Good evening everyone.

Uh appreciate you gathering with us tonight.

We've turned it up to eleven and we are here for uh two meetings tonight.

Uh we have a brief special called session with three items on which we'll vote, and then our regularly scheduled agenda setting session uh with some items that we'll preview for January.

Uh do need a roll call from the clerk.

Here, Taylor.

Wright Fisher.

Here.

Johnson, here.

Cul Pepper.

Here.

Myers.

Here.

Thornton.

Here.

Hamby.

We have a quorum.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

I appreciate that.

Uh all right.

We have uh three items of business tonight.

We're gonna have an opportunity for public input in just a moment on the three special called session items on which we'll be voting tonight.

Uh and then we will have an opportunity for public input during our agenda setting session on our consent agenda on each of the planning and zoning items, and then on old and new business terms of public input are essentially the same for all of these.

It's a three-minute opportunity.

You see a light in front of the clerk, it will turn green when you begin speaking and provide your name and place of residence, yellow when you have 30 seconds remaining, and then red when your three minutes has concluded.

And I'll thank you for your time with us tonight.

So is there any member of the public who would like to speak to any of our special called session items tonight?

All right.

Seeing none, we'll come to commission discussion.

And we do need a motion for suspension of rules given that this is their first reading.

Do I hear such a motion?

All right, I've got a motion from Commissioner Fisher and a second from Commissioner Link.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed.

All right, hearing none, motion carries.

All right.

Um First Order of Business is setting the qualifying fees for the 2026 general primary election as prescribed by law.

You have an agenda report in front of you.

And I'll entertain a motion regarding this item.

So I've got a motion from Commissioner Thornton and uh second from Commissioner Myers.

Commissioner Thornton, any remarks?

Umers.

No, um except for yes, I guess there is one remark, and that's I look forward to that committee uh these are based these qualifying fees are based on the uh the present um salaries for the different positions, but we have that uh subcommittee ad hoc committee that's gonna be get together soon, I assume in January.

We're we're waiting on feedback from one of our unified governments across the state.

Once we get that, we'll be able to meet the great.

So I look forward to getting together that committee that's gonna look at salaries.

All right.

Uh any further remarks.

All right.

There's a motion, a second on the floor.

Uh does this require an ordinance, attorney Drake?

All right.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed.

All right.

Hearing none motion carries.

The next two items are in response to continued food needs across the community.

Fortunately, we do have some supplemental funds that we've accumulated due to uh diligent management from across the organization.

And so I appreciate the manager and uh the entire staff putting us in a position where we have uh a little bit of funding that we can provide to provide some food security to our community as we head into the holidays.

Um item two is supplemental funding for the food bank of Northeast Georgia in the amount of 50,000, and I would entertain a motion regarding this item.

So move.

Second.

All right, I've got a motion from Commissioner Link.

I have a second from Commissioner Davenport.

I'm gonna have Attorney Drake read the ordinance right now.

An ordinance to amend the FY 2026 operating capital budget for Athens Clark County, Georgia.

So it's provide funding for financial support of the food bank of Northeast Georgia and for other purposes.

Uh Commissioner Link, you made the motion.

Any remarks?

I'm just grateful we're able to provide this assistance.

Commissioner Davenport.

Just got a question from Bob.

Um, how much we have left in our contingency fund?

Um it's decreasing.

It will be if you take action tonight, uh sorry, next at your next meeting if you take action on the collective bargaining terms, which will take a chunk out of the um contingency where this is coming from, and based on the previous one, we're pretty much tapped out of the contingency.

Um, we we also have obviously fund balance should we encounter any kind of emergency or anything that we need to deal with.

But if my recollection was it was somewhere around 8 to 900,000 was what was in there to begin with, and then we've kind of chipped away at it as well.

After this.

So 100 and 33-ish in there, and then we still had a couple small ones, I think, in there.

So probably around 100,000 still remaining in there.

We got to tighten our belt, y'all.

Commissioner Myers.

Yes, in in both uh the agenda report for this item and the next one, it mentions that uh the staff are working to identify if ARPA funds could be reclaimed to offset the use of general funds, uh contingency funds.

Do you have any status update on that?

