City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone and welcome to the city of Roswell mayor and council meeting on Monday April 27th 2026. I am Mayor Mary Robisho and I'd like to introduce my colleagues and council members present. Mayor Prom and Councilwoman Sarah Bon, Council Member Alan Cells, Council Member Christine Hall, Council Member Jennifer Phillippy, Council Member Erin Brumley, and Council Member Chris Zack. I now would like to turn it over to City Administrator Randy Knight to explain how the meeting is run. Mr. Nighton.

Thank you, Mayor Robisho, and good evening everyone. Um, in accordance with section chapter 3.70, the city code, the city council shall hold regular public meetings. The purpose of city council meetings are for the public to participate and speak on agenda items which constitute formal decisions by the elected body. These items are listed on the published agenda which can be accessed prior to the meeting on the city website. And public public comments and questions are essential for mayor and council to contemplate and consider as they make each decision. We appreciate you being here this evening and we ask that everyone uh present if you would please fill out a comment card if you would like to speak on an agenda item to ensure an accurate record of the meeting. We have a number of staff people here who can assist you. The uh cards will be called in the order they are received by the city clerk. And we ask of course that everyone um if you would silence any electronic devices at this present time. And if it's it if it's necessary to have an independent conversation, we ask that you exit the rear doors uh to the vestibule area. The mayor is a presiding officer and we'll conduct the meeting uh this evening. We encourage everyone in attendance to always check out roswwell 365.com for a calendar of events and other other forms of information. We appreciate you being here again this evening and uh we um take very seriously uh service to Roswell residents. So, thank you for being here. Mayor Robisho.

Thank you, Mr. Nighton. Um we'd like to invite now and welcome Roswell Fire Department Chaplain Dory Griggs to deliver the invocation in a moment of silence.

Thank you. It's good to be back after a little extended leave for working. So, please join me. Holy one, we are grateful for the opportunity to gather here tonight to discuss the business of our wonderful city. Be with the mayor, city council, and city staff as they work with and listen to our residents. It is an honor to recognize esteemed veteran of Roswell, United States Army Specialist Maya Goulsby. Be with her and all our veterans and military members. We owe them a great debt of gratitude for their service. Be with the family and the fire family of Kevin Cash. His life and dedicated service to our community is honored with the naming of the street for him tonight. Bless our first responders, members of our fire, police departments, and 911 dispatch. Keep them safe as they work tirelessly to keep us safe and protected. Be with each of us here tonight and as we return to our homes. Amen.

Thank you. I would like to invite United States Army Specialist Maya Goulby, please come forward and lead us in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance 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.

Specialist Goulby, if you would stay at the podium, we're going to come down and join you. We're here to honor Maya Goulby, a dedicated city of Roswell water operator and a proud Proud member of the United States Army National Guard, Specialist Goulsby answered the call to service at just 18 years old, enlisting while still in high school in 2018. She served on a vital border mission from 2024 to 2025, where she was awarded a special commander coin for operational excellence. Her decorations include the Army Forces Reserve Medal and the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal for her honorable mobilization and service. with over five years of experent.

With over five years of experience as a water operator, Maya ensures our city's infrastructure remains safe and reliable every single day. And we thank you for that. Also, I, Mayor Mary Robishau, officially named Maya Goulsby an esteemed veteran of Roswell and ask all citizens to join me in recognizing her outstanding service to both our country and to our community. So far I'm 24 years old accomplish things in my career.

And how old is your baby? My baby is actually four months. So, she just had a baby four months and she's still And I have a 2-year-old daughter as well. I wasn't yet.

Thank you. Congratulations. Welld deserved. City Clerk Nancy Long, please read the next item on the mayor's report.

Yes. This is approval to name the new connector road north of the Green Street parking deck as Kevin Cash Memorial Drive in honor of firefighter Kevin Cash presented by Sharon Isizo, deputy city administrator.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. I am pleased to share that the voterapproved bondf funed parking deck is scheduled to open next week. As a part of that project, a new connector road was constructed just north of the deck, linking Highway 9 at the Southern Post traffic signal to Green Street. This not this new roadway now requires a name and staff is recommending it be designated designated Kevin Cash Memorial Drive in honor of City of Roswell Firefighter Kevin Cash. I'm happy to answer any questions. Do I hear a motion? Councilwoman Hall, do I hear a second? Council member Bon, all in favor, please raise your hand. Passes unanimously. So, Fire Chief Tro, please come forward and if you could give us a few words.

Thank you, Mayor. Mayor, members of the council, to the Cash family, and to my brothers and sisters of the Roswell Fire Department, thank you. I stand before you tonight both as a fire chief and as someone who had the privilege of wearing the same uniform as Kevin Cash. Kevin was not a name on a plaque to us. He was a teammate, a friend, a firefighter who answered the call because it is who he was and who he was made to be. Tonight, by naming this road in his honor, Roswell is making a promise. A promise that every time a resident drives down the street, every time a new firefighter reports to the station, and every time his family passes by, Kevin Cash's name will be spoken. His service remembered, and his sacrificed never diminished by time. To the Cash family, we carry him with us always. To this council, to our mayor, and to this community, thank you. Thank you for your steadfast commitment to never forget the men and women of public safety who made the ultimate sacrifice. That commitment matters. It tells every firefighter, police officer, and 911 communications officer on the line tonight that this is a city that sees them, values them, and will never never forget them. Thank you. We do have Jana and Abby with us tonight and we'd like to bring him up uh if and present him with a few things. Mayor,

thank you. And then I'm going to invite the council members to join me at the podium. Thank you.

Next is the consent agenda. City clerk Nancy Long, are there any speakers for the consent agenda? There are no speakers for the consent. Does council have any comments regarding the consent agenda? Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda? Council member Zach, do I have a second? Council member Philippy. All in favor, please raise your hand. Passes unanimously. Next is the regular agenda. City Clerk Long, please read the first item on the agenda.

Yes, this is approval of an inmate housing agreement between Cherokee County and the city of Roswell, presented by Chief of Police James Conroy.

