City Council - Regular Meeting

I should say that.

Sure.

We will begin in 30 seconds. All right. You ready, Michelle? Good. All right. Good evening and welcome everyone to the committee meetings for January 27th, 2026. The elected body present. Mayor Mary Robisho. Council member Jennifer Philippy. Council member Erin Brumley

here. Council member Christopher Zack.

Council member Alan Cells. Council member Sarah Bon. Council member Christine Hall. I am Randy Knighton, the city administrator along with deputy city attorney Joe Cusack and the executive assistant to the council and deputy city clerk Michelle Miller. The purpose of committee meetings are for city departments to convey information to mayor and city council and discuss initiatives listed on the published agenda as well as provide updates of vital information essential for the operation of city government. And by ordinance, the committee consists of the mayor and council as well as the city administrator who serves as the chair of committee meetings. And this is a public meeting, but it is not a public hearing. And therefore, while we certainly welcome members of the public, we do not take public comments at this time or in committee meetings. Public comments and questions are received at the regular city council meetings on second and fourth Monday as well as fifth Monday in open forum. We do encourage residents to engage in our online platforms. And if you have any questions or need information, please reach out to our staff. The city web service portal is a mechanism to report issues or concerns as well as roswwell 365.com for a calendar of events. The first item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes of the January 13th, 2026 committee meeting. Do I have a motion?

Motion by council member Philippi. Second by council member Brumley. Do we have any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? All right, that passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Item number two is listed on the regular agenda. We have consideration for the mayor or city administrator to approve the Nesbbit Lakes dredging assistance policy application and requires budget amendment with funding source to be identified. We have uh Mr. Watson and I believe that uh Mr. Godshaw may join you uh a bit later, but we'll have Mr. Watson go first. Yes, Council Member Hall.

Thank you. Um I'm going to recuse myself for these next two items because I am a Chering resident. Although I'm not on the HOA, I do benefit from um I pay dues into the association. the association would benefit from this. So, um I will be recusing myself from this from these items, but I would uh before I leave the room, I would like to speak generally about uh the dredging program. I'm not addressing these applications that are here, but just a little bit of history um as we spoke um yesterday. Uh the um current dredging program actually pre-existed Mayor Wood's um administration and it was during uh Mayor Wood's administration that it was updated and since then uh the the dredging program that the city has has been um basically supported through through that administ Wood administration, the Henry administration, the Wilson administration and hopefully this um new administration as as well. Um basically back in in in Mayor Wood's days, I mean we started to recognize that it's very very important to our watershed both upstream upstream and downstream. And um we need to address this as a city and and perhaps um what we learned and talked about in in our retreat that the federal government at some future time in the next probably 10 to 20 years is going to put that onus 100% on the cities. Um so as part of that um we've been supporting this uh in April of 22 I did do a dredging workshop for the city. It's out there on the city YouTube page. Um it

basically encouraging uh homeowners associations to share resources to uh gain knowledge to maybe find uh alternative ways to um um eliminate sediment in their um retention ponds. But this is something that benefits the city as a whole. Um, so I will just uh I'll I'll leave it at that and at this point just excuse myself and just text me when you're done with these items and I'll All right. Thank you. Thank you. Duly

noted. All right, Mr. Watson. All right. Please proceed, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Nighton. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, as Mr. Nighton said, the the two items that are next on uh the agenda are two dredging assistant applications. Um, what we're going to do is I'm going to go give you kind of a background on the dredging uh assistance policy. I know that we've already done that for you, but just to to go over that policy, I'll then go into the specifics about what each application had in it and then Mr. Gonchal, the CFO, will come up and talk about the financial thing. So, we're actually going to do the two items kind of together so that we're not repeating some of this stuff. So to start. All right. So, as a background uh to the dredging assistance policy, which uh used to be the lakes and ponds partnership policy, um it is a policy that the city has uh that um upon approval of mayor and council that there is the ability to share lake or pond dredging costs um and it's qualified up to 50% of the dredging costs to a maximum of $500,000 uh with a lake or pond owner. There's two main criteria that a pond or lake needs to have. One is the drainage area, how much area is is draining into it or the volume of that lake. So, a lake or pond must meet one or the other. If it does not meet one or the other um and the the application gets denied because of that, the applicant then has the ability to petition directly to the mayor and council. Both of the applications that I'm bringing to you meet at least one of the requirements, but just kind of want to give you a background on the um on the policy. Funds will be reimbursed upon project completion. So, basically, the applicant goes through the process of putting

