City Council - Regular Meeting

It's

Good evening Stonecrest and welcome to our. Good evening Stonecrest and welcome to our City Council meeting. Today is Monday, July 27th. The time is now 617. I will now call this meeting to order. Madam City Clerk, can you be so kind and do the roll call?

Yes, we'll do. Good evening, everyone. Mayor Jasmine Cobble.

Present.

Mayor Pro Tem Tara Graves. Here. Councilmember Alicia Washington.

Yeah.

Council member George Turner.

Yeah.

Council member Karmisha Smith.

Present.

We have a quorum.

Thank you. Next on the agenda is invocation by our very own Mr. Jeremy Reed.

Good evening, everyone. Mayor, City Manager, Council, I thank you for this opportunity to stand before you this evening for this opportunity to share what I believe is going to continue to move Stone Quartz forward. Throughout scriptures, there is a theme for those who lead, and one of those themes is the call to stewardship. In Micah 6 and 8, it says, He has told you, O man, what is good, and what does the Lord require of you except to be just? and to love and to digitally practice kindness, compassion, and to walk humbly with God, setting aside any overblown sense of importance or self-righteousness. When I read this scripture, I thought about times where my mom said, and you know better. And I now wonder, why did she say you know better? It's not because I've experienced this particular thing before, but she was saying, I put something into you that you should be able to steward this moment better. And ultimately, she says, your character should be shown better in this situation. So in this scripture, there's three things that I want to point out to us today. The first one is to do justice. What that means is to steward your authority fairly and well. The second one is to love mercy, to steward your influence compassionately. And finally, to walk humbly with God. to steward your position humbly, knowing that you are accountable to someone that's greater than you. And in this situation, of course, it's God. But in your seats, you're accountable to the city of Stonecrest. So I have this question for you tonight. So as we gather tonight, maybe remember this. The question of stewardship is not whether we will leave a legacy, but what kind of legacy our stewardship will leave. And I hope that we found in our stewardship to be faithful. Let us pray. So, Father, in Jesus' name, we thank you for this day. Father, I thank you for this great counsel that you have allowed to lead this city and to move this city forward. Father, I ask now that you give them the spirit of stewardship, the stewardship over their minds, stewardship over their consciousness, stewardship over their ability to lead this city. Lord God, I ask now that they take this situation, they take this council, they take this city of God more seriously, Father, so they can understand in the direction that you lead them to go. Father, but more than that, Father, I ask that you give them the grace to give them the understanding that they will have to answer to someone greater than themselves. And Father, lastly, I ask God that you be with them. Give them the mindset, Lord God, to make the best decisions to move this city forward. And Father, I ask down your son Jesus' name to bless them and to keep them in all of their ways. In your son Jesus' name I do pray. Amen.

Amen.

Next on the agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance by... Councilman George Turner, District 4.

Let us face the flag and stand to our feet, please. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Next on the agenda is the approval of the agenda.

Before we move forward, Mr. Reid, can you come back to the podium.

Jeremy, my man, my man Jeremy. I've opened up 100 of these. Jeremy, Jeremy, Jeremy, thank you. Probably have a few of these by now, but we're gonna keep giving them anyway. Thank you for your word. I don't know if everybody knows, one, Jeremy, the staff member, but also, as you can tell, Jeremy's been given an assignment from above to lead his people. But double tasked with serving our public, both in the city and as a town. So I brag that we get to have a person like Jeremy who can not only bless us with his gifts and talents as an employee. On behalf of the rest of us, Council Mayor and your colleagues and certainly our community, we want to thank you for what you do here, but also thank you for what you do for our greater community. Serving any group is not easy. Rather, it's a congregation of folks or in a government.

But what you do, not just here, but out in our community is valuable.

I don't know if you all know what Jerry's position is, but he works in our communications department. One of his functions or his task rather is to share our stories with the community. Fantastic job doing that. But he does it in a space where God has led him. And we're so thankful that he's led you here. But thank you for your words of encouragement today. Trust me that we got the message. And we certainly appreciate that. On behalf of all of us, here's another small token of appreciation from us to you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much.

Thank you again mystery we appreciate you. Next on the agenda is the approval of the agenda Council. Is there any need for any adjustments. Councilman Turner.

Under. Oh, business. There are two items that we wanted to move to the next work session. First one is item B. That's the matrix for the fee study. And item C, that's the CID resolution.

And you want these items moved to the work session in August?

Yes. My chart shows item B, resolution for matrix fee study, and item E, cooperation agreement with the SLP-CID.

Any other adjustments? I would like to move executive session before public hearing. I would entertain a motion if it's no other changes. Councilman Turner.

Move for approval of the agenda, which is three stated adjustments, removing item B from old business, removing item E from old business, and executive session following public hearing. Second.

executive session following public comments before the hearing executive session following public comments second 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 three yay district four yay district five yay district one is yay Motion carries four to zero, the agenda is now approved. First item, next item on the agenda is the approval of meeting minutes for the special call meeting for June 8th of 2026. Council, have you had a chance to review the minutes for the special call meeting? And this is the one for, THE A.M. SPECIAL CALL MEETING ON JUNE 8TH. MAYOR POTEMPO. COUNCILMAN TURNER.

MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE SPECIAL CALL MEETING OF JUNE 8TH, 2026, 1130 A.M. I BELIEVE IT WAS.

Was it 11 a.m. or 11.30? 11.30. I did have one question. Mayor Cobble, was you on that meeting via Zoom? For June 8th at 11.30.

The morning meeting?

It said via Zoom, but I just didn't recall. So, Sonya, if you could just verify. Thank you. Did you, Councilman Turner? Is there a motion on the floor?

Yes, we did not receive a second.

OK, so can you restate your motion?

Was there any correction to the minutes on that date?

I'm sorry. You're just going to verify if mayor copper was in attendance. Councilman Turner.

Move for approval of the minutes may, I'm sorry, of June 28th, 2026 with any stated corrections.

June 8th.

June 8th.

At 1130. Second. 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 1 is yay. The special call meeting for June 8 at 1130 has been approved. based on our city clerk just verifying the information. Next on the agenda is the approval of the meeting minutes for our work session June 8th at 6pm. Council. Is there any need for adjustments?

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilman Turner.

Move for approval of the work session minutes of June 8, 2026. Second.

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. History for the district 5 in district one is yay the work session meeting minutes for June 8 has been approved. Or to 0. Next item on the agenda is the approval of the meeting minutes for the City Council meeting for June 22nd of 2026.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilman Turner.

Move for approval of the City Council meeting minutes of June 22nd, 2026.

Councilman Turner, I do have some unreadiness on this one. On these minutes, it stated that I, Mayor Pro Tem, made a motion. And I did not make a motion for the approval of Modine and Jenkins. That motion came from Councilwoman Smith. And the other thing I had a question about was it stated Mayor Cabo was away from the dais during the vote, but she was absent from the meeting during that vote.

No, no, that's not correct.

That's not correct.

I was away from the dais, but I was absent from the meeting. I was present in the meeting and on record, and then I returned to the meeting after my brief absence.

So I was not absent from the meeting. You was absent for that vote.

Which is what the minutes reflect, that I was not on the dais for the vote.

I know, but you left the building.

Correct.

And was not in attendance of the meeting. Was in attendance of the meeting.

You could not vote. You was not in the meeting. We had to contact you. I was here for the meeting on record. I was in and on camera. This is not even this is not even debatable. I literally was on. Right. It's not debatable.

She was absent for the vote. So it's not she wasn't at the dais, but she was not in the building and she was not via Zoom. So she was absent from the dais.

Not absent from the meeting.

You was absent for the vote, so that's why we had to change the vote.

Language right now says I was not at the dais. Does it not? You was absent. You was not in the building. Would you like to change the word from not at the dais to absent from the dais? Is that what you're saying?

Absolutely.

Absent from the dais is fine, but not your original comment was I was absent from the meeting. You couldn't make a vote because you wasn't via Zoom. That's not correct. I WAS IN THE MEETING. I LEFT THE BUILDING TO RESPOND TO A FAMILY EMERGENCY AND I RETURNED TO THE MEETING. I WAS ABSENT FOR AT THE DIUS. I WILL CERTAINLY ACCEPT. BUT TO SAY THAT I WAS ABSENT FROM THE MEETING IS FAR FROM THE TRUTH.

COUNCILMAN TURNER.

I HAVE TO CHANGE MY MOTION TO DEFERRAL OF THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM MAY 22ND UNTIL WE CAN REPLAY WHATEVER RECORD IS NECESSARY.

Now it's my turn. I'm sorry could you repeat your motion.

I move that we defer the approval of the minutes from June 22nd until we can validate. What's in the records.

The motion has been properly moved in a 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. District 4, district 5, district 1 is nay, motion carries 3 to 1. The approval of the meeting minutes for June 22nd has been deferred until it's reviewed to the next council meeting.

Yes, Mayor Cobble. I would like the city clerk to restate the call of that vote. I believe I heard two nays. Were there two or three nays? Right. Either way, no matter what the motion was, if you will recall the vote, please. In the microphone, please. If you'll say council member district blank vote, council member district blank vote, please.

Okay. We have Councilmember Alicia Washington, yay. Councilmember George Turner, yay. Councilmember Karmesha Smith, yay. Mayor Pro Tem, nay.

Next on the agenda is public comments. At this time, Madam City Clerk, would you please be so kind and read the rules for public comments?

Citizens wishing to make a public comment may do so in person. Citizens may also submit public comments via email to cityclerk at stonecrestga.gov by 2 p.m. 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 our first public comment is from linda miller

7, 5, 7, 0, no hollow road left on the Georgia 3, 0.

It's a button if you can push it in a turn. Is the light on?

OK. 7, 5, 7, 0, no hollow road left on the Georgia 3, 0, 0, 5, 8. I oppose this motion. um for the um recycling plant and i asked that even though i'm gonna put is your comment for the public hearing it didn't state that on your form if so that'll come after okay well they called me so okay that's right thank you

Chandra Cates.

Hi. Can you hear me? Yes, ma'am. My name is Chandra Cates and I live at 2035 Marbury Trace, Lithuania, Georgia. came here to address the issue of a neighbor that I live two doors away from. His address is 2025 Morbid Trace, Lithuania. He has his cars on his front yard that has not been moved in over years. He has a fence that is broken and torn. He has a deck that has collapsed, and he collects garbage from other places and continues to bring them onto his yard. His front of his house is littered with motorcycles, bicycles, Anything you name it he got it on the yard on the side of the House and the back of the House and it's the complete eyesore for the Community, so I would like to know what could be done about this. Thank you.

The next comment is from Deborah Taylor.

My name is Deborah talium and I live at 2019 charter manner and left on you in Marlboro coming some division i'm calling to. Really complain about the House next door, which is 2021 it's been vacant 2021 charter manner it's been about eight years and I tell you the grass is so hot, I mean trees growing up around my wonder her wonder poison abby nobody live there. They don't have any walls. They don't have any floors. When it rains in my sockets, I can see water coming through my sockets from they got a leak in their house. Not only that, I can hear like squirrels or rats or mice inside the walls. I mean, Cody, of course, would come over to the house. She'd find them. She'd pay the fine and go right back to being the same way it is. That's my complaint for today. It's not much, but it's a complaint. Thank you.

Karen Arrivillaga- Dave Marcus.

I'm Dave Marcus 6501 Rockland Road, Stonecrest District five. I'd like to mention two things. The first is in thinking about the second thing I've realized how much the Council has done this year to restore and to set the stage for further restoration of, um, well, really of confidence in our finances and our financial picture. You all have, uh, Re hired a very qualified auditing firm who knows the city and those a lot of cities. I do most of Atlanta. You have rehired somebody who is reported to be a very competent excellent and with high integrity finance director. You've put out a schedule for the rest of the audits a nice aggressive one. And I want to say I appreciate that very much. And that's all on that subject. I'm not setting the stage for a complaint. Y'all are really moving towards a responsible government of qualified professionals and, of course, let's not leave out the city manager.

Sorry.

We've not had audits in quite a while, other than the 22 which got done. And it was held up for reasons I don't know. There's been a lot of A lot of fuzziness around finances on the audits have cost us the withholding of I think 3.2 or 3.8 million dollars from the state. Which should still trickle in, but we didn't have it to spend in in the years we were supposed to get it because of those audits and i'm really glad you're doing them. What I really want to come to is that on July 2 there was a break in in city hall. And people are starting to wonder and ask questions. And even there are rumors about was it an opportunist break in a smash and grab where somebody or a gang came in, broke down doors and stole a bunch of stuff? Or was it targeted to specifically laptops and documents in the finance director's office and the city manager's office? And did they break in, or did they get in in some other way? I know you cannot speak about the progress of the investigation itself, and I would not ask you to. But if you could elucidate for the public a little more about the facts of the incident itself. I think that would be a good thing because nature abhors a vacuum and when there's not information out there, people fill it in and nobody really knows what to think. Was it targeted? Was it random? Nobody saw signs of doors that were busted in and it just the whole thing just seems a little a little odd. By the way, the press release, the initial one was appreciated, but I think we're asking for a little more detail that you can release given it's the description of the crime, nothing to do with the investigation. Thank you.

