City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, Stonecrest, and welcome to today's City Council meeting. Today is June 22nd, and the time is now 6.08. We will now call this meeting to order. Madam City Clerk, can you be so kind and do the roll call?

Yes, ma'am, will do. Good evening, everyone. Mayor Jasmine Cobble.

Present.

Mayor Potem, Tara Graves. Here. Council Member Alicia Washington.

Here.

Council Member George Turner.

Here.

Council Member Karmisha Smith.

Present.

We have a quorum.

Thank you. Next on the agenda is invocation by Bishop Michael Payton.

Thank you. Thank you. All the council members, the mayors, let us bow our heads. Is it green?

Okay.

Good evening, everyone. Let us pray. Lord, we bless you and we thank you for this opportunity to be here on tonight. God, we pray that you would bless this meeting, that it be a great success. Give all the leadership and the council members the wisdom to make the right decision in everything that's being discussed. God, we pray that your presence will be here tonight. that you would lead them and direct them, God, and give them the resources to do the things, God, that their vision is calling for them to do. God, we pray that this meeting would exceed their expectation and that you would do everything that they ask for you to do. God, lead them and direct them in the way that they should go. And we believe, God, that this meeting is going to exceed their expectations. And we thank you in advance for what you're doing. It is so, and so it is. In Jesus' name we pray, amen.

Amen. Next on the agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance by Alicia Washington, District 3 Councilmember. Can we all please stand?

We pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Bishop, can you come back up to the front for me, please?

We have a small token of appreciation for you, if I can open it. I'm wearing that. I promise you . On behalf of the Stonecrest City Council, we want to say thank you for spending some time with us this evening and gracing us with your presence, and most importantly, your prayer. We know you're down the road in Snellville, but everything that we do in Stonecrest, we know, affects our surrounding community. But more importantly, everyone you pray over, whether they're in Snellville or in Stonecrest, needs you, so thank you. On behalf of Stonecrest, we just want to say thank you for doing the work that you do in the community and our faith-based organizations. Government does its part, but it's not without our faith-based groups that help us, even if it's just a word of prayer. But feeding our community, sheltering our community, providing programs for our community, that's what helps build a government success. Not just the work that's done here, but the work that you do, more importantly, out with all your parishioners. So thank you so much for spending time with us, but thank you for the work you're doing.

Thank you.

Now, of course, you know, it's not without a picture that this happens. We've got to turn that way.

Thank you all very much.

Thank you. Thank you again for your presence. Next on the agenda is the review. I'm sorry, next one agenda is the approval of the agenda itself. Council.

City Manager. That's it, Madam City Manager, when I met Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you very much. You own it.

Yes.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Yes, Councilman Turner.

I wanted to interject and comment on public comments and public hearing rules of decorum. Where shall we place that? They don't want to hear you I wanted to have a question and make comments about public comments and rules of the quorum for public hearings.

We can put it above public hearing. Any other adjustments to the agenda. So I want to make an adjustment for under new business F. I want to change that to for decision. And I wanted to read approval and ratification of city manager employment agreement.

Sure.

Approvement and ratification of city manager employment agreement. I also want to remove G to our work session. I was just notified that our HR director would not be joining us today. So if we can move that to the next work session. G for discussion for supplemental pay policy. And then I also want to remove H to the work session as well. Governments and ethics standards to the work session. Any other adjustments? Hearing none, I will entertain a motion. Yes, Councilman Turner.

Move for approval of the adjusted agenda with the four stated changes. Second.

Motion has been properly moved and seconded by Councilwoman Smith. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed nay, starting with District 3.

Yay.

District 4.

Yay.

District 5.

Yay.

District one is yay. The agenda is now approved with the stated changes. Before we move to the next item on the agenda, I want to take a moment and welcome our new city manager, city manager Catherine Turner, to her first city council meeting on behalf of the mayor and city council staff and residents of Stonecrest. We are pleased to have you join us today and welcome to the team. Next on the agenda is review and approval of the minutes. First one is special call meeting for May 18th. Do we have any changes? Yes, Councilman Turner.

There is one minor correction. You had the SLIP CID. It is the Stone Crest Latonia Industrial Park CID. And oftentimes it is abbreviated with the acronym and the P is left off. That is very important. That is the park that the P is on there. And I did make that correction in the meeting, but it still came out without the park being a part of his name. And then it is being activated. It's important that we get the name exactly right. It is the Stonecrest Latonia Industrial Park CID.

Any other stated changes? Hearing none, I entertain a motion.

I pro tem.

Yes, Councilman.

Move for approval of the meeting minutes on special call meeting May 18th, 2026 with the stated correction. Second.

The motion has been properly moved and second by Councilwoman Washington. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed nay. Starting with District 3.

Yay.

District 4.

Yay.

District 5.

Yay.

District 1 is yay. The minutes for the special call meeting May 18th has been approved. Next on the agenda is the City Council meeting for May 26. Council, have you had a chance to review those?

Mayor Pro Tem.

Yes, Councilman Turner.

Again, it was just a Scribner error. Councilman Fai expressed his experience. I think it says Councilman Fai is experienced, but it's just a minor Scribner error. And I'm sure that could be corrected. Also, with the slip CID, it was mentioned of the appointments to the committee And it's not a committee. These were two board appointees to the slip CID board, not committee. That's on page five of six.

Any other stated changes? Hearing none.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilman Turner.

Move approval of the meeting minutes from May 26 which is data corrections. I second.

Motion has been properly moved in second by Councilwoman Washington are you ready for the question. All those in favor of the motion please respond with yay all those opposed nay starting with district 3 yay district 4 yay district 5 yay district 1 is yay the minutes for the City Council meeting May 26 2026 has been approved. Next on the agenda is the approval of the meeting minutes for the special call meeting, May 26. I'm sorry, May 28 of 2026. Is there any need for adjustments? Hearing none, I entertain a motion.

Number 10. Yes, councilman Washington moved that the approval of many minutes for the special called meeting for May 28 2026.

Motion has been properly moving is second by councilman Turner are you ready for the question. All those in favor of the motion please respond with yay all those opposed nay started with district 3, yay district 4, yay district 5, yay district one is yay The meeting minutes for the special call meeting May 28th of 2026 is now approved. Next on the agenda is public comments. Madam City Clerk, can you be so kind to read us the rules for public comment?

citizens wishing to make a public comment may do so in person citizens may also submit public comments via email to city clerk at stonecrestga.gov by 2 pm on the day of the meeting to be read by the city clerk all members of the public wishing to address the city council shall submit their name and the topic of their comments to the city clerk prior to the start of any meeting held by the city council There is a three minute time limit for each speaker submitting or reading a public comment. Individuals will be held to those established time limits. Thank you. Our first public comment is from Faye Cofield.

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Stonecrest sits on some of the most valuable land in South DeKalb. And in fact, it sits on some of the most valuable land between 285 and the South Carolina border because we are the first major shopping center that's located along the side of the road that you don't have to travel into town. And I know that because most of you know I travel, and when I travel, it's less than 1,000 miles on the drive. And when I drive to Savannah and I come back, I think it's Dothan, Dublin, something. You come down, and as soon as it gets to that point, you have to use the bathroom, or you have to eat. you're right there. And this is a little, I hate to say it, little hick town that has nothing else but places for you to eat along the road and to stop and maybe do some shopping. We need to start looking at what we can do to make Stonecrest a better place. because so far all we've gotten has been storage facilities gas stations and liquor stores and when we put that big tall storage facility over there on hillandale we took away some of the best land for new generation housing if you think about going down i-20 into the city of atlanta All we have to do is look at Conyers. Conyers is getting the sprouts. Conyers has nothing money-wise, people-wise that we don't have. But they're getting stuff because they're going out and they're actively looking for it. If you go down to Costco over there on Jodico Road, that was once just Costco sitting there. Now they have top-end, high-tech, top-of-the-line townhouses. being built there for rent and their apartments are being built for rent the apartments are all top of the line they have a sprouts there they brought in every eating place you can think of including two-story chick-fil-a the only one in the state of georgia I ask you to please look at what they're doing at North Point Mall and look at how they've torn it down and what they're going to build there. And I will say that North Point Mall was built as a high-end mall to compete with Lenox Square. When Stonecrest Mall was first proposed, it was actually proposed as perimeter east. And I know that because when I first came to Georgia in 79, that land was cleared and they were getting ready to do that we have to stop thinking with a low end poverty mentality and start thinking high end to bring everybody up and so you know that is that is my comment that we are sitting here we have this valuable land we have some of the best housing the best existing housing in south dekalb in fact in dekalb county at a reasonable price But all we're getting built is this low end. I don't even know how to describe all these houses because they're not even modern style housing. But I will give a shout out to understand we've got an arborist to somebody that is going around making them misspoke this time. Donald Rose.

Good evening. My name is Donald Rose, Jr., and I wanted to address the City Council tonight. I recently moved here, and I want to say good evening, Mayor, City Council members, staff, and fellow residents of Stonecrest. My name is Donald Rose, Jr., and it's an honor to stand before you tonight I am a proud US Army veteran, a community advocate, a business owner, and someone who has dedicated much of my life serving others. For more than three decades, I've worked in public health, community engagement, economic development, and advocacy for some of the most vulnerable populations. Throughout my journey, one lesson has remained constant. Communities thrive when people choose to serve something greater than themselves. I recently made Stonecrest my home, not by accident, but by choice. When I arrived, I saw more than buildings, roads, and businesses. I saw possibility. I saw a city strategically located, rich in diversity, culture, faith, entrepreneurship, and untapped potential. I saw a community standing at the crossroads of what is today where it can become tomorrow, the question that brought me here is simple. What can I do to help? I believe Stonecrest can become a shining city on the hill, a city known throughout Georgia and across this nation for innovation. I am from Tulsa, Oklahoma, the home of the original Black Wall Street. of the 1921 race massacre. So if anyone knows what generational trauma is, I do. I saw it for myself. I left the city for 10 years and came back and the city was still in disarray with generational trauma. They're still dealing with it today. But I believe Stonecrest has the opportunity to show where we care for our seniors, their value, a city where veterans are honored, a city where entrepreneurs can build generational wealth, a city where young people can see a future worth investing in, a city where government and community can work together rather than apart. I am not here tonight seeking recognition. I am here seeking partnership. I want to lend my experience, my energy, and my network to support the vision of this council and the residents of the city. Whether that means helping grow business opportunities, supporting communities, investments, I stand ready to serve. my mother often taught me that when god places you somewhere he expects you to leave it better than you found it that is my commitment to stonecrest i believe the best days of this city are not behind us they are ahead of us mr rose that is time okay thank you so much dave marcus

One second, Mr. Marcus. Mr. Graves, I'm getting some feedback that people cannot hear on Zoom. Sorry about that.