together an application. Um if approved and um the city has some sort of a a reimbursement amount that they are required, they need to go through the construction. it needs to be signed off by the city. Um the city then evaluates all the receipts and upon approval of that then that is when the applicant would get reimburse up to whatever the amount is that mayor and council approved. Um it's important to note that reimbursement is solely for the dredging operations. It is not for uh either um I've got here pond modifications to the outlet control structure, landscaping design costs. It is only for uh costs that are incurred specifically related to dredging operations. Um the applicant, this is um an important piece, the applicant must get a land disturbance permit in advance of the application for dredging assistance to be evaluated. The reason for that is is we want to make sure that if we're going to recommend [music] or deny an application that the applicant has gone through that process to say they've met all of the city requirements to do a dredging project. So, they must get uh an LDP before we can uh recommend approval or or denial. Um they then submit a dredging assistance application to Environmental Public Works. We review those applications. Um and then if the applications meet the requirements, then we will bring forth as a recommendation to the mayor and council that the application meets the requirements. um we will tell you the amount that they're requesting, but it is not upon staff to say this is the amount that we are recommending. We're basically just saying that the application meets the requirements. Okay. Um all right. So the first one we're going to talk about is Nesbbit Lakes. So um the application was for lower Nesbbit lakes and here are the specifics on the

project. So the pond drainage is 320 acres and the pond storage volume is 256 acre feet. So actually this this lake meets both of the requirements. Um but it only needs to meet one. Um based on the application the dredging would be approximately 400 cubic yards which equates to approximately 450 truckloads. Um so those are one way. So that would be 900 trucks you know come get the sediment and and come return. Um, another thing that we have is in going through the land disturbance application, um, if there are if there is a bond that is required for road maintenance, then the HOA, um, would need to have a bond for that. So, that is something that they will um that Nesbbit Lakes has agreed to. Uh, these bullet should have been switched. Sorry. They submitted the dredging assistance application to uh, environmental public works in September of last year. Um but Nesbet Lakes received their land disturbance permit uh 12312025. The total dredging cost was $68,875. Um and the application is seeking 50% of that which is $34,437.50. Um, as we're evaluating each of the applications that come in, one of the primary things that we look at is is I if the pond or lake is dredge, will it provide a benefit to the residents of Roswell? What I mean by that is there's a lot of lakes and ponds within the city that are amenities. It's just it's a lake and a pond that is only for the HOA. Sometimes it may only be for a homeowner, but what we look for is is there storm water detention capacity within within that pond or lake. Was it designed for that? And will this amount of dredging support that? So, we

evaluate that and based on looking at uh Nesbet Lakes and their application, it does meet that requirement, which is a which is critical. So the staff recommendation for uh Nesbet Lakes is that we would recommend approval of the application pending a budget amendment. Okay. Before I go to the next one, are there any questions on Yes, ma'am. Well, sorry about that. No, no. Council member Bramley, please. Hi. Um so and uh is there a amount of time that needs to pass before an uh natur request assistance again? Like could they come and request assistance?

Uh that's a very good question. So if an applicant has received dredging assistance in the past, there's a 10-year wait period before they can apply again for more dredging assistance. Okay. Thank you. And that would be for I'm assuming in these two particular applications that's for the entirety of the project. These are submitted for the entirety of the project. They're submitted for the entirety of the project. Yes, sir. Thank you. [snorts] I'm sorry. Council member Zack.

Hey Brian, you may cover this. Um, and if you do, please tell me. I can be quiet, but just for a point of clarity that the budget amendment is to move funds into an account and not necessarily identifying the funds. Um, where that's coming from and where I'm trying to make that distinction is there is some amount funded for these kind of items, but there still needs to be a budget amendment for that funding to move into a different account for this approval. Correct. So, I'm going to answer part of that and then I'm going to leave the second part to our CFO, Bill Gaw. Um, in the 2026 budget, there was a line item that uh was approved for $250,000, but for the actual movement of money, I'm going [clears throat] to have the the financial people answer that. So, all right. So, uh, the second application is Cherine Lake. Um, this is, uh, on the west side, uh, just off of, uh, Pinerove Road. And here are the specifics on Chering Lake. So, the pond drainage area is 973 acres. The pond storage volume is 22 acre feet. So, again, this lake meets both of the requirements, although it only needs to meet one. Um the dredging is approximately 9,000 cubic yards of sediment uh which equates to approximately 900 uh truck loads one way. Um they have also agreed to a transportation bond for for road repairs. Uh they submitted their application to environmental public works December 19th, 2025 and obtained their land disturbance permit January 9th, 2026. Uh the total dredging costs were $650,000. Um and they are seeking 50% um of that. So $325,000. Um again, similar to Nesbet Lakes, when

we review this, what is the benefit to residents? It can't just be an amenity. And there um this lake does have uh detention uh storm water detention capacity that that 9,000 cubic yards will uh provide a benefit. Uh again with this one we would also recommend approval of the application pending a budget amendment questions on Yes. Council member cells. Yeah. Just a few comments and questions that I'd like you to make. One is um is the requirement to provide an easement to the city a part of your assessment? And if so talk a little bit about why that is.