Angela Green.

Good evening. My name is Angela Green. I live at 2023 Marbury Trace. I'm in District 1 and I live next door to a hoarder. This issue has been going on for over eight years and it's been a struggle. And my neighbors, for them, it's their property value. For me, it's my health, my safety, and my property value. Living next door to a hoarder is a nightmare. I have photos of a collapsed deck, trash, remnants collected on the front porch, two broken down cars. I've been in this neighborhood for 20 plus years and it's heartbreaking. I could cry because it's just, it is so difficult to get help. I'm here today to ask for help. My help. Can you imagine going to your restroom where the shared wall is? And it smells like rancid meat, cigarette smoke, marijuana. The people live next door have no air conditioning. So I've had my roof replaced twice. I'm about to have it replaced again. And they've never had their roof replaced. So I'm not sure if it's mold over there. Some of my neighbors that have spoken, they've had rats. I've been looking. I think my place is sealed up pretty well. But living next door to them, at some point, that will be a $1,500 charge for me to have my place rid of the roof rats that some of my other neighbors have paid $1,500 to have their homes sealed up and the rats removed. As far as safety, the shared wall. Our roof is not separate, so having the gutters replaced, I paid before to have all the gutters replaced. But now I cannot ensure someone's safety that's replacing the gutters to go onto somebody else's property. I'm just here today again to ask you all for help and to find out how do I submit my photo of the crash in the junk in the front yard. I'm a gardener. I enjoy gardening. Have not been able to do that for a few years. Not as much as I'd like. Not as much as I'd like to because it smells horrid outside. There's a West Nile virus. As a scientist, it's scary for me to go outside to garden because it's sitting water. on that property. So I ask you please help any way you can. Thank you.

Tierra Liggins. Bernard Knight.

madam mayor mayor pro tem members of city council good evening i'm bernard knight i'm the chairman of the stonecrest lithonia industrial park community improvement district i'm here tonight to thank you for your uh unanimous vote on may 18th to create the cid and to report to you that on june 23rd the cid held its first elections and board meetings At that meeting, five members of the district board were elected to serve, including myself. They joined with the two members you had previously appointed in being sworn in, and they then chose Greg Wright as the CID executive director, Mr. Larry Kaiser, PE, as our civil engineer and infrastructure project manager, and me as chairman. We expect our tax revenues to begin arriving early in the fourth quarter of this year. A month ago, our District Board submitted to you and Assistant City Attorney Alicia Thompson our draft cooperation agreement with the City as the first step in negotiating the terms of the agreement. We are currently looking forward to hearing back from Attorney Thompson with the comments from her and this Council. At our June 23rd meeting, the District Board also voted to adopt a list of our top priorities. Some of them are Cooperate closely with the City of Stonecrest and its residents within the CID area. Reach out to residents within and near the CID area and work together on issues of mutual interest. Hire off-duty or private security to supplement police and code enforcement. Facilitate the removal of junk cars from public rights-of-way the cleanup of noncompliant blighted properties and removal of graffiti. Promote transparency by publicizing board meetings, issuing newsletters and developing a website. And promote the beautification of the CID and nearby residential areas. Our next meeting is August 18th. The details are available in On Common Ground News. The public is invited. And thank you very much.

That was our last public comment.

Thank you. Next on the agenda is executive session. I entertain a motion.

May I partake?

Councilman Turner.

I move that we go into executive session for just personnel. Are you going to go all four?

Just say all four.

I move we go into executive session for real estate personnel, cybersecurity and litigation.

Second.

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 three. district for your district by a district one is Jay motion carries 321. 3 to 0, I'm sorry. 3 to 0. We are now adjourned to executive session. Councilwoman Washington.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

We're about to go into executive session.

Okay.

I want to call you on the phone.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I was but everybody's waiting. Thank you stonecrest Council, I would entertain a motion to come out of executive session and return to our regular work.

Now for him.

Now from Turner.

Move to come out of executive session to return to the regular Council meeting.

second 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 three district three district four yay district five yay district one is yay motion carries 3, 2, 0. We are now back in our regular council meeting. Councilman Turner.

Move to approve the amendment from executive session. Second.

The motion has been properly moved and 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. District 4.

Yay.

District 5.

Yay.

District one is Jay motion carries 3 to 0. The minutes where the executive session has been approved. Next on the agenda is public hearing. Madam city clerk can you be so kind and read the rules for public hearing yes.

Citizens wishing to participate and comment during the public hearing portion of the meeting may comment in person. You may also submit your requests, including your full name, address, position on the agenda item you are commenting on, whether it is for or against via email to cityclerk at stonecrestga.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 turn 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 all public hearings. Only the applicant may reserve time for rebuttal.

Thank you. The first item on public hearing is RZ 26004, 7224 and 7226 Maddox Road by Director Q. Thank you, Mayor Fulton.

This is a City of Stonecrest initiated application requesting a rezoning of approximately 92.19 acres from M. light industrial to M2 heavy industrial to allow for various heavy industrial uses. A background on the parcels, the site is located near the intersection of Maddox Road and Rock Chapel Road. Maddox Road is the local Stonecrest Street. Rock Chapel is a major arterial state highway. The surrounding areas contain a mix of light industrial uses, such as truck parking and automotive related uses, compliant with the zoning district and the 2030 Stonecrest Comprehensive Plan. The requested uses include ready mix concrete plant, hot asphalt plant materials recovery facility. Outdoor processing operations include concrete recycling, wood paste processing, metal recycling, soil processing, grinding, crushing conveyors and stock piling of bulk materials. The city of Stonecrest zoning map has the property zoned as M light industrial. The property is currently the remnants of an abandoned rock quarry. The DeKalb County GIS map indicated that there is a floodplain along the northern property line of 7226 Maddox Road and along the property line that separates 7224 Maddox Road and 7226 Maddox Road. Public participation. Property owners from within 1,000 feet of the subject property will mail notices of the city of Stonecrest initiated application requesting the rezoning from M light industrial to heavy industrial. The community planning information meeting was held on June 11 at City Hall. There were 18 residents that did speak in opposition. During the public comment portion of the meeting, numerous numerous constituents voiced opposition to the request with concerns related to public health, air quality, noise, dust, traffic, road conditions, property values and the proximity of the facility to residential neighborhoods. The Planning Commission was held on July the 7th, 2026. Zoning map again has 7224 and 7226 currently zoned as M light industrial. The future land use map has this property classified as LIND, which is light industrial. This is a property location map. This is an aerial of the two parcels. Like photos. Like photos from a truck parking that's across the street from the subject property and the entrance of the property. person.

Map of town.

House woman Smith.

I have one question miss Cowie property owners within a a 1000 feet were email notifications. Bills actually mail mail sorry yes mail that's what I mean. About how many properties it is that I don't have that number on me okay. Map of my you.

Any other questions before we move into public hearing.

I have questions.

I didn't who said that me oh, yeah, the form is common thinking.

Director Covey your recommendation for this application. On July 7 was denial. Planning Commission, what is your recommend recommendation today.

I have a recommendation that this time. I'll defer to legal for further explanation.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. As it's been discussed with staff, and after review the analysis, we believe it's best that the decision to be totally in the hands of counsel. And so for now, the staff recommendation is neither approval or denial, but we'll leave the decision on the matter totally in the hands of counsel.

And when you say we please elaborate on who we Yes.

Staff.

Along with the director probably it's your position also that the staff has no recommendation this time had a recommendation on the 7th because staff believes that it should be in the hands of the Council.

At the advisement of legal yes.

that the advisement of legal staff believes that this recommendation should be in the hands of the council. Is it not always in the hands of the council to make the final decision on planning and zoning matters?

That is correct.

And have we not always historically listed a staff position when it has always been in the hands of the council? And repeat that question for me and we not always listed a staff recommendation and the staff report both in the planning Commission and at the Council meeting that is thing that is always in the hands of the City Council that's what makes this application different.

I will give it to legal to explain the detail of this particular rezoning case.

What would make this application different than any other when it's always in the hands of the City Council to make the final recommendation?

Uh, there is no difference because this is a city initiated rezoning as, um, any other city initiated rezoning would be. And so we would leave the decision totally in the hands of council and as a city initiated rezoning in the past. In the time that I've been here, I believe so, yes.

And has the staff not made a recommendation when the city initiated rezoning?

And I can answer that question.

But we are sure that the city has initiated zoning, rezonings in the past. We're just not sure today if the staff report had a different recommendation or no recommendation. Correct. I'm going to wait for it.

I apologize. Mayor Carbo, could you repeat your inquiry again?

Oh, no, no, that's trying to help. That one was illegal. The July 7th Planning Commission meeting, there was quite the conversation back and forth and what's the staff seeming seem to have a very Arch position on its recommendation of denial and then today. And the staff report has no recommendation and at the advice of legal is going to leave it in the hands of the City Council of which is always in the hands of the City Council and even though we've initiated reasonings in the past and the staff has made recommendations this particular application is slightly different. And the staff. Not making a recommendation today. but 20 days ago was very adamant about its position. I find that extremely peculiar, but noted.

Councilman Turner.

I too rely on staff recommendation for matters of this nature. And there have been times that I've looked for it and it was neutral. So to say that it always is there may not be totally true. I cannot point to a specific one, but I am one who has relied on that recommendation and there have been times that it has been neutral. So yeah, it does exist.

Council any other questions before we open it up for public hearing.

No more questions, I do have a comment. You have the floor. Director Q, I appreciate the work that the city staff has done to vet this rezoning application. Certainly we want our staff to ensure that rezoning applications meet our code of ordinances and certainly in the essence of protecting the city. So I did watch the Planning Commission meeting and do appreciate the work that the staff did. Understanding how the staff came to its recommendation of denial is clear in that meeting. If anyone watched it, it is very clear that the staff does not believe that the application meets our city standards, certainly does not comply with our comp plan. What is slightly odd is that the city would initiate rezoning and then justify why we should deny that rezoning after we initiated it. Slightly strange. But I do appreciate the work that the staff has done to ensure that we the public are made aware of the consequences, of course, of deviating from our ordinances and code that is for the protection of our community. I do want to make sure that it is clear that the staff had a position on July 7th in that Planning Commission meeting and then today, July 27th, that the advisement of legal no longer has a recommendation and is remaining neutral, as Mayor Pro Tem Emeritus put it, is remaining neutral. uh in any other application that the city has had whether it initiated or not one the staff had a recommendation two it's always been in even if that recommendation was neutral still a recommendation this packet however has a hash mark in it no words and no recommendation just assuming the position of neutrality and then also last but not least um And it's always in the hands of the city council to make the final decision, so this application should not be much different than any other in that regard. So I do appreciate the work that you all have done and certainly will leave it to the city council to make its final decision.

Madam representative. attorney Thompson and just for the record, I just want to state that. the city's code of ordinances does not require the staff to provide a recommendation. It is definitely something that, as Mr. Turner has said, has been a guidance for the city council, but it's not a requirement. And as you all will notice, the ordinance which the city attorney's office prepares also is completely neutral and blank because, again, we just wanted to leave this decision in the hands of city council. Thank you.

Council, I will entertain a motion to open up public hearing.

May I present?

Councilwoman Smith.

I move that we open public hearing. Or trying to find it. Or are the 26 dash 0047224 and 7226 med ox road.

Second.

The motion has been properly moved in 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 starting with district 3. district for the district five yay district one is yay motion carries three to zero, we are now. In public open for public hearing. And the applicant is here.

City Council. Miss clerk, if I could please reserve the last three minutes of my time for rebuttal. If you could cut me off at seven minutes, I'd appreciate that. I have a number of slides prepared for presentation tonight. But let me just jump right into the presentation that we were just having about this, the new staff report.

Is that better? Can you hear me?