Not yet, because that'll be partly dependent on any of the reclaimed dollars that come back at the end of the year into January, and that would be a conversation we would have with you all.

That that could be a way in which we could replenish some of those dollars.

Um, but we don't want to, we don't know where that amount is until we get to that point.

So we also have to keep that in mind thinking of the discussion from last month when we were talking about oh, yes, we'll use other funds for affordable housing from that fund.

We'll have to make a decision there.

Um I just want to add that I'm you know very much a support of this, and that I think it's important to stop and pause for a moment as we approve this item and the next one to think about the effect of the federal actions on the residents of our community and our local government here that we're dealing with.

Um, because it's not only the federal shutdown, delayed SNAP benefits, there's been a pause in support for meals on wheels, which is the next one, and then in the next item as well, so I don't repeat it.

There's the it mentions that there's been an end of the senior community service employment program, which eliminated paid training for 181 older adults, including statewide, but including 43 in Clark County.

So there's a lot of local consequences to what's happening in the national news.

But happy to support this.

Commissioner Thorne.

I was going to um say, and and we always talk about tight tightening our belt.

Um I'm not going to uh I'm not going to mention my concerns about one particular organization, because each of you got my emails, and um I thank Bob for trying to explain what is going on.

But when we give these agencies money, and they and they're and they're spent in ways that are not beneficial to the entire and especially in these tight times.

In these tight times, we cannot be doing doggone surveys over and over again in these tight times.

So I think only one commissioner responded to me.

I appreciate Bob responding to me, but all of you got the email, and nobody else even thought about it.

So I'm going to support this.

But when you talk, we got to tighten our belt and all of that in front of everybody.

Look who's spending the money.

And Bob, I would also like to get the full budget for people in belonging.

I would like to get that budget.

Well, Commissioner, obviously, this is pertinent to these particular food suppliers.

Well, I'm when we got to spend money out of another pot, and people are not spending the money the way they should.

It needs to be said.

It's nowhere any other place in the agenda.

Kelly, I could have said this.

Anyone else before we take a vote?

All right.

We've got the ordinance read.

Appreciate that, Turney Drake.

All in favor, please.

No, did I read this or okay?

I know.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed.

All right.

Hearing none, motion carries.

Uh three wash rents repeat.

Uh, can I hear a motion?

So move.

Motion from Commissioner Link, second from Commissioner Davenport.

Commissioner Link, any other remarks?

Yeah, I mean, I I would like to echo some of Commissioner Meyer's remarks about the federal government's um recension of funds and failure to take care of the people in this nation who are in the most desperate situations.

And I'm grateful to live in a community where we're able to fill some of the gaps.

Um, and I hope the tides will turn in the coming years.

Commissioner Davenport, any follows?

No follow-up.

I'm having to read the ordinance, Turny Drake.

Ordinance to amend the FY 2026 operating capital budget for Athens Clark County Georgia, social funding for financial support of the Athens Community Council and Aging Mules, home wheels program, and for other purposes.

Any further remarks?

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right, hearing none.

Motion carries.

Um given that we are uh at the end of our special call session.

I need a motion to adjourn.

So move.

All right.

Second.

Motion from Commissioner Thornton, second from Commissioner Link.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Hearing none, motion carries.

All right, we're gonna move on to our agenda setting session.

Um we previously have uh examined these items, and right now one, two, and three are on the consent agenda.

Would any commissioner like to remove an item one, two, or three from the consent agenda for discussion?

I wanted to take off three to ask the request uh ask a question, but then I'm fine with the going back to consent.

No, I I also was going to ask for three.

Um, three will be on discussion.

Anything else?

All right.

So uh members of the public, if you would like to speak to items one or two, now is that magic time?

Not all at once.

All right, I'm gonna move on.

All right.

Um we do have uh one planning item, so I'm gonna relocate for this uh so that uh planning director Lonnie can come up and show you his pretty pictures.

Yeah, it's a different thing.

She understands that to be friendly.

All right, so we'll have a presentation from planning director Lonnie on this one item, uh public input on it, and then commission discussion.

All right, good evening, Mayor Commission.

Uh, we have this one item for 293 Hoint Street.

This uh this item was heard by the planning commission at the December 11th, 2025 meeting.