Yes sir. So good question. So it is a requirement that uh the HOA or individual land owner in this case both HOAs need to provide an easement so that the city has access to be able to um monitor that the lake and pond over time. So that is a as part of the application they actually have to say will you give a perpetual easement to the city? Yes, that happens once if they get approved then we go through that process of actually getting that easement

and that that that's useful because you're using it as a part of our overall storm management storm water management concept or is it just simply monitoring it? It's it's still part of I mean it's part of the overall storm water system but it allows access that the city can get to that lake or pond so that we can make sure that it is you know is it still meeting its designated you or I'm sorry is it still meeting its design intent. Um and so it's just it's a we ask for easements so that we can see where the money is going and making sure that it it is spent correctly.

Okay. And and it's it's a after the fact reimbursement. So we're looking at the entire project. It has completed project. It has passed all of its required stipulations from the land disturbance to the road maintenance to all of those things before the city writes a first check. Correct. Absolutely. So the the project actually has to be fully completed. Right. Right.

So um both of these projects I think the Nesbbit Lakes is probably a three to four month process. I think this one is a five to six month process in terms of the actual dredging. So it would this would not be until the second half of 2026 when the receipts would come in that uh our department would evaluate for then reimbursement to occur.

It seems this is maybe to Joe but uh it it seems that the ordinance is a little squishy, you know, I mean it it written on a cocktail napkin and passed and that that's great. I mean, they, you know, they wanted to get this on the table and they wanted to deal with this. It seems like I'm not sure uh does it, does it, uh, stipulate that an easement to the city is a part of the consideration or not?

Yes. And I believe it is in I think it's the final subsection subsection six G6 I believe or I want to find the easement portion of this but it it is part of it where the an easement has to be granted to the city for them to to partake in this uh in the dredging ordinance or to receive that reimbursement. So, and and that's part of the city's interest there of yeah, I guess there has to be a public interest. We're taking utilization for our storm water management services. Um, and so that that allows us to enact this ordinance because that's the public benefit.

Right. And so, so just a couple more thoughts here. One is uh could you talk a little bit about how we're how we're using this with the storm water? uh we have a big matrix that says you know we have this huge bucket called the Chattahuchi and at the end of the day this much water can go in in a given time and that's some kind of you know big u AI driven meaning Brian uh driven concept where we're keeping up with all this and using these kinds of tools to assess the where we are with regard to that requirement.

Yeah. So I mean if [clears throat] you look nationwide this is not a common policy. I mean, if you look uh um going back to what council member Hall said, this this uh policy actually started back in 1998, and it was, you know, for sight of there's going to be dredging needs that HOAs are going to have to take on. These are private um ponds and private lakes, so that the city doesn't own these. um and the expense can be high. But if they are if HOAs are not maintaining the lakes and ponds, then there's a decreased amount of storm water capacity into the system. So what happens is you get more flooding and you get um you also get more sediment that you know navigates downream and into our waterways. So this is um it's a policy that helps with that. Um, again, we don't own the lakes or ponds, so it's a it's a it's just a policy to help out.

Yeah, it's definitely an incentive. There's no doubt. Right. Uh, and this these are the first two ever, or no, we've had one one or two others before. No, there's there's been a number of them in the past. I think rough the the last one was approved last year for Lexford um uh HOA. Before that, the last one was in 2016. So from 2016 to 2025 um there was not a uh there was not an approved application money didn't go to this policy but between 1998 and uh 2016 uh roughly 10 projects have come through right

but this is this is definitely in the city's interest and and although we put some money aside for it which I don't typically we don't there was some fund that was used from time to time much smaller smaller as the city's now of an age, you know, these retention ponds are beginning to age. We we've talked about one in particular on the east side that uh has really caused big big problems because they haven't maintained it. So So it's a great I think it's a great incentive program. I'm all for it. Thanks.

Yeah. Thank you, Council Member Bon. With regard to the uh the Cherang Lake project, given the fact that it's going to be 1,800 truck trips between oneway, double to 900 one-way truckloads, um what does their project timeline look like in relation to our Pinerove project? Would it predate the Pinerove project that would be in front of this? I [clears throat] would have to ask uh my transportation friends is it'll predate it. Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Okay, so it'll be complete before the Pine Grove. Yeah. Okay, cool. All right, in that case, great.

Thankfully, transportation [laughter] was here to help me because I that's what I thought, but I didn't. Yeah. So, basically, also just any project within the city once you get an LDP, you have six months to be able to start on that project. So, they're both of the applicants are waiting for what is going to be the outcome of mayor and council to start the process. They're rocking and rolling as soon as we approve. Okay, understood. I just wanted to make sure that we weren't redoing a brand new road just to have 1,800 truck trips go across it. Thank you. Yes, Council Member Philippe.

Um, I don't know if you know the answer to this, but just out of curiosity, do you have any idea how the dredging how the contractors estimate the dredging cost? It would seem to me like looking at chering it's twice the amount of sediment, twice the number of truckloads, yet it's only, you know, like $20,000 more in cost. Do you do you have an idea of what goes into the policy? [clears throat]

I'd have to get into the spec specifics of the application, but when I was on the private side, when we would do this type of work, sometimes you'd go out and do sediment sampling. So, you'd go out in a boat, very expensive way, and you basically put a rod down, you push it down until you get, you know, refusal. you map that out and you would calculate how much sediment is from that. Um, depending on the cost, the cost can vary because it depends on what equipment they're going to need to get and how far like if the lake is very narrow, if it's much wider, if they're only pulling from the side, if they can use a long arm excavator. So, it kind of depends on each project. Um, but yes, we did notice that, you know, the prices are very or what they're asking for prices is very similar. Um, what I would interpret, not remembering everything that's in the application, I apologize, is that it's probably easier to get sediment out of Cherine than it is lakes.