Great. Thank you. Just a little background on this application. You know, I think it's no secret that this application, I think, originates out of the Metro Green litigation or the number of lawsuits related to the Metro Green litigation that have been pending, I think, now for in total probably about five years. And as of last fall, those lawsuits remain pending. They still technically remain pending today. But last fall, the city of Stonecrest came to Metro Green with an offer to try to resolve those cases. And that offer included finding a new site for Metro Green, an alternative site for Metro Green to be able to operate somewhere other than the Snapfinger property that I assume everyone here is familiar with. And so when Stonecrest came to Metro Green with that offer, Metro Green was happy to talk about it. Stonecrest proposed two sites that would be potential alternatives for a Metro Green operation, one of those being the Maddox Road site that we're here talking about tonight. in february of la of this year a settlement agreement was signed that i don't understand that's now on the public record and that settlement agree settlement agreement included uh the city filing the rezoning application that brings us all here this evening They mentioned this initial staff report. So after the rezoning application was filed, staff issued its initial staff report that recommended denial of this application, the staff report that we were just talking about. And there's really two reasons why staff issued that denial. One of them was legal technicality, I think Mayor Cobble was just alluding to, and the other was that staff had some questions and they wanted more information about the proposed uses that Ms. Quahle just listed off for us. Now, Mayor Cobble's point, the final paragraph of that initial staff report that recommended denial said that the application must be denied because the rezoning does not comply with the future comprehensive plan. that technicality has been solved because there is a proposed ordinance drafted by stonecrest council that's in the staff report in the agenda packet tonight that would amend that comprehensive plan to allow for this rezoning so it'd be my position that that technicality that was a one of the two bases for denial of the initial report has been solved uh as of this evening Secondly, the additional information that staff requested has been provided. It was provided between July 8th, July 23rd. Staff, the applicant were talking about those uses. We were asked to provide information regarding the proposed uses. the environmental permitting surrounding those uses, the potential impact on the neighborhood. We provided all that information to staff. That information is in the agenda packet that you all have in front of you. And obviously, between the proposed ordinance that I mentioned and the additional information that we provided staff, there is a level of comfort that staff has with this rezoning because they revoked their previous denial. I know Mayor Caldwell, you pointed out that they haven't taken a position positively or negatively regarding their amended report now. And that may be a practice here at Stonecrest. I'm a real estate attorney. I haven't done as many rezoning applications to some lawyers, but I've done a lot. I've never seen a staff report that doesn't issue that doesn't either give a recommendation of approval or denial. So I can't speculate as to why staff is not taking a formal position regarding this application. But what I can say is that their initial denial report which is exactly what the Planning Commission relied on in their recommended denial, has been withdrawn. So they're no longer recommending denial of this application. I think that's significant. But let me quickly turn. There are eight factors that are set forth in the Stonecrest ordinance that this council is supposed to weigh in determining whether or not a rezoning is appropriate. It's our contention that all of those factors weigh in favor of this rezoning and should lead to an approval of the application. Let me just gloss over them quickly. I think the major theme that you see in these factors is whether or not the proposed rezoning is consistent with the area where the rezoning will take place maddox road is a large isolated site it was a former rock quarry before stonecrest ever incorporated has always been an industrial site the area around it is industrial we have truck parking we have salvage yards we have the waste management uh transfer station uh that is just i think it's about a thousand feet from this site so the point being there is industrial all around this area This is not a rezoning where the city is asking for an industrial park to go in a primarily residential neighborhood or putting a residential use in a commercial neighborhood. This is more industrial in an existing industrial area on a site that has always been industrial. Also want to talk about the economic use of under the current zoning. This property has not been used to my knowledge in over 15 years because of the zoning. It does not its size. It's 90 plus acres. I think it's four times the size of Centennial Olympic Park. It cannot support a single light industrial use. You can't put a gym on 90 acres and expect it to survive economically. also want to touch on uh excessive impact on infrastructure there's a lot of questions about traffic about noise about those types of things and we've submitted those findings we've submitted reports that you'll find in the staff materials in the amend report the access point to this project would be exit 75 on i-20 it's approximately two miles north on highway 124 that is an existing industrial highway full of Tractor trailers, dump trucks. That is the primary traffic that goes up and down Highway 124 of the site. Coming north on 124, you make a left turn onto Maddox. You pass a truck parking lot. You pass a salvage yard. You turn right into this site. There's no residential areas on that primary access route. It doesn't go through any neighborhoods. And like I mentioned, it's already industrial traffic on that corridor. I also wanna touch on environmental economic benefits to the city of Stonecrest. This recycling center, it is not a landfill, right? There are no materials that are permanently stored on this site. There are six or seven recycling-related uses that are coming onto the site. We're taking on C&D. We're taking on concrete you might have pulled out of a driveway. We're taking on wood waste that a landscaper might have cut down trees. They bring those to this site. We process those materials on site, and they are hauled off. There's no hazardous materials on the site. There is limited utility use. It's on an existing septic system. And with that, I appreciate it. I will reserve my last three minutes for rebuttal. Thank you.

Thank you, is there anyone speaking in favor. Is there anyone speaking in favor. Is anyone speaking in opposition.

Linda Miller.

Hi. Linda Miller, 7570 Noel Hollow Road, Latonia, Georgia, 30058. He stated that there are no subdivision. Right at Maddox Road, and I post, right at Maddox Road, on 124 and Rock Chapel, there is a subdivision that's there. When you get to Maddox Road and you turn right at the Texaco and you go all the way behind there and you go so far, there are some homes and everything that's back there. So for him to say that there's no subdivision on Rock Chapel and 124, there is. Because my subdivision is right across the street where he's talking about a truck stop that's being built. So what we're going to do have truck stops all along Rock Chapel and 124. That's what we're going to have. What about all the other things that can be added on to Rock Chapel and 124? That's hurting our health. And it's hurting our property values. Our homes haven't been up at free size subdivision. I don't think for five years because I bought my home in 2022. So I oppose it. And I don't think that you vote for it at all. And I feel as though if you choose to, then what we need to do, we need to replace anyone that vote for it. That's our stand on.

The others were sent via email.

Anyone else in the audience speaking or opposed?

Mayor Cobble, I appreciate what you said and what you were asking. How does the staff have a recommendation and the legal taps them on the shoulder and all of a sudden they don't? I don't think they change their minds totally voluntarily. And I think you should consider that their heartfelt recommendation is not to approve this. Second, I know you all want to do what is best for the city. If you do vote for this, you're going to need to explain why your neighbors to your families to people who you want to support you for your next election, you are going to need to explain why and so far. All we know is it's tied up in the final settlement agreement that you agreed to in January. But even after paying to get an open records copy of it, the core of that because the city agreed with Metro Green not to tell anybody signed an NDA and then let Metro Green review the open records request and decide what would be released. We still have no idea. And if you do not explain why after voting yes on this, well, you're not going to get reelected, and you're not going to be real popular. That's all I'll say. The reasons not to do this are lengthy. Those of you who, like the mayor, looked at the Planning Commission meeting know what they are. If you looked at the CPIM meeting, you know what they are. Um, and as for the technical reasons that the gentleman representing Metro Green said, there is no item on this agenda that I can see with my eyes. And please correct me if I'm wrong. That says there is an ordinance to change the future land use map to make that little discrepancy go away. It's not on the agenda tonight. Unless I maybe I didn't get the third page, but we will see. And we will be watching all of you and your votes.

Anyone else speaking in opposition? You can read what's online. Thank you.

You're welcome. The first comment is from Renee Cal, Ms. Isom, and Councilwoman Smith. I hope you are enjoying this new Monday. I'm writing this letter because I'm shocked that the council initiated a project that is very detrimental to the city of Stonecrest. Since Ms. Smith is a new council member, I feel confident that she will not follow the reckless behavior of her colleagues. I am stunned that our mayor and the city council sat and allowed Metro Green and Greenland LLC to bring anything as destructive and environmentally as this plant can be. I am deeply concerned about the potential risk this project poses to our community safety and well-being. I urge the city to pause implementation and work with community members to find safer, more sustainable alternatives. Our community values progress, but not at all expense of the community. To begin with, Metro Green previously operated in DeKalb County with no regard for the residents whatsoever. Metro Green violated regulations on Miller Road as they should have never been allowed to operate solid waste in a light industrial zone. Metro Green obtained an illegal permit from the Environmental Protection Division. Stonecrest City officials welcomed Metro Green into the city when Stonecrest had no legal authority to do so. Metro Green is not truthful about the dangers of mixing concrete. Mixing concrete on or near residential properties pose significant health, environmental, and structural hazards. Particles get into the air, which cause chronic lung disease. and wastewater from washing tools or mixing sites is high in pH and contains heavy metals or fine silt that can poison local soil, kill nearby plants, and damage neighboring yards or water sources. Dust accumulation can drift into neighboring properties, which lower property enjoyment and values. It is not true that streams, wildlife, wetlands will not be impacted. The Mayor and City Council should have never agreed to the demands of Metro Green. Many of the materials they plan to crush, such as asphalt, metal recycling, are hazardous to the residents' health. The Mayor and the Council do not have the right to exercise the power of zoning that is not aligned with the City's charter and comprehensive plan. The developers should build this harmful project somewhere else and see how their residents like it. The Council should speak against environmental racism and stop turning a deaf ear. Why isn't our city booming like Cumberland, Dunwoody, Alpharetta, Buckhead, and Tucker? We have an eight-year-old city with what economically sound development? Zoning ordinances are enacted to protect us, not to destroy us. Do the right thing, City Council. Peace, Renee Cowell. All right. The next one is from Jennifer Wilson. Dear Mayor Cobble and members of the Stonecrest City Council, I am writing to respectfully urge you to vote no on any effort to fast track approval of RZ 26004, 7224 and 7226 Maddox Road before the community has had the opportunity to participate in the public engagement process that has already been scheduled. I am deeply concerned that a vote appears to be moving forward before community stakeholders have been properly heard. The City canceled the July 9, 2026 Community Planning Meeting at the last minute and rescheduled it for August 13, 2026. If that meeting is intended to gather public input, why is a vote being considered beforehand? Approving this proposal before hearing from the community puts the process out of order and undermines public trust. This proposal has significant implications for stonecrest. Many residents are concerned that relocating the Metro Green and Greenland material recycling center would further impact our environment by reducing green space, increasing noise, dust, truck traffic and emissions potentially affecting groundwater and wildlife and negatively impacting nearby property values. Whether residents support or oppose the project, they deserve a meaningful opportunity to be heard before any final decision is made. I am currently out of town with my family and cannot attend tonight's meeting in person, but I wanted my concerns to be part of the public reference. I respectfully ask each member of the City Council to honor the public engagement process by postponing any approval until after the August 13th community meeting has taken place and residents have had the opportunity to provide input. Please demonstrate your commitment to transparency, due process, and meaningful public participation by voting no on fast tracking this item tonight. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Jennifer Wilson. The last one is from Piper Bunch to the Mayor and Council. I come to you as a South DeKalb resident who has fought against Metro Green for six years. Please do not allow Metro Green to operate in our community. Have you been on the proposed new location? There are homes on that street. There are subdivisions within a few miles of that location. To crush concrete is to put carcinogens into our air. You do understand that air will travel to all of us in South DeKalb. why would you put this community at risk again? To the new council members, please don't let the transgressions of the former mayor and city council members cause you to vote against the lives of your constituents. And that is time.

Thank you, can you hear me now, would you like to come up and. address any of the concerns from the people with opposition.

Yes, thank you. I think I've got three minutes left, so let me... There's a lot to respond to. Let me be as quick as I can. I know, Mayor Cobble, you posed a question, I think, to Ms. Quahle. I think Ms. Miller brought up the point about residential in the vicinity. If you look at the current Stonecrest zoning map, there is a small cluster of residential properties on Maddox Road, about 1,000, 1,500 feet from this site, okay? Say there's 10 or 12. About half of those or more than half of those are either abandoned homes or they are residential properties that are not being used for residential areas for residential use. Excuse me. So if there's 12, there's maybe 234. I don't know the exact number of actual residences within 1000 or 1500 feet in Stonecrest closest property. But more importantly, if you look at the future land use map, those 10 or 12 residential properties are gone. They are per they look at the future land use map. All of those residential areas that are close to this property in Stonecrest are designated industrial. So per the future land use map, those are not gonna be residential properties anymore. Secondly, to the uses, I heard the clerk read the emails, a lot of concerns about, and there was a lot of concerns in CPI meeting about the potential uses. look at the materials in the amended staff report we've submitted environmental studies we've submitted noise studies we've submitted details about the very strict permitting structure that surrounds all of these proposed uses we don't just show up and get to operate we have to get epd permits we have to get clean air permits we get inspected we get re-inspected we get surprise inspector there's lots of rules that we have to comply with that are set by the federal state governments that if we don't comply with, we can't operate. And we're even more that we're subject to huge fines. Metro Green has a long history of being a responsible operator. Lastly, I think Mr. Marcus got up here and asked why we should approve this. I'd urge you to look at this slide. Everybody in this room wants Stonecrest to grow. In order to grow, Stonecrest has to build. When you build things, you create C&D waste, drywall, plywood. Concrete. Right now, there's nowhere for those materials to go in Stonecrest. Nowhere to take them. And as a result, this is what you get when there's nowhere for C&D materials to go. This is a recently active illegal dump on Randall Road in Stonecrest. It is astounding. You have shingles. You have other ways. That's a 40-something foot tall warehouse that you have things dumped on illegally. allowing a recycling plant like the one that's proposed here eliminates the need for this problem it gives somewhere for all of this stuff to go and better yet that facility will create recyclable products that go back into the stream of construction we take concrete we grind it up we create materials that are used in roads we take trees we take limbs we make mulch we take things that would otherwise end up in a legal dump like this or in a landfill, and we create new and reusable materials. We do it in a safe and responsible way. We have a history of doing that. Thank you very much. I appreciate consideration, and we'd urge you to support this application. Thank you.