Chief Conroy. All right. Good evening, mayor and council. Uh, this is a request for an approval of an inmate housing agreement between Cherokee County and the city of Roswell to house city of Roswell inmates. First, I'm going to explain what's a City of Roswell inmate. A City of Roswell inmate is a person who has been arrested and charged with a Roswell ordinance or one of those charges that can be heard in Roswell Municipal Court. An example of those charges are DUI, reckless driving, disorderly conduct, public intoxication, misdemeanor shoplifting, minor offenses like that that can be heard here in Roswell Municipal Court. State charges are those more serious offenses that must be heard in Fulton County State Court or Fulton County Superior Court. state court if it's a misdemeanor such as family violence or superior court for a felony such as aggravated assault, sexual assault, autotheft, burglary or murder. Those inmates are state inmates and must go to the Fulton County Jail for adjudication. Now, I'll give you a brief history of jails in the city of Roswell. So, City of Roswell operated its own municipal jail up until 2017. Uh the jail was closed and as you see across the street it's in the process of being demolitioned as we speak. Once that jail was closed uh Roswell inmates were housed at what was called the North Fulton Annex. This is really the Alpharetta jail. It was owned by the city of Alpharetta but it was operated by the Fulton County Sheriff. The Fulton County Sheriff operated it, staffed it, and you could bring Roswell inmates or those charged with state offenses to the North Fulton annex. When COVID came, the sheriff chose to close the North Fulton annex. So, for a period of a little over two years, we had nowhere to house um f

uh city of Roswell inmates. State charges and superior court charges continued going to Rice Street, but the sheriff would not take um those charged with municipal offenses from any city up in Fulton County. Uh, Sheriff Labot was elected, came in, decided to reopen the North Fulton Annex, and then began charging $75 ahead for Roswell inmates. We signed that agreement, and we were utilizing the North Fulton annex for a period of time until staffing became an issue and the Fulton County Sheriff's Office came under a DOJ consent decree and they chose to close the North Fulton annex. We were fortunate enough to find some partners at the city of Smyrna who operate a city of Smyrna jail and we were able to bring our Roswell inmates to the city of Smyrna and house them at the city of Smyrna jail at a cost of $90 per inmate per day. We received notice recently that city of Smyrna is going to close their jail effective June 1st. We will not have a place to take our local inmates. We were able to partner with our friends at Cherokee County and Sheriff Reynolds and they have come up with a proposal for us to house our inmates at the Cherokee County Jail at a cost of $125 per inmate per day. The distance between here in Smyrna and here in the Cherokee County Jail is about the same. So that worked out well. In the meantime, City of Alpharetta has reopened their jail and they've been operating just as a jail for the city of Alpharetta. only their inmates can be housed there. We have received a proposal from the city of Alpharetta that was much higher than anticipated and exceeded my budget. Therefore, my recommendation is that we proceed with this agreement between the Cherokee County and the city of Roswell. I'd be happy to take any questions you may have.

City clerk Long, are there any um speakers for this item? There are no speakers. Does council member have any questions? Council member Zach. Hey, just one question. If Alphetta decides to come down in our their price, how easy is it us for to transition from Cherokee to Alpharetta? So, there's no need to transition. We can use as many jails as as we wish. So, this is not a sole use agreement.

And the charge is per prisoner that you bring, not so much that we pay a monthly rate of any sort. per prisoner per day with Cherokee County. With Alpharetta, it was the similar charge of 125 per prisoner per day came with an annual access fee of a little over $700,000 per year. Any other council member have a question? Do I hear a motion? Council member Hall. Second, Council Member Bon. All those in favor, please raise your hand. passes unanimously. Thank you.

City Clerk Long, please read the second item on the regular agenda. Uh, this is approval of a text amendment to articles 24.6, adoption of Roswell dredging assistance policy section 24.6.1, dredging assistance policy of the city of Roswell Code of Ordinances. This will be the first reading. Presented by Brian Watson, director of environmental public works. City Attorney David Davidson will also will read.

Thank you, Mayor. This is an ordinance to amend chapter 24, utilities and services, article 24.6, adoption of Roswell dredging assistance policy of the code of ordinances of the city of Roswell. Now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Roswell, pursuant to their authority, do hereby adopt the following amendment. Chapter 24, utilities and services, article 24.6, 6 adoption of Roswell dredging assistance policy of the code of ordinances of the city of Roswell, Georgia is hereby amended by deleting said article and replacing it in its entirety by adding a new article 24.6 entitled Rodwell Roswell dredging assistance policy which shall read as shown in exhibit A attached here to Incorporated herein and if approved this is the first reading.

Brian,

thank you mayor. Good evening, council. Um, as was mentioned, uh, when this was brought to committee back on April 14th, based on feedback that staff received, um, over the past several months on the dredging assistance policy, staff were propos proposing some changes to this policy. The primary goal of these changes are to refine the amount of assistance and to clarify the process so that it aligns better with the budgeting process and timeline for mayor and council. In your packet, there are four exhibits. Uh the first one is the one that uh attorney uh Davidson just read. Uh the other three exhibits are the current policy um that exists right now. The second exhibit is a redlinined version of the policy showing the proposed changes and the third exhibit is a summary of the proposed changes in tabular form. The first set of changes clarify the timing of when the application and approvals must be completed in relation to the budget year. Currently, the policy does not include any dates for submittals of applications in relation to a budget year. So, this hopefully will help clarify that. The proposed revisions um are on your screen and are in the middle section here. The first one is a timeline by which a draft application is to be submitted uh which needs to be evaluated for the following year. We are proposing this date to be March 31st. The timeline or the second one is the timeline by which uh a completed application is to be approved to be eligible for the following year. Um we are proposing this date to be December 31st. And the last one is a timeline by which the land disturbance permit is to be approved to be eligible for the following budget year. And we are also proposing this date to be December 31st. The next proposed change just clarifies some items that would be considered when evaluating dredging applications. Currently, the main evaluation criteria is storm water. Um, but we have added

some additional items including downstream water quality impact of the lake or pond as well as the contributing drainage area of their lake and pond. Uh, and with that, I'll take any questions that you all may have. Thank you, city clerk Long. Are there is there anyone who wishes to speak on this item? There are no speakers. Does council have any comments or questions regarding this item? Council member Hall.