No problem. Wow, is this up? Good evening. I was going to say good evening, Council and Mayor. It's nice to see you at a meeting, but the chair is empty again. And Ms. Turner, thank you for taking the job. Thanks.

Noah.

Yep. I want to mention four things each very briefly. The first is that thank you. The second is as you talk about ethics standards at the work session, I'd like you to address two things. One is potentially changing the charter so that when there are ethics violations or governance issues, there are penalties. That really doesn't exist. Anybody cannot do anything that is required by the charter and there are no penalties. That just doesn't seem right. Second, or third, as you all probably know, there were six businesses broken into and robbed and damage caused at the Buttermilk, what I think it was the Buttermilk Biscuit area. I hope that this city is doing something to straighten and strengthen out its IGA with DeKalb County for Police Services. If you're not you are letting us down policing has been an issue here, since the city started there's no reason. In my mind, not to have to cab do it, but the idea we have is very loose, it does not provide standards for response times for number of cars patrolling stone crest or for anything else, and I do hope you'll are working on that. the last is that it's been great to see this council and the legal department of this year um settle virtually all of the major lawsuits against the city i would ask that the city be transparent and let us know what those settlements were like in particular metro green It either does or does not require the city to rezone some land for them. It definitely seems to require the city to apply for rezoning. And we have no idea what it took to settle a $30 million lawsuit. And I think we'd like to know, especially since that rezoning comes back to the Planning Commission on, don't hold me to this, July 7th. And the context for that zoning request was given incorrectly at the cpm. It was initially said, and this was then amplified and corrected. But initially it was said that it was done just as a kind of routine thing to get the zoning to match the zoning map and future land use map. That was a curious thing because that's the only parcel it's being done for in Stonecrest now, and there is a project going on, I believe, as part of the zoning code amendments to make land use and zoning match. So why this one now? Please release that. That settlement agreement, the Metro Green attorney has said it is a public record and it's not private. Ms. Thompson said, do an ORR for it, an open records request, which I have. And the legal department turned around and said, hey, Dave, it's going to be 100 bucks. And there are other people who are chipping in $10 each. And I appreciate that. So we'll get it. But it would be much more decent of the city to simply step up and release those settlements so we can know what you're doing. and i'm not saying any of those settlements are wrong i'm not saying that there was a better choice than doing something for metro green with the maddox road zoning it's the market but i am saying we should be told what you've done thank you renee kale

Good evening, City Council. I would just like to say that I am extremely disappointed that the agreement was made with Greenland LLC. At the CPM meeting, he didn't say Metro Green. We know it's Metro Green, but we fought for six years. they did not adhere to the rules and regulations many of them were just ignored while the residents over on miller road and snap finger woods drive suffered so we're happy they don't have any operations over there now so seven two two four And 7226 Maddox Road. Yes, there are residents there. They don't want a recycling plant or whatever is proposed. We do want to see the agreement.

It's a public record and we'll be glad that we do see it.

Yes, we are extremely disappointed. Thank you.

Do you have any via email? Public hearing is now closed. I'm sorry, public comments is now closed. Next on the agenda is public hearing. Madam City Clerk.

Citizens wishing to participate and comment during the public hearing portion of the meeting may comment in person. You may also submit your request, including your full name, address, position on the agenda item that you are commenting on, whether it is for or against via email to cityclerk at stonecrushga.gov by 2 p.m. on the day of the public hearing to be read into the record at the meeting. A Zoom link for the meeting will be sent to you upon your request. When it is your time to speak, please state your name, address and relationship to the case. There is a 10 minute time limit for each item per side during our public hearings. Only the applicant may reserve time for rebuttal.

Thank you, Madam City Clerk. Councilman Turner.

I just wanted to mention to the public and to council as well. I did listen to the CPIM meeting and the content was very, very interesting as to what was stated by concerned citizens. And I know it was very emotional and it got to the point that it was a little bit vulgar at some point in time. And with the city having to rebroadcast that, I'm not sure whether we have to blur and bleep it or not. If we wind up bleeping it, then that's a transparency issue. But it's something that we need to take a look at, is that we ask that you please control your emotions and let us understand this. prime time and the words we choose incite others to follow suit, and it may not be suited for regular public consumption if it gets any further. I don't want to chastise anyone, but I do want to say if we can keep it clean such that we can broadcast it without having to bleep or blur anything, it would benefit us immensely. Again, I appreciate the passion and I kind of share it in some regards, but we have to choose our words carefully that we don't violate any FCC rules here.

Thank you, Councilman Turner. First item for public hearing is 2026 millage rate. Keisha Franklin, finance director and Eric Hawkins, revenue manager.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

Evening.

So this will be our fifth consecutive year the city has maintained the same military the city is proposing an increase to is. The city is not proposing an increase to its military however state law requires a tax increase advertisement, because the proposed military exceeds the calculated rollback rate of 1.227. It is important to note that property reassessments are conducted by the DeKalb County Tax Assessor's Office, not the City of Stonecrest. Therefore, any increase in an individual property owner's tax bill will be the result of increased assessed values, rather than an increase in the city's military. Property taxes represent approximately 15% of the city's annual revenues, which was made, which remains significantly lower than many municipalities throughout Georgia. And at this time, we will walk through the presentation of the proposed ministry, which includes any adjustments or changes made in the last presentation.

Hello again, everyone. So we had our first and second public hearing back on June the 8th at 1130 am and 6pm. So today is our third and final public hearing for the adoption of the 2026 millage rate of 1.257 meals. The Taxpayer Bill of Rights was enacted in January 2000 with a goal to enhance individual property owners' rights when appealing an increase in property value, prevent tax increases resulting from increases to existing property values in the county due to inflation. If a property owner does not agree with their annual property tax assessment, they may file a dispute by following the appeals process and deadlines indicated on the notice issued by the county tax assessor's office. excuse me, the City of Stonecrest is proposing a millage rate of 1.257 that exceeds the rollback rate. And upon conclusion of this public hearing, we would have satisfied all statutory requirements by the state, such as issuing a press release, five-year history of levy, advertise for all three public hearings, conduct public hearings, And if adopted, this would be the fifth year of the millage remaining at 1.257 mills and unchanged since 2022. A millage rate is the determining factor when calculating property taxes. One mill equals one dollar in taxes for every thousand of assessed property value. Rollback rate represents the millage rate that would produce the same total revenue on the current year's digest that the last year's millage rate would have produced had no reassessments occurred. The rollback rate is calculated by the DeKalb Tax Commissioner's Office. Reassessment values within Stonecrest are determined by the CAP Tax Assessor's Office, which is 40% of the property's fair market value. So on the left, you'll notice the notice of property tax increase. What is notable about this notification, if you look at the bottom portion, of the notice. The proposed tax increase for a homestead property with a fair market value of 300,000 is approximately $3.75. And the proposed tax increase for a non homestead property with a fair market value of 525,000 is approximately approximately $5.25. Although the city is not proposing a millage rate increase, the state considers any millage above the rollback rate a property tax increase, which is 0.03 mills or 2.44% increase. There are 11,365 homestead properties with an average fair market value of $300,000. There are 9,050 non-homestead properties with an average fair market value of $525,000. Properties whose assessed value remains unchanged would generally experience no change in the city property taxes resulting from the city's millage rate. The following PT 32.1 form reflects the City Manager's Office advertisement proposal to keep the 2026 millage the same as the 2025 millage at 1.257. With keeping the millage rate the same, properties that had no increase in reassessed values would not see an increase in taxes. The 2.44% percentage tax increase is the calculated increase between the proposed millage rate and the rollback rate. Property assessment values are not determined by the City of Stonecrest, but by the County Tax Assessor's Office. So this is a copy of the current tax digest and five-year history of levy for this year. The tax digest reflects an adopted 1.257 millage rate from 2022 through 2025 and the proposed 1.257 millage for 2026. As a result of the reassessed values, the digest reflects a revenue increase of $82,459. That's a 2.87 increase from 2025. The budget allocation of these additional funds will be determined during budget development. Gross property taxes levy represents approximately 15% of the city's total operating and maintenance budget. So this slide here breaks down a couple areas. So understanding the millage rate, if you're reading through this at your leisure, basically what this is saying, in short, the millage has remained 1.257 since 2022. Any increase in the tax bills are the result of increased property reassessments. Understanding digest growth, this basically breaks down that the tax digest growth can occur through increases in property values and new development added to the tax growth despite the millage rate remaining the same. So understanding revenue growth, this basically points out as revenues grow, budgets increase over time to support and enhance city services, infrastructure improvement, and administrative operations. How it all works together. As the digest grows, the rollback rate decreases. The state guides all statutory processes, procedures and deadlines while the city evaluates its budgeting needs. The millage is then adopted and the annual budget is developed for the next fiscal year. This is a continuation of how it all works together. This table shares additional details on how it all works together with items one through six and the revenue supported services that we provide. All right, we're going to do a recap. So what we discussed, the city of Stonecrest is proposing to maintain its current millage rate of 1.257 mills. Any increase in any individual tax bill would result from property value reassessments performed by DeKalb County, not from any increase in the city millage rate. The City of Stonecrest remained among the lowest municipal millage rates in DeKalb County and among the lowest municipal millage rates in Georgia. The advertised 2.44% tax increase only impacts resident properties with increased reassessment values determined by the County Tax Assessor's Office. The city of Stonecrest property tax revenues only represent 15% of the city annual revenues, which is 35% lower than most municipalities. For other municipalities, tax revenues generally represents 47 to 50% of their annual operating revenues and budget. I'm now open for questions.

Council, do you have any questions before we move into public hearing? I entertain a motion. Councilman Turner.

Move to open the floor for public hearing on the resolution for the 2026 military. Second. Second.

The motion has been properly moved in second by Councilwoman Washington. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed nay, starting with District 3.

Yay.

District 4. Yay. District 5.

Yay.

District 1 is yay. We are now open for public hearing for the 2026 millage rate. Do we have anyone speaking in favor of the 2026 millage rate?