Excuse me, ma'am. Excuse me. Counsel, do you have any questions for the applicant, staff, or legal? After we entertain a motion to close public hearing.

I'm going to close public hearing on Aussie 26 that 0, 0, 4, 7, 2, 2, 4, and 7, 2, 2, 6 matters rule.

The motion has been properly moved in second by councilwoman Smith. Are you ready for the question? All those all those in favor please reply with yay all those opposed with district 3. Starting with district 3. History for the district 5, yeah. One is yay. Public hearing is now close. Council. Do you have any questions for the applicant. And we didn't want to know.

They pretend I have questions for staff leave.

Mayor cobble you have the floor or to call me when you come to the point.

The applicant mentioned that the concerns listed in the staff report from the Planning Commission meeting had been satisfied. I believe you referred to the second major issue. I think the first one was something very general to a legality, but the second was concerns relating to the zoning. Can you either affirm or deny that those concerns concerns were met.

Staff did ask for recommendations or clarification on the information that was from the applicant before. The environmental report that's in the packet is what was submitted to staff.

After you reviewed that environmental report, what was the staff general's assessment of the concerns that were related to environmental issues and post the environmental report?

that information is still not warrant any additional changes to the report. But the uses, as far as Attorney Arnold did state, that we did get clarification on the uses based on the request to rezone.

but we have an environmental report and we have an explanation of its possible uses.

Yes, from Mr. Arnold.

From the applicant, okay. Even after receiving that in reviewing that staff still obviously took a position of neutrality in this report. Did that have any effect that those items being satisfied have any effect on that neutrality?

It did provide clarification. But the initial process and again, there was no change.

Okay, thank you, Dr. Foley. I have a question for the applicant. I know you only had three minutes, so you went really quickly on a couple of things that were mentioned in the public comment, but I want to go back through them a little more slowly. One of the constituents mentioned a truck stop, and I don't recall a truck stop being a part of the uses or the use that you... provided to the planning director as one. Can you confirm that a truck stop is not a use that you recommended?

That's absolutely correct.

You stated that the nearest neighborhood was roughly between a thousand and fifteen hundred feet from this site. I get that right? In the city of Stonecrest, yes. And that in our future land use map, it shows that the city would consider those within that 1,500 feet or so to be industrial uses in our future land use and not residential as they are in our current. Is that correct?

That's correct. If you compare the current zoning map with the 2036 map, And under the current map, there's 10 or 12 yellow residential properties on that current map that are about 1,015 feet, 1,500 feet from the property. Like you said, if you look at the 2036 map, those 10 or 12 properties are all purple industrial on the future map.

Okay. Now I do understand that there are neighborhoods on Maddox Road, Maddox Road not being a small road by any stretch. There are neighborhoods on Maddox Road, but you're saying that what is within 1500 feet from this particular site. um is 10 to 12 parcels of which have no usage today at all don't appear to be residential by use and that our future land use doesn't even classify them as that is that correct correct so you know on that western end of maddox road in the vicinity of the site i don't think it's a formal neighborhood i think there's five or six houses on the south side of residential lots again i don't know which

which each is being used for. I think a few of them are current residences. I know some of them are abandoned, some of them appear to be industrial uses, but a few of them are on the south side of Maddox Road, a few of them on the north side of Maddox Road. I don't think it's a traditional neighborhood, if that's what your question is. Okay.

But recognizing that there are neighborhoods on Maddox Road. East, away from maybe your particular site, but certainly do exist on Maddox Road.

That may be the case. I'm not familiar with the entirety of Maddox Road, really just familiar with the West End, but in the vicinity of the site within, you know, quarter mile, half mile plus,

there's no residential other than ones that i mentioned that i'm aware of okay uh in the i think it was one that the clerk was reading um someone mentioned that there would be some environmental hazards as a result of crushing materials that were hazardous but i think you mentioned in your opening that nothing hazardous was going to be crushed recycled so on and so forth um Can you kind of elaborate again on, and I know you mentioned some of the wasted material was more like construction material, plywood, shingles, things like that. Can you differentiate between what material would be environmentally unconscious that you all supposedly are not going to be doing versus what you will be doing. If you'll walk through that a little bit slower.

Sure. So to be extremely clear, first of all, there's no what would be classified by the APD as hazardous materials except at the site. So take, for example, asbestos, something like that, not allowed at our site, not accepted. Secondly, there's no municipal solid waste accepted at this site meaning there's no garbage except at this site we don't take general trash that you might put out in the can by the street to be picked up by the trash truck that those types of materials are not accepted at this site what is accepted this i think you just said it is what's called colloquially c d construction and demolition material so um imagine you were doing uh we'll use the example the the ladies are up here talking about the dilapidated homes say one of those dilapidated homes was being torn down. Okay. And so there's a collapsing deck in the back. Usually you see a rollaway dumpster that gets put in the driveway as they tear it out. So they take the lumber out of the deck, they throw it into the dumpster, and that dumpster might end up at our facility. And That lumber might go through a grinder. It gets crushed up, created mulch, and then shipped off again. And just to be clear, you know, concrete's another material that we take. You talked about the crushing, and there's more information about this in the environmental study that we submitted. There are strict requirements about dust control when it comes to this type of operation. It's measured in dust. The EPD measures dust in opacity. So it's basically how thick is that dust that you're creating. And I think they use calculations by proxy. The thicker the dust, the idea is the further it might dissipate. so there's a there's a strict i think it's a strict 20 limit that we can have on the dust opacity that is measured by uh the epd also on the issue of dust just to point out again this is a very large site it's over 90 acres it is also insulated uh by dense forest uh i think we have about 100 feet of dense forest on all sides so even to the extent that uh there is dust created we also uh Those these crushes that we use. They use a water spray system to mitigate that dust. So as the rock is being crushed, it's being sprayed with water that dissipates the dust. So between the requirements are already, you know, forced to comply with by the EPD that we do comply with through the EPD. We have those treatment systems. We also have just large space and trees. All of that under the permitting regime that we are required to abide by contains all that dust on site in a way that is approved by the federal government and approved by the state of Georgia EPD.

Last question for you, then I have another one for Director Coyle. I believe that you mentioned in your first seven minutes, a comp plan or some ordinance change, and then Mr. Marcus referred to that same thing. Can you restate what that was?

Yes, and if Stonecrest Council has any, wants to correct me, but I'll be happy to try to explain it as best I can, unless you want to take it, Alicia.

Absolutely, thank you. So at the current moment, and Ms. Kari, I don't know if you want to speak to it either. At the current moment, the property sits in, um the property sits um in an area in accordance with the 2038 comprehensive plan that is um zoned for light industrial um so in order for it to for the heavy industrial to fit the city council will have to essentially amend the comprehensive plan. And until that amendment happens, and if that amendment happens based on your agreement or disagreement with the matter before you today, then the property can be rezoned. So in order to have a rezoning, we do need an amendment to the comprehensive plan. Because as it stands right now, the property sits on in an area that is currently zone for light industrial use in the 2038 comprehensive plan.

i think if i could chime in i mean i think when you're rezoning a property you're changing it from classification a to classification b and when obviously in the future land use map it's a it's not b and so in order to effectuate the rezoning as a as a legal matter you've got to pass that ordinance that changes it from A to B. So it's kind of just a matter of standard legal process that when there's a vote to rezone a property, you also have to have this ordinance that amends the future land use map to reflect that rezoning that's being approved. Right. I got you. Okay. So I'm going to just restate that. So

Those of us who are common can follow that. If the City Council were to approve the rezoning, then the natural next step would to also amend the comprehensive future, the comp plan, the future land use so that it reflects what was approved in the rezoning. You wouldn't rezone the application and then not subsequently make the change on the map.

That's exactly right. I think both of the that's the two agenda items related to application that are on there tonight. I believe there's one for the, you know, the rezoning application itself. And the second agenda item is for the ordinance that we're talking about.

Well, I do not see the comprehensive plan listed separately unless it is a part of the rezoning package.

So I would ask that because we wanted to keep kind of the package and the information neutral because we wanted to adhere to whatever direction the city council were to go with if the city council voted to approve this amendment I would ask that in the vote you all also adopt an amendment to the comprehensive plan when we've done it in the past the comprehensive plan amendment and the rezoning was in the same zoning ordinance, but because we didn't know which way we were gonna go in this matter, Whatever is in the actual statement of the vote is how the ordinance will be amended, as I stated before. Right now it is completely blank. It is a blank template. So if you all do amend the city's zoning map to approve this, Rezoning, I would ask that in that vote you also amend the comprehensive plan to also approve this rezoning.

Understood. Just restate that to make sure we all understand it. There's multiple parts to the rezoning. We want all of our documentation maps included to reflect the same information. So if the rezoning is approved and everything that the rezoning affects, which would include the future land use and the comprehensive plan would also need to reflect the change in the rezoning. So it is not any any foreign concept or any kind of a backdoor recommendation it is simply to make all of the um supporting documents match the decision um so i understand so hopefully that clears up um what you were referring to one thing uh there is a draft ordinance that's been proposed that's in the agenda packet for this evening's meeting yeah yeah yeah i did it was just uh we have in the past have seen them as two separate items um but but i understand um this has been quite the unique handling of this application in which this one too is now uh the comprehensive plan and the map is separate from the rezoning i mean i understand both ways it's just a little different than we've done it in the past um thank you i have one more question for the director probably So you received these recommended changes or the compliance to our policy. You've received the environmental report. Obviously, if the rezoning was approved and subsequently, so with the comprehensive plan and all of our maps, we've heard now that the environmental issues related to crushing or any airborne environmental issues are supposedly rectified through the explanation from the applicant we've heard that the closest neighborhood within 1500 feet not Maddox Road totally but just within 1500 feet or so is the closest neighborhood in which our future land use calls for that to be There's not a truck stop in the use. And so you've heard kind of all of this rebuttal-ish from the applicant. Is the staff's position still that you would deny, that you would recommend denial, even with all of the considerations and considering, obviously, that we initiated the rezoning to begin with? Not what legal has advised you, but what is the staff's recommendation based on compliance with our code?

The review of staff's report remains the same. Any additional information?

Thank you.

A clarification on the request as well. For the rezoning, there is a comprehensive plan amendment. This area is light industrial, so you will be changing from light industrial to a head.

Understood. I yield. Mayor Patel.

Mayor Patel. Mr. Kyle, we stay right where you are. Can you cue the site photos again. I believe it's from staff. Right there. That's good. That's good. Based on these site photos, this is actually what is on the site right now.

That's correct.

Okay. Keep thumbing through the rest of them and take a look at what's being used on the M1. Now, in my package, you have a lot more photographs than that.

The photos that were in the... packet from the applicant we took these pictures actually some of those pictures do represent um what is being proposed they may not be actually what's on site so it's just a visual correct of what um the anticipated request for um the uses are to give you a visual of what they will actually look like and back up to the first four

Okay. Even looking at an area photograph, there's a lot of activity going on now in M1. And I'm trying to see how this would change on the M2 in terms of what else we might see. Because I have concerns about the crushing. And I know under the previous discussion, we talked about containing any crushing that might take place. uh to indoors and uh did i not read that in the package that uh that is a proposal that all crushing would take place indoors absolutely i'm not

The application doesn't propose indoor crushing. That's really not a practical use. If you see any kind of C&D recycling site, there's ones all around Metro Atlanta. Those are all crushing as an outdoor activity. Again, it is contained with dust control measures. There is an indoor use proposed. If you look at the site plan, it's called a materials recovery facility. That is effectively a sorting facility. So if you imagine the rollaway dumpster I mentioned, that might have cardboard in it. It might have wood in it. Those materials will be taken in that site, sorted in that site into piles of wood, piles of cardboard, paper, whatever that may be. And then once they're packaged, they're hauled off the site. That is the indoor activity of the site.

And the same thing with burning. Is there any specific processes for burning?

There's no burning. I'm sorry to interrupt you. There's no burning at the site.

No burning on the site. I want to make that clear because you have wood processing, yada, yada, yada. So there will be no

burning of materials on the site absolutely no burning on site the the wood processing is effectively mulching so imagine uh the big wood chippers that you might see a tree crew have we have a big one of those we feed wood through it it creates mulch there was a question about stockpiling what's the limit on stockpiling So there's strict regulations on stockpiling. I think it's a matter of hours that you can keep materials on there. So for instance, imagine the mulch that I'm using for an example. Once it's crushed, I think we have 24 hours to get it off the site. Nothing, no waste that enters the site is stored for any significant period of time. Everything that comes in goes back out very quickly.

