Currently, an applicant may pay temporary license fees, which is 25% of the actual annual license fee. So, if you if you pay $4,000 a year for an alcohol license, you'd be paying $1,000 for that while also being assessed pr-rated annual license fees for the same period of operation, which in essence could be considered duplication. The second issue is what we call the fee, why we assess it, and how much it is. The temporary license fee should be clearly understood as an administrative fee and not possibly mistaken as an additional privilege fee. The proposed uh amendment to address this issue is also relatively straightforward. Under the amended procedure, an applicant may seek a temporary license, whether that is in two weeks or two months, pay on the same prrated basis discussed earlier, plus a $100 expedited processing fee instead of the PR-rated amount plus the 25% of the full year's alcohol license. And that can be a big difference. This is a clearer and more defensible approach. When an applicant seeks a temporary license, staff must accelerate the review and investigative process, coordinate inspections, confirm

eligibility, and monitor compliance before the full license process is complete, and that drives costs. This flat fee helps recover those costs and the administrative the additional administrative work. The expected financial impact on the city is expected to be under 10,000 per year, while the benefits new businesses should be meaningful. Overall, the proposed change creates a more transparent, defensible, and businessfriendly fee structure while preserving the city's review and oversight responsibilities. Operationally, it also reduces administrative redundancy and gives staff a clearer framework to work by. for the community. There is no expected impact as these changes are administrative in nature. Before we move on to the next topic, are there any questions about the amendments to the temporary alcohol license, the expedited review or the fee structure?

I have one question. What is the typical time frame from inquiry to get an application fill let's say filling it out, okay, submittal of the application to when we take action? What's that time frame? Could be about three months. Is that a fair? Yeah. That's why we do the 90 days. Yeah. And in what time frame do people ask for a temporary license? Very quickly. Um sometimes have them come in and say we plan to start serving this weekend.

We I mean sometimes we can't comply. Um but what it when they do come in currently for the temporary alcohol licenses, we speed things through the process. It goes over to the police for them to do their investigative work. um our finance team does their work and then we grant if if they pass that and their application appears to check all the boxes necessary to um to be able to comply with all the regulations, then they can receive a temporary license. But that that could be a couple of weeks, whereas the process could take 90 days, which is how we're focusing this how we're making this new focus. We're expecting a 90-day period and anything less than that would require the expedited processing fee.

Okay. Is the temporary term commensurate with the application process? In other words, how long does the temporary license hold up? The the initial temporary license, if I recall, is 60 days. I think it's 90. 90 days. Yeah, I think it's to cover the entire window of what we anticipate sometimes with the advertisement time period and everything is 90 days. So 90 days um so the initial one is 90 days with the ability to get an extension if situation dictates. Got it. Okay. Yeah, that was my question. The extension if we go past 90 days could be either the applicant or the city may be delayed that you can do an extension and it happens from time to time. I'm

sure. Okay, that's great. That again more business friendly. That's great.

I'll confirm Any other questions? All right, that brings us to bring your own beverage. The BYOB license allows eligible businesses to let customers bring their own bureau wine for personal use. Distilled spirits are prohibited. Customers must be at least 21 and alcohol must come in sealed original containers. The business is still responsible for making sure rules are followed. That includes checking age, preventing use by intoxicated patrons, and making sure any unfinished alcohol is taken home or thrown away. It is only allowed for eligible businesses and must be approved by the city and remains subject to important safeguards. Currently, we only have one BYOB license, which is Matilda's, but there is another in the pipeline. Historically, there have only been a few Bob licenses, and they've been in generally a craft type establishments. think like paint and set type uh type businesses. So what's the current issue with Bob licenses? We believe that the provisions would benefit from clarification in three key areas. The responsibilities of the license holder, the applicability of Sunday sales restrictions, and the public hearing and approval process. First, while the existing language does address responsibilities of the license holder, it should be strengthened to include clearer requirements regarding on-site supervision and overall accountability during Bob activity. Second, the current language distinguishes between establishments that already hold an underlying alcohol license, such as a restaurant, and establishments that do not sell alcohol, but seek to allow patrons to bring alcohol onto premises under a BYOB license. That distinction was originally

tied to state regulated Sunday sales restrictions, which led to most BYOB license holders being prohibited from allowing alcohol on Sundays. Since then, the state has received guidance from the Georgia Department of Revenue indicating that it does not regulate Bob activity because no alcohol sales occur. As a result, Sunday sales restrictions, which are regulated by the state, do not apply to Bob. Finally, the approval authority language should be clarified. As it's currently written, it could give the impression that the community development director has the authority to issue a BYOB license. The proposed amendment clarifies the proper public hearing and approval process. So the solution for this and the proposed BOB changes are modest and mostly administrative. The purpose of the amendments is to make the BYOB provision clearer, easier to administer, and more consistent with how the city already reviews and approves these requests. First, the proposed language better defines the requirement for BYB and clarifies the responsibility of the license holder. This includes adding language regarding required on required on-site supervision. This helps ensure there is a responsible party present and accountable while patrons are bringing alcohol onto the premises. It also provides some clarification regarding the existing responsibilities. Second, the amendments remove references to Sunday sales regulations because BYOB does not involve the sale of alcohol by the business. That language does not apply and creates confusion. The proposed language maintains the existing BYOB hours of Monday through Saturday from 9:00 a.m. until 1 hour before closing, but no later than 1:00 a.m. The amended language would also allow now allow patrons to bring alcohol into the establishment on Sundays from an 11:00 a.m. until 1 hour before closing,