Once again, I'm going to say that we need to stop saying for and against and then have for those people that have questions and concerns, because I'm not for giving any more money to the city, period, not one red cent, because you have not accounted for the money that you've gotten. And as was said by one of the previous speakers, I'm not going to call no names, We need to know how much money was paid to Metro Green, Greenland or whoever they were and where that money came from before we can agree to give you one red penny more in tax dollars. We want to know about some other lawsuits that have been settled. But since we are in this fiscal year, If you want our money, you got to do like everybody else that want to get money from us. You need to tell us where it's being spent and not say for Mr. Marcus to give you $100 to tell him something that he could probably go down to the courthouse because you're saying it's not a sealed case. He could go down to the courthouse and get the results. So I think it's kind of petty. And since it's petty like that with you, then we should be petty and tell you we're not giving you one red cent till you account for all the money that you have and for the money from the previous thing where they did the accounting and they found out these city employees have been misusing their p cards and i understand that's never been paid back so i'm i'm not in favor of it i'm not opposed to it i'm gonna tell you like i used to tell my son till you can give me an answer about what you've done with my money i'm not going to be in favor opposed to anything so we want to know i want to know personally and uh you've been already asked by someone else how much money did you pay metro green to settle metro green green whatever the name is to settle that lawsuit And that way we can decide whether or not we should say whether you can get an increase that you say this. This sounds like something my ex used to say this, this, this, this confusion about we raise in taxes, but we we're doing this, but we're not doing this. So the only thing I've got to say is tell us how much money you have spent on the Metro Green Greenland, whatever lawsuit and and not make Mr. Mr. Marcus paid $100 because you see, I just gave him $10. So I let you know that I'm I want to know too. And if you give it to him for free, of course, I'm asking $10 back because I came out my travel money.

Thank you, Miss Cofield. Anyone else speaking in favor of the 2026

Good evening. I am in favor of there being a millage rate. Absolutely. And I totally agree with Fay. In all of the public hearings, there's no place to say, well, I'm concerned about this. I don't know if I'm, you know, if I'm positive or negative about it, but I'm concerned and we'd like more information, some questions, which I don't have here. But what I want to say here is, The city needs the operational audit that was discussed at a tips committee meeting several months ago, it needs it, so the city and the city manager and the citizens can feel comfortable with city is spending money on efficient operations. that's 50% audit and 50% public relations. I also want to say, you've held a millage rate to what it is. The city is not going to provide a police force with this millage rate. The city is not going to pay DeKalb County more money for policing. The city is not going to be able to do anything much more than it does unless inefficiencies are identified and money can be saved or the taxes go up. And while... I don't know that I can afford a lot more taxes in general. What's going to happen? You can't build a city out of nothing. And every program that everybody in this room wants is going to cost money. And I think it's about time the city started planning for that. be a tough a tough sell unless in the next year, there are really some great deliveries from the city and I expect the next year to be better than the past seven years, but you'll be facing headwinds yet, if you want to be a city that serves the citizens. you're going to need a little more money and you're going to need to spend it very efficiently and transparently. I'll also add, in addition to the Metro Green lawsuit, the settlement with Jacobs Engineering. That probably was a big one, and I have no idea if they paid us or we paid them or nothing happened. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dave Marcus. Anyone else speaking in favor of the 2026 military?

Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Fred Riggins. I live in Barney Mill, Georgia. I travel. And one thing I want to say about the miller's rate, we need that. But we got to be fair to the people. We put those slides up there. They can't read them. They're like mine. You get 85. You can't read that. We need to move forward. And so that when you put up a slide, it is in what? It is in a presentation order. So they can look up and read it. All those numbers they call, you get a little line up. That's just like writing a letter. We got because you we are not giving the people what they are paying for. They want us to have a good presentation. When you come in for the people, they can read what you put up on their board because they're gonna leave it tonight all they remember is that what 1.357 mills rate they can't read anything else in there i'm telling what we need to do if they can't present it in flat presentation they should not present anything until they get ready and then we can move forward as a city we say on the hill with a beacon light i live in georgia i live in I live in Pennsylvania. I live in Florida. I live in Ohio. I did travel. I was in what? Research and development, higher education. All of these slides, what they put up, where they look is what? There's no excuse. I would, you will come to me like that and you will give me a presentation. I will tell you, go home and come back and bring something I can read. I think we're going to have to move forward with that. The millage rate is fine. We can move forward, but we gotta do something with the people. We are fooling the people because they can't read it. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment. Anyone else speaking in favor of the 2026 millage rate? ANYONE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OF THE 2026 MILITARY. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. COUNCILMAN TURNER.

MOVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 2026 MILITARY.

SECOND.

MOTION HAS BEEN PROPERLY MOVED AND SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN WASHINGTON. ARE YOU READY FOR THE QUESTION? The motion has been properly moved in second by Councilwoman Smith. Are you ready for the question? The motion has been properly moved in second by Councilwoman Smith. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with District 3.

Yay.

District 4.

Yay.

District 5.

Yay.

District one is J public hearing is now closed for 2026 military. Next, on the agenda for decision is the resolution for the 2026 military.

A resolution by the Mayor and Council of the City of Stonecrest, Georgia to fix the millage rate for ad valorem property taxes of the City of Stonecrest and for other lawful purposes.

Councilman Turner.

I had a couple of questions for Eric, Mr. Hawkins. So how consistent has been presented to us on three occasions and we've had a chance to look at it thoroughly and it's been sent out to the public to view as well as online. there's one thing I wanted to point out. And that is. on the tax bill itself. It shows state taxes, city taxes, the cab, sanitation, street lights, stormwater, and so forth. The one that we are concerned about is only the one that says city taxes. There may well be some increases or decreases in some of the other areas. So if you expect your tax bill to be exactly the same as it was last year, if your value of your house hadn't changed, that might not be the case. It's the tax portion for Stonecrest that will go essentially unchanged. Am I correct there?

That is correct. What we're specifically speaking to are the taxes that are levied by the city, in which, as in my presentation, we're not levying a tax increase because we are keeping the millage rate at 1.257 mills, where the increase come from is if there's any property increase values that increase in the property values. by definition of a tax increase that is defined by the state of Georgia. So we have to refer to that as a tax increase, although we're keeping our millage rate the same.

I point that out because if you're like me, when I get my tax bill, I open it and I go straight to the bottom line. Did it change? And if it changed, it may well or it will be because of some other increase and not the city of Stonecrest. So keep that in mind that you will look at it line by line instead of just looking at the bottom line like I often do. Go straight to the bottom line and start screaming. Okay. Thank you.

Council, do you have any other questions?

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

I have one question for Mr. Hawkins, and that is, as it relates to us voting on millage rate, I understand that this millage rate is one that we have had for the past. This would be five years. When will be the next opportunity for us to vote on millage rate? Will it come up again next year?

Yes, ma'am. It will come up next year in June when we go through this process again.

Okay. Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Council, any other questions before we move forward? I'll entertain a motion.

Move for approval as a resolution for the 2026 military. I second.

The motion has been properly moved in second by Councilwoman Washington are you ready for the question. All those in favor of the motion please respond with yay all those opposed nay starting with district 3. Yeah district for the district 5. Yeah it's your one is Jay motion carries 4 to 0. For the approval of the 2026 military. Next on the agenda is public hearing for ZM 26001 Woodrow Road by Mrs. Q, Division Director, Community Development. That's a long title.

A lot of people. Thank you, Mayor Pro Temp. This is, let me make sure you get it. ZM266400 Woodrow Rogue, Mr. Adolphus Armstrong for New Birth Missionary Baptist Church. This is a request to remove the approved conditions numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 11, and 12, established under DeKalb County case number CZ00060. The amendment is sought to allow the property previously approved for an assisted living facility to be developed as a solar farm. The City of Stonecrest zoning map has the property zone and located in Stonecrest Tier 4 overlay with an underlying zoning of R100. The land of 6400 Woodrow Road was historically part of a largely rural area in southeast DeKalb County that became the massive campus for the New Birth Missionary Baptist Church. Public participation, property owners within 1,000 feet of the subject property were mailed notices of the request in April of 2026. The community planning information meeting was held on May 14th with 19 residents in attendance with concerns that were raised for, that were promised the community access to certain facilities on the campus at no cost. They were asked, they asked the question whether or not the soccer field will be relocated, whether lighting in the area could be restored and where, whether the developer could provide guidance to residents that were interested in transitioning to solar energy themselves and if um any of the trees will be replanted on woodrow road these are the conditions that were listed in the cap county cz0060 november 20th 2021 case again is conditions one two three four five eleven and twelve This property, future land use map is institutional. Again, the overlay zoning map is in the Stonecrest overlay tier four district. This is an area map, aerial map of the location. The proposed site plan has the solar panels in the requested area where the conditions are requesting to be removed. Staff recommendations are to approve with the conditions to amend the approved conditions established in DeKalb County case number CZ00060 to again remove the conditions of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 11, and 12 with the conditions that the development would be limited to solar panels and related equipment on the approved 11-acre site. The project must follow all environmental regulations, including erosion, stormwater, and permitting for any floodplain or wetland impacts. Screening and buffering must reduce visual impacts, and construction must minimize dust, noise, and traffic, and no other intensive uses will be allowed without further zoning approval. Mayor Pro Tem, the applicant is here if you have any additional questions.

Council, do you have any questions for Ms. Cowley before we open up public hearing?

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

Good afternoon, Ms. Cowie. I do have a couple questions. One, what's the current use or is the land currently being utilized where these solar panels are going to be placed?

The, according to the applicant, the current location is a soccer field. It is currently vacant, vacant land that is used for recreational areas.

Okay. But is there a relocation of the ? Are they moving those activities to somewhere else on the property?

Yes, we have requested that from the applicant.

OK. I listened to a meeting. I'm not sure if it was the CPIM meeting or zoning board of appeals. Please forgive me. However. There was a question raised about a better usage for this property than putting solar panels there. And the question that was raised was the parking lot panels. And I think I heard that New Birth thought about utilizing parking lot panels. However, they would not be able to do it because they have to go back and plant trees. Could I get a little more information on that piece, please?

That was a request to reevaluate that there was a minimum amount of trees during the initial development of the entire campus of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church. So to reevaluate the area of where the trees are, the arborist is going to conduct a review to make sure that the trees and the canopy are being met. currently for the campus and for the future development but i'll also let the applicant elaborate on the optional uses as well councilwoman smith

Yeah. Oh, you were done. I thought you were letting them elaborate on it.

I thought somebody was coming to the podium. They're going to come during their part. I just wanted to make sure you didn't have an additional question for me before I left for the public. Okay.

I think that's all for you. I'll save my other questions for them. Thank you. Thank you.

Mayor Whittem, I would like to ask a question to Ms. Kelly.

Yes. You have the floor.

For this type of what they're trying to do, the people who, Mr. Allen's property that connects to the Newberth property, is it any consideration for the person that lives behind this project? Is there any consideration for them, like Mr. Allen's property, when you're talking about putting something like a solar panel stuffer?