There was a mention of floodplain. Once you subtract the floodplain, how much acreage is left?

I would direct you to the environmental study that we submitted that has a flood delineation that shows the exact floodplain. The floodplain is a very small area. The north of the property, it's in the existing tree line. It won't be encroached upon. The trees are not going to be disturbed. Everything is going to be left at the site the way you saw in those pictures right there.

Okay. Go back over to the buffer again. You have nearly 100 acres. How much buffer is built in and guaranteed for the site on all four corners?

So for that specific information, I'd refer you to the site plan that's in the application. I've gone through with Ms. Quahle's staff, I think, a number of iterations of that site plan that show all the setbacks. Again, we have over 100 feet of dense forest around the entire circumference of the property. And on top of that, I don't have the footage and I don't have the site plan in front of me, but we're complying with all federal, state, local setbacks in terms of the future activity. We've also been very intentional. If you're going to look at that site plan, we are positioning the... we back up if you look at the site plan we lay out in boxes where the proposed uses are expected to be they're all way back inside tucked in the 90 acres so it is not as if we're operating near the existing tree line we're tucked back into that kind of back uh north central area of this property that abuts uh unincorporated to cab it's an industrial undeveloped industrial property to the north so we are to answer your question briefly packing everything in as closely as we can so that it's as far away from everything else around us as possible

Ms. Cowley, is there a required buffer on the M2? I mean, what is the required buffer?

I don't have the development regulations on me because we are here to specifically specifically get direction on what the uses will be. Again, these are two separate parcels. So as Mr. Arnold did state that the the the uses will be confined within both parcels. But again, there are two separate parcels. So we're going to make sure that if there is a confirmation that those uses are identified with the proper buffers in the required buffer.

With these two separate possible, will they be combined as one at some point here?

That's something we haven't discussed. If I could back up one second on the uses. This rezoning application is just the first part of the process. We have also submitted to staff special use applications for each of the uses. So all of those uses that we're talking about tonight, I know this is about the rezoning. I know we're kind of getting into the uses themselves. But all of those uses that we're proposing will be back before this council under the guise of special use permit applications, at which time we'll have the opportunity to give any additional information, answer any questions that you guys or the public may have about that. Again, tonight is just about the rezoning, and I'll be back. We're already on the next cycle to discuss in more detail specific uses. So I'm happy to provide any additional information as part during that process.

Thank you. Ms. Cowley, I'm asking you to repeat yourself on a couple of the things that are unique to M2 versus M1 that is being asked for here. I believe that were about six or seven the uses that are permitted in M2 that are not permitted in M1 that's being asked for in this application.

that was out during the crushing, the heavy industrial part of it, but I had to list permitted uses.

Yeah, it's in the package. I have it. I just wanted to emphasize it so you can come back to it, okay? And I keep hearing the word about carcinogens. How do you measure whether or not that is a potential risk? Has that been measured? Either one of you.

I think that's a specific term that I want to be careful about. Concrete is primarily sand and other similar aggregates. There's an environmental study. You look at the environmental permitting that we have to obtain from the state, from the federal government. If there were carcinogens, i.e. toxic materials, toxic emissions, emanating from the site, it wouldn't be allowed in the first place. There's no hazardous materials that are coming in, and our position would be there's no carcinogens, there's no toxic fumes, however you want to describe it. None of that type of material or byproduct is created by any of the proposed uses of the site. Okay.

Although I understand, and I really wanted to see those slides about what is going on on the property right now. So can you describe what the property is being used for at this moment?

The property is not being used at all. as far as I know, has not been active in any way for at least 10, closer to 15 years prior to the incorporation of Stonecrest. Back when it was still part of unincorporated DeKalb, it was a rock quarry at some point. This is back in probably the early 2000s. But once that rock quarry operation ceased, again, this is somewhere in the 2000s, maybe 2010, it has not been used at all since. It hasn't generated any business activity, hasn't generated any significant jobs, tax revenue for the city. It's effectively just been sitting vacant for over a decade now.

Mayor Pro Tem, I yield for this time being.

Thank you. Council, do you have any other questions?

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

I think I'm about to get my answers before we, okay.

Councilman Turner, you asked for the uses, the permitted uses in both zoning districts. Light industrial has industrial uses of what's permitted is what you're asking, correct? Alternative energy building materials or lumber supply establishment, general contractor, contractor, heavy construction, outside storage. Special trade contractor, a crematorium, but there's special regulations for that in another section. Fabricated metal manufacturer with EPD permit required, light manufacturing, general aviation, and light industrial, heavy equipment repair, service or trade, manufacturing light, outdoor storage, industrial. Again, see a specific section, 4.2. Railroad car classification yards, recovered materials, recovered materials processing wholly within a building, recycling collection, recycling plant, transportation equipment, truck stop, vehicle yard, storage yard, warehousing or storage. In the heavy industrial, the permitted uses for industrial are listed as alternative energy, a brewery, general contractor, outdoor storage, special trade, a distillery, fabricated material, manufacturing without EPD permit required, light manufacturing, heavy industrial, light industrial, manufacturing heavy, again, see Section 4.2, manufacturing light, manufacturing operations not housed within a building, mines or mining operations, quarries, asphalt plants, gravel pits or soil pits, outdoor storage, railroad or car or car classification yards or teen truck yards, recovered materials, recovered materials processing wholly within a building, recycling, recycling plant research, and testing facilities.

Thank you. I accept because I believe we have the option if we were to choose to approve with restriction of some of those uses.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. I apologize for breaking the air.

Thank you, Councilman Turner. Councilwoman Smith, you now have the floor.

Thank you, Councilman Turner snatched it from me, but it's okay. I do have a few questions, actually. On the same note as Councilman Turner, I just want to be explicit here, and this is probably for the applicant. With the current zoning and the list of things that you all are planning to do, is there anything on your list that you are planning to do that you can do within the current M-1 zoning?

So a little bit of a history lesson on this property. Around the time the quarry operation was going on, while this property was still part of unincorporated DeKalb County, this is a prior property. think prior property owner two or three property owners before they did obtain two special use permits from dekalb county uh one for the asphalt plant one for the concrete plant those are the same uses that we're proposing now the applicant's proposing now but in the interest of transparency in the interest of informing everyone about what we're what we're doing we are going back through the process of obtaining special use permits again. So to answer back to your question, I think the answer to that is yes, there could be asphalt plants now. There could be concrete, ready mix concrete plant now based on those historical special use permits that were issued about 20 years ago. But, you know, again, we're coming back to Stonecrest in good faith and as a good neighbor and saying, you know, we want to have those effectively re-approved. So to answer your question, yes, we could do concrete now. Yes, we could do asphalt now. But we're back asking for permission again, notwithstanding.

Director Cowie. Don't go anywhere. Director Cowie, you heard what was just stated. Can you confirm or deny?

I'm going to clarify that has a special land use does not run with the property if it's not existing continuously. If it has stopped operation during that time from six months to a year, unless it was a special condition associated with that property, then it will run with the property. But a special land use permit is just that, a special land use permit and the discontinuing use of that particular request does not continue to exist. So if the concrete or the is not currently in existence. It will not continue unless there is a request for another special land use permit.

Okay, thank you. And from what we've heard, it is not in existence right now. There's nothing going on in the property right now.

Okay. Those two uses we've already applied.

Okay, thank you.

As it relates to the number of properties that is closest applicant You stated 10 to 12 within 1000 to 1500 feet, approximately 10 to 12 in Stonecrest that stuck out to me. Are there any residential properties that are not zoned in Stonecrest that are within that 1000 to 1500 feet?

there is a there is to the north and to the east of our property uh between this property and there is the martin marietta quarry that's an unincorporated cab between those two sites about 1500 feet get a similar distance there is a a new residential area that's going in unincorporated cab but again a similar distance from all the other residential properties that are in stonecrest

Okay, so the answer is yes, yes, okay, thank you for that. As it relates to. Mr. Turner talked about things that could possibly be done indoor, and you said that concrete crushing is not something that can be done indoor. Is there anything on your list, the seven things that you're planning to do, that can be done in a closed-in area?

no not other than the sorting activity that i mentioned earlier no these are all traditional outdoor activities and something i should have mentioned earlier is that we have similar a similar crushing two similar crushing operations one on pleasant dale road in gwinnett county uh and one on the west side kind of in west midtown um also there so those are all outdoor activities that are that gwinnett county said is fine with them that fulton county said was fine them there again they are because of their size these are crushers that are probably 30 40 feet tall And even even longer and there's a you know you've got piles of aggregate you've got you know workers going around it's just not a suitable indoor use. couldn't safely be done inside.

Okay. In your regulatory oversight and permit renewals, the public safety and regulatory oversight section, you mentioned periodic inspections by EPD and or municipal enforcement staff. periodic as in do you guys have any any suggestions or you you'll take whatever, if this is approved, you'll take whatever the staff recommends as the the enforcement or the the frequency of inspections, pop in inspections, those type things.

there's several different layers of of kind of inspections that we're subject to um you know federal state and local i mean we'd invite anybody to inspect any of our sites at any time i i invited staff to come look at um our pleasantdale plant in person they weren't able to coordinate it but those are the additional pictures that i think mr turner was referring to in the packet um so we are subject to inspections before we can operate We get set up, we've got a call, EPD come out, look at what we've set up. Does it comply with all the regulations? They say yes, then we can begin to operate. Once we begin to operate, they inspect us again. Are you complying with... The noise ordinance are you complying with water requirements dust requirements all those things were subject requirements at startup we're subject to I think they're six month periodic inspections, just as a matter of course, and like you mentioned we're always subject to. You call it surprise or inspection anytime but we'd welcome that because we have a long history of operating in compliance with all of the regulations that we have at the federal level at the state level. in Gwinnett County and Fulton County, and Metro Green, quite frankly, has a very clean track record of operating in compliance with everything they've got to comply with.

Your application states that dust, noise, water, discharge, and environmental impacts, they're going to remain below regulatory thresholds due to the various mitigation options you've put together. Is there going to be any independent or third-party verification that is done prior... I mean, has there been on your different areas that you can provide proof that you've been operating under the regulatory requirements? Have you submitted any of that information?

Yes, we have. For example, we've provided... portions of noise studies that we've had conducted at our various sites and those some of those results are in the environmental. materials that we provide a staff that are in front of you in front of you tonight and what those i'm just giving an example. How those studies work is you have a very large site right, you have a third party professional engineer come in. Take noise readings from all sorts of different areas might be way over in the corner might be right in the middle, next to a machine might be out on the edge. And the portions of the report of the example report that we provided for another site demonstrates in this instance that we are well below. uh the noise ordinance at that site so we have similar studies uh i haven't provided the full things to staff the full report staff we did provide the relevant portions of it but but your point you know these are you know professional operations that are set up by engineers whose job it is to make sure that these kinds of sites uh operate responsibly and in compliance with all the regulations they've got to do. It's not it's not a matter of us just, you know, backing up a truck and starting up this stuff overnight is a very tedious process and getting them set up and then on top of that, complying with everything as we begin to operate.

In my research, I found that a lot of what you want to do are a number of things that you want to do with the processing piece, the concrete recycling, the asphalt plant. Those things, the dust particles can travel for a couple miles for some of those. depending on the weather conditions. And I've also did some reading that if someone has allergies or things of such, then that can impact them, their quality of life. I heard you say that you guys would have some mitigation plans in place when it comes to the concrete grinding, which is water. Can you talk about that a little bit?

Sure. So as I mentioned, these are these are professionally designed, very sophisticated systems. I can't speak for for what you research, but you know, these Systems are built by engineers, they're installed by engineers, and they're designed to mitigate any emissions, whether it's dust, whether it's diesel fuel from a machine. They're all designed to minimize those types of emissions. So I can't speak to the sources of the research that you did, but all of these systems are designed by professional engineers. They are regulated by professional engineers who work with state EPD. with federal EPD. So there are very smart professional people whose careers are focused on making sure that these types of uses don't pose a real risk to the public and Metro Green has a track record of operating in compliance with those regulations in Gwinnett County in Fulton County for almost two decades now. So I certainly understand your concerns, certainly understand the public's concerns. But I think when you really look into it, I'd be happy to talk about it with you more provide reports to you if you want to see them. That I think the the concerns oftentimes are not to say that they're not legitimate, but they're overstated. Because again, these are sophisticated operations that are designed To mitigate the risk to everybody and I and they they emit you know such low levels of of dust of emissions that the federal government, the state of Georgia and other localities around metro green deem them as acceptable uses even in crowded areas.

You have any idea on how close the closest residential property is to you guys it's just a matter of curiosity to the the Gwinnett county facility.