So that's a week after we normally meet with the planning commission.

We have a little parade logistical thing we work through.

So um this was just last week that they heard this.

The request is to rezone.

I'm sorry.

There we go.

The request is to rezone a parcel from park P to commercial downtown C D in order to process that request.

There is a vote that will be needed to change the future land use from government to downtown.

Um, as part of this application, there also needs to be a designation of the design area.

Any sort of property that is in our commercial downtown zone also gets assigned to an overlay design area.

The adjacent properties are in the Doherty Street design area, so that is staff's recommendation.

Um there was no concept plan submitted, but the intention here is for this to be associated with a mixed-use multifamily development.

So this depicts the future land use and the lot sort of triangular shape lot on the left in light blue is currently government for future land use, and the request is to change it to downtown, which is consistent with all the other parcels adjacent to it, save for the lay park piece.

Similarly, this is considered part of the Lay Park property, even though it is across uh Hoyt Street right of way and also the portion of Hoyt Street that is no longer right of way but is still used as a driveway.

And this just gives you a little more context for the piece of property that we're talking about in relationship to downtown.

It also shows you very faintly the design areas.

Um they're in the the green on the light green, unfortunately.

Uh north downtown would be the design area that also is adjacent, but just barely.

It's it's really to the west, and it's more associated with the Bethel redevelopment.

Um the Doherty Street corridor area is what the designation is for all the properties that are to the south and the east.

All right.

Here's an aerial view.

Um so you're familiar with this piece.

This has parking that serves Lake Park presently, also has that portion of Hoyt Street that was formerly public right of way, but is now used as a driveway as well as a totlot playground.

Planning commission's recommendation is for approval of the future land use request change as well as approval of the rezone.

They found it to be compatible with the 2023 comprehensive plan, um, compatible with the surrounding future land use, the zoning, and the development character of the area, and then wanted to recognize that downtown is the central hub of Athens Clark County, supports a variety of businesses, jobs, um, has a wealth of transportation opportunities and options, and does it but the University of Georgia as well as several event venues?

Um and they are recommending uh the downtown design area to be the designation moving forward.

And that is staff's report.

All right, thanks, Bruce.

All right, is there any member of the public who'd like to speak to this item tonight?

Again, just provide your name, place of residence.

Yeah, three minutes.

Good evening, Commissioners.

Mr.

Mayor, uh my name is Ed Lane with SPG Planners and Engineers uh at 1725 Electric Avenue.

And I'm speaking on behalf of the downtown development authority on the request to rezone this portion of this parcel.

And um I I would just add, I know later in the agenda tonight you have a uh the the larger development agreement to discuss.

And so I just wanted to I understand that larger context, but the way we uh uh what the downtown development authority hired us to do, the way we prepared our report and our uh presentation to the commission was to rezone this on its own merits, uh separate and apart from the larger project.

Um of course, if if y'all do decide to do that, that this is a piece of that, but uh we believe the downtown development authority believes it's in the best interest of of the ADDA and the city to rezone this uh regardless, as it does open up some possibilities for you all whereas it does not close any doors.

Uh the lay park parking lot and the playground can remain exactly as as they are, since the city would still retain that land if if y'all uh chose to do that.

So I um I did just want to mention that, and I'm here to answer any questions you may have, and uh appreciate y'all's time.

Thank you, Rain.

Is there anyone else here to speak to this item tonight?

Any uh commission discussion?

This is in Mr.

Link's district.

Yeah, um I mean I I think the planning commission had a pretty reasonable discussion about it.

Um we've got a lot of potential for this property and um you know a public-private partnership projects proposed for the the land that could actually bring massive public benefit.

So um the others?

Commissioner Myers?

Yeah, I I do have a question for Mr.

Lane on this.

Looking at this here, because I I think, and perhaps this was um Mr.

Lonnie as well mentioned that this was actually considered part of Lake Park.

Which I haven't heard it referred to as part of the park.

It was just like the parking lot.

But um, was there ever any in the design considerations?

Um was there ever a the look at just using the one triangle in the front, or was it always both triangles?

So I as I mentioned there, I am only representing the downtown development authority on the rezone only.