Yeah. I was just thinking even the truckloads, like if you build a pool or something, right, the more truckloads of dirt they have to take out, the more expensive it is. So just but but to get but to be able to get that you're you're able because the costs are similar and there's more truckloads is is probably a easier process to dredge. It also could be there these are two different contractors. They may have a different cost to haul. They may have a place that they can haul it to. And I will tell you it's going to be very difficult to get that type of information from a contractor because I'm sure that's [laughter] I understand that. Just giving you Yeah. Thank you, Council Member Zette.

Oh, just as a heads up, I'm planning on approving this. I think we'll have to figure out the finances, but that's a different subject. And I I kind of want to jump in at this point, though. um to say given the dollar amounts and the fact that the city's on the hook and the residents are on the hook, I would almost want to recommend for staff that they should be involved in the procurement process given that there's two projects that not only one do I think we'd have better resources to get competitive pricing, but if we're able to bundle these projects on behalf of the citizens, I think we would get better pricing. I know that's probably complex and not what the process and policy outline, but in this moment, I I really think there's an opportunity for cost savings both from the taxpayers not within these two neighborhoods and the taxpayers within these two neighborhoods.

Yeah, it it's a good idea. We kind of have to be careful with that and get how much we get involved in the procurement process on a private project. Um my experience has been once the city starts touching that there's a lot of liability that comes on the city. So, we we would have to figure that out. What council member Hall was talking about in the dredging workshop uh because um I was deputy director at the time and Sharon Nisa was director at the time. We put on that workshop and the idea was to actually get the HOAs to work together themselves and say, "Here's some information." Um we recommended different dredging types. We there was different um uh contractors that they could use. to to have them start talking. But once we actually start getting into procurement side, um I'd have to get with legal, but I it there's a potential liability that the city does not want to take on with that.

Thank you. All right. Any further comments or questions at this time? Y Mr. Got show.

You want to sit over here? Yeah, that's you. I don't care where I sit.

As as usual, Brian gets to talk about the engineering and the tonka trucks and I have to talk about dollars. Um so real quick just to summarize the uh the financial side of the uh of the issue. Nesbbit uh dredging cost is $68,875 and seeking 50% reimbursement which would total $34,437.50. Uh in Chering's case, their total cost uh bid is 650,000 and seeking 50% reimbursement for 325,000. Um, as has been mentioned, the ordinance calls for um reimbursement up to 50%. Um, not to exceed $500,000 per application. Um, so we have a a range of uh amounts that we can approve or that we could recommend and that you can approve, but of course, whatever we whatever we recommend, you as council have final say. So, um, we do recommend at this point uh 20% per project. Um that is based on the fact that we did approve $250,000 for all current year dredging requests in the fiscal year 2026 budget. Um I'm not sure if this was clear, but on Wexford in 2025, we did a budget amendment to use $110,000 from soil and erosion fund. Uh but there's only 20,000 left in that fund. Now I'm not sure how um Martins's Landing was funded in 2015. Um,

it was multiple

multiple sources were were used to fund that one. Um, and as mentioned by Brian, there was no applications in between 2015 and 2025 with uh with the Wax Lake being the last one we did. Um, we have not put aside general fund money in the past for this. This is the first time we did this. It was an anticipation that we felt some applications were going to come forward after Wexford got approved. And based on feedback from the community, that's why we put what we could um into the 2026 budget. Um the 2020 the 20% recommendation would be 251,775,000 uh $775 between the two projects. Uh so we recommend utilization of the previously approved $250,000 and then transferring $1,775 from the general fund contingency which would require a uh a vote u a budget amendment vote by this this body um at an appropriate council meeting u that you see today. see your question.

Yes. Question, Council Member Brumley. Um what what is the cost of each one of them? Because um I did a little spreadsheet and the money is left less than that amount. So the Nesbbit Lake total bid as I understand it. They they've received firm quotes uh from the dredging companies and Nesbet Lake was $68,575 and Chering was $650,000. Oh, 650. Okay.

650. Right. So, at 20% um that comes to 300 and uh I'm sorry, that's the 50% number. The um 20% number in total would be uh 251,775.

Yes, Mayor Robisho. So, we're January 2026. This is the total budgeted for this project type line item. Do we know the length of time it takes for approval and if there are any other um HOA subdivisions that are in the process of seeking funding this year by any chance that we've heard of?

So I have heard of a couple of others that are interested. Um typically so des Lakes and Cherine have been in contact with our department um maybe for the past two years um going through this process because it's it's it's a burden on an HOA to go through the process. Um I have not had anybody else reach out saying that they are planning on submitting in 2026. Um if somebody else has heard other that but that they have not reached out to the department and at this time we do not have any applications. Is that correct?