Thank Thank you, Mayor. And thank you, Mr. Watson. And I'd like to thank my um council colleagues and mayor for reinforcing the city's commitment to our dredging program. Um this is something that um is wellreceived um and and something that will help future councils or this council as far as budgeting. Clearly this year we had some applications and in years past this was not a budgeted item. So um councils mayor and councils of the past um basically funded this program through budget amendments. So this is a great great addition to the program. Thank you for working on it and thank you for the city's commitment to storm water management and um helping uh well communities helping share the costs with the city and and and and vice versa. It's a win-win for everybody. So, thank you very much.

Any other comments, Council Member South? Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple quick things. I know we we we have talked about this a lot, but this may be the only time that some residents will hear this and it's a program that we hope people will take advantage of because it's important to our storm water management. So, so let's just talk just a little bit about a couple of those things. One is the the real objective here as council member Hall brought up is to make sure that a budget period interdicted the request and the spending. And so just talk a little bit about that process. So they they would come would make the application by March 31st with their uh uh perhaps with their appraisal or without their appraisal at that point

with an engineers's estimate of probable cost. So that would be March 31st of a given year to be eligible for the next budget year. Right? So for example, if it were already in place, it would be March 31st of 2026 to be eligible for the 2027 budget. And so with this new structure, which as as Christine pointed out, uh was unfunded, now we'll have the council have the opportunity to both look at the merits of the case, look at the impact of the the region that it's affecting, and then make a a decision specific to that one, and still have an opportunity to take it through the budget process. Would you uh just so people have an idea of how many of these we have gotten over the years, would you just walk through how many you've seen in your your uh years here? So over the so since I've been here, we've seen five applications

and that's been how many years? Over the last five years. Okay. And we've seen five. Um over the years, my goodness, I don't know that. That's good enough. I just want to understand this isn't like there's a bums rush of these. It's it's a big project for for a a home ownership association or for a neighborhood or whatever that it's not something people are going to beat the door down because of this new policy. But it's something that as needed and with a engineering requirement that's clear and has the cause as well as the the the scope that they're going to do, we can make an informed decision as a body. So that's what this does. Correct. Correct. That's perfect. Thank you.

Any other questions? I do have one with the um portion that talks about the affected V area that this could approximately how many um are we talking about in the city of Roswell from your best estimation programs um I'm sorry ponds that could come under this

okay I understand the question so currently there's two minimum criteria either the drainage area that is coming to the lake pond or the volume of the pond one of those two need to be met to meet the minimum criteria. Right now, if a lake or pond does not meet that minimum criteria, they could appeal to mayor and council. But in terms of just the lakes or ponds that actually meet the minimum criteria, there are approximately 49 lakes or ponds within the city that meet that. Thank you. Any other questions? Do I have hear a motion? Motion.

No, you're not good to do it. Um, council member cells, do I have a second? Council member Zach. All in favor, please raise your hand. Passes unanimously. Thank you, sir. Thank you. City Clerk Long, please read the third item on the regular agenda. Uh, this is approval of scope of work number two with the Downtown Development Authority regarding the former Independence High School. This will be presented by Director of Economic Development, Daryl Connelly.

Welcome, Darl. Good evening, U Mayor Robishaw and council. Tonight I'm presenting to you a scope of work number two um pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement that the city entered into in January 2025. Uh that particular intergovernmental agreement is for economic development projects that are brought forward by the city. I apologize. Here we go. All right. Uh the city has a right of first refusal and an option to purchase the Independence High School on Mimosa Boulevard. This was obtained by the city uh when we purchased the Crab Apple Middle School. This is a high impact opportunity with the potential to advance our economic development goals with catalytic redevelopment. This particular property uh is in the downtown activity area. This is uh part of our comprehensive plan. Um it is a area that we want to focus on with mixeduse uh transforming underutilized sites. This particular scope of work uh the city would be engaging the DDA to lead pursuit of a redevelopment project for the property with a qualified developer. City would acquire the property by exercising its purchase option then transfer the property to the DDA for redevelopment in partnership with a qualified developer. The scope of work uh services are outlined. DDA would put together a comprehensive project action plan. Uh this would need to align with the

economic development strategy. They would put together a development and negotiation strategy and also run a developer identification process and uh partnership process. The plan and strategy will be presented to council prior to proceeding with formal negotiations or any commitments. The DDA is required to fund all necessary thirdparty costs associated with the S. So uh project management services would be provided directly by city staff. You've seen this slide before. We are currently in the original origination phase of our economic development process. Uh so this is just the beginning. Terms of next steps, the DDA would initiate the action plan and redevelopment strategy, conduct due diligence and feasibility work, evaluate acquisition and partnership approaches, and then return to council with recommendations. There's no financial obligation without mayor and council approval. We are recommending a motion to approve S. W2 with the Downtown Development Authority regarding the former Independence High School property and redevelopment initiative. Happy to answer any questions.

City Clerk Long, are there any speakers for this item? Janet Russell, Janet Russell. I thought I wouldn't have to be here tonight and then I saw the the words DDA. There are not enough words for me to say how much we don't need the DDA involved in Independence High School's acquisition. Every time they get involved, we end up with garbage. Need a few examples? Southern Post city paid cash for it. We drained the solid waste management fund. We lost all the interest. We lost all the property taxes. We let them manage it. And when we sold it on paper, there was a $67,000 profit and they got to keep it. Who are they? Want another example? They were charged with redeveloping Highway 9 from Hulcom Bridge to here. So they took the soft way and started here with the idea of clear-cutting all the trees and moving the war memorial. That cost the city taxpayer $2.5 million in design ideas which were trash. So here we are with Independence High School. I've already approached Mary Mayor Robisho about an idea and I don't think we need the city to get involved with the DDA when all you have to do is go to the Fulton County Board of Education and do it yourselves. The thing that bothers me too is that they get to work with a private developer. Surprise, surprise. It'll be their buddies behind the scenes who are going to make it something it shouldn't be. It is an historic building. My idea is

worthy of talking about. It would be unique in metro Atlanta. It would develop our tourism industry and our visitors. We're the only city that has one, a historic building. I I just don't know. The DDA, I don't know, downtown Destruction Authority, maybe. We all love Southern Post because it's so homey and cute. They also, I believe, gave us the parking garage and helped with the Hillrose construction mess over there. I look like I'm looking at the pyramids of Giza with all the orange clay. And today I noticed they were knocking down the police building, the records building. The environmental impact in the air around here. None of you live around it. It was as brown as these walls today as they bulldozed everything down. Now imagine if you lived over there. I don't mean the people in the million-dollar town homes. I mean the people in the little homes. You can't be outside the DDA, Downtown Destruction Authority. Please don't pass this and give them permission to work with a private developer. That's not the city's business. The city business is to do something for the community. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers or no other speakers? Does council have any questions? Council member Philippy. Um there seems to be some confusion about the DDA and their role. Um at least partially I believe they've played different roles in some of the developments um that two of them were just mentioned, Hill Rose and and Southern Post. So can you describe to us what is the DDA? What is it used for and is it an arm of the city?