I know I know but basic but begin with WNA and some of the other core spaces team is here, and I feel like they would be better to answer that question.

Um I I don't know if if you if it's okay to bring them up now.

Sure.

Certainly would you like to hear from Mr.

Bacon?

Yeah.

I'm just curious if that was an option.

Hey there are Andy Savoy Core Spaces.

Um we did not consider the um singular parcel just using the one triangle.

Uh just given the North Downtown Athens master plan showed the development of both of those triangles, and the previous um IGA considered the development of both of those triangles.

So it was kind of a natural extension to consider both of those triangles as one.

Thank you.

Thanks.

I would also note that in the in the conceptual design that the DDA commissioned, uh both both were used as a structured activity.

I think is uh we've discussed in previous conversations.

It demonstrated to be infeasible financially to kind of have the two triangular buildings.

Um, but at least one was mocked up and designed for that spot.

Anything else on this one?

All right, thanks everyone.

We're gonna move on to old and new business.

All right, so uh old and new business now is items three and five through thirteen.

Three and five through thirteen.

Would any member of the public like to speak to any of those items?

You can line up at the podium and you'll each have the three minute opportunity if you would like to speak to any items three or five through thirteen.

Or if not, we can begin discussion.

No one is this the applicant, you want me to go now?

Uh if if you are here to speak to any item five through thirteen or number three, now is that time.

I'm speaking about item number six.

All right.

Good to see you.

All right.

Uh evening everybody.

Uh thank you for the opportunity to speak again tonight.

So I'm Jack Murphy.

I'm with Carter.

Um talking about the home and village redevelopment.

The most important thing to take away from tonight uh is this.

The plan development that we've submitted represents a more responsible and better site plan for the community than what can be developed by right.

The reason we did not want to go with the buy-right process is that it would require building a significant amount of ground floor retail space whenever 50% of recently developed ground floor retail in Athens is currently vacant, as well as building a lot of unnecessary parking that would not take advantage of shared parking opportunities between the residential and the retail.

We would rather take the money we would have been spending on the retail and parking and use it on improvements to the existing retail buildings, the parking lots, the pedestrian-only connection to Magnolia Blossom, the townhome buffer, and creating roughly double the amount of pedestrian plaza space and tree canopy that would be required by the buy-right plan.

If the plan development is denied, the site can still be redeveloped at the same residential density at the same height, but without all the improvements that we made as a result of community feedback.

We've heard a lot about traffic, uh, but a buy-right project could create the same amount of residential density as our plan and retain the rest of the current allowable density, which the totals over one million square feet.

Our plan caps the total density at around 300,000 square feet, unless we come back through this process, speak to the community and get uh approval from you guys.

All this to say the waivers being granted as part of this plan development, make a better site plan for everyone, the neighborhood, the city, our tenants, etc.

We understand that growth and change can be scary, uh, and there are real challenges associated with that across Athens Clark County.

But denying a plan development that reduces the total allowable density, lowers potential trip generation, and fixes failing infrastructure doesn't solve those problems.

It actually removes the ability to control them.

We know it's a compet uh complicated site, um, and we can't go through everything in three minutes.

So our plea tonight is that you all take time to speak with us between now and the voting session to discuss the project with us in greater detail, get to know Carter, you know, learn our track record and you know see what we stand for.

Um at Carter, we have three values creativity, tenacity, and care.

And the last of those is the most important one to us, and we've been working on this project for 18 months now.

And I would not stand up here and say the things I'm saying if I did not truly believe that the best possible site plan and the most realistic site plan for the redevelopment of this property is the one that we've submitted to you guys.

So um happy to answer any questions tonight.

Um thank you to the commissioners who have already scheduled meetings with us.

Um and we look forward to hopefully connecting with uh everyone else.

So thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Murphy.

Go around.

Good evening.

Hi, I'm Michael Goltzer.

I live at 120 Valleywood Drive in Athens.

Um I'd like to speak to item number six.

Um I was here at the last meeting with the mayor and commission when this item was essentially put on hold.

Um as far as I'm aware, nothing has changed in the proposal.