Yes, that is a good question, Councilwoman Washington, and we do take consideration as staff to review the project itself of the buffer requirements based on use in our current use. So we will review that. So consideration is taken when we are reviewing the plans for when we finally receive the site plan for the development itself.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions for Mrs. Cowley. I entertain a motion. Councilman Turner.

I move to open a public hearing on ordinance ZM 26-001-6400 Woodrow Road. I second.

Motion has been properly moved and seconded by Councilwoman Washington. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed nay, starting with District 3.

Yay.

District 4.

Yay.

District 5. Yay. District 1 is yay. We are now open for public hearing for Ordinance, I'm sorry, for Ordinance ZM26001, Withdrawal Road. Do we have anyone speaking in favor? Oh.

Uh, good evening to the mayor city council concerned members of the stone crest community physically here. And also to those of us who are watching by zoom again, my name is Adolphus Armstrong. I'm at three, six, four, nine down up in court in Decatur, Georgia. And I am representing the applicant new birth missionary Baptist church at 6,400 Woodrow road in stone crest, Georgia. Can the audience see the presentation that I have or just do I need to provide this or?

Someone's coming up to the podium now. Well, while they're coming up, I don't want to, I guess, be calling for the time that I

The time that I do have in terms of the question regarding the parking lot, I think based on what the director shared initially, what is supposed to happen for every 10 parking spaces, there is supposed to be a tree in the island. And over the course of time, we have not been able to adhere to this. And so we've had conversations with the arbors as to what the requirements are. We're currently in the process of having a tree audit done for the entire property. And what that effectively means once you start to replant those trees, it provides shading that would preclude having solar panels to be used for their best use. And so that's one of the reasons why solar panels would not necessarily work since you're going to be in the process of replanting trees in that area. I think one of the, while the presentation is coming up, one of the additional questions has to do with the soccer field or open field as it stands right now. Again, currently right now, the soccer field is pretty much, you know, vacant. We don't necessarily use it for a soccer field. I guess in the typical terminology, that's what we've called it, soccer field, open field. But as it currently stands right now, there are no formal programming that takes place at the soccer field. OK, and I'll come back to some of these additional questions as I go back through. I think the last question had to do with the potential impact on adjacent property. So I will come back to that one. And again, this is an amendment to the 11 plus acre consent decree impacting the new birth campus effectively called the soccer field, removing the senior housing land use restriction only requirement. And again, for the project is the new birth alternative energy solar project. the scope of the project has developed the subject six acre parcel of solar panels to provide green energy alternative for the reduct power reduction of the church the project has two sponsors new birth missionary baptist church guided by the new birth missionary baptist church real estate committee under the spiritual leadership of reverend dr jamal h bryant and committee chair dr layton hull New Birth serves as the anchor institution providing vision, land, and faith-based leadership for the project. Project management is further strengthened by Elder Maurice Waddell, COO, and Adolphus Armstrong, CFO, who will bring operational and financial expertise to the development. The second project sponsor is the New Birth Community Development Corporation, chaired by Dr. Michael B. Roberts. The CDC is the nonprofit arm dedicated to advancing community development, affordable housing, and economic empowerment through the Village at Stonecrest initiative. Our technical team is led by Andre Douglas of TTAP, who will actually be installing the solar product. The purpose of this request is to request the approval of rezoning modification and amendment to the consent decree associated with civil case number 00-CV-13462-10 related to the original rezoning case 98-CZ-0006 for the 220-acre main campus. Under the 1998 site master plan and reference consent decree, the 11-acre parcel within the 228 acre New Birth Church campus was designated for senior housing slash assisted living and also was subject to a 24 month development moratorium that expired in 2000. Specifically, the project sponsor is requesting removal of this restriction because the consent decree restriction expired 25 plus years ago and is no longer applicable or needed as the senior housing development will instead be incorporated into the proposed New Birth Village mixed use development planned on the adjacent 33 acre parcel along Latonia Industrial Boulevard. The requested amendment will remove the restrictions requiring that the subject 11 plus acres identified as the open field slash soccer field of the Newburgh Church campus be reserved exclusively for senior housing development, combining this acreage back into the 200 plus church campus, allowing the land to be developed for other beneficial uses. And if you can kind of see this, the subject area that you see here that's in the yellow circle, this is the 11 acres in question. And where it stands right now, it is encompassed by the remaining 200 acres of the New Birth Campus. So specifically as it relates to this condition, and Councilman Washington, your question about the adjacent property owners, This property is effectively bounded by all of new birth property. A secondary piece of this is another part of the property. But the thing to note is that when you're putting in these type of solar projects and as a part of the special land use permitting process, you're required to maintain a 50 foot buffer. And as it stands right now, that 50 foot buffer will be a undisturbed buffer so that the trees that are there will remain. So it would almost be impossible for any adjacent property owner to see the panels from their property. You literally will have to drive on to the new birth campus to look at the solar panels in and of themselves. And in addition to that, one of the requirements is you're required to have a security fence. And in addition to the security fence, we're going to have landscaping around that. So it still looks aesthetically pleasing to the individuals that enjoy the new birth campus. And this is just another visual again, the yellow circle that you see here. This is where the subject 11 acres is. And as you can see, it's completely bounded by the remaining 200 plus acres of the new birth campus. So the current existing condition for these 11 acres, it limits the use to the construction of a senior housing facility slash assisted living facility and the secondary condition that you know would remain for the property is that access to the new birth campus by truck way shall remain open at all times And again, this is just another visual showing you what that 11 acres looks like in terms of different viewpoints as to what it is. And again, hopefully for everyone, you can kind of see what it looks like here. And again, I apologize for the sizing of the images that you're looking at here. And in conclusion, the requested amendment would allow the new birth camp church campus master plan to evolve in a manner that maintains the broader development vision for the property relocate senior housing to the more integrated mixed youth mixed use new birth village development and introduces renewable energy infrastructure through the proposed solar installation. Removal is required to proceed with already secured project funding. The applicant respectfully requests the city's review and approval of these modifications. And if I have any time left, I'd like to reserve it for any potential rebuttal.

Thank you.

Thank you. What's the time remaining? Thank you. Anyone speaking in favor of ZM 26001?

Once again, Stonecrest has missed a wonderful opportunity because we should have been working with Newburgh since they are the biggest land owner in Stonecrest with all of that vacant land. We should have been working with them a long time ago to get what we wanted. what we needed. I am very in favor of this solar thing. I think you guys realize the best four months of your life was when I was living on the African continent. And living on the African continent, almost everybody that works a regular job has solar. Their solar is a little round hub thing, looks like a tube. And it's about half the size of your roof. And it fits on your roof. It costs about $2,100. But when the power goes out, whether I was in South Africa or Kenya or whatever, as soon as that power goes out, that solar kicks in. So you don't have any dark spot. I'm saying all of that to say that we should have been working with New Birth to be included with those of us that live around that area so we could have kind of partnered in and got some of the solar that they have. It's a wonderful idea that they're going to be doing the church by solar. I say that to say if you've ever seen solar work, solar is probably the best thing that's going. Georgia Power don't like it, but the fact of the matter is the sun ain't going nowhere. And the sun is what powers solar. And that's why it's the biggest, fastest growing means of powering the African continent that you'll see. So, yes, I'm very in favor of it. What I wish we would have been able to do was because y'all got so much land over there, is to look at probably putting a senior development over there, a smaller one like the one that sits between Kroger and Lowe's. And once again, in Conyers, if you've ever been to Kroger and you cut across like you're going over to Aldi, but instead of going to Aldi, you go around, you'll see these houses that look like they're sitting in the Lowe's adjacent to Lowe's. and they're single family attached housing with little pools and stuff, you know, water features and everything. That's senior living over there. That's what senior living should look like. One story buildings, not people piled on top of each other. You know, I guess, you know, I'm opposed to people living all on top of each other. But this solar thing that they have going, the city of Stonecrest has once again lost and missed a wonderful opportunity to partner with somebody to get part of it. Okay.

Thank you, Ms. Cofield. Anyone else speaking in favor? ZM 26001. Anyone speaking in opposition of ZM 26001? Council, I entertain a motion. Councilman Turner.

Move to close public hearing on ordinance. On item the M 26 that 0, 0, 1, 6, 400 Woodrow road.

Motion has been properly moved in second by councilwoman Smith. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed nay. Starting with district three.

Yay.

District four.

Yay.

District five. Yay. District one is yay the motion carries forward to 0. We are now pose a public hearing. Next item on the agenda is for decision ordinance for the 2600 16400 Woodrow Road. Mayor pro tem. Councilman Smith.

I have one additional question for Director Q, please.

You have the floor.

Director Q, the one question that I have, I know this was passed by DeKalb County. The former use of the land was passed by DeKalb County. And I know that Stonecrest was not in existence at that time. So my question is a matter of form. Because we are Stonecrest, the land is now in Stonecrest, DeKalb County does not have to do anything further Like, they don't have to vote on anything. This is all us now because the land is in Stonecrest, correct?

That is correct. Not only is the land in the city of Stonecrest, the conditions follow the land. So we have jurisdiction over this parcel now being in the city of Stonecrest. So that is correct.

Okay. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem, I yield.

Thank you, Councilwoman Smith.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilman Turner.

As a follow-up to that question, When a property is zoned conditional, does the condition last forever, or do the conditions ever expire if the property is not developed the way it was proposed to be developed? Does it revert to its original zoning at some point in time?

Thank you for that question, Councilman Turner. It does not revert unless that is a part of the conditions that after a certain period of time, the condition will expire based on non-development. But the conditions that are on a piece of property will follow that land until they are, as we have today, are amended, removed, or amended, or additional conditions are set forth on that piece of parcel.

I too just visited a property on another land that had extensive solar farms and they're very well used and very efficient. In the city of Stonecrest, is there a solar farm of any sorts?

Not to our knowledge as of today. We don't have a solar farm existing in the city of Stonecrest.

This will be our first. Is this just considered a solar project? Is this considered a solar farm?

Solar farm based on the number of solar panels. So it will be considered a farm.

Okay.

But it will be our first. So we are reviewing it extensively to make sure that we are making sure that it's done properly.

Okay, and I'm glad to see the arborist on board to monitor this whole process. I understand you got to have sunlight and trees will be involved. So I heard you say that no trees will need to be removed to make this happen. Did I hear that correctly?

You did hear that from the applicant, Councilman Turner.

And staff concurs?

We will work with him and of course we concur.

Okay. And planning planning recommendation for this project, I mean from yes.

Planning Commission did recommend the same conditions from staff.

And staff recommends.