but no later than 10 p.m., which mirrors the previously contemplated Sunday BYOB hours. Finally, the update clarifies the approval process. The amendment makes clear that the city council is the appropriate approving body. These changes have no expected financial, operational, or community impact. They are intended only to provide greater greater clarity, consistency, and accountability for the license holder staff and the approval process. That's it for BYOB. Do we have any questions on that? Straight forward.

Unlike the previous items, the following proposed amendments are less about correcting a current issue and more about creating an opportunity. The opportunities are related to farm wineries and limited tap establishments. Farm wineries and limited tap establishments are specialized alcohol licenses license categories with more limited operations than a traditional on premise alcohol license. Farm wineries are tied to agric agricultural production production and allow the sale and tasting of wine within a defined tasting room and operating standards. Limited tap establishments are designed for businesses that are restricted that have a restricted selection of beverages with limits on the number of taps. individual consumption and hours of operation. Together, these license types allow for targeted alcohol-related use uses while maintaining clear operational limits and safeguards. So, what's the opportunity? The opportunity here lies with enhanced customer offerings and cross-pollination of local small business. Two Milton business owners have shared that their customers are looking for additional options. Farm winery patients have expressed interest in malt beverage offerings while limited tap establishment customers have expressed interest in a wine selection. As we reviewed those concepts, we also saw an opportunity to support local economic development and small business. The proposed approach would allow these expanded offerings but with a local connection. For farm wineries, any malt beverages offered would need to come from a Georgia licensed micro brewery, brewery, or brew pub with at least one offering from a Milton brewer. If that product is not available from a Milton brewer, the product would need to come from a brewer within 100 miles of the city. Similarly, limited tap establishments could offer wine, but at least one wine product would need to come from a Milton producer holding a Georgia farm winery license. If that product is not

available from a Milton producer, that product would need to come from within a 100 miles of the city. The intent here is to improve the customer experience, respond to community demand, and create stronger connections between local businesses, local producers, and Milton's broader agurism and economic development goals. or before I go to the next section, I do need to show some edits that we need to make to the proposed amendments as we explored this. So, I'm going to go to the next slide. So, as we reviewed the proposed language for the limited tap license, we recognized that it could have been read to create two separate daily limits that could be compounded, one for all beverages and one for wine. That was not the intent. The highlighted language equates the ounces to drinks by general alcohol content and then limits the number of drinks that can be served on a calendar day. We'll need to include that because that is not if if the council so chooses that is not in the current draft. Now, that is all I have for farm wineries and limited tap establishments. Are there any questions before we go on to the lowest hanging fruit?

My only question is so this this only allows one to sell the other and vice versa. It doesn't do anything to the hours of operation or otherwise. It does not change any hours of operation. Okay. So right now is there a limit on the consumption by any individual? There is three three drinks, right? I think so. Is there current So currently on the books there is? There is. Okay. At limited tap establishments, it's 48 ounces of malt beverage. And because there was no wine offering, um there was no limit on that. Okay. So what we created was the limit on wine similar to the alcohol content of beer. Okay. So it's currently on Okay. Got it. Okay.

Any other questions? All right. I want to jinx us, but I think we're moving to the easiest of the stuff. So, the remaining proposed changes are primar primarily legacy language cleanup. First, the update removes outdated references to the former chapter 64 zoning ordinance and replaces them with references to the unified development code or the UDC. Second, it removes the definition of limited food service restaurant since that type of establishment no longer exists in the city of Milton. Finally, it removes the same confusing approval language discussed during the BYOB section from the incidental service license section. That language, if you recall, could be read to give the community development director authority to approve an alcohol license. So, the update clarifies the proper approval process. Are there any questions related to the cleanup or anything I have presented to you this evening?

Yes. Would you go back one slide? I just So, how many drinks can you have? So, three. This was a lot of fun today. Um, I know that. I saw that, but I just don't.

So, when we recognized that that the you couldn't just go by the ounces. Um, you had to somehow create equate wine with beer because you would have there's a chance you could have a combination of the two. Um, what we did is it was always 48 ounces. So 48 ounces is three pints of malt beverage, 16 ounce malt beverage. And each one and if you equate each one of those pints to a glass of wine, it would be equate to about 6 ounces of wine, which was the original 18 ounces that was in the the original code, the original draft code. Each of those, all of those account to one drink or three drinks total.

That's a lot of math. That was just wait till you've had three drinks. Hopefully the servers get here's my question. And you know, I don't One of my charms is I don't need alcohol to be obnoxious. So, um, but I don't why are we conditioning that? We care about who's driving, but what is this policing the number? I I just seems odd to me because driving is is an unstarter. But even with that amount, you'd be over the legal limit. So, why are we policing that? Help me with that.