Um the items that were discussed at the last meeting are still the same items and same concerns, and I don't see any need to move this forward until there's been more communication and possibly some addressing of those concerns that the community brought to you at the last meeting, and that I've sent to you uh members of the commission and the mayor um in an email earlier today.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Galtser.

Ed Lane with SPG Planners and Engineers again.

Um I wanted to to mention just two things sewer, and then again um there were questions raised by some of the commissioners about why is this a planned development instead of uh some other entitlement or a by-right project.

Um regarding the sewer, uh, one thing that that I would ask if you all have the time is in the staff report under the public utility department section of that staff report, I think they outlined that they uh support this project and approve the rezone request.

And uh that was a lot of work that was done uh with PUD and the team uh meeting the their kind of new technical standards for how to do on site uh uh sewer storage.

And um and understand in the summary in the beginning of the staff report, there was a statement that was quite alarming there about there's not the infrastructure can't support the this.

Um and and I think as you know, there are many carrying capacity issues for sewer uh countywide, and this basin is one of those.

Um, but PUD is working on solutions for that, and and we met with them to satisfy those needs on this project.

So I I didn't want that kind of infrastructure issue to be a reason why uh y'all may not uh support this.

The second was just about the PD uh route, why it was chosen, and and I think Mr.

Murphy spoke to this, but it was there is a way to do this density, and uh this is a CG zone, we're not asking for any additional density.

Um most of the waivers are because of the part that's not being redeveloped, not the new part.

So there is a way to you know kind of play with the ordinance and make stuff work, but that's not how Carter operates, it's not how we we would prefer to operate is to find loopholes to make it work by right.

It was more let's do a plan development, an open and transparent process with the neighborhood.

Um, and they had a lot of community engagement.

The reason they wanted to do that is what he mentioned, they pulled the property for a long time.

So these are going to be their their community, and so they wanted to have that process.

So that is why we chose to go the planned development route.

Um, and because it is a difficult site, we had a lot of waivers uh needed for the the part of the retail that will not be demolished.

Um but anyway, glad to answer any questions you all may have, is from the prior discussion it did seem like there were some outstanding questions.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr.

Lane.

We're fighting over.

Hello, my name is Colette Walsh.

I live at 225 Magnolia Blassom Way, that's in the cottages of Homewood.

Um I live downhill from the shopping center, downhill from the creek that is from the shopping center, downhill from the sewage line from the shopping center.

I'm here today to ask you to please vote against the proposed apartment complex in the shopping center.

I'm very concerned about the effect this will have on the sewer system that we have in place now.

There will be 500 more toilets, 500 more showers, 250 more dishwashers, kitchens, laundry rooms, etc.

Our current sewage system, I don't think, I mean, I heard him say that they said it would it could handle it.

I've seen the pipe.

We had a breach in our sewer line this past summer.

They for seven days we had signs up all over that it was toxic waste and do not touch.

That's now that's before 500 sewer 500 more flushes of the toilet every day.

Um my house backs up to that creek, that the um the holding tank, whatever the thing is, is going to um let a little bit of water out at a time.

My house is also between the sewer line and the creek.

So that means that if that sewer line busts, it's my backyard.

Um I'm concerned about the railroad being so close to that holding tank and the vibrations that vibrate my one-story cottage are going to be vibrating right up next to the sewer lines and next to the holding tank.

Um I just think that that needs to be addressed.

Uh, all through our walking space, our green space.

I see the pipes exposed where the creek goes across.

Those pipes are not in good shape, and I think that we need to address the sewage lines before we start putting 500 well, 250 more apartments.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Walsh.

Good evening.

Good evening, I'm back.

So uh good evening.

Last time I talked about the sewage issue, and I have not seen any comments, any changes, any nothing uh during this month.

But I just want to clarify that the large box that they're bearing in the parking lot will be holding raw sewage, not storm water.

And are aging these aging sewer lines are failing.

Have the county attorneys considered the liability associated with proving approving this many new residential units here that their own staff says lacks the wet weather sewer capacity.

Considering the ongoing problem with sewage in people's backyards, approving a project that will increase the amount of sewage is a dereliction of the county's duty to protect its citizens from harm.

But now I'm going to move on to a new topic: stormwater detention.

ACC stormwater regulations pertaining to the redevelopment of a previously developed site applies to this site.