No sir we do not have any applications. uh we've not been asked or pre-applica. We also ask for applicants if they're interested to meet with the city to not only go over the land disturbance permit process, but also to meet with the um with the department EPW so that we can walk them through what we would what we would be looking at and to make sure that when they submit their applications that it's as complete as possible. Thank you, Council Member Bon.

Get back to the project outline slide. Sorry, I know it's in a different slide deck for you. Or if you remember it off the top of your head, that's fine, too. Uh, what is the impact total impact acreage again for both projects combined? And do you know the total number of residents within that impact area? You want to pull?

I don't know this answer to the second question, but I can get you the drainage area. Sorry. Pull. Just pull. Let me see. That's fine. You can get it. That's true. You can see it. Yeah. Yeah. So 973 and 320. So 1300 uh acres um draining, but I I don't have the house count. Understood. Thank you. Council member Zach,

just for clarity, are we looking to make an approval of the budget amendment uh as well as the application today or just the application? Yeah, today is the consideration of whether or not this item, you would deem this item uh worthy of moving forward to a formal mayor and council meeting. And at that time, you can make that determination. Council

member, I'm sorry. Yes. Couple things. One is it's not like uh someone rushes in and says, "I have to dredge this afternoon." I mean, these are longtailed cats as you described. I mean, this conversation has been going on for two years. So we we we we certainly can pace ourselves. If somebody wants to come pitch us on this, we can say we can put you in the 2027 budget if we need to or something to that effect. I think that would be within our authority to do so under this agreement. Uh the other thing is is that I'm not sure that the the ordinance provides for approval of one and not the budget issue at the same time. Is that right? That's your impression. I don't think we can do it separately.

You have to have Correct. Yeah. Exactly. We have to commit. We have to commit the funds. Yeah. Yeah. The funds have to be there in some fashion or another. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. I mean, and so it so we we could say these are the only ones we're doing this year,

right? We could say these are the only ones we're doing this year. But I do think this is an important project and we should think about how we fund this in the future because it's it's you know everything goes back to economic development from me. Storm water is a big part of our conversations in virtually all the things we do in economic development. These aren't exactly in u hubs of commerce either one of them. Um but you know that's that's probably pretty thin for my for my lights in terms of what we should put aside for this kind of a project. So, we want to make sure that they do it, not put it off. So, I would say that we're probably going to have to commit more than $250,000. That's council member Zack and then Visa.

Own's point. I would recommend as a general process change that we approve an application and then figure out the funding in the next fiscal year. And I know this is going to have to be a hybrid of that, but that that'd be my recommendation on how to solve for X. Okay. Council member Bon respond to that real quick. Uh, typically your quotes are only going to last you 30 to 90 days tops. So they wouldn't be able to wait that long given the wait time too. Um are the HOAs aware that 20% is the recommendation at this point in time and do we know if they have the ability to cover the rest of those costs because if they don't have the financing abilities it's they're back to square one. Correct? We don't know that. I am not aware that they are aware of the percentage.

Understood. And then how was the 20% recommended solely because that was what was funded last year? No.

No. Last year was a Waxford received 100% reimbursement for $108,000. They had applied for two I'm sorry. They received 100% of their request which was 50% of the cost of 216. In this case, we set aside 250 in the budgeting process for 2026, not knowing how who was going to come through and and who was going to be ready or not in 2026. Uh there are provisions in the ordinance, the way I've read it, that mayor and council can designate funds later if they want to, but this is what we have available today and it's just too early in the budget cycle to know where we could obtain additional funds.

Stupid question. So, I realize that these don't happen overnight. So, we weren't aware, I mean, it's January. We weren't aware going into the budget last year that we were going to have two applications coming forward. Um, I think in the case of NESB, it was I mean, they got it in on 1231, right? Well, sorry. We were aware of both of these applications coming in LA last year. That's why the $250,000 was put aside. Yeah. Got it. But we didn't have a ballpark estimate as to how much these were going to cost at that point in time. ballpark, but uh did not know the ultimate amount. We didn't get the stuff until after the budget was approved, [snorts]

the the final numbers because the numbers changed. To your point, the contractors had to go back and get updated estimates. So, we didn't have the the numbers going into budget, the actual numbers. To council member Zach's point, in terms of process moving forward, if council's authorized up to $500,000, it would probably be within the best interest of council to have $500,000 set aside to utilize. Um, especially if we know for a fact that not one but two applications are coming forward, but I realize that's hindsight's 2020

and I think there was another budget question related to that. I think they're at the towards the tail end of the budget. Um there was a recognition that something may be coming and there should be some seed money if you will placed in the budget and $250,000 in essence was lack of a better term a placeholder at least something there in anticipation of um these dredging applications coming forward. So, you know, when when you're in the throws of a budget and toward the tail end of a budget and you realize that this is something that should be funded, then it was it was a placeholder.