So, the DDA is it's the downtown development authority. They are a state um chartered organization. Uh they are charged with redevelopment projects for the city. They have more powers to uh do development projects than the city has. So, they can go and enter into agreements with with developers. They can issue bonds for a particular project. They could also issue um tax abatements if if if we need to issue a tax abatement. So they have significant powers that the city does not have. And what is their authority and what are we asking them to do here?

We're asking them, we're entering into an agreement. It's a scope of work. So they will come back to the city with a plan. It's an action plan that will come back to mayor and counsel. make sure that you are okay with this plan and what their strategy is for acquiring the property for if they're going to issue an RFP. You will see exactly how the process would be would be run. So, it's also uh has in there a negotiation strategy and how they they would approach it. Uh they' be utilizing city staff and legal counsel uh to help them uh move the project forward. Uh why couldn't the city do this directly?

Uh the city doesn't have the powers to do that. Okay. And and what is the funding source of the DDA? Uh the DDA has uh funds in their bank account from issuance of different taxes and bonds. So they have they have a balance in their account that they could fund these these costs. So is there a cost to the city for this so? There is no cost to the city other than paying for city staff. And what would happen if we didn't exercise our first right of refusal? Uh we would lose the opportunity. And what could potentially happen if we lose it?

Uh the the school authority could end up selling to somebody else and we would not have control over the project. Okay. Um there are concerns um that I've heard from residents about the city owning too much property. What does this obligate us to? does not obligate us to to anything at this point. So, we would come back to mayor and counsel if there is some sort of a an ask of of council monetarily, but the idea would be that the city would purchase the property and then end up transferring the property to the DDA and potentially to that developer. So, we would not be in the chain of title for very long.

Okay. And then just a couple other statements that I read in the agreement. Neither party shall independently enter binding commit commit commitments without approval for mayor and council. Correct. That's correct. And um any key decision points require council direction. Correct. That's correct. Okay. Thank you. Any other comments? Council member cells. Thank you for those questions. That was very helpful. I hope it was helpful to uh the residents as well. So, let's talk a couple of things about the deal specifically. Uh, is there a price in our purchase option stated by uh the public the school Fort County Board of Education? There is. There is a set price.

And what about the timeline on the purchase? The purchase option is available until February 2027. Have they already I I think the phrase is uh deemed it uh excess property. I'm not exactly sure how they say that. Have they already done that? They have not done that yet. But if they the school would have to deem it to be surplus property and then they would come to the city since we have a right of first refusal. They would come to the city and say does the city want this particular property. Right. If we say if we say no then they move on with

right selling it to some other developer. And to uh to your point, um part of the reason for these S so is because the DDA does have significant authority and we want that authority to be used in ways that come back to council. So this this is we before the deals that she's talked about that Janet talked about were not through an S so we basically just gave it to the DDA and said go do what you will and what came back was what came back. This is different than that because this is really like you showed on your slide for the the timeline of the development process of the economic development process. We're at what step one two 1.2 out of 13 or 14 steps. Yes. Right.

This this gives us control over the process and so the DDA would not be doing anything that that mayor and council would not want them to do. Right. And also we we cannot sell directly. We cannot go find a developer and work to develop something that we want and then own the property and sell it directly to the developer. It has to go through the DDA. Is that that's my understanding? Is that your understanding? That's my understanding. All right. Thank you. Any other questions? Council member Brumley.

Um and since we're talking about what is the DDA, you know that how how is the DDA the people who work there? How do they do they get appointed? Is this um does it come from the state? Does it come from city? Can you explain to the public? The members of the DDI are appointed by city council. Do how many do they have? Uh there are four current members. I think there are two open seats. Okay. Thank you.

One last question. And this will be for me and through the process because it technically is a partnership between the city council mayor and council and the DDA. The city and the DDA can make sure that we have public input through the process with whatever plans either come forward or suggestions of plans as Miss Russell has stated had a very great idea that we that's been will be brought up as a possibility of an idea to explore. Correct. That's correct. Thank you. Any other questions? Do I hear a motion? Oh, wait. Sorry. One more question. Go ahead.

Okay. Uh, council member cells, you wanted to make a motel, do I need the motion? Do I have a second? Council member Bon, all in favor, please raise your hand. All opposed? So 5 to one, the motion passes. Thank you.

City clerk Long, please read the last item on the regular agenda.

Uh yes, this is approval of a parking services contract with 12 Oaks Parking LLC in substantial conformance with the attached contract. And this is presented by Bill Godshaw, chief financial officer. Just testing the clicker. Thank you, mayor, city council. Uh tonight I am bringing forth a proposal to approve parking service contract with 12 Oaks Parking LLC. Um the proposal and the uh template contract are in your packet for further review. to uh start off on a scope of services. Uh this is uh the scope of services will cover uh daily operation and systems management of the green street parking deck. It will also cover data collection and reporting. Uh it'll include 24-hour monitoring including light cleaning operations of the parking uh deck. It will not include any revenue collection as previously announced. Um it is simply to gather data and to report on that data. Also included in scope of services will be uh the Canton Street, Elizabeth Way and East alley uh lots and on street parking uh which will include kiosk management. The goal of this is twofold. One is to uh ensure space turnover optimization um as well as data collection and reporting in a similar manner that we're doing for the deck. The idea being to find out how often these spaces are used, how often they're turned over uh and so forth. The third aspect of services will uh address enforcement and compliance. 12 Oaks will provide dedicated staff for assigned city parking assets. The assigned assets being Canton Street, Elizabeth Way, and East Alley, just to be clear. Um they will issue parking charge notices uh in extent of people who have gone over or parking in unauthorized spaces and they will assist with the administration and