Approval with the conditions as listed one through four.

One through four, I see you eliminated seven condition.

Well, that's the removal of the condition 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 11, and 12. But we also included conditions to those conditions of the removal of the condition.

So you removed seven and added four.

Yes.

So we got a net. And that was 16 conditions owned by DeKalb County initially.

Yes.

And they're still there. I mean, the others actually took away. The others are remaining.

That's why we listed them by number.

Okay, all right, IU.

Thank you, Councilman Turner. So let me clarify, you removed seven of the conditions from DeKalb County and we added four.

We removed seven conditions that were listed on the initial rezoning request for the campus development. Those are referred to the senior living facility. So the ones that were removed were specifically related to the senior living facility. And then we added conditions that the development must be approved on this 11-acre site. It must follow all environmental regulations, including erosion, stormwater, and permitting for any floodplain or wetland impacts. Screening and buffering must reduce visual impacts, and construction must minimize dust, noise, and traffic, and no other intensive uses would be allowed without further zoning approvals. Thank you.

Thank you will put him.

Council Washington.

Are the solar panels taxed when you have in the farm.

I don't know about taxing of the solar panels that may be a question for the applicant. Yes.

Thank you, Councilman Washington, for the question. As far as we are aware, there are no taxable impact in that for the energy that's going to be produced by the solar panel is going to be used 100% by the church. So it's not as if the energy is going to be used outside of the church. So it's literally as if you're getting, you know, solar panels on your house, you wouldn't necessarily be taxed on the self-generation of energy. Hopefully that helps.

Any other questions, Council?

Mayor Pro Tem?

Councilwoman Smith?

Is there a way, I know we have it in the packet, but is there a way that we can have Director Q state the conditions that are not being removed, the current conditions?

So for clarity, Councilwoman Smith, you're asking for the conditions that were not removed?

Yes, the current conditions that were passed down from DeKalb County for this property that are not being removed.

Okay, there's question. Condition number six. Lighting shall be established in such a way that no direct light is cast upon or adversely affects adjacent properties and roadways. Number seven, there shall be an outdoor recreational area equal to no less than 5% of the total area of the lot. Number eight, applicant shall comply with the DeKalb County tree ordinance and all green space requirements. Number nine, all utilities will be underground. 10. The applicant shall comply with all conditions identified in the consent order dated October 11 2021. Number 13 access and road improvements are required by Public Works. 14, there shall be imposed a 24-month moratorium applicable to each of the parcels of real property that constitute the campus of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church, which is defined as the subject property and all those parcels of real property included in zoning case CZ98006, prohibiting A, a construction of any new facility, building, structure, or additions except for the contemplated ALF and except for existing structures that are damaged or destroyed by fire or other act of God may be reconstructed subject to the then applicable building regulations and b the filing of any special land use permit applications rezoning applications application for variance or special exception which would in any way alter the present zoning on the new birth campus not including the filing of any application of a special administrative permit or other permits necessary for the operation of legally permissible temporary and seasonal events And fifteen, the use permitted on the new birth campus during the term of the moratorium shall be limited to the permissible uses of the cathedral complex, the permissible use of the family life center, the permissible uses of the to be constructed assistant living facility with a maximum of one hundred and thirty three units. and legally prohibited temporary or seasonal uses on the Newburgh campus. 16 is access to the Newburgh campus by Chupway shall be open at all time.

Thank you so much.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you, Director Cowie. So with that being said, those are all the conditions that still stand. With that being said, we are, New Birth is, I'm sorry, meeting these conditions with the change from the senior living facility to this solar farm.

Yes, because if those conditions that were placed on that property are removed, so yes, that is correct.

Okay. So, uh, one question, um, there shall be number seven, there shall be an outdoor recreational area equal to no less than 5% of the total area of the lot. So because new birth has a recreation facilities on their property, they're still meeting this criteria. Number seven, because of that, is that correct?

That is correct. Or they will meet that 5%, um, condition.

Okay. All right, that's all my questions. Mayor Pro Tem, I yield.

Thank you, Councilwoman Smith. Council, any other questions? Hearing none, I entertain a motion.

an ordinance by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Stonecrest, Georgia, to amend certain conditions on property located at 6400 Woodrow Road, parcel ID 1610619, to provide severe ability, to provide for repeal of conflicting ordinances, to provide for an adoption and effective date, and to provide for other lawful purposes.

Thank you.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman, Councilman Turner.

Move for approval of RZ26-001, Woodrow Road.

I second. ZM.

Member for 10.

Councilman Turner.

Move for approval of the ordinance for ZM26-001, 6400, Woodrow Road.

Second.

Motion has been properly moved in second by councilwoman Smith.

Are you ready for the question?

All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed nay. Starting with district three.

Yay.

District four. Yay. District five.

Yay.

District 1 is yay. Motion carries 4 to 0. The ordinance for ZM 26-001 6400 Woodrow Road has been approved. Next on the agenda is reports and presentation. A approximation for municipal court clerk by Mayor Cobble.

I'm from him.

Councilman turn.

So you want to hear from the court? Um, Mayor Cobble said if she was not back from her emergency call, she would have me to read this for her. Good. Okay.

Whatever is your pleasure.

Thank you very much. Will you come to the podium, please? Good evening. Good evening. State your name.

Davina Daughtry.

Say it again.

Davina Daughtry.

Ms. Daughtry. By the governor of the state of Georgia, a proclamation, Georgia Municipal Court clicks weak. Whereas municipal courts play a significant role in providing access to justice, preserving public safety, and promoting the quality of life for Georgia's citizens, and whereas more georgians interact with municipal court clerks than with any other court personnel and the public's perception of the judicial system is largely shaped by these interactions and whereas municipal court clerks are committed to maintaining neutrality and impartiality providing equal service to all and upholding the standards set forth in the uniform rules for municipal courts of the state of Georgia, and whereas municipal court clerks serve nearly 400 municipal courts across the state of Georgia and play a critical role in the effective administration of justice, and whereas the state of Georgia recognizes and appreciates the contributions of municipal court clerks and their positive impact on Georgia's communities. And now, therefore, I, Brian P. Kemp, governor of the state of Georgia, do hereby proclaim June 8th through 12th 2026 is Georgia Municipal Court Clerks Week in Georgia. In witness thereof, I have here unto set my hand and cause the seal of the Executive Department to be affixed this 30th day of January in the year of our Lord, 2026. Thank you very much. Congratulations.

Next on the agenda. We're moving to all business is for decision ordinance for slump 25007 1695 Spring Hill Cove.

There for him the applicant has requested a 30 day deferment. They're not here.

Are you asking for a deferment.

Yes, you asking for a deferment to the next council meeting to the next council meeting of 30 day deferment to the next council meeting, July the 27th.

Council, what is your pleasure?

Councilman Turner have a question for legal. The item is on the agenda. And there was no written request submitted to counsel to defer this. Do we have the option of hearing it, not hearing it, deferring it, denying it, approving it?

Yes, I believe you have the option to do any of those things.

It is for decision. Councilman Turner, you have heard this. Yes, we have heard it. Yes, sir.

And I would also add, I'm sorry, thank you. I would also add, if we could clarify whether it's a 30-day deferment or to council meeting, because just in case those dates conflict.

Is the 30-day deferment to the next council meeting July 27th?

I'm sorry, I'm just saying maybe pick one or the other.

July 27, the next mayor and city council meeting. Councilman Turner.

Move for a deferral to the next council meeting July 27, 2026.

May I proceed?

Councilwoman Smith.

I have a question. I know there's a motion on the table, but I do have a question.

You have the floor.

Director Q, the applicant asked for this to be deferred. Are you able to give us a reason why they're requesting for it to be deferred?

The reason Councilwoman Smith, my apologies, was stated from the applicant, one, the applicant is not here today, but there is additional information according to the applicant that needs to be submitted that staff did request during that time period and we have not received. that the additional information when we contacted the applicant for today's meeting in preparation, they stated that they were not ready. And of course, they are not in the state of Georgia to present on their behalf also or answer any additional questions.

OK, do we feel that we have given the applicant ample or adequate amount of time to get back to us with the information that has been requested.

Um, staff does feel like, um, as though there was additional information requested and we have given the applicant enough, um, time to submit that information. However, of course the applicant stated that there is, uh, some, um, additional information that they have not received from their request. So they are asking, um, the additional, uh, deferment to the next mayor city council meeting.

Okay. So for clarity, the applicant requested something of us and they're saying that they did not receive it from us in order to send us something that was requested of them.

No. Um, for clarity, the information that we have requested from the last, um, mayor and city council meeting during that process from the applicant staff has not received.

Okay. OK, thank you. Mayor Pro Tem, are you?

Thank you, Councilman Smith.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Washington.

Yes. They had got to defer about 60 days, correct?

They did.

To this date to have what they were supposed to. Okay. I would think the 60 days was well enough time for them to get whatever it is that they needed or either had someone here to represent them or another 30 more days. Yes. I yield.

We we do have a motion on the floor. Like of a second. Did.

I move to defer slupt 25007-1695 Spring Hill Cove to the next council meeting, which is July 27th.

Second.

Motion has been properly moved and seconded by Councilman Turner. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed nay, starting with District 3.

Nay.

District 4.

Nay.

District 5.

Nay.

District 1 is yay. I placed a motion on the floor. I cannot vote against my own motion. So it's a yay for me. So we have a topic.

Mr. Mayor is not here to break the tie.

Let me see if I can get a mayor for us.

Another motion has to come. This is highly unusual, Joe.

Are you recessing the meeting for, I think?

Madam City Attorney, point of order. And we recess to get someone to vote. Okay. I believe we have another dead vote. It's deadlocked at 2, and another motion has to be put on the floor. But we can do another motion.

Is there another motion that the council wants to put on the floor?

So I'm calling it, my limited parliamentary knowledge would say that it is dead.

So we do have a dead vote. Okay. So we're going to move on and come back.

No, you can't leave it there. There has to be another motion.

May I approach him?

Yes, Councilwoman Smith.

I would like to place another motion on the floor. I move that we give the applicant until our work session to respond and we make a decision there.

Did I get a second?

Second.

The motion has been properly moved in second by Councilwoman Washington. Are you ready for the question. All those in favor of the motion please respond with yay all those opposed nay starting with district 3.

District 4.

District 5.

Yay.

District 1 is Before I say yay, what was the motion? Because I stepped away. The motion was to defer it.

To our work session.

The motion is yay. So the motion carries three to one. This item has been deferred to our work session for decision only.

Okay, who's next on the agenda?

Next on the agenda is for decision, resolution for the matrix fee study by Director Q and Keisha Franklin, our finance director.