If I if I could supplement that, the 250 was added towards the tail end of the budget process exactly as Mr. Knight has has referenced. Um, and it was added once we did a updated forecast of where we were going to finish 2025. That's right. We realized that we had additional surplus we had not counted on. we had been balanced up to that point. So, anything more than 250 would have required a reduction somewhere else at that time. Um, it had not been funded in advance in any year previously. Uh, I would have been delighted to put more towards this, but this was what we had available in the moment. Um, if we are tasked with finding something, we would be happy to work with council to find out where that that comes from through the budget amendment process. Council member Sales,

well, we do go whole years at a time with no no none of these, right? So I mean and years together. So I mean I would just carry over the same 500. Yeah, we could we [laughter] could we could do that for sure. But I I my question is to to the the budget constraints and and the need to fund this over the long term. Do we have a survey of the age of ponds? Because it you know we that gives you some indication. Uh do we even have a a complete a complete list of pondage? [laughter] Yes, Bill. Do you have a complete list of ponds? Uh, and and can you can you get out there in a boat and see where I have to get out in a boat? You're from the bayou. You and Mary can make a day of it.

I got I got a job boat we can use. Yeah, we could look into that. That that will definitely take some time. Um, we could look into a survey of the ponds. I know. I don't want to rocks in your rucks sack, but I do think if we're going to use it as as a as a budget matter, we should probably start thinking about where we are in the process of maturing ponds, especially if they all hit at one time. Yeah. Mayor Mayor Robisho,

I think, and and that's a good project to to get a handle on it. But don't we need to differentiate this um abatement of funding is really only for HOA type. So if it is a business p um property, they're not eligible for this. So while that might also need to be considered in our overall storm water system, they're not eligible for this kind of assistance. So you know that might we might need to if we're going to do this to separate out the two.

All right. Yes, council member Philippy. I I was just going to comment that I asked um Brian a similar question before just about timing them and how we could space them out and there was also complexity to when the HOAs themselves would be ready to fund them and when they would come forth with their application and stuff like that. So maybe there is some prediction we could do but I don't know how accurate it would

it will be very difficult. I'll just tell I mean the honest answer we can give you a pretty good number let's say on the number of lakes or ponds within the city that meet the area drainage area requirement. Okay, that would be pretty easy. Uh in fact I think the number is 49. Um because I [laughter] because I happen to have list but what's going to be what's going to be hard is the volume, right? So what which ponds are eligible from the volume standpoint because those that that don't meet the area could potentially meet the volume. So that would be difficult to do and then you'd have to marry that up with the time that that pond was put into place and that becomes very difficult. So like Roswell Area Park pond now that isn't a park but that was built back in you know we think in the 50s and then it was added to and it got bigger. Well, there's a lot of lakes and ponds within the city limits that are very similar.

So, it it would be it starts to get difficult when you try to get to that granularity. Yeah. Maybe Sarah's idea of a rolling number would be a good idea because it isn't it's it's an environmental question. It's an economic question in that it's part of the storm water that we have available to to to approve projects for economic development. to the extent that they're this is you know this is clearly not in the in the realm of that but so maybe something like that where we make that a part of the annual budget and it just rolls over the next year that's a great idea council member Philippy

maybe we could also put together a more complete program where we have the um neighborhoods become part of this and they are on a schedule that they have to commit to and be a part of so we can all plan for it going forward. Your dues are going up. Yeah. [laughter] Well, they have to pay for it at some point, don't they? Council member Bon,

I will say as somebody who lives on a pond, unfortunately. Um, not every pond is completely controlled by an HOA. So, you're making the assumption here that HOAs are maintaining and controlling the ponds. For example, in my neighborhood, I own a pie piece of the pond. by unfortunate neighbors pie piece is where the pipes are on said pond. So it's really about drawing straws at that point. But there's about if I were to guess 20 homeowners between the side of the pond I'm mine and the far side of the pond. Theoretically you could possibly create some sort of homeowners situation. But then there's also the argument too, well the rest of the neighborhood also benefits. How come they're not in? you start to begin to um split hairs at a certain point when you're looking at things that aren't wholly controlled by HOAs. Just my two cents.

All right. Thank you. Any further questions or discussion pertaining to this matter? All right. Seeing none, we'll take the item number two first. Um the consideration for the mayor under or city administrator to approve the Nesbbit Lakes dredging assistance policy application and requires budget amendment with funding source to be identified. We'll take that one first. Uh do we have a motion? Motion. Yes, ma'am. Trying to figure out the motion. Are we approving? We're not approving the dollar amount at this point in time. We're solely approving the application. Correct. Council, what is your recommendation? Gentlemen,

my recommendation is 20% per project. My recommendation would be to modify the agenda language with if it's approval that's great and then whatever the percentage that would be so that when it comes to mayor and council for the for approval that it's the whole agenda item with the amount that's been it's stipulated in that point. Okay. I agree with then it would get it all as as one but I'd have to ask we should we should part of our approval is the 20% or not 20%. Is that what you're saying? I would I'd recommend whatever the dollar amount that mayor and council approve gets assigned to the agenda item so that whatever you approve whatever the dollar amount is that you approve tonight when it goes to mayor and counsel now you're the