So the Gwinnett County facility is, excuse me, it's in a, I call it a light, a similar light industrial area as this is located. We have office buildings, we have warehouses, we have logistics centers far closer within, you know, kind of just back Gwinnett County, this Pleasantdale Road, you can imagine it's very, you know, concentrated area. So we're operating in those areas. very close um to other commercial operations in in some residential and even some instances that are uh as close if not closer than um than the ones that are in stonecrest so again there's a history of in other municipalities of allowing this uses it in and again concentrated areas this is a pretty relatively remote area um in terms of the distance between us and other uses

Okay, so yes, there are residential properties just as close as this 1,000 to 1,500 feet near Gwinnett County.

I haven't measured a residential property, but in Gwinnett County, during this permitting process, if you go home and look at Google Maps, you'll see our Pleasantdale location is right next to office buildings, warehouses, places where people go to work every day, and Gwinnett County deems that safe, notwithstanding.

Okay. Where people go to work, people live. That's where I'm getting to. Where people live.

And I understand, but I think when it comes to regulations, you know, the federal government of the state of Georgia are concerned about people no matter if they're at work or if they're at home.

Understood. My question is more on live, though. That's what I'm trying to get to.

I understand. I don't want to say something is not true up here. I haven't measured to the nearest house at the Pleasantdale location, but if I did, I would be pretty confident in saying that there are homes or apartment complexes in the vicinity of Pleasantdale Road. Obviously, it's a very populated area.

All right. Thank you. I just want to highlight the question that I asked before about the property. We're calling out that there are residential properties, 10 to 12, within the 1,000 to 1,500 feet in Stonecrest. But I want to highlight that we have to make responsible decisions, and we need to consider that this property is, there are homes, residential properties, that may not be Stonecrest, but there are still homes near within that 1,000 to 1,500 feet near the facility that may not fall into Stonecrest. Mayor Pro Tem, I yield for now.

Thank you. Council, what is your pleasure?

Mayor Pro Tem, I have another question.

Yes, Mayor Acaba.

I'm going to ask the question to the applicant first, and I have another one for you, Director Q. Will you help me with what your position is and the understanding of our settlement agreement and the initiated, city initiated rezoning for this project compared to the city's position on July 7th and its position today? You're asking about the staff report? Yeah, I'm asking about your understanding of both the settlement agreement and the city initiated rezoning the staff's position in their report on the 7th and then the non-recommendation today.

Sure. So I I think maybe there's excuse me 2 questions in there. I mean, first off, as as far as the terms of the settlement agreement that's pending between Stonecrest and the Metro Green parties, that document is a matter of public record at this point. Um, you know. So I would refer you to it. I mean, there is a specific provision in there under which the city of Stonecrest agreed to file this rezoning application. And so they they file the rezoning application. I think the second part of your question is about the staff report. Yeah, I touched on that before. I know there was. I understand there was the initial denial. I mentioned the two reasons, one being a legal technicality that's been resolved, and the second is the additional information they're looking for. And obviously, once we We didn't have an opportunity. We had not been asked for that additional that additional information at the time of the Planning Commission meeting. I wish we would have been so we could have given it to staff prior to the Planning Commission making its recommendation, because at the time of the Planning Commission meeting, the only thing they had to rely on was the initial report that that recommended denial for the two reasons that I mentioned that I think have both been have both been satisfied at this point. So I can't again speak for staff's decision to take a neutral position as far as a formal recommendation goes, but I do strongly believe that we resolved all the concerns that that initial denial was based on.

Thank you, Director. My question is similar. The applicant obviously feels like they have satisfied the concerns of the recommended denial from July seven. Will you clarify whether or not you believe that has been satisfied or not and what you still believe is the staff recommendation based on our code and obviously what the applicant has provided to you since July 7th and what you heard today from the applicant?

Mayor Cobble, I will again clarify your question and based on staff's report, staff has gone through the process of initiating this application as requested. We have done our staff report and we've reviewed it and gone through that process. initiated a recommendation and at the advisement of legal with additional information not only provided from the applicant as well. Our stance on the recommendation is as is at the advisement of.

Okay. Thank you, Dr. King.

Councilman Turner.

Let me just say that we've been in this predicament for quite some time with Metro Green. And this appears to be an effort to move a problem from one location to another. And I don't want to say that it is better or worse. But I think that's what we were kind of charged to evaluate. Maddox Road as a potential location for this operation would have less of an impact on citizens, but nonetheless, it will have an impact. So we have to decide between the two, whether we concur with this rezoning for a potential movement of a recycling plant. And while I love recycling, but I don't particularly understand these major recycling facility and their impact on our health and the environment. So I'm torn as to whether to comply with the requests or otherwise. But we have to act on what we believe is best for the city of Stonecrest. And until you finish the comments, I'll reserve my motion.

Councilman Turner, I didn't hear what you said at the end.

I said if there are no more comments, I'll offer a motion, but I will yield for additional comments.

Council, any other questions for the applicant, staff, or legal? I entertain a motion.

Mayor Patel.

Councilman Turner.

Move for approval of RZ 26-004-7224 and 7226 Meadows Road.

The chair seconds. The motion has been properly moved in second by Mayor Pro Tem Graves. 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.

Nay.

District 1 is nay. So we do have a tie vote. Two nays and two yeas. Mayor Cobble, what is your pleasure?

My pleasure is to offer a substitute motion for deferral.

We have a motion on the floor.

Yes, you have a motion on the floor that did not receive an affirmative in either one way or another. So I am inserting parliamentary procedure to request a substitute motion because you did not achieve an affirmative on either side.

Attorney Thompson. So we do have a tie vote. So it's my understanding that Mayor Cobble would vote to break the tie. Can you offer me some content on that, please?

If there's a vote on the table, and Madam Mayor, if you're, if you're poised to break the tie, I would request that, we would request that you provide that tie-breaking vote. A substitute motion would be proper if

Before the vote actually takes place, but we're in the middle of over right now, well, you can't make a substitute motion before a vote takes place. In a tie. Would you like to reset so we can. Research Robert rules. Assuming you're the parliamentarian for the city. I'm sorry, can you repeat what you're saying? Do you think that we should recess so we can look at the parliamentary procedure under Robert's rules? You didn't answer the mayor programs question you advise me to vote, you did not answer the question about a rather I can offer a substitute motion or not you just advise me to vote. So i'm asking do we need time to look at robbers was order and to decide if when a vote is not receive affirmative and either way on either side of a substitute motion can be offered.

I would ask Madam Mayor Pro Tem, I think the mayor should place the tie-breaking vote.

According to our charter, we have a tie vote. So when we have a tie vote, we're the tie-breaking vote.

Yeah, I'm well aware of the procedure for when the mayor votes. I'm just asking if the city attorney would like to take some time to review the Robert rules of order and parliamentary procedure to determine whether or not my request for a substitute motion can be honored. If not, no problem. But I'm asking for you all to take time to research that and make that decision based on fact.

And the fireman married the questions on the table for me.

yeah.

I would, in this instance, I would say that you all need to have a tie breaking vote and. As you are the tiebreaker out as that you place your vote.

All right, I will abstain. The city council is the legislative body of this city. The city council are the five voting members of this city council. The city council's legislative authority is to make decisions on behalf of the five districts that it represents. the city council should be able to come to a majority vote seeing as the city council has the majority influence so i see no reason why the city council cannot come to a majority agreement and then put it in the hands of the non-voting member i have no influence or decision making powers and any other items not only presented today, but in any other of the agenda items. So the City Council should be able to get a consensus on a vote considering that it represents all five districts to use to weaponize the charter for this particular vote. I will abstain from that.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

according to our charter the mayor shall cast the deciding vote if there is a tie our charter trumps robert's rules so in this instance the mayor is to vote the mayor does not have the option to abstain

Why wouldn't the mayor have an option to abstain? That is a vote. You either can vote yes, vote no, or you can abstain. So you are correct. The charter does give me that authority. And so I have casted a vote. I have voted to abstain. Just as that is offered to you as a voting member, it is also offered to me. There is nowhere in the law that says that I only have two options in which everyone else has three. There are three options. You also have had the choice to abstain. You casted an affirmative vote.

Councilman Turner.

That option to abstain has to be accompanied by a written rationale for such. And absent that, I believe the charter is clear that we cannot abstain. We are obligated to vote. I question as to whether or not we have a legitimate tie because When that was written, it was assumed that it would be a tie to approve or deny. And since we never received, it was 3-3, that's when we had six members, six voting members. And we have not achieved that. That's the only question I would have. But otherwise, the mayor is obligated to vote according to the charter.

and uh that's what we said i'd like to read the statement you're referring to in the charter section 2.10 the council member no council member should abstain from voting on a matter properly brought before the city council for official action except when the city council has a reason which is disclosed in writing prior to or at the meeting and made a part of the minutes i have disclosed here at this meeting my rationale and it is a part of the minutes it is not exclusive to at the meeting it includes or at the meeting so yes prior to obviously someone who can only vote in the event of a tie would not be able to provide right in writing prior to a meeting absolutely impossible i would only have the opportunity to abstain at a meeting in person giving made it made a part of the minutes in which I have given my position, my reasoning and it isn't a part of the minutes.

We approach him.

That's what it's meant.

So Mayor Cabo, your legitimate reason, because it has to be a legitimate reason, your legitimate reason is what?

I'm sorry. No council member should abstain from voting on any matter properly brought before the city council for official action except when the city council member, which by the way, it refers to a city council member, council member being one word. I am not a city council member. I am a part of the city council, two separate words. I am by definition not a city council member when city council member is one. However, the word legitimate one is obviously arguable and to not in the charter. The words legitimate reason is not listed here. And that is obviously the discretion of the person who was evaluating legitimate. And so I haven't given my rationale. I have done it in the meeting. It is in the records. This refers to a council member. Again, I am not a council member. I'm a member of the city council, two separate and distinct definitions, which is also in the charter. if you go to the beginning of the charter the charter describes the definition of a council member in which it lists five members voted as a city council member it then mentions the mayor separately and the six of us together collectively are the city council this particular section is referring to a council member in which i have not only complied with although the definition of that role is not me i have given said answer and rationale in person and recorded in the minutes the word legitimate is nowhere in this section can you scroll down to the section since you're in the charter that says when there is a tie then the mayor must break that tie i did i casted a vote my vote was to abstain the mayor shall vote in the event of a tie of the council members i did that And the mayor shall vote. So only vote in the event of a tie. The mayor voted.

Madam Mayor for Tim. So it seems that either way, this motion has failed. If there is if the council does accept that the abstention of the mayor, the motion that was on the table is not going forward. So if, um, which one offered a motion to, if now there is an amendment to the motion, um, and if the council accepts to have an amendment to the motion, then maybe at this time, the mayor could make that amendment.

Just for clarity. Um, and abstention does not constitute as a vote.

the based on what facts does an abstention not constitute as a vote? The city has adopted Robert Rules of Order as its parliamentary procedure of which, by the way, at the last special call meeting, I believe you gave guidance and instruction to the mayor pro tem to actually read some language about the Robert's Rules of Order and being used in the city's adoption of its parliamentary procedures. So not only is abstaining a vote, The charter says that when you abstain, which means it recognizes abstention as a vote, you shall either do it in writing prior to or in the meeting with rationale. So how can abstaining not be a voting action? And yet the charter outlines the specifics on how an abstaining vote shall be captured. How can two things exist at the same time?

Under Robert's rule of order and Georgia practice, abstentions do not count as a yes or a no. A vote is a yes or a no. That's where we are right now, a yes or a no.

That is slightly correct, yes. The abstention is not a yes or a no. It is by definition its own death category. It is an abstention. It is not a yes or no. You are reading that correctly. Although your interpretation is trying to imply something else, even the charter gives instructions on how to abstain. Not only does it give instructions, other council members have abstained for a vote in the past.

By definition itself, abstention is refusing to Comply.

Where did you read that? It's too abstain to not comply. What JDs that we all of a sudden possess and don't have anything in front of us that says that an abstaining vote is now not valid, except when you all use it, then all of a sudden it becomes valid. But again, the charter clearly outlines how an abstention should be achieved, which means it recognizes abstain as an actual action allowable to be taken. I have done so.

Madam Mayor, can you disclose, so if we're looking at 2-348, it does say disclose in writing to

or at the meeting and made a part of the minutes, can you state for the record your reason for it? I've already stated that for the record. The meeting is being recorded. The clerk is taking minutes. I have stated it for the record. If you'd like to go back, then maybe someone in communications can replay a said. But I have already given that. Madam Clerk, do you know the reason from the mayor's abstention? To your point, City Attorney, either way, the motion did not achieve an affirmative either in approval or denial, which then gives the Council the opportunity to offer another motion. My recommendation was to defer. that way they can have a discussion. I think one of the public comments was actually a recommendation, and I'm not sure, Director Q, what the August meeting is for. Okay, it's for their special land use permits for uses. But it certainly does give the council an opportunity to get back together and discuss to come to a decision between the four of them on rather or not to move forward with this rezoning. So I asked and offered the council to do a deferral and give them an opportunity to come back, talk with each other, flush out the differences and come to a consensus, a majority consensus.