Thank you. Okay, go ahead.

Good evening Council again. The major. The matrix study was conducted to evaluate whether current fees charged by the city adequately covered the costs associated with providing the services. The study compared is this existing fees to actual service delivery costs and identify areas where fees have not kept pace with operational expenses. The proposed the adjustments are attended to improve cost recovery reduce reliance on general revenues and to align the city's fee structure with industry standards and comparable jurisdictions. We have taken into consideration some of the concerns from the last meeting. And looking at the packet you will see that we have may a. We have updated the master fee schedule. So for the fees that are related to commercial fees, we immediately updated those fees to receive our full cost recovery. And for the fees that are incurred by citizens, we did a phase-in approach. Well, we'll walk through the examples through the presentation. But high level summary is if it was a commercial fee, we immediately updated that fee to what we would get to recover all our costs. And if the fee was related to a citizen residential fee, we gradually increase those fees year by year. And so I'll hand over the presentation to Director Kuehl.

Thank you director Franklin listed you'll see the current fee total cost that the fee calculation methodology methodology was presented by the consultant team. The fees that you see are the recommendations which is the current fee. Yes, councilman Turner.

I must agree with the public comment made about these overhead. It is impossible to see those numbers is a way to make them larger than other

You have them in your packet.

I have them, but I wanted the public to see them as well.

So the master fee schedule was only a snippet and an example to show what was actually in the packet with the number. I actually have copies if a resident here today would like to have their own individual copy. But again, we understand that again, this is just a snippet of the master fee schedule that you do have in your packet that was available with the packet.

The bottom line is this is the best we can do for today that is the best that we can do.

Again, the objective was to streamline the fee structure. The time assumption fully burdened hourly rate. We have a comparative summary, the legal compliance and again the end result is the master fee schedule. The fee study results reviewed 293 fee line items. That was not including the items that we also included from parks and recreation. We looked at the departments of building, finance, land development, planning and zoning, again, and parks and recreation. The fee calculation method was the time estimate, which is the average staff time by position, title spent per permit application or fee related activity. times the fully burdened hourly rate, which are the salaries, the benefits, the productive hours, services and supplies, supervisory support and citywide overhead that gave us the full cost of the fee, the maximum justifiable fee that can be assessed. Again, this is just a snippet, but as Director Franklin did state, there is a current fee, the consultant's proposed fee And you will see the city's proposed fee that's either rounded to a whole number or rounded down if it was too, if the increase was too high. But as stated, if there is a 50% increase or higher to our resident, we Considered or we're recommending a phased approach, as you will see, you will see phase year one 2026 or phase phase year two or 2027 etc until five years on which the consultant team did recommend to. reevaluate in five to seven years. That is the summary based in the updated matrix chart is based on the recommendations that we heard from the last mayor and city council meeting for a phased approach for those fees to not be assessed all at once to our residents. But all commercial projects, the fees as recommended are as listed. Mayor Pro Tem.

Thank you. Council, do you have any questions?

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

Thank you. I do have a couple of questions. I think you said it, but I just want to confirm that the fees associated with Parks and Rec were updated in this document based on our conversation from the last meeting.

They were included in this document, but it is my understanding that Assistant Director Porter had additional updates that may not be included in this document. Um, but there were a few changes, a few of the programs that were listed before have been, um, it is my understanding that they may have been removed and director Porter may be able to, uh, elaborate on those changes a little bit more, but they were, uh, updated with a few changes, um, in some of the services that parks and recreation were offering.

Okay. So I'm sorry.

No, I was asking Assistant Director Porter, was that correct in my assessment of the summary that she gave in reference to the updated fees?

And it looks like she's coming up, OK.

Yes, that is correct. Good evening, Mayor and Council. That is correct. Our programs team wanted to exclude some of the programs that were on the last one. And so we sent some updates recently for that.

okay so what we have in front of us is not the final no okay thank you for that and then i i have a request of uh those who are preparing the documents for us um this spreadsheet or goes over eight pages i think it is it will be extremely helpful if we could ensure that when the Sheep goes beyond one page that we have the column headers on each page. I've scrolled up a million and five times to refresh on what what is this and what column. So if you guys could give a provide that for us, it would be greatly appreciated.

Will do, Councilwoman Smith.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. That's all I have.

Thank you, Councilwoman Smith.

Mayor Pro Tem. Councilwoman Washington. Yes. On page 18, we talk about the athletic program. You listed Bronze Mill, Salem, and Gregory mostly. But I was going to ask about Farrington Park. So we have a fee for soccer. um i know it's specifically broken down to the tournament and the field prep and also the cleaning trash removal because farrington is not here it's not listed um Are you gonna in the future begin to charge them rent? Because you know that they do play soccer on a regular basis every Saturday and every Sunday. And they pretty much take up most of the time of the park. So will that be applied to them for the rental since you're moving forward with this rental fee?

Yes, ma'am. It will be an actual, it will be a field rental. However, Farrington park is one of our passive parks. So we are not, it's not an active park. Um, we have had some unpermitted activities, which we have talked about and are going to be setting up a meeting with the teams and with you councilwoman so that we can discuss that further.

Okay. So is it the amount that you're charging? Is it per month or per usage?

per usage or per hour.

Per hour? Mm-hmm. Okay. Thank you, IU.

You're welcome.

Representative Tim.

Councilman Turner.

I'm looking at the heading and what we're working with here. It says resolution for matrix fee study. So we commissioned a study to get these numbers so we could compare to other cities, whoever provides a similar service, so we can know whether or not we are inbound with what others are charging. That's not to say that we have to, because we are really trying to make Stonecrest attractive. And then sometimes you set your fees to attract people to the city based on what you're trying to achieve. I just want to make sure that we are not operating that based on what was suggested in this matrix. We have to, at some point in time, get to these numbers. And I know that there are times that you will I say bypass the fee. You make an exception. You can waive the fee based on what we're trying to achieve in terms of attracting activities to our city that we can gain greater benefits for. And I take the same posture as I did the last time. I don't want to just charge a fee just because we can charge a fee and get the money. That's not what we're here for. You know, yeah, sometimes we may well, it may well cost us more than we gain. But if we gain that good relationship with the community by providing the service, then I think that is something that you would have to measure as well. So just because you can charge it doesn't necessarily mean you have to charge it, but we have a fixed study which tells us what the boundaries are based on what other cities are doing and based on our projected staff input. So that is good. But what you're trying to achieve here is my understanding was to accept the fee study. And you don't have to enact each recommendation right away. I know you said you're going to gradually put some of them in place. But I'm trying to understand, is that the effort to put all of these in place as quickly as we can?

I think Director Franklin and myself did state that for some of the fees so they won't be so heavy on the resident We will fade. Some of the fees will be paid as you see. So in the five years of the recommendation of the evaluation between the five and seven years, by the end of the fifth year, we should have assessed all of the recommended fees that are recommended in the study.

I'm looking for flexibility in terms of some Activities may well not benefit. We may well not benefit from the higher fees. You may well benefit from the lower fee. I wanted to make sure you didn't rob us of that ability to have that flexibility by saying this is what the study calls for. This is what it must be come hell or high water. Well, I just wanted to throw that out there is that we must maintain some flexibility and that's all. And by adopting this fee study, we're not saying that this goes into effect with the adoption of the study. We're just adopting the study and you can take your numbers from the study to set the fee for each activity. Is that correct? Am I reading this all wrong?

Well, this is the guideline we're using to impose the fees by commercial versus residential. Essentially, if you look at the cost of living, even if we were to reach the total cost, recover our total cost in five years, we would probably still be behind in total cost because that total cost will change in the next five years. So we're just trying to not absorb all of the costs of providing these services and actually recovering some of the costs. It's not to make a profit from the citizens or commercial, but so that we can get the cost back of what we're putting in to provide new services so we can have premium services in the city.

Yeah, I can appreciate that. But some of the services are paid by through tax dollars. And you're right, we don't recover nickel for nickel. we just want to provide a good service to the citizens of Stonecrest. And if we don't recover every penny, I think, well, I'm okay with that. I'll be in a situation where you, have such a great demand, then yes, you can raise your fees and still provide the service that the citizens deserve. But I don't want to chase people away because our fees might be out of alignment and I could be totally wrong and we could be well below market and settle ourselves short. But I think that would be indicated by the number of people participating. If we were so low market, we should be overrun with people coming in to make applications. And we might want to do that to attract more activity. So something to consider.

Okay.

Council, any other questions?

May I proceed?

Councilwoman Smith.

So I just want to be clear on what it is that we're being asked to approve today, because I'm looking at the resolution and it says approving the city of Stonecrest comprehensive user fee study and adopting changes to the city of Stonecrest fee schedule. So are we adopting what's in this packet or No, no. Or are we adopting what's in this packet? Is that what we're being asked to approve today?

Where did you read that from? I'm trying to find that.

That is on page one 12 of the packet.

I'm looking at the decision. What's on the agenda.

She's reading a resolution.

Ah, okay.

And councilman Smith has the floor.

Help me out. Yes, I'm reading the resolution and the resolution is what we've been asked to approve. So I want to make sure that we all understand what it is we're approving today.

Yeah, they're putting answer that question for me. Yeah.

We're asking for the fee schedule to be adopted. Of course, the study was approved for the consultant team to actually move forward and provide the information to us. The schedule is the supporting document as the result from the study because the consultant team did assess our current fees with the recommendations that are on the matrix as well.

Councilman Smith, did that answer your question?

So the, um, the matrix that is attached to our packet or in our packet right now, I've heard that there are some changes that still need to be made to this matrix. So are we approving what's in the packet right now? Are we approving the concept of making changes to our fees?

Councilwoman Smith, what I heard is we're approving the fees. and not just a concept. We're looking at the study and we're approving the fees, is that correct? So we can move forward and say with the amended changes from the athletic or from parks, or we could defer it until all the changes was made and it's placed in our package and we can approve it

Mayor Pro Tem. So, Councilwoman Washington, does this go forward not in just one year, this is for the next five years, correct? That these numbers will be implemented, right? Okay, I was just trying to understand. I'm sorry?

That is correct.

Councilwoman Washington when we was um I think it was the last meeting um where we had this on our agenda Councilwoman Smith suggested that we do it in phases now I was I was under the impression that we was going to do it in phases for the residents and not for the commercial okay got it so we're doing it in phases for our residents um so Councilwoman Smith Madam Mayor Patel I'm sorry. Yes, Attorney Thompson.