I'm not so sure I'm not sure we vetted that mayor Mayor Robisho you have

um so I thought I also heard though is there a possibility of wording the approval tonight to move forward something to the effect of guaranteed 20% with a possibility of an adjustment higher as budget as budget amendments could possibly be done. We just don't I mean I'm being honest. I don't I'm scared to I'm concerned to commit to this without truly understanding what well where it's coming from. What other things are going to need to be reduced to cover this? I'm not you know. So is that a wording that could be at least moved forward as we continue to look at things in the next two weeks?

Yes. And and I was going to make the point that you can always amend this from the dis. So say in those two weeks the the full funding comes forward the the amendment can come from the dis of it's actually being fully funded at that 50% assuming all those numbers end up working out. So that's something you can do the baseline tonight and then ultimately amend it uh at the following the first reading or this is just going to be one singular reading I believe. I'm sorry it's going to be one one reading

it. Well this is where I have to ask for help since we put it as two agenda items. I guess we could always pull one and combine them to go to mayor and council. I think there would be so two se two separate two two separate items but it will just be one one reading. So in those two weeks we'll have that time to work out the the math behind this. I

I I think in answer to your question mayor um we can always include language about a potential budget amendment. So it doesn't have to be in the next two weeks is what I'm saying. It could be further way down the road. This body always has the ability to amend the budget as it sees fit. um we would just need some help in like you said identifying the the the either the source of revenue or the reduction in expenditure. So I don't I mean if Joe can legally make that language work, it doesn't have to be between now and next two weeks, it could be part of that and we're instructed to go find or encouraged or however you want to word it.

Yes, Council Member Z. Yeah, I'll say I wasn't I I thought today would just be the approval and not talking about the finances, but it seems like they're intermingled, which you know, it's okay. We could talk about it. Um, with that being said, I'm almost challenged at this moving forward in any way because I imagine if we go with the 20% recommendation, the homeowners associations for both groups are immediately going to come back and say, do they do not have the funds ready to to match an additional 30% on top of that? And I and I don't quite know how to solve for X here, but I just recognize I think if we move forward, even with the 20% language, it's almost guaranteed that it's going to get removed from the the council meeting. So I almost think this has to be a separate committee meeting just on talking about the finances behind it. But that's my perspective,

Council Member Brumley. Um, and also I don't I don't feel comfortable committing to the 20% because that already puts us, like I said, 1700 in the red and we need to change things. If we do 19%, everything falls out already in the budgeted one. So my point is there's and I'm I'm not sure if we have an amount tonight, but you know, it it makes a difference, right? If we just if we do n 19% we don't have to make any changes to the budget. If we do 20, we have to add, you know, changes to it, right? I'm new here, so I don't

Yeah. So, so procedurally, Lyn, give me a nod if I'm wrong, but it would require an an approval from the council to actually allocate this to these two projects, but it's not a technical budget amendment and that we would be taking money away or adding money. We would simply be designating the funding from that object where the 250 is sitting. But if we do the 251700, you're right. We would have to make an actual budget amendment of 1,700 to move it from one funding source into this funding source. Council member Sales, you have a I do.

One is uh they have a contract that has a a skunky date. So, uh, we need to think about, you know, we we certainly have some decisions to make, but we do have a a time clock that is not our own. Do you have any visibility to what these time clocks are for these two? I'm looking at one of the um construction estimates right now. I don't see a time frame on it. We'd have to put that back on the HOAs to check with the and they they actually have different contractors. So, they're not using the same

fair enough. But we just need to be cognizant of the fact that there are there are clocks that are not ours to control. So, we we have decisions to make. So, council member Bon realize I'm a seasoned veteran in this room right now. It's like the first time I've ever been here. It's the longest tenur person. Um the babe

I know. Look at me go. Um, I do want to encourage the rest of my colleagues though that this is one of those instances where we kind of have to walk and chew gum at the same time because if we were to bring this back to a future committee, it would be at minimum two weeks from now. It takes a four to six week process for us just to get through the meetings and that doesn't account for them going back to search the funds, talking to the HOA and deliberating that way. Um, typically these quotes usually are I'm I'm not going to say this is their quote for sure, but it's typically a 30-day estimation. What I've seen in the past is dredging is like usually a little bit more wiggle. It's very close. It's usually 30 to 60. 30 to 60 if you're if you're lucky. Maybe 90. Oo, I would love a 90, especially going into spring.

But they they also, and I don't know this, the HOAs may have had, you know, when they're dealing with contractors, a lot of contractors know, okay, this is an HOA. They know they need approval, so they may be able to work with them. Pre-negotiated rates. Understood. But yeah, just in terms of the timeliness of it. Um, and then also too, given the timeliness of Pinerove's project, I don't want this project to get punted until maybe next year, the year after that, the year after that when we have this gorgeous new Pine Grove road to run 1,800 trucks across it. So, in the interest of time, I think it's a wiser investment to invest earlier to make sure that the project goes through to ensure that we complete it before the Pine Grove project. But that's my opinion. Why don't you speak?