The stormwater criteria impose standards of water quality, runoff reduction, stream channel habitat protection, etc.

These generally require detention of stormwater.

The large scale of this redevelopment should provide ample opportunity for stormwater management to meet ACC requirements.

However, the site plans indicate no stormwater detention whatsoever.

They're piping it directly into the stream.

The applicant says this parcel qualifies for runoff from existing impervious surface standards as part of Code Section 5-7C.

There is no such section of the code.

Presumably they refer to 5-4-7B, which says that the Department of Transportation and Public Work director may determine that full compliance with the stormwater criteria may be infeasible in the redevelopment of a previously developed site.

Has such a determination been made?

I don't see it.

Which criteria were used to determine to make this determination.

If an official determination has not been made, then the proposed plan is extremely inconsistent with ACC stormwater regulations.

If ACC allows this to move forward with a site plan that doesn't allow for any stormwater detention, they will most certainly argue, the developer, that it is truly feasible, infeasible when it comes time to submit their formal stormwater plan.

You are not supposed to receive relief on the basis of a self-created constraint.

Please uh I also have not seen any anything drawn in.

Uh last time I mentioned the 75-foot stream buffer and others, I have not seen that clarified on the plans.

And uh please turn down this proposal, and we really need a more holistic proposal for this site that takes into consideration all this infrastructure.

Thank you, Miss Little.

Thank you.

I was done.

Anyone else here tonight to speak to any item of old or new business?

Good evening.

Hello.

My name is Lisa Germain.

Um I live in Riverbottom.

Um, I don't live in River Bottom, sorry.

That's why I used to live.

Um we live in Homewood Hills on Valleywood.

Um I had sent an email to my commissioner about uh the concerns that we have in the neighborhood for increased traffic, different people coming, you know, just the concerns.

I have a son who um has disabilities and has visual impairments.

We already have a fairly difficult um community to navigate with the the cars through traffic that we have.

Um the speed bumps have helped somewhat, but still it's it's of a great concern.

But after listening to other people in the net in the neighborhood, it also brings to mind a problem that we have that is really an infrastructure situation.

The house that we live on is actually on Honeycutt Creek, and we have had we've lived in the neighborhood for eight years, and we have had three times that we have had um water up to our porch and actually backing up into our toilets and into the bathrooms from stormwater.

When it rains, sometimes the um manholes actually float on our street.

So if this is where we're at and we are upstream from everything else happening, if we end up having 250 extra units that are then feeding into that system, we've had washing up foam, um toilet water, gray water in our bathroom, and that's as it is now.

That's not with any of this new development that's coming on.

So that's a real concern for me.

Just you know, the traffic absolutely, but very definitely how just even the infrastructure of how the heck do we manage to stay in a house that we absolutely love in a neighborhood that we love when we're just gonna have even more water and more problems.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Maine.

Good evening.

I am Robert West.

I live in 145 Atkinson Drive.

I haven't spoken before at something like this.

I wasn't really planning to speak, so I'm just wrote some things down listening to people.

Um I appreciate everybody who's come out to support um and share their opinions.

Um the one of these guys said something about uh, you know, getting a lot of community feedback and wanting to be transparent with the community about their development.

Well, it sounds like for my perspective, it seems like a lot of the community feedback, quote unquote, has been people telling them that you suck and to go away.

So you know, I think not everyone here is well versed in the exactly, you know, zoning laws and how rainwater is going to work, but doesn't, you know, may not be able to articulate in just the right way, but has a deep and correct feeling that this is a poor choice of the land and doesn't really help anyone here.

You know, what would I have to look like to be come up here and you know, do you think I'm going to support this?

No, I'd probably have to wear a suit to do that.

You know, I'm not sure exactly who this is supposed to benefit, um, except people who are selling the land and making money off of it.

The the idea that they're piping some of the suit, the you know, some of the water in this creek is such a joke, honestly.

I mean, this creek already floods multiple times per year, usually, like dead minimum, usually once per year.

The space this creek goes through through is through the neighborhood, just to be clear, like it winds through the neighborhood in a pretty beautiful liminal space between people's houses, having you know the this area be affected.