I just have concerns about the phased-in approach of a fee. If the city's going to set fees, the fees should be what's set by the city council. I mean, if you're talking about a phased-in approach, it would be good if those listed fees are before the council for approval because right now,

They are.

They are. Okay. The phased in by year. Okay.

They have it listed like that in a packet.

But we're not explicitly setting a fee or a particular service or are we, again, that phased in approach will set that fee for that particular year and say that that is what it's going to be.

In the packet, it shows the exact dollar amount that is going to be set for that calendar year. So it's an increase per year until we get to that total fee.

And under the phased in approach, these are all fees that are lower than what they've been assessed at. There's nothing that's phased in that we typically

All of the fees that I reviewed is within the fee study. It's within that guidelines, the boundaries of the fee.

Right. There's nothing that we're facing that's not, that's higher possibly.

No, it's not.

Mayor Pro Tem. Yes, Madam City Manager.

I would like to read a respective request to see if this can be deferred to the next council meeting. I would like to have the opportunity to review it with Director Franklin and Director Q. This has been on my sixth day on board, and I just want to make sure that we review the matrix fee schedule and discuss the matrix fee study before you all make the final decision. And at that point, hopefully we'll have some of these questions answered.

Thank you, Madam City Manager. You're welcome. Council, I will entertain a motion.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

I just want to make the point that I was attempting to make a little bit more clear. What I would not like to happen or would not like to see is that we approve something on 622 and we say we're approving what's in the packet and then someone comes back later and questions the fees that may be presented to them which are not in the packet that the council approved on 622. That was my point in questioning exactly what we were approving. But I will move that this be deferred per the request of the city manager to our next council meeting for decision.

Do I have a second?

Second.

The motion has been properly moved and second by Councilman Turner. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion please respond we gay all those opposed nay starting with district 3.

Yeah, it's your 4 day.

District 5 yay district one is Jay motion carries 4 to 0 to defer the resolution for the matrix fee study until our next council meeting. Next on the agenda. Is for a decision, the ordinance for purchasing card policy amendment by. Director Franklin.

This is the second reading of the purchasing card policy amendment. Key updates to this policy included clarification of an employee eligibility, revisions to the authorized cardholder provisions, removal of bonding requirements, and implementation of credit and background check review requirements for all cardholders. Additional language was added regarding emergency and disaster related purchases to provide operational flexibility while maintaining accountability. These changes are intended to strengthen controls reduce organizational risk and ensure purchasing the car remains compliant transparent and properly monitored. At this time, if anyone has any questions there has not been any changes since the last since the first reading of the purchasing card amendment, this is the second reading.

Thank you director frankly any questions Council. Erin and I entertain a motion.

I can read.

Madam City Clerk. An ordinance by the Mayor and Council of the City of Stonecrest, Georgia, amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article 6, Finance, Division 2, Purchasing, Section 2-261, Purchasing Card Policy, to provide an effective date to provide for severe ability and for other lawful purposes.

Thank you.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Yes, Councilman Turner.

After hearing the second read of ordinance or purchasing card policy amendment, I move for approval. Second.

The motion has been properly moved and seconded by Councilwoman Washington. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed nay, starting with District 3.

Yay.

District for the district 5 yay district one is Jay motion carries 4 to 0. The ordinance for purchasing car policy amendment has been approved. Next on the agenda is new business for decision contract for audit services by director Franklin in our city manager. Miss Turner.

Good evening. We bring before you a recommendation to approve Malden and Jenkins as the city's audit firm to assist with completing the city's outstanding audits and restoring Stonecrest to a current audit cycle. Council may ask why changes being recommended the answer is straightforward, the city is current the city's current priority is completing 2324 and 25 audits and establishing a sustainable path forward. This requires a firm with governmental expertise staffing resources and capacity necessary to support the audit recovery effort of this magnitude. The city has previously worked with Marjana Jenkins and is familiar with the firm's governmental audit approach. Additionally, independent review by the Georgia Department of Audits and Accounts identified reported deficiencies during the review of the 2022 audit and required corrective action in future years. While the audit was accepted, the state's review reinforced the importance of selecting a firm with strong governmental accounting and reporting expertise. Our job, our objective is not to simply hire an auditor. The objective is to complete the outstanding audits, restore compliance, strengthen financial transparency, improve public confidence and position a city for future grant opportunities, financing initiatives and long term stability. And we will we have a presentation that we can share with you guys.

Mayor Pro Tem and members of the City Council. The City of Stonecrest would like to express its sincere appreciation to TABNTAB for its professional service and partnership. We are especially grateful for the firm's effort and collaboration in assisting the city with the completion of fiscal year 2022 audit and supporting the city during a challenging period of audit recovery and financial reporting. The city appreciates the time and commitment provided by TAB and TAB and wishes the firm continued success for its future endeavors. Thank you for serving the city of Stonecrest. While we would like to move forward with Marlene Jenkins, LLC. They're a more robust team. They have over 100 years of experience to assist the city with outstanding audits and restoring Stonecrest to its current audit cycle. They're experts in government and comprehension knowledge, staffing resource, and capacity necessary to complete the audit recovery effort and maintain compliance going forward. They're able to analyze large volumes of transactional data, have a high percentage of partners and manager involvement, And they provide a timeline for completing FY20, 23, 24 and 25 and ability to help the city recover from his current backlog and return to a sustainable annual audit cycle. They serves numerous local government throughout Georgia. Our rationale to establish services with Malkin and Jenkins is because they were founded in 1918, so they have over 100 years. They're nationally recognized in the top 100 as one of the largest certified public accounting firms. They support over 775 states and local government across the nation. They support over 175 government awards, the GFOA, and the ASBO financial reporting certificate. They're familiar with Stonecrest's complexity of the city's financial operation, and they focus on experience in government industries. you know on-site or remote audit support they're well experienced with the client's transition and stonecrest will establish a task force to work alongside of maury and jenkins and then our goal is to complete audit year fiscal year 2023 through 2026 audits and return the city to a current audit cycle We have a work plan and project schedule. We've met numerous times with Marlene Jenkins. Our segment one is planning and interim procedures, which will start date late July to August of 2026. Segment two would be the final audit field work procedures starting September through October of 2026. Segment three is to review the completion and delivery procedures for FY 2023 audit by December of 2026. And then we'll continue our discussion with the client management team ongoing. This is our proposed timeline for fiscal year 2023 through 2026. We'll have an audit timeline on reconciliation, audit preparation, and documentation requests. Fiscal year 2023 audit we plan to have completed by December of 2026. Once that's been approved and accepted, then fiscal year 2024 audit will be submitted, will be accepted by February of 2027. Fiscal year 2025, June of 2027 and then fiscal year 2026 is September of 2027 and then we will be current with all of our audits for the City of Stonecrest. Of course this proposed timeline and final delivery dates for this engagement are strictly continued upon the timely and complete provision of all requested documentation that is requested to us from Altine and Jenkins for the City. So what I would like to do now is open up any questions that you may have. And I have our engagement partner, Doug Moses, the CPA, who's here to join us.

Council, do you have any questions?

Madam City Manager. Slides you showed us. You can get that to us, El Ponto. What I'm looking for are the dates as to when these audits are projected to be completed, and I wanted to. Good. And say again when you expect to be current with the audit.

We expect to be current with the audits for 2026 by September of 2027. And I have it on the screen.

what that's what i wanted to have in there okay okay and how does that uh compare to what we had projected with the previous auditor i never saw that proposal okay then uh the one that they were working on was at least the 2023 that's fine they were working on 2022 is that correct no 23 destroyed on that 2023. Okay. And when it was, when was that projected to be finished? Did we have a date?

We didn't have a exact date. But they did say 2026, that 2023 would be completed.

So they were saying by the end of this year, so they're taking a year to complete one audit?

Well, technically, we didn't start until the end of April, the beginning of May.

Okay. You've had experience with this auditing process. What's the average time to get an audit done?

I would think at least six months.

At least six months, so we should be getting two per year.

That's in the current state, if we're in the current state. But yes, we could get two done per year, but normally in the current state, it would take at least six months.

Okay. I'm just trying to get a feel for when these artists will be caught up. That's what we've been begging, begging, begging, and begging for. And new sheriff in town. Let's hope we can catch this up and we get these dates. When we get these dates, we're going to hold you to them. Okay. So roughly one per six months. And we are currently working on 2023. Correct. Okay. All right. That's it for now.

Council, any other questions?

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

Madam City Manager. Welcome. I am saddened that I couldn't be there for your first meeting in person. However, I do have a question as it relates to those dates. You mentioned having a team in place to help get this moving or make sure this happened, those projected dates. Does that mean we have to bring someone else on to help in addition to the team that we already have or you're assigning people within the city already to ensure that we meet these dates?

We are assigning people within the city already to meet these dates. It would be ideal if we routinely had staff that had the capability to do these duties. So we want to make sure we include the staff that we have. I am looking at bringing in someone to actually assist with some of the schedules. getting some of the schedules done and caught up to date. But most of the research and the reporting, we are getting with the team to have them either learn how to do it or actually provide that information so we can have that in-house knowledge.

Okay, thank you. And a question for Malden and Jenkins. Are they going to be, are we going to have a dedicated Stonecrest team that's working on this to ensure that we meet these projected dates? Because this is important to us and our constituents getting these audits done. So I just want to have a clear understanding of the plan.

Yes, ma'am. Basically, if the city is pretty much kind of closed out for fiscal year 2023 and 2024, my recommendation would be when we come in and do our planning and preliminary work, to kind of work on both years at the same time if everything is closed out. And so we can be testing 2023 while we're testing 2024. An example would be if we got all the bank reconciliations for 2023 and 2024, our team would be going ahead and auditing both years of bank reconciliation. And so once we get through 2023, we will have already kind of tested a lot of the 2024 numbers Issue 2023 in December and then maybe two or three months later, issue 2024 and move on to the next. Same thing can be done for 2025 and 2026. If things are closed out properly and timely, then we can work on both years at the same time. Okay. But we don't have a dedicated team working specifically on Stonefield.

Thank you so much. Additional question for Madam City Manager. And that is the schedule that you have proposed that you all have worked through. How are we going to ensure that we are on track? And will we see some type of project plan with some milestones ensuring that we are on target with the proposed schedule?

Yes, we plan to have a project schedule put together with these major milestone dates so that we'll be able to give you an update in the City Council meetings of where we stand.

Okay. Sounds good. Thank you so much. Mayor Pro Temayil.

Thank you, Councilwoman Smith. When you say council meetings, are you referring to every council meetings or would those updates be given in your report or when Director Franklin give her updates during financials?

I can give it the updates during the financial update meeting.

Thank you. Council, any other questions? Councilman Turner.