Oh. Oh, that's Council member Stells also wanted me to pitch in. I realize budget amendments seem scary. Um they're they're quite normal. Um so we're going to be going back through this especially given the fact that I realize that I'm speaking to the choir right now. You had a previous administration that set your budget. Um and now you have a majority of new elected body. So I have a feeling that you guys are going to be having more budget amendments moving forward throughout the year. Um but I do understand your concern about the benchmark and moving past it based off of what was allocated. All right. Yes, Council Member Brumley.

I mean, that's going to add time, right? If we do a budget amendment, that's why they're marrying them together. So, that's why we're going to have the same goes to So, we can do this with the budget amendment at 20%. And then if council and and the mayor elect to provide additional funding, we can bring that as a future budget amendment, which I think that's what you were referring to is that there's a somewhat uh lack of recent history of budget amendments during the course of the year, but this would fit ex we talked a little bit about the budget amendment process last week. This is exactly what that process is designed for. So the idea of doing 19% is not good. [laughter]

I mean, I'm trying to save paperwork and save time. Okay. I I I the 20% just works out as as a good round number. Um the 1700 will not have a material consequential impact on contingency funding and it sounds like I'm going to be instructed and encouraged to continue to identify other sources between now and then anyway. So, all right. Any further questions or comments? All right. Seeing none, we will entertain a motion. The resolution

consideration for the mayor or city administrator to approve the Nesbit Lakes dredging assistance policy application and required budget amendment with funding source to be identified. And the this is a motion to move this to council. That is correct. Correct. So, I make a motion that we move this issue to council with the 251775 and at at and uh an open-ended funding request. Oh, that's fine. Yeah, you're good. You're good. I'm just trying to keep it going.

Motion by Council Member Cells, second by Council Member Philippine. Make sure we have clarity on the motion. So, I mean, I think I'm a little I'm confused. I'm confused. [laughter] So, let's make sure we have clarity. Could you could you restate your motion, please, sir? Can I put it in the form of a poem? The motion is to move this issue to council for further consideration on the budget amount and approval of the request of these two fine organizations to dredge their ponds.

Okay. All right. Thank you. We have that as a uh motion on the item for Nesbbit Lake since it was listed separately on the agenda and that was a second by council member Philippy. All right. Any further discussion? All in favor? All right, that passes unanimously. Then the next item is the consideration for the mayor of city administrator to approve the Chering dredging assistance policy application and requires budget requires budget amendment with funding source to be identified. Same same motion. I hope you wrote it down.

Motion motion um as stated by council member cells for uh the chering dredging application. Do we have a second? Second by council member Zack. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor. All right, that passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Good discussion. And someone can contact council. Okay. [laughter] All right. Give me that. Okay.

All right. And then the next item is the consideration of a blanket approval to perform right-of-way acquisition services and to accept right-of-way options for the Green Street Mobility project in an amount not to exceed $875,000. That would be Mr. Flecker and Mr. Nicholas. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, so this is for the Green Street Mobility Project. I'm just going to give a quick background of the project and then uh talk about the ask. Um, so the Green Street Mobility Project will construct an 8 to 10 foot multi-use trail along Green Street from State Route 9 to Cherry Way. Uh, this project will also convert um the traffic on Green Street from two-way operations to oneway southbound. that has actually already taken place as we speak all the way from Woodstock Road or Woodstock Street down to State Route 9. Um but then Plum Tree Street will also be converted um from vehicular traffic to pedestrian path and then the area aerial utilities are also being placed underground. Um on this project we have 16 parcels that are currently being impacted uh where we need uh rightway acquisition or permanent or temporary easement or some driveway easements. Um just a quick overview of the project. Um so this is Green Street uh that runs uh west to east on the map. Um and then Plum Tree Street is running south to north. Um so State Route 9 is on the left side of the map and then Cherry Way uh with the phase this is for phase one of Green Street. This is uh the end of the project uh for phase one.

Um so we are requesting blanket approval for the acquisition services uh for all these parcels. This is our standard procedure. Um the amount of $875,000 is based on appraisal estimates uh with a little bit of contingency. And this is a not to exceed amount. So if if we need to go above this amount, this would come back to council. But we do have the funding in the project account. And with that, we'll entertain any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Nicholas. Questions or comments for Mr. Nicholas. Seeing none, we will entertain a motion. Motion by Council Member Cells, second by Council Member Hall. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? All right, that passes unanimously as well. And I believe that does conclude our committee agenda for January 27th, 2026. With that, seeing no further business, we'll entertain a motion [laughter] of a motion of adjournment by council member Bon,

second by council member Brumley. All in favor passes unanimously. Thank you very much. And we will move toward the city council chambers for the special called meeting for closure purposes. Yes.