payment collection. Um, I want to add a point here that the city retains all pricing decisions, fees, and charge rates on these three lots. Um, as well as any pricing decisions that may be made with the parking deck. Uh, this is a, as we'll cover in a second, this is an expense reimbursement contract. This is not a revenue contract. Uh, so the first component financially is the operating expense reimbursement. The annualized uh amount for this is $257,000. For the pilot period that runs from May 1st through December 31st of 2026, the operating expense reimbursement will be $172,000498. The management fee component of the contract will be $2,000 per month. Uh and for the eight-month period in the pilot program, it will be $16,000. So the combined monthly invoice over the pilot period will be $188,498 which will be build in level monthly payments of $23,562 per month. And just to say it one more time, this only applies during the pilot period from the period May 1st through December 31st, 2026. look at the uh financial decision- making that was involved in in how we assessed this contract proposal. Uh at the beginning during 2025 as we developed the budget for 2026, we determined that personnel costs for parking operations would be approximately $35,864. Uh this included all in-house parking operations, including full-time staff, part-time staff, and a manager. The proposed operating cost of management fee from 12 Oaks Park uh LLC is $188,498.

Um again, this comparison uses our 2026 budget. Um and savings uh of 117,367 would be returned to the general fund or redirected as the council deems appropriate. I'd like to cover a little bit about the procurement method. Um we've had some discussions about procurement methods over the past couple of months. This is a new one um for this year for 2026. It's uh we are using a comparative purchasing uh program also referred to collocally as the piggyback method. And so uh Sandy City of Sandy Springs conducted a full competitive request for proposal for their parking management program. Their program involves a garage similar to our deck, though it's underground. Uh they have on street parking. They offer valet services, which are not included in this contract. Uh and they also help Sandy Springs uh administer its enforcement program. All of which are substantially identical to the scope of Roswell's programs and needs. In the Sandy Springs process, uh they conducted a proper evaluation. Uh it was a competitive uh process. I think there were three companies that bid including 12 Oaks and Sandy Springs awarded the contract to 12 Oaks. The RFP evaluation criteria scoring and award were conducted in full compliance with applicable competitive procurement standards. And given our Georgia law and Roswell's procurement code, we are allowed to use the uh contract uh competitively procured by another local government when a scope terms and conditions are substantially similar. I consulted with city attorney regarding our compliance with these provisions. Uh and he agreed that we were in substantial compliance with the cooperative purchasing provisions. So just to kind of summarize once again the legal and operational basis that we

are substantially similar in scope, competitive origin, comparable scale, appropriate city attorney review, and the financial terms are applicable. And the key aspects of the contract terms besides pricing would include a 30-day cancellation notice. And that cancellation does not include fees or penalties. So, we can provide 30-day written notice and the contract ends on day 30 with no additional costs to the city. We also plan to perform a full competitive procurement in the fourth quarter of this year, 2026, in which uh we hope to undertake a a vendor uh selection process for January 1, 2027 forward. Staff recommendation at this point is to authorize the city administrator to execute a parking management services agreement with 12 Oaks Parking LLC on a management fee cost reimbursement basis based on a competitive contract award by the city of Sandy Springs following a competitive RFP in the amount of $188,498 for the remainder of fiscal year 2026. The funding will come out of current budgeted funds. The term ends on December 31, 2026. And the next step after this would involve a full RFP process that would be conducted through the council in the ordinary course of business in the fourth quarter 2026. With that, I'm happy to take any questions.

City Clerk Long, are there any speakers on this item? There are no speakers for this item. Does council have any comments or questions regarding this item? Council member Phelp. Um, so this presentation wasn't part of our packet. So some of my questions come from the presentation that were in the packet. Sure.

Um, that presentation I believe was provided by 12 Oaks. And in there they talk about an operating expense of 257,000 which you mentioned that was prrated to 172,000. They further go on to um show their staffing proposal which would equal $148,000 a year in salaries um plus payroll related cost of $35,000 annually. So now we're up to $183,000 and then they're showing some additional expenses beyond there. So is 12 Oaks losing money on this proposal? I would have to let 12 Oaks answer that question.

Yeah. So it would be helpful if we can have um presentations that match up. Um the other thing I'd like to know is about the frequency of the reporting. Um do you know how often the reporting will be given? So we can determine that ourselves. We can set a minimum of monthly in the early part. We'll probably do weekly and we include to have debrief meetings with them in the beginning on a weekly basis and at least monthly to make sure that we understand the data that we're looking at. Okay. Um so it mentions that there will be financial occupancy and space turnover data. Will we have any demographic data on this where we can determine um where the visitors are coming from?

Uh I think the best we can get from their operations would be the license plates which generally do not include demographic data. We might be able to work with Roswell, Inc. to get better data that way, but through this contract we won't have demographic or source data. Okay. So we're not going to know where people are coming from. Um, let's see. Um, um,

council member Hall, just a sec. Could we clarify? So, we would not get the true demographic data except possibly the license plates for the green street parking, but for the on street since it will be something that people will pay for, wouldn't we not be able to figure out where those people are originating from? Yes or no? I mean from financial I'd have to ask 12 folks that question since so that might so that might be available for that aspect they can come up would you want to they're here would you come up would y'all be willing to come up and answer that question sorry our other questions

or not thank you for having us by the way council members um as for demographic data data points that we will get whether it's on street parking or the parking deck would be license plate. So license plate would be required for whether it's the on street or through the LPR system that's being installed within the parking deck. So whether it's a a payment transaction or not payment transaction, we will have the ability to pull license plate data. As far as pulling a report for demographic of where they're from from license plate data, do you have an answer? Can sir, can you get just give us your name position? Jeremy Scott, 12 Oaks parking.

Okay. Thank you. eager to get started with the question. I apologize for that. So maybe Michael's our uh executive vice president of operations. So maybe you can speak to what data we may be able to get. Michael Craig. Um so are we talking about the the the street spaces for demographic? So we when when someone You could speak for both I mean I know there might be a differentiation between the two.