Thank you, Mayor Cobble, for your comment. We were asking you to break the tie, not offer recommendations.

Well, surely my freedom of speech allows me to offer any type of verbiage when the microphone is on. So I don't need your permission to offer a recommendation.

I didn't say you needed my permission.

You said you weren't asking me for what I said.

I was stating what I wasn't asking you.

Yeah, but I mean, I don't need your permission. You don't have to.

Are you going to break the tie?

I casted a vote.

So the mayor refused to break the tie.

It says the mayor shall only vote in the event of a tie. I voted.

Attorney Thompson.

It doesn't say the mayor shall and must break the tie by saying yay or nay. I am allowed to abstain like you are. And so I have casted a vote.

I think as it stands right now, we have two votes. Or yay and two votes for nay. The mayor has casted a vote for extension if and I might have missed it. So I apologize if she's stated the reason for her abstention on the record. So it can be made a part of the minutes. That seems to be sufficient per section to dash 348, so I just want to make sure that we have that reasoning. recorded in the minutes, but the City Council is free to. put another. vote on the table for decision.

Councilman Turner.

considering we only have four seating council members until December, possibly. Elections in November, runoff will be in December if there should be one. So this matter could be unresolved until January is what we are possibly looking at. I'm just perplexed.

No, the council with the four of you, as you have passed many other items and have more today on the agenda and have voted with four members of the council prior to today, can achieve three votes, either in the affirmative or in the decline. You can. So you're... Your assimilation that from now to December, every item will go to a vote. Well, we obviously know it's not true. You voted in the special call meeting, you voted in other meetings since the resignation of District 2, and you have achieved three. votes either to defer to deny or to approve so no there's no there's nothing that says that because there are four council members that this will go on to december you all matter of fact today right now can still achieve three votes one way or another you can come back and achieve three votes one way or another there there's nothing that prevents you all from coming to three votes either in the affirmative or not No, no, I didn't say that at all. I didn't say that at all. Those are words you're using. I said, like you have done in other items, you all can come to a three to one or a four to zero.

Or you can break the tie.

I have voted.

I have voted too.

wonderful you should as you're a voting member of the city council mayor of the city of stonecrest i vote in the event of a tie i vote difference i vote in the event of a tie There is no language that says I must vote only in yay or nay. There's no language that says I am a tie-breaking vote of which I have to vote yay or nay. It says the mayor only votes in the event of a tie. In the event of a tie, I voted. The same rights you have, so do I.

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

So, um, the it's clear the mayor has decided not to vote. We had a tie in the past and she voted in that instance. So it's clear that she's choosing not to fulfill that is untrue.

I have voted today as I voted any other day of this particular tie.

She chooses not to vote. No, I chose this particular tie. So we must, I think I have the floor.

You do. And I'm going to correct you every time you make an association that is untrue with what I said or what I need. We need order. We do. So don't lie on the microphone. That works both ways. I have voted as I have in every other. It is not considered a vote. It is a vote.

Councilwoman Smith, you have the floor.

We should determine what it is that we need to do to move forward in the event that we have a tie and there is a choice made not to break the tie. That's where we are.

Mayor Pro Tem and Councilwoman Smith.

Councilman Turner.

A president has been set. We've had this to happen in the past when we failed to get three votes. And three votes are required to deny or approve the item rolled to the next council meeting for a decision. That's how it has been handled in the past. We've been here before, but for different reasons, but we've been here before. When we didn't get the charter required three votes, the item neither failed nor passed. and it rolled to the next council meeting. That's been a precedent that has been set.

I guess we have a failed motion due to the mayor not breaking the tie. Is that correct? Attorney Thompson.

At yes, at this time there is the matter has not moved in the affirmative or in the negative.

So that motion failed. Council, I will entertain a motion.

I didn't understand you.

The previous motion failed, so I will entertain a motion. or deferment. The chair moved to defer RZ26004, 7224 and 7226 Maddox Road to the next council meeting.

Second for the point of discussion.

The motion has been properly moved in second by Councilman Turner. Are you ready for the question?

Question. Again, I don't know what it was said as a matter of procedure, but when they vote fails to get to requisite, a motion failed to get to requisite three votes. In the past, it has rolled to the next meeting. to the next meeting automatically. So I'm not sure whether we want to follow that or just go ahead and vote to put it on the next meeting, just for consideration.

So I would recommend to move it to the next council meeting, but I think we will have the same problem because I know my vote is not going to change.

I will support your motion.

All those in favor of the motion, please respond. Yeah. Oh, it's starting with me. No, no, no. I'll say District three. No, four. Yeah. District 5. District 1 is nay. We have a tie. Mayor Cobble.

Did you vote no on your own motion?

You can vote no.

I'm just asking, did you vote no?

Correctly. So what is your pleasure?

City Clerk, would you please restate the motion?

defer to the next city council meeting and we please do a roll call of the vote uh district three nay district four yay district five Yay district one nay.

Considering that it was my recommendation to defer the motion, I will agree and vote yay to defer to the next council meeting.

Motion carries with two yays, two nays and the mayor breaking the tie to defer this to the next council meeting in August. Next on the agenda is the discussion for supplemental pay by Ms. Robin Jackson. Good evening.

You have the floor. Oh, so, um, city manager, um, forwarded your email to me, um, Ms, uh, Karmisha Smith. about your questions. So would you like to go over them in order or did you have specific ones? Okay. Alrighty. The first question is, how is any increase above the standard 5% determined? So the city policy was in place first in 2022 and it was changed. And I think Ms. Thompson, she reviewed that and made suggestions on edits and changes for the new policy that took effect in May of 2025. The only change that was made was the word minimum was added to that policy. And who makes the decision to approve increases of 5%? There are no examples of 5% salary supplements that we've done here. It's been either 10% to 15%. I've left some examples in the packets on your screen. On a diocese.

Okay, so i'm sorry back to your first question, I mean your first statement, so the policy itself. says a minimum. Of 5% yes. Okay. And you're saying that the standard is not typically 5%, although the policy says a minimum of 5% or two level of responsibility.

Okay, so it's a minimum of 5%. The standard has been 10 to 15%. Okay.

And the 10 to 15% is to determine how. How do you guys get to the, whether it's 10, whether it's 12 or?

That depends on the, I guess the duties and responsibilities above what your current role is.

OK, any any form that you guys complete to say that based on these criteria is you get 10 percent and you get 15 percent?

There's not a current form. Usually that information is only written on a payroll action form that is created by Miss Merline that either comes from the city manager, H.R. director and the department head. If there is one and they have a discussion because that's how they're the need is discussed. Okay, to do that. And they they make that determination. And then they give Miss Merlin, the analyst, they give her the information, whether or not it's email or verbal, to create a conference, I mean, to create a payroll action form to get those signatures from the department head, the HR manager, and the city manager.

so the person who makes the determination is the manager not hr the manager makes the decision whether it's five ten so sometimes there's not a manager there so sometimes it would just be the city manager and the hr director okay um but if in the case like for example

You have an example there for the one of the planning and zoning staff members. They actually filled in for the building permit. specialist. So the request came from Miss Cowie to the city manager. City managers discussed it with the HR director. However, they made the determination to come up with a 10 or 15%. I wasn't part of that conversation. So I can't share that part with you. But and then the forms are created and it's done that way.

Okay. Carry on.

is in what instances is a direct a department director eligible to receive supplemental pay? There are no determining factors or discussions detailed that would have been made available to staff outside of the executive level. And it says Canada department director be awarded supplemental pay for taking on responsibilities of their sport. I'm sorry.

Let's back up to your to your previous statement. Okay, so um, could you say that again? Who determines whether a director?

Yes, I said you said, uh, I'm sorry. I said there are no determinant determining factors or discussion details that have been made available to staff of my level. So pretty much city manager, executive staff and things of that nature would make those calls and not have that discussion with me.

Okay. So for a director, then we will have to get the city manager makes the decision on whether a director receives supplemental pay or not.

Yeah.

Okay. And there's no guidelines. We don't have any guidelines around outside of what the policy states.

No.

Okay.

In a department, oh wait a minute, yes. Can a department director be awarded supplemental pay for taking on responsibilities of their subordinates? So the policy does not reference what level an employee should be to be awarded supplemental pay. There have been a few employees who have received salary supplements for responsibilities lower than their pay grade. An example in your handout is the finance director, Keisha Franklin. She had, if you look at the pay information that I gave you all, A grade. So the IT manager, for example, this is this form. The IT manager would be a grade level 19. And it was housed in the finance department. And she's on the back side. She's a grade level 26. And she received that for over a year.

So was that supplemental pay? Yes. Somebody approved or submitted a form for her to receive supplemental pay?

Yes, it's in your handout.

Oh, the handout that was on the desk that I didn't have an opportunity to look at before I sat down. Okay. And that would be exhibit the first sheet. Is that what you're speaking of?

That has the grade levels of everyone. So that just gives you the grade levels of all of the staff to show that, for example, the salary supplement that Keisha Franklin received, it was for the IT manager position. That's a grade level 19. And she's a grade level 26. And that's housed in her own department. So it's her subordinate. It would have been her subordinate that she received that for. And the other one. And who approved that?

That is approved by who recommended and approved because according to the policy, somebody has the recommended so somebody recommended right?

So this happened in January 2024. I started in May. So I have no idea about who recommended. Well, that's when her back pay was paid. So when you ask, there's another question about proration and things of that nature. But she has signed off on this. The former city manager, she signed off on this. The memorandum was signed by the HR director.

OK, so the city manager signed off on it. She was serving a temporary role of a uh she was the director of finance and she was serving as a manager i.t manager okay and city manager okay all right you can no no no city manager approved you said the city manager approved okay

So your next question was, if yes, under what criteria? And I said that's determined by executive staff. And if no, how is the workload addressed? That would be a question for the department heads who have experienced staffing shortages and requested supplemental pay for their staff. So for example, I can give it like I gave the example of Director Pugh.

She had a shortage for

building permits she had one of her staff from planning she sent an email to the former city manager that the three of them i under from my understanding all talked about it they gave um miss merlin an email to create a payroll action form to give that staff member 15 i mean 10 i think that one was Alrighty. Next, is the authority different for appointed versus non-appointed staff? There's been no difference notated in the policy. Both have received, both appointed and non-appointed staff have received salary supplements. And it says the city council play a role in these approvals the personnel policy supplemental pay does not indicate a required approval from Council. The personnel policy indicates the city manager and our current system there's no place for a city, I mean a city council member to sign that paper.

Yeah, I think the attorney helped answer that question the last time I put the question out there, that if there's not any change or any change to the budget line, any additional budget needed, then we wouldn't typically see that.

So what specific criteria determine eligibility for acting status or supplemental pay? All staff, no matter what level of position is, have duties and job responsibilities. So a list of additional duties would be considered when deciding if someone qualifies for supplemental pay.

So you just triggered something in my brain. Acting. In the policy, I thought I read, I don't have the policy right here in front of me. But I thought I read in the policy, and you can correct me where I'm wrong, that a person is put in an acting status. Is that a criteria of supplemental pay, or that's just something that could happen when one receives supplemental pay?

I think that that could happen. For example, the communications department We have a communications coordinator when we didn't have a communications director. She filled many of those jobs, job duties and responsibilities, but she wasn't called the communications director.

Okay.

This HR verify that the employee meets the minimum qualifications of acting position before approval. The department head, the city manager and the HR director will all be responsible for completing an assessment of the employee's knowledge, skills and abilities. In many cases, directors don't don't necessarily have the experience of their staff. Their staff is the ones who actually do it. So when you say minimum qualifications for someone that's stepping up, particularly usually they are pretty well versed in that departmental needs and those departmental needs.

And my question as it relates to the minimal qualifications, you guys have a, um, a you have drop job requirements so minimum qualification mean they meet all the criteria as it relates to your job requirements if you as if you're going out to hire someone you have those requirements so i'm asking it who ensures or if you ever ensure that they're they meet those qualifications

No, I understood your question. So the the what I'm trying to say some. So, for example, if I use communications again, this person is well versed in the communication and they have met minimum requirements of the communications department as a whole. So typically it's not someone that would just be someone that's newly hired or doesn't have the experience to do that kind of work in that department. So, of course, yes, they would make sure that they meet those qualifications, not not exactly as is listed on the job description, but, you know, overall performance level and see where they can assist with the shortage, you know, with the staffing shortage.

Okay.

So you wanted to know about supplemental pay related to special degrees and certifications and what qualifies as additional or special. So I put above the minimum requirements of the position. Certifications and degrees from accredited schools, associations such as SHRM, like for an HR person, is recognized, you know, something like that that's recognized around the nation. And who decides eligibility the city manager director and department head at this time, and is the standard. Is there a standard review process. There's no standard process and documented for the city.