There's trails along this, having this be affected by a construction project that nobody wants upstream, it's just just silly.

Um, I think people are upset about this for many reasons, but one of them is probably just a general lack of feeling like the city is just pumping money into infrastructure.

Nobody nobody wants, and you know, people want cheap affordable housing.

I get it.

Is this the place for this?

Like almost definitely not, assuredly.

Um, yeah, so that's really all I have to say.

Thanks.

Thank you, Mr.

West.

Is there any other member of the public who'd like to speak to any item of old or new business tonight?

Um my name is Lillian West.

I live at 145 Atkinson Drive.

Um, I don't know a lot about this project, but I did hear that they wanted the apartments to be five stories high.

And I heard that many people are not in favor of that.

And I and it I also heard that at the last meeting that that was not altered at all.

So I think that's one of the big objections is five stories high.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

West.

Good evening.

Good evening.

My name is Shanice Allen.

I live at 130 Meredith Ridge Road, president of Inter East Athens Neighborhood Association, and I'm speaking on number five.

My first concern is the relocation of the playground, and this is regarding the core Hub 2 project and its impact on Lay Park community.

The playground is being moved without sufficient funding identified to fully complete the project.

This relocation did not originate as a community requested improvement, but rather as a change that primarily benefits the developers' projects footprint.

Yet now taxpayers are being asked to cover the remaining cost of relocating and rebuilding a community asset.

I respectfully ask why are public funds being used to subsidize a private development decision and did not directly that will not directly benefit the neighborhood.

Secondly, I am deeply concerned about the ADA accessibility in parking.

The proposed plan moves accessible parking to over 500 feet away from the entrance of Lake Park.

For clarity, 500 feet is approximately the length of one and a half football fields.

For individuals with mobility challenges, parents with children, seniors, and anyone using assistive devices.

This distance creates a real and unnecessary barrier to access.

ADA accessibility is not just about compliance on paper.

It is a mean of is about meaningful, dignified access.

Moving parking that far from the entrance undermines the principle and disproportionately affects those who rely on Lay Park the most.

Third, I question why community parking is being tucked away while a parking deck directly across from Lay Park, which will be built, is going to be student a student parking deck, which will not be utilized for community access.

If the goal is accessibility, equity, and shared use, the deck should be part of the solution rather than pushing residents further away.

My concerns, the playground relocation, lacks full funding and unfairly shift costs to PEX taxpayers.

The changes primarily benefit the developer, not the community.

88 accessible parking being moved 500 feet away creates a significant access barrier.

And I just didn't make up the 500 feet.

I got that from the planning review meeting.

Existing parking resources near Lay Park are not being appropriately leveraged.

Ensure full funding, responsibility is placed appropriately, and prioritize community access equity and ADA considerations before moving forward.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Dr.

Allen.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Hi, my name is Susan Monteverdi, and I live here in Athens.

On Safety Athens, we did a Facebook survey of parents because we were always told, well, students don't drive in Athens, they don't bring cars.

Well, I'm here to tell you it's a little bit different than that.

The question was does your student have a car on or off campus?

In survey results, immediately we had 71 yes, six no.

Over 90 percent of students have a car at UGA, and many live off campus.

Hub one is 260 spaces short versus the number of beds that they have.

They have students park at the RIV and Newberry, and they're looking for more parking.

Hub 2, which is the core project that you're looking at now with IZ uh zoning and 20% reduction in parking, will have 584 on-site parking spaces for 1,400 beds, which is their general rule of thumb of 42 percent.

This doesn't cut it.

This leaves 697 spaces needed at one per bed.

The new deck will only have 700 three 373 spaces after allowing for 52 for Lay Park.

What does this mean?

This means when ADDA rents 100 percent of the new spaces monthly to students, there will be 303 more cars parked on the streets plus the already 260 spaces from hub one as overflow.

That totals 563 cars on our streets.

This is what parents call ridiculous.

And then with in returns with the deal, this is what I just wanted to say personally.

We learned at the uh at the last work session that the 2.5 million sewer capacity increase would have to be built by the developer if he wanted to do the 950 bed project by right on existing property.

We also figured out based on Hub 1 at 1195 per month with a 15 percent return on investment, the developer is roughly putting a million dollars in his pocket just based on the increase in density of the unit of the project.