Uh okay. So, I I think Jeremy talked about the Green Street garage, but as far as the street spaces go, when if someone creates a session through the app that we use, the payment portal that we use, their their phone number is entered, uh their credit card information, all that. Now, we can't really share credit card information because of PCI compliance. phone numbers, we can kind of figure out where someone lives, you know, just like the license plate. But um can I continue?

Thank you. Um in the research and the coordination with Sandy Springs, has there been feedback about the friction from users of this system? H how frictionless do you feel the system is? Uh well actually we've had very good feedback from the city of Sandy Springs. Their council members are very pleased. Everybody at the city um the I'll be honest with you, the the payment platform that we use is is a three-step process. Um I if you'd like afterwards, I can show it to you. I can show it to all of you on my phone. It literally takes 8 to 10 seconds. uh you you put your license plate in, you put your phone number in, it sends you a text, you put your license plate in, you put your credit card in. If you use that credit card, the next time you start a session, your credit card is there. So it it'll ask you if you want to use that same credit card. And if you do that, it it becomes like a three or 4 second process.

And how much cyber insurance do you carry? We our base policy is a million with a $15 million umbrella that covers that as well. Um and so back to to u Mr. Godshaw um the RFP ends uh for or the the um this contract would end at the end of the year. During that time we will be going out to RFP for any future um contract work. Correct. We would initiate the RP process in the fourth quarter with a view of awarding the contract to begin operations January 1, 2027.

Okay. And part of that will include um evaluating what it would look like to bring these services in house. Correct. Yes. And and a key part of that will be the data capture from the pilot program. We will provide that to the RFP participants. Okay. And then just a reminder uh for staff, I am awaiting a model of the first two hours free and a flat fee for events. And um I would expect that that model would be more relevant once we have some of the data from here. Yes. and we can continue to refine those models as we get the data, but I'll I'll check with my counterpart on that. Council member Bramley,

um the slide that you had that three three numbers on the three lists. Yeah, that um key distinction here retains 100% of gross parking revenue. Um what is the um the split? What is the gross part? I mean like we get now I got you. Um hold on. I'm guessing. So the budgeted amount for for the on street parking is $160,637. That's budgeted in 2026 budget. Mhm.

So um when 12ox does the transactions for charge for credit cards that for example that is already part of the operating expense of number one is that so that's the revenue component. The budget component is 305,000 for the services they they are proposing to provide. Not who's who's paying for the banking fees? That was my question. Yes. So, it's 100% of gross because you're eating up the the rest of them. Um, have we decided what is going to be the charges for the parking?

That is a determination made by the city administrator and I don't think we have finalized what that is. We're going to work on that work on those charges during the onboarding process. Sorry, would you repeat that question? The question when it says 100% of gross parking revenue the last one. Okay, perfect.

Council member Bumley asked that the parking rates for on street parking have been set yet and they have not. They will be set by the city administrator, but we have not set them yet because we haven't gone through the onboarding process with the contract. Council member Zach, what's next? I believe

Sure. Council member Hall. Thank you. Just a clarifying question. I was a little confused because we have a budgeted amount that we expect for on street parking. So there would be a I would presume that we would have an idea of what those rates are and they're not set yet. I I'm there was modeling done around the rates um and utilization and I don't have those handy and the actual setting of rates is uh by uh the perview of the city administrator and that has not been set yet. We've have some modeling. I don't have the details in front of me to answer to that extent.

Okay. So, the modeling was based on some presumption of what the rates would be and that that'll be formalized by the city administrator potentially. That is correct. Thank you, Council Member Zach.

Um, it's Mike and Jeremy, right? Thanks for impromptu uh taking our questions, but I got a question maybe for Bill, but you guys might participate. I'm trying to get more clarity on kind of the data capturing. We're kind of talking amongst ourselves exactly where and what data was being captured and how. Um so I guess to outline a little bit for Green Street, the parking deck. Um we're going to have LPR readers, right? And those are going to be city of Roswell funded. And yes, they are owned straight up by the city as part of the park deck buildout. So, yes, there LPRs at at the entrances that are our property.

Okay. And and to clarify, was were those funded by the PFA bonds or was that part of the original go bond? It was a combination of both. Okay. Okay. So, for Green Street, we're going to have LPR recording data. Are we also going to Is that going to be seamless, frictionless? people drive through and they park and they get the LPR read during the pilot program or are they going to have to interface with the kiosk even though the the rates expected to be zero?

I I'll ask Jeremy and even Sharon is to correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we still need them to pull a ticket so we can trigger the gate and capture the data so that the pull ticket and the LPR reading will be matched up by the data capture system. But that that ticket pull is critical to actually beginning the data capture system. Does that answer your question? I think so. I'm kind of thinking through it. And then from kind of interfacing with our hardware, there's going to be software, right? And that's going to be Green Street's going to own the capacity, all the software that's using our hardware. Is that the idea?

I think the software has two components. There's the software that's running the hardware, and then it's going to be the software that you guys use to interface with the software running the hardware. So, think about two pieces of software coming together at the hardware point to communicate back to 12 Oaks for the data capture and to actually monitor and manage the uh the ticket poles, the LPRs and and other operations. Okay. And then on the actual street that will be like a kiosk that they're interfacing with. That'll be the app program that

you Sorry. There there's currently two pay on foot machines out there which are a physical kiosk that you walk up to, you enter your credit card in, you put your license plate in. We will also have a think of it as like a virtual kiosk or scan the pay is what we call it. It's you can either text or you can scan the barcode and it's through your phone. So, there'll be two options to pay out there. Okay. Thank you. I think I'm good. Thank you. Any other question, Council Member South?

So, we're talking about the contract and and not the the presupposition. And I I want to understand if I recall when we last talked about this, and this wasn't you, it was Jeff. So we may have to have a conversation postponed or further. I don't know. But the contract they were participating in parking revenues for Green Street as well. Is that and that's now not the case. Is that you guys understanding? I mean previous proposal included a revenue share arrangement uh predicated on the deck u revenue as well as on street parking revenue.