I know with some things we throw money after it to make it happen, this is one that I think we need to spend a little more if we can make if we can accelerate this so tell us if we need additional staff, we need to. Do whatever it takes to accelerate this. in terms of council authorizing additional personnel or whatever to get this done? I mean, he said he could do two at one time. Do we need additional personnel to help double up? Or what? Do we need additional contractors to help double up and get it done?

That's one of the things that we have proposed to Douglas to try to get if we need additional staffing so that we can double up. We put some aggressive dates out there that we proposed to him before. So we're looking forward to that. Once he gets in here and takes a look at all the information, then we'll be able to come back and see if we need some additional staffing because we definitely want to meet the timeline that we have proposed.

OK, because this is costing us. And I know you're saying that the grants are on hold and we shall get them eventually. But I feel that at some point in time, you may well lose some of this funding. So to take some of our funding to help get this thing advanced, council, I think, will entertain whatever it takes to get it done. So let us know.

We will have something presented during the budget adjustment period next month, and so each line item will have the reasoning and the rationale behind the budget adjustment, but we'll have a line for that on there.

Very well, okay.

Thank you.

Council any other questions. So Madam City Manager have our previous auditors been notified?

Yes ma'am they have.

So I move to remove tab and tab as the city auditors.

Second that can.

Motion has been properly moved in second by Councilwoman Washington are you ready for the question. All those in favor of the motion please respond with yay all those opposed nay starting with district 3. Yeah district for the district 5. District one is yay motion carries 4 to 0. TAB and TAB has been removed as the city auditors. So we have a proposal from, currently have a proposal from Moden and Jenkins. So I will entertain a motion that we approve the proposal pending review of the contract.

Mayor Pro Tem. Councilwoman Smith. I move that we approve the proposal from Mauldin and Jenkins pending review of the contract review and acceptance of the contract.

Madam Mayor Pro Tem. Yes, Madam City Attorney. I would ask the vote be for the appointment of Malton Jenkins pending the review of the contract.

The appointment of Malton Jenkins pending the review of the contract.

That's better.

Councilwoman Smith.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

I move that we appoint appoint malden and jenkins as the city auditors pending approval of the contract review review and approval of the contract oh madam city attorney

The City Council just needs to appoint Malden and Jenkins pending the review of their contract. Okay.

Mayor Pro Tem, I move that we appoint Malden and Jenkins pending the review of their contract.

Second.

Motion has been properly moved and seconded by Councilwoman Washington. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion, please respond with yay. All those opposed, nay. Starting with District 3.

Yay. Yay.

District 5.

Yay.

District 1 is yay. Motion carries 4-0. Congratulations, Moden and Jenkins. Welcome aboard. Madam City Manager, you said we should expect an email from you Tonight tonight we just say bye in the morning. Next on the agenda. For decision contract for vendor recommendation or South East athletic complex dog Park, miss to Nisha Boykin procurement manager and Mister Harry our city engineer.

Good afternoon, good evening, Council, Mayor, City Manager, Tanisha Boynton, procurement manager, procurement official for the City of Stonecrest. I'm here this evening for a vendor contract, vendor recommendation for the Southeast Athletic Complex Dog Park. The procurement department released solicitation for this project on February 4th of 2026. We received a total of four responses, 1,688 Vendors were notified based on our usage of bid net. Upon completion of the internal review of all bids received, F.H. Bashan S.N. Nielsen and Associates LLC was deemed the lowest responsive responsible bidder. We're asking council to approve the award for a contract. and the issuance of a PO and along with the notice to proceed to F.H. Bashan, S.N. Nelson and Associates LLC and the amount of $382,705.20. I'm here to answer any questions if you have any. Also, the funding source would be SPLOSH, utilizing GL account number 300-6210-541200, which is site improvements. I'm here to answer any questions if you may have any.

Thank you for your presentation. So we received four response, Pat?

We received four bids in response to the solicitation.

I thought I read in a packet we only received. I thought two didn't respond. Is that not correct? I have to bring it back up on my computer. Council, any other questions?

Mayor Pro Tem.

Oh, and maybe that I'm sorry, excuse me, and maybe that we had some that were not responsive to the solicitation. That may be a part of the backup that you may have received. They did not submit the required contractor licenses and certifications and a couple of other documents they they were required to submit. So they were deemed not responsive to the solicitation and there's requirements.

Thank you, Councilman Smith.

Hello, Ms. Boynton. I have a couple of questions. One, is it normal, typical for us to only receive four responses out of 1,688? Is that typical?

Well, it depends. It depends on their interest in the project. It also depends on their location. There's no way for us to be able to explain the turnout. And that's what all procurement systems that are out there. It's just Given my experience, because the vendors are responsible for registering with the platforms that are used, the various platforms out there, we cannot control the submittals, the responses that we receive. But the vendors are registered based on their commodity codes, and that's how they receive the alerts and notices of solicitations that are released.

Okay. With their, I think I read somewhere in the packet that the, there was a $5 million umbrella for liability.

We do provide the certificates of insurance requirements and the liability insurance that we use is based on the Georgia Department of Administration. We utilize their book based on the type of project or whatever it is that we're soliciting for. We use those as our determining factors as to what the certificate of insurance requirements will be for each one of our solicitations.

okay I did a little research and found that to be a little high but if you guys are using some type of standard that I don't know about then that's fine with this project 384 K it seems expensive for a dog park for one is that typical

It is $382,705.20. It's based on, I mean, I think that we, but Harry can also provide more substance to your question or more information related to what you're asking. But we have to take in consideration inflation. We have to take in consideration the time frame in which these projects may have been adopted by council and the time frame in which we are now being able to start moving forward with the projects. So a lot of the costs and responses that we are receiving may be more due to current inflation in the market rate.

Is Southeast Athletic Complex the right place for this dog park? It's an athletic complex. We have other parks that are more family and family friendly so is this a part of the master parks plan and is it a part of the vision for southeast athletic complex having a dog park at that location

council members smith uh yes that is correct so we looked at the master plan one thing and second thing is the space where the space is available and then also looked at the people going there currently you know dock walkers are going there right now so those are the three factors we considered dog park at Southeast. First is the master plan and the other two.

Okay. Thank you for that. I am a dog lover. I have two. So I would definitely like to see a dog park in the city of Stonecrest. What I would like for us to ensure is that we are prioritizing our park improvements the way that they should be prioritized i know that there are a number of things that should be happening at southeast athletic complex personally i know um improvements that can be made for the human people there so um as it relates to the priority of this? Where does it fall on the priority list when it comes to the master plan for Southeast Athletic Complex?

So currently, Council Member Smith, we have two projects there. One is expansion of the existing restrooms. That contract was awarded by the council and that is in the design phase right now. And also we have a project that council approved and we went on to the bid And then we are trying to get the funding adjusted for that in the media adjustment that is additional parking. So we have three new spots of parking that is already designed and we have the bid. It may be a little old, but we are trying to get that brought to the council during the mid-year adjustment. So those are the two projects that we are actively working on. And we are also looking to get some netting for those fields so that the balls don't go into the woods. We have some price for that. We are also looking at that project. So those are the three projects we are working on currently.

So the $383,000 for this project, what was the budget or the anticipated cost for this when this was approved by council? I don't even know when exactly it was approved by council, but are you in the same price range that you were thinking when this bid was put out there to do this?

um no ma'am um it's it's higher than what we anticipated it is it's a little higher just to give you a little description of this project we are going to have two dog areas for the larger dogs 100 by 100 and for the smaller dogs 50 by 100 and we're going to have our We have several play items for the dogs, but still this bid is a little higher than we expected.

Can you give me about how much higher than expected? What were we expecting?

It's in the $150,000 to $200,000 range. That was the estimate that I remember correctly.

Okay. That's extremely higher, much higher than expected. Okay. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem.

Thank you, Councilwoman Smith. Council, any other questions? Councilman Turner.

Along the same line of questioning, I'm not very familiar with dog parks. I saw the one in Avondale, but what was the proposed size of this park and how does it compare to other municipalities?

Are you asking about the entire park area?

No, the entire dog park area, yes.

Dog park area, I can give you that. So there are two sections. The dog park is 150 by 100 feet. But it is broken. There is a middle fence going on to separate the larger dogs and smaller dogs. So we have two areas. Those are going to be Bermuda grass sodded. 100 by 100 is for larger dogs and 50 by 100 for smaller dogs. And then the smaller dog area will have one doggy crawl, one king of the hill, one rover jump over. So those are the three equipment going to be installed inside that. On the larger area, one doggy crawl, one king of the hill, one hoop jump. and one rower jump over. So four items. These these play items would be spread out throughout this area and sorted out and fenced completely. And there will be a sidewalk running from our entrance road all the way to the dog park. This is going to be located just next to the proposed fire station at the front.

Hmm. dogs and fire stations okay. To talk about liability was it for the construction liability cost of that liability of operating the park.

It is the, we specify what the certificate of insurance requirements are during construction. So this is the completion of the project.

Construction liability, not liability of operating the dog park.

Correct.

That's a different category.

Correct.

All right. And I know we settled on Southeast Athletic Complex, but, well, the contract is out there now. I won't back up to that. OK. So either we accept it or reject the bid is where we are, right?

It's at your leisure. If you wish for us to reject and revisit the discussion, make revisions to the scope of work, or do as you request us to do, then we do have the ability to reject all bids and rebid out the project at a later date.

Thank you very much. I know our city manager might want to take a look at it.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Ms. Wilma Washington.

Yes, we would need insurance once we do this dog park.

It is my understanding that it'll be managed, I believe, by Parks and Rec's department. So I'll defer to the city engineer for clarification.

it is general insurance that covers all the municipal activities that's you know probably our training will be able to just the gma insurance you said we do need insurance once one is built we don't need a separate uh insurance for this you know it is just like any other parks any any other insurance that is covered uh by a typical municipal government insurance uh

So if anyone gets bitten or dogs get hurt, it wouldn't reflect to the city?

That, you know, they can.

Legal.

Yes.

Yeah. As Mr. Karakoram already stated, the city is insured. So any claims as they come, depending on the circumstances, the city will address them.

Council, any other questions?

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Washington.

Yes, I wanted to ask you, did you all check around for how much a dog park of this size, you know, normally would run? I understand you were saying the cost of living and things raised up. Is this the almost $400,000 about roundabout what they would be paying right about now for a dog park?

What we did not check how much it costs in other places, but we had an engineering estimate which is much lower than. The big amount.

Thank you.

i'll entertain a motion. awesome in Turner.

I move to reject this. The proposal will reject to be it. And revisit.