I would have to go back to the 2022 2022. Before that, I

think it I think No, I think we I think we rewrote it in 2022. Um, which we affectionately called the clawback of the alcohol code. Um, that was after in 2020 or 2021 we had really expanded the alcohol license offerings in the city. Um, and some one of the concerns, if my memory serves me correctly, was related to the fact that a limited tap establishment serves no food. And because it serves no food, there was concerns of it becoming a bar, which we don't allow in the city of Milton. And there, I believe, is at least the basis for the restriction of the amount of drinks. I remember all that now.

That helps. Thank you. I do. I appreciate that. Yeah. Okay. And it's up to the establishment to police said quantity. It is and we only have one limited tap establishment and we have not had any issues. Okay. In any future limited taps for farm wineries are use permits. Correct. That is a zoning item and everything. Okay. All right. But a limited tap establishment could serve food if they so chose to get into that and then have the other ratio. Certainly they could turn into a restaurant. Yeah. All right. For everybody. Any more on your pres? Is that Are you done with presentation? That's all I have. Mayor.

Okay. Any council questions before I call for public comment? Okay. Um, do we have any public comment on this, Tammy? We do, sir. Okay. Uh, if you will please call the first. Now, we have 10 minutes per side. 10 minutes each side. Yes, sir. Do we have any how many in support and how many in opposition? Uh I believe they're all in support. Okay. So again, that's 10 minutes uh total for applic. Okay. Please call the first public speaker. I invite Kevin McGuire to the podium. If you'll state your name and address for the record. Thanks.

Hey, good evening, mayor and council. My name is Kevin Mcuire at 2139 McFarland Lane here uh on behalf of myself as an individual. Um just want to comment on agenda 26 item agenda item 2611. Um as you know Mr. Mayor Amit and I have uh reached out to you in the past to brainstorm ways to help small businesses succeed especially in this downtown district. Um I'm someone that likes to think outside the box to support economic development in our community and I encourage the city and uh the council to do the same. I personally love seeing small businesses succeed and believe it's a win for all parties when that happens. Um, Whitetail is seeking to serve wine under a limited tap license. As was just discussed, we live within walking distance of these shops in the immediate vicinity and see no reason Whitetail's request shouldn't be granted. My wife and I, along with our three girls, frequent all the businesses in this downtown district, and are regular visitors at all the local shops and restaurants. As a family, we visit Whitetail multiple times a week for coffee, snacks, and the occasional afternoon beer. Um, my wife and I would love to enjoy wine as another offering at one of our favorite local spots, especially if it helps a small business succeed and contributes to the economic development of downtown Milton. To borrow a phrase from the city of uh the city manager, we think approving their request would be very businessfriendly. So, let's create that opportunity for them and improve the customer experience at Whitetail. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Next is Ami Vas. Good evening, council and mayor. Uh my name is Amit Fus. I live at 3020 Evelyn Lane. Um I'll echo everything what Kevin said. Um completely support small business. Uh so for revision 488 and 4-107, I'm fully supportive. Uh my family also loves to uh enjoy and attend Whitetail. Um we're not part of the cycling community, but we love the coffee and the opportunity to have a beverage in a very relaxed environment. Uh my kids love to have hot chocolate and decaf lattes. I love to drink an occasional beer. My wife does not drink beer and so being able the have the opportunity to have a glass of wine would be hugely beneficial and like Kevin mentioned, huge supporter of local businesses and want to see the downtown Cribapple corridor really succeed. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Uh next, Robert Steinfeld. Okay. You don't wish to uh David Borggo and Pamela. Okay, then that concludes public comment, sir. Okay, I will close the public comment and ask council if they have any questions. Otherwise, we'll open up for a motion. Mr. Mayor, I make a motion we approve agenda item number 26-11. Madam, Mr. Mayor, just a real quick point of order and to the maker of the motion. I do think there were some modest edits uh that were presented on the screen. So, if the maker of the motion could just say the approval, but with any edits otherwise displayed on the screen. You always get the tough ones.

I was going to say what he said. Approve. Approve with any added. I got it. I'm not drinking, Ken. I'm good. I got it. It's not a high bar. Mr. Mayor, I make a motion we approve agenda item number 26-11 with the motions that were suggested on the screen. Second. Okay. I have a motion from Council Cookerly and a second from Council Dolan to approve agenda item number 26-11 with the uh um edits on the screen. Motion. Okay. Uh, all in favor, please place your votes.

Did it go through? Okay. Yep. That motion passes unanimously. So, thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. Um, mayor and council have anything to report on? Hearing none, I'll have a a motion. I will say one. Yeah. Great job with Meet the Neighbors by the city. That was a well-run event as always. Appreciate you doing that. Thank you. Yes. That's all. Thank you for that. Yeah, good stuff. All right, with that motion to adjurnn. Anybody make a motion to adjurnn? Second. Can we do this online, please? Yep. We got a motion from Haney, a second from Dolan to adjourn. Okay, mine's not refreshing. There we go. Thank you,

Brian. Sorry, you're good. Michael. All right, that's unanimous. Thank you.