And how much did the dollar amount to us change? Was it 100% through the parking and now at zero or what was the split? What were you thinking the revenue would be for the contract that we are not seeing? It was a step tier process where a certain portion of revenue was 100% a second tier of revenue was I believe 7525 and then the final tier was 15% to 12 Oaks and 85% to the city. So in the modeling, what did we think that the bottom line cost or benefit to Roswell would be under that structure that we are no longer doing?

So our um last forecast uh running with running at 100% was about 600,000 and with the split I believe we were coming in around 450,000 roughly net to us or net cost. Uh the net revenue before cost. Okay. and and how much re how much cost on our side under that model. So there that proposal also absorbed the variable cost and left only the fixed cost and it was a a little bit break even maybe a little bit underwater total total and based on based on the last projection we ran.

Okay. And and so the I think that's my my issue with this whole conversation is we're talking about the contract and the last vote. I'm sorry, my phone is almost out of gas, so I keep losing the uh but I think it was March 9th that we voted that we were going to charge for Green Street. And it was at the work session about parking where we we empowered uh as I termed him my dear friend the parkings are uh to set variable pricing but we have had no conversation as a body to change the vote that was had on March 9th to charge for parking for Green Street. and I showed up for a meeting that has been cancelled, but other than that, I don't know if there's been any other meetings about this issue with the mayor. Certainly not with any with this council member. So, I'd like to know where that decision was made and on what basis that decision was made because we're talking about how we're going to execute something that is in contravention of the last vote that we had, which was March 9th, about this issue. Who wants to take that?

I'm going to ask city attorney Davidson to explain again what he had written out to all council members on this issue.

Yes. So, so back in 2025, this council passed a resolution giving the city administrator the authority to set the pricing for parking in the city. What the uh March 9th proposal did was added more parking areas to that proposal with the recommendations that Green Street be free part of the time, that city hall be free part of the time, but it still left the authority up to the city administrator. And in my opinion, given him that authority, um while it does say that it would be charged on certain times and free on certain times, it doesn't give a minimum charge. And so he's free to charge zero. He's free to charge up to I think the maximum was $5 an hour. Um and and that was set by council. this council has the ability to go back and change the authority at any time, but um in my opinion, he has that authority until such time as that has changed.

Well, clearly as the one who made the motion on that, I feel differently about it. I think it was demand pricing that he had authority over uh in particular and to presume that the demand is zero and therefore the price is zero is not exactly in the spirit of what we passed. And furthermore, uh, Bill said in response to, uh, council member council member Philippy question that there would be no financial data. And darn right, there's not going to be any financial data because we're not actually charging for the parking. Uh, so that to me is a real issue is that this decision was made. I got a phone call that had at least three different reasons why we couldn't charge, all of which I uh uh debated. And uh I never got a straight answer on that. So I'd like I believe we should be talking about whether or not we have agreed as a body that the pilot program the that that we were going to do this this trial pilot period was to find out things and now we're not finding those out. Who made that decision? Where was I? Uh and and how did we conclude that the the body has changed its mind? Can somebody tell me that?

Council member Bas clarify council member cells. Are you saying that you're wanting to pay for parking? So you're wanting that that was never a discussion that was made by the elected body.

That is correct. for the Green Street parking deck in particular. We said that was the quite frankly the whole topic of the pilot program was about the Green Street parking deck most specifically and that decision to make that zero was made outside of this body as far as I can tell. I don't know that price was ever discussed. It was more so just if the pilot program was going to be initiated or not. And in order to establish the software, hardware, all of the the words that I have no idea how those work or how those were explained, but it was to be able to set up the actual infrastructure in place to be able to get the data that we never had access to before. But we as an elected body never set a price. So the price, as um city attorney Davidson said, could theoretically be zero, but we never discussed a price at large. We did not set the price. That is correct. We said that the demand pricing would be set by city administrator Nighton. That is correct.

And I and I'll take that question now, Council Member Cells. Correct. We did state that demand pricing would be set by city administrator. As we all know, we ran into some issues or some changes in the construction plan for the Green Street activation project. So because of what that was going to do to shut down Green Street, changing the AC access to the Green Street parking deck and changing the availability of the gravel lot very quickly in regards to the availability of that being utilized for employee parking modeling, which was part of the quote unquote pilot project concept design. All of that changed very quickly with some changes that was done once the contractor was able to get into the project and see how much road work would really be required to rip up the entirety of Green Street blocking off the gravel lot. So there was a very quick decision, but there was a decision made by legal in that because the way the wording was done from the 2025 passage that the city administrator could set the pricing and that the pilot program was supposed to be on demand. There was a determination made very quickly that it had to be done, i.e. Green Street would be free. we could get some of the data for the next six to seven months making sure that we would not go into the holiday season as best as we could. So, we're not but to see that we could start to get some data with the we will not get pricing data. you are correct on Green Street, but there's also the concept to consider is it going to be any real data that we could be using to try to move forward with this project in regards to why was it done quickly? Because from legal

advice, there was not a need. There was a vote that had been taken in 2025 that the city administrator could set the pricing per zero to up to $5 was the way it was worded and was explained to me and we explained to everyone the best of our ability. We also moved a little fast because it is opening in a week and at that point in time the contractor was starting to have conversations with company with businesses that were going to be affected by the closure of Green Street figuring out ways to have deliveries done. So there was that determination talked about the minute there was a decision which was made by city man administrator with myself involved with less we made the immediate phone calls to all council members. I tried to reach everyone myself personally. So that is why there was not a vote because from council's advice this is how we needed to move and we needed to move quickly. It is a pilot project. the way it was worded was even what was approved in March stated that it was dynamic pricing meaning that the city administrator could change and adjust the pricing as needs arose. So that was the determination

as demand but ask that you now ask for permission to speak if we're going to go this route. We're we're going to go this route. Okay, fine. Council member cells.