We also understand that ADDA, in order to make the financing work, has to use the 546,000 of debt that's retiring from the Washington Street Park debt in order to make the finances work.

Well, that's not fair, because 60 percent of that 546,000 could be going to the ACC general fund at $327,600 annually from now until ever to be used for something else.

ACC will be responsible for operating maintenance, not even discussed, and emergency services for student parking, which will have liability on that deck forever.

Where is ACC going to get the 1 million dollars for Lake Park in order to improve the park after the playground?

The bottom line is this.

The developer is putting $7.8 million into an affordable housing fund while ACC is incurring $11.5 million for student parking for a student parking deck in debt in debt.

Why?

Does this have anything to do with the gratuity clause and thank you, Ms.

Should ACC go directly into debt with $8 million to the affordable housing fund without building a student parking deck?

Scale down the project.

Thank you, Ms.

I appreciate you being with us tonight.

Thank you very much.

Good evening.

Good evening.

My name is Heather McElroy, I live at 228 Magnolia Blossom Way.

Um I'm glad that you are still here because I was driving as fast as I could coming from another event.

I'm exhausted of talking about this.

I feel like we've talked about it for a very long time, but I wanted to be here to let you know that I am very much against the Homewood Shopping Center redevelopment the way it is proposed.

Um I'm tired of hearing the buy right stuff.

I'm tired of the fear-mongering.

Um this is not what's best for the community.

This is not what the community has told y'all for nearly three years that we want for that space.

Um if y'all would just vote on the future land use, it would alleviate a lot of the issues that the neighborhood has as far as the height, um, pushing everything back onto cottages at Homewood.

We do not need more apartment complexes in this town.

And there are a lot of people that feel that way, but are afraid to come up here and talk because of the business that they're in.

I am not afraid to talk.

Like I'm raising my family here.

We've been here for decades, and I want to continue to live here.

And there are apartments everywhere in this town with lots of vacancy, a lot of vacancy.

The future land use tells you we don't need more apartments.

Why do y'all even consider this?

Like it is astonishing to me that it's even being considered.

And I'm really frustrated that it got tabled, quite frankly, because there were so many people that spoke out against it.

We do not want it.

It is not what is best for Athens.

We have so many apartments in this community.

It is not good for our environment.

There are many other issues that other people have talked about that need to be addressed on the forefront, and this site can be redeveloped redeveloped in a much more feasible way for our community, not on top of single story and two-story houses.

And it's just frustrating that we're still here and we're still talking about it when it should have been voted down last month.

And I'm asking you to please vote it down.

We are the taxpaying citizens of this community.

Please do not pass this next month.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

McElroy.

All right.

We'll come to the commission discussion.

I think I don't three was pulled from consent.

Uh Commissioner Myers, you asked for a discussion of this.

Oh.

Still thinking about the last comment.

Um yes, I did want to make sure I understood this correctly because I know this um project.

Um the what do we call the people of hope project here?

Has you know, there are a lot of concerns about it moving forward.

So just in terms of this, that I looked at the picture, I found the answer to where the forced main was, and it says that it will uses passive voice.

So basically, I'm I want to ask you who built the original sewer forest main on Freeman that needs to be replaced.

Was it actually ever used because it was going to this development that hasn't been built yet?

So and then if so, how come it didn't work ten years later?

Yeah, so I'll answer a piece of that, then I'll have Paula come up and do the piece.

So no, it has never been used because there was nothing to connect to it.

And that actually plays a direct role in why it failed over the period of time.

And who who paid for it?

It was done privately.

It was done by a private developer and then turned over for me to think.

That's correct.

It was done by providing and turned over publicly.

Okay.

So it's development never came online, that line is set dry.

And now it's unusable.

Okay.

And you mean because it wasn't being used?

That's correct.

That's what caused it to deteriorate.

That's correct.

That's just normal because it requires the whatever to be going through it to keep it in shape.

Okay.

So anything further, Commissioner?

I think and and is that the same, is that the same people of hope development that's being looked at now?

Is that with a different owner or I mean it was it's the same name.

No, it's not the same.

It's name the it's the word hope isn't there.