Okay, so no standard review process. So what I'm hearing or what I heard is that a person who recommends someone for supplemental pay, they have the ability to determine whether it's 5% to 15%. Right.

So in this particular one, the certification and degrees, you have an example there, too. That would be our madam city clerk who received a certification for city clerk for Georgia. I forget what it's called. She received five percent, I believe it was.

Okay, I got it. So I'm just doing an overall summary of what I've heard. So a person can recommend supplemental pay between five and 15%. There's no criteria to say what is five or what is 15.

Because on the level of responsibilities, how much how much extra is added?

So if you have one additional, you have an outline that says if you have one additional task.

I don't have an outline.

Okay. So right now there's nothing documented that says how much.

That is the policy. That is all that it says. It's not, it doesn't spell out every instance.

Does HR give any recommendations when something comes across their desk?

It wouldn't be at my level.

Okay. Okay. Do you have any more of my questions there? Or was that it? Okay, okay. Yeah, keep going.

Okay. How are the additional duties documented for acting status of supplemental pay? Pay is documented through through a form. That's the payroll action form and or email communication. And that I said there is no formal process. And is there a standardized form or justification required? The city does not currently have a standardized form for justification. Justification is required when, when justification is required, when the need is identified to have an employee take on additional duties and responsibility to keep the city functioning. Whose signatures are required on documentation to execute supplemental pay? City manager, HR director, and the department head.

How is the wait wait. City manager HR director and the department head are required to execute supplemental pay yes.

necessarily in that order okay okay. How is the start and end of supplemental pay documented and communicated? The start of supplemental pay is established from the personnel action form, which states the start date. The current form does not have an end date for reference. There has not been a consistent process to determine end dates.

So the form doesn't have an end date. Do you guys go back and take a look? Because I think in your policy, it says that supplemental pay cannot go beyond a year.

No, it says 12 months or can be discussed later with the city manager to determine if it continues.

okay so 12 months at at the 12-month mark who determined who is um ensuring that at the 12-month mark there's a discussion made because 12 months or the city manager can request for it to continue so who's who has oversight for that right so at the payroll level that when i process payroll um we usually do a um

a review of the payroll. And when I pretty much keep track of the issue of salary supplements, and it's a conversation that's had with the team to determine how long it keeps going.

So when I'm told that it stops, that's when it, you know, that's when I've done it.

So on your package, it gives you an example of how many pay periods those employees actually had. Because like I said, we only had two who went over a year. That was a former city manager and Keisha Franklin, the finance director. Everybody else has been like 17 pay periods, different numbers.

Ms. Franklin. in the form of city manager. So who approves the sub supplemental pay for a city manager?

I don't know. I don't know. On this particular one. I think it's there.

I believe that the mayor signed off on that again, this packet that you guys threw in front of me today.

The mayor signed off on that one.

What do you know about? Wait, wait, I'll look. Give me a second to see.

Looking can actual question I just want to make sure I heard you correctly, you said that the. Policy was written in 2022 and it was changed in 2025 right um with a minimum of. 5% right, that was the only word change it at first it said 5%. It said 5% in 2022. Yes, it only said 5%.

Now it says or to a level of responsibility. So that means depending on what your duties is, it didn't have to stay at 5%. It's just an extra word. That means the same pretty much the same thing to me. One says 5% or to the level of duties that they give you. This one says a minimum of 5% up to, it doesn't say up to 10%, it doesn't say up to 10 or 15%. It says up to the level of responsibilities that they give you. Okay. Ms. Smith, did you find it?

I didn't call me slow, but I have not.

Right under the job description. I just redacted the name. The signature is there. But as you see under the. Is it in this this packet?

Oh.

Page two.

Page two. Okay. Oh, okay. You redacted the name from this? Yes. Okay. Okay. So the director. No, Human Resources and Mayor Cobble. OK. So.

Oh, you said you already had the question and answer about the budget. I did. Okay. So I don't need to go over that. Did you get the answer about how it impact benefits?

No, I did not get that. Okay.

Okay. So it doesn't it doesn't impact benefits right off. So usually these are positions that are already budgeted for. So it's already money in that department. So retirement and retirement calculations would be different, of course, but like regular health insurance and things of that nature is already budgeted under each position.

Okay, so with the supplemental pay, if I am receiving supplemental pay for a year, then my retirement benefits are based on my salary. So with that increase, I would get additional retirement benefit.

Correct.

Okay.

What is the complete work complete approval workflow from request to final approval? The department head or city manager if there's no department head identifies a need for coverage when there's a vacant position that falls within their area of responsibility. Two, the city manager, HR director, and department head will assess the vacancy and the short-term need to have those duties to be a continuous progress, I mean process. The request is sent to the HR analyst where she creates the payroll action form and it still goes back to those three people, the city manager, the department head, and the HR manager, I mean HR director. And when all signatures are complete, then I get a copy of the payroll action form for payroll processing. I keep a payroll spreadsheet every week or whatever, and we go over the payroll. somebody, two people in HR always go over the payroll to ensure that it's processed. And like I said, keeping up with her and well, until recently, the HR director would state whether or not it was to continue or not based on those questions. Like I said, there's only been those two instances that have received over a year. So nobody else has gone past that.

Okay. And with the two instances that went over a year, where would I find the justification? I see I have the form, but where would I find the justification?

On the form? On the form, it's something that's written. You might not be able to see it right away. But on the form, right underneath the checkbox, There's a small bit of supplemented due to increase finance duties, payroll, payables, and purchasing card transactions. This supplement will remain in effect until the finance director has been trained and received proper training to complete these processes.

Oh, so for this one that was that went over a year, the person in the position was not trained in over a year in order to be able to complete the duties of the role.

I have no idea about.

Question above your head, above your pay grade.

It's not that it's above my head or whatever. I mean, I just, I probably shouldn't get into all those other rumors because I wasn't part of those conversations.

No, I'm not.

Not being bonded and not being able to perform those payroll duties and responsibilities.

Oh, okay.

You see what I'm saying? Yeah.

I don't know about the rumors. What I'm asking about is what's written here, like... there was somebody in place. That's what it says here. And this supplement was based on the duties being fulfilled while the person who is in the seat is being trained. Okay. Were those all my questions you had?

No. I think we answered some of them.

So I'll take a look at my list and see if there's anything missed at the time I'll, I'll let somebody ask any questions that they may have. Thank you. Mayor Pro Temayiu.

Thank you. I just have one question. I know for the supplemental pay that that was a year or longer over the 12 months, it says that something should be provided in writing to the city manager. In writing to the city manager, do you get a copy for your personnel file or for the personnel file?

Oh, that would go to the analyst when she creates the payroll action form. So like I said, I'm only getting the form at the end to do the payroll process of it. Okay. So I'm not sure if they have an email thread or if it was a conversation. I'm not sure. No, I have to be in writing. But I don't I don't. Yes, I wouldn't be the one that received that. Or if the city manager could have even kept it in her own email. I don't know.

And then, if they're doing two jobs they get so the percentages for both positions that they're fulfilling or is a because I see on one or on one of them, it was overlapping supporting two different departments. Was that percentage for both departments or is the percentage for each department they're filling in for.

I think it's like I said, I think it's due to the percentage is probably thought out depending on how much more they give you outside of your regular duty. So I don't think I can determine whether or not they give you 10 or 15%.

Right. I'm just saying on one form, it has one department from April of 24 to 7 of 24 and then another department from January of 24 to 8 of 24 and then their position that they have. So technically they're doing three jobs. So I just wanted to know. The one that says 19 pay periods? I was just saying is that percentage for both jobs together or is it two separate?

When you say both jobs together?

Yes. With overlapping? Yes. Okay. Got it. Yes. All right. Thank you. You're welcome. Council, any other questions for Ms. Jackson?

Yes, Councilman Turner. Not to belabor the subject. It probably needs to come to our finance committee because what you talk about here is very concerning. So we need to take a close look at whether or not we need to tighten up our procedures or just get a better understanding. So I don't want to belabor it at this hour, but I do say that we probably need to bring it up again Madam City Manager at one of our other meetings, and I would probably suggest personally that it goes to the Finance Committee.

Councilman Turner, are you still?

Are you?

Thank you. My last question. I noticed on I guess when you receive the form, are you looking for all signatures? Or because I noticed on some form, you might have one signature on another form, you might have three, right?

So sometimes there's not a department head. So in some cases, it would have been the HR director and the city manager. So it just depends on what what position it was and what, you know, what the vacancy was.

Okay. Council, any other questions?

Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilwoman Smith.

I just want to state that thank you, Ms. Jackson, that since I just received the packet, then I may have some additional questions later. So my question should be directed to you, Ms. Jackson. OK. All right. Are you?

Thank you, Ms. Jackson. I appreciate you. All right. Thank you. Next on the agenda is for a decision. Ordinance to amend section 2-180, authority to execute checks, written orders, and financial instruments, second read.

Mayor Mrakas, attorney Thompson man remember TIM, this is the second read for the ordinance to amend section 280. Mayor Mrakas, And the amendment was to remove the deputy city manager. And the deputy finance director position from the list of individuals that was. That were added earlier this year as two individuals or two positions that would serve the city in the execution of checks and written orders, so the Council has proposed that. There's been a proposal to remove those two positions from the list of positions mentioned in this ordinance. And. that's the that's the gist of ordinance. And this is a second read, yes. And with the second read, there will be, we would ask for a vote to be made for approval or denial.

Mayor Pro Tem, I have some questions.

Mayor Cobble?

I have questions about page, oh, I don't know what, there's no page numbers. Section 2-180. B and C. My first question about B is I just wanted to be reminded about what the decision was from the city council on the obtaining a surety bond. I thought there was a kind of discussion back and forth that the city's government insurance would cover the those who were a part of this agreement or this ordinance rather um but i didn't see that reflected in c the c's language still states that these folks shall obtain and maintain a charity bond in the amount established by the policy so my first question is has that position changed and if so it's not reflected here if not certainly it's fine just i remember a discussion about that and i thought the council had come to an agreement on that matter anybody who has the answer um we never

voted to remove that out of the, for the requirements. So it is stated properly.

Okay. All right. So we will still ensure, we will still require the positions mentioned to obtain a surety bond.

That is correct.

Okay. C, my question is C, is, I'm going to read the sentence and then give you the question. Well, I guess it's all a C. It says it refers to the City Council temporarily suspending or permanently revoking check signing authority. And I just wanted to my question. I have a question about clarity on the language and also procedure. So in the charter, of course, we all know that there's only two positions in the charter that have check signing authority, which is the mayor and the city manager. The definition of this ordinance is, of course, changing the code of ordinances that reflect the execution of checks or financial instruments. I believe we list those in both this ordinance and the prior one as signers of all orders, checks, instruments, and warrants of payment. And so I think we've even had this discussion that checks, instruments, and warrants of payment are not exclusive to check signing. However, our charter does make exclusive to check signing of instruments of payments to the city manager and the mayor. So I just wanted to understand if the language in C was going to refer specifically to check signing, that that would seem to be in conflict with the language in the charter that only assigns check signing authority, not any other forms of payment, but specifically check signing authority to only the mayor and the city manager. My question is, is that language in conflict with the charter, saying that check signing specifically is with the mayor and city manager?

My response to that question would be no. I think check signing is a duty that is assigned to the city manager and is one assigned to the mayor, but the council still has the authority to assign that responsibility to others. Because again, the language in the charter doesn't say that only the city manager and mayor shall sign checks. It just says that that's one of your duties. So if council wants to assign that duty to someone else via ordinance, I think that's allowable.

Okay, I just want to re-say that. So your legal opinion is that although the charter assigns that responsibility to only two roles, that the city council can write a code that extends that same authority to others not mentioned in the charter?

I think we have to be careful with using the word only, because it doesn't say only, it just says that's one of your duties.

Okay, let me rephrase it for clarity. The charter, your legal opinion is that the charter lists check signing authority to two roles within it, only the mayor and, I'm sorry, within it, period, that would be to the mayor and the city manager. your legal opinion is that the city council can write an ordinance that extends that same responsibility to those not listed in the charter.

I believe that's what this city council or city council before this one did in this case. Yes.

Yeah. But I'm just asking you is your legal opinion that that's obviously you wrote it. So I guess you are in agreement that the legislative body can assign the same authority listed under the city manager and the mayor in the charter to others by legislation.

and correction i didn't i did not write this ordinance i don't remember you didn't you didn't make the one that's in the packet you didn't this amended one you didn't write i didn't write the original ordinance no oh yeah i was referring to the one that's in the package i made amendments to the existing ordinance but i didn't write the ordinance Right, but one that we're talking about is yes, so but nevertheless the duties are assigned to the marriage duties are assigned to the city manager. And it seems that the ordinance can also the ordinance via council's approval or the Council that adopt this originally also gives it to certain individuals.