Okay. So um uh so the position is that the uh delivery problem is solved by zero charge for the parking. That's that's that's a new one. That's the fourth that's the fourth thing that I've been told about why we had to make this zero was because now we're talking about the deliveries are are impacted and therefore the parking should be free. But anyone who listens to the March 9th conversation with a fair and honest view would hear that the conversation was whether or not Green Street parking deck was going to be paid or not. And we spent an enormous amount of time on that conversation. And the conclusion of this as uh put forward by Council Member Brumley was that it was to be paid. That was the conclusion as of March 9th. And there's nothing that has been done to overturn that except the unilateral decision as determined by the city administrator with dynamic pricing based on what was going on within the situation. And what was stated to you, I'm sorry if you misunderstood my statement to you, was not that it was because of the delivery. It was a concept of the construction company was already reaching out to businesses to develop a delivery uh strategy. So it was felt that it was best to try to get ahead of that, make a decision so that we did not get caught in unre information not being out to the citizens that was correct with a determination of them having to walk through what would be and continue to be a construction zone model all the way down Green Street. And as I said to you when we talked about this before, we have known since the

beginning of this project that Green Street was going to be closed, that it was going to be a construction zone, that there was going to be uh that whole process. We had a meeting with the HOA at at U Blacksmith Row in January specifically talking about the fact that it was going to be closed. None of this is a surprise. None of this was not planned for. So the it's the answer is the parking is free. Then the what is the question is the way this has been done. And I personally for one think that we should have had a discussion about that before we decide on the contract. Councilwoman Bon.

I would just offer at this point we've exited the scope of the item at hand. We're not supposed to be discussing if they're paid or not paid. are strictly discussing if we're approving the vendor or not. This seems without a doubt out of that scope. So, uh I'm of the frame of mind that we should move to public questions at this point unless council has something relevant to the vendor in the contract. Any other comments from council? Uh yes, this is the only time we will be talking about this because we're about to sign a contract that precludes charging. So, this is gerine to the topic. It is in the heart of this contract. Any other comments?

Do I have a Do I hear a motion? Oh, sorry. We had already asked for public comment and there was none. Okay. Okay. Do I hear a motion? Councilwoman Bon, do I have a second? Council member Bremley. All in favor, please raise your hand. All opposed. Abstain. Abstain. So three two and two abstension. 31.

31. It carries. Thank you, sir. Next on the agenda is city attorney's report. City Attorney David Davidson, please read the first item. Thank you, Mayor. The first item I have is approval of a resolution of the mayor and city council for the purpose of approving the exercise of eminent domain to acquire certain property situated in the city of Roswell for use for the transportation project known as Big Creek Parkway and for execution of any additional documents necessary relating to said use of eminent domain. Joe Cusack will present.

Good evening everyone. Uh tonight I bring forward a resolution for condemnation in the use of imminent domain for the Big Creek Parkway project. Um when the project is completed, this will connect Warsaw Road and Old Alabama Road via overpass over 400 and alleviate some traffic congestion issues within the city. Uh tonight I bring forward a resolution for condemnation on parcels one and two uh for this project. Uh mainly this is the Roswell Creek apartment complex uh that in which there is nine buildings that will be affected by this and I'll I'll go into our extensive negotiations on this but eight of those buildings at one point housed residents. Uh we have been negotiating with the apartment complex for the better part of a year now uh and have come to an agreement on on moving those um the residents out of that that apartments that lived in those eight buildings. Uh that agreement was reached last year and the residents have vacated uh those apartments and they vacated before Christmas of last year. So they've been out a fairly long time. Uh and the city has paid protective rent uh to keep those apartments vacant. Uh in a condemnation of this size, um it's not unusual to to have to use the condemn uh condemning powers that the city has. Um, so there's there's nothing unusual about this in the process uh the legal intensive process that is imminent domain and and condemnation. We've had some productive conversations with uh the apartment owners uh but at this juncture uh we are asking for authorization to to utilize imminent domain. Um we can always negotiate uh and try to reach a a resolution via that way uh via negotiation. Um, but at this point it seems condemnation is going to be the only uh the only thing that moves this along, keeps this project uh on track. So I would ask that you uh pass this resolution, adopt this resolution, give us authority to utilize imminent

domain and condemnation uh for the Big Creek Parkway uh project. Uh and I'd be happy to answer any questions that may be asked tonight. Thank you. City Clerk Long, is there any speakers for this item? There are no speakers for this item.

Does council have any comments or questions regarding this item? No. Do I hear a motion? Council member cells, do I have a second? Council member Brumley. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Five. All those opposed? One. So 5 to one. Motion passes. Thank you. City Attorney Davidson, please read the second item on the city's attorney's report.

Thank you, Mayor. This is approval of a waiver of the sidewalk requirement for the gravel road, dirt road on Lackey Road. So, the Lackeyis own 80 acres on Lackey Road for which it's named. Um, and they are interested in subdividing their property. It is a gravel road surrounded by the city of Milton. Um, our ordinance provides that whenever something is being subdivided, developed that people um pay into the sidewalk fund or or put in sidewalks on their streets. Um, it helps us fill the gaps so to speak. Um, the issue here is this is a gravel road with ditches on the sides and for which it the city of Milton has told the lackis that they will never allow paving entering this road. So, uh, they have asked that this be brought forward, um, as a waiver of one-time requirement. Um, we would recommend approval of this. Um, simply because of the situation that they are in. Happy to answer any questions.

City Clerk Long, are there any speakers for this item? There are no speakers. Thank you. Does council have any comments or questions regarding this item? Council member Bon.

Yeah, just to note, um I'm familiar with this site. Um I walked over it as well. Um just to get a better idea of it. Um since it's a gravel road, it's not only abudded both sides by the city of Milton. Even if they were to put a sidewalk in place there along a gravel road, it would be a sidewalk to nowhere. um it would be connecting into Arnold Mill Road at a point that City of Roswell does not control and is um very exurban in its layout. So I don't think that it would ever have sidewalks there no matter how much infill they get. Um so I do appreciate um the consideration of being able to look at items like these and be able to provide lenience when it makes sense.

Thank you. Any other comments? Do I hear a motion? Council member Zach, do I have a second? Council member Bon. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Passes unanimously. City attorney Davidson, please read the last item on the city attorney's report. Thank you, Mayor. I have a recommendation to go into closure at 5:30 on Monday, May 11th to discuss personnel litigation andor real estate. Do I hear a motion?

Council member Brumley, do I have a second? Nobody wants to go in closure. Council member Felipe. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Passes unanimously. Being that there are no other items, this mayor and council meeting of Monday, April 27th, 2026 is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you for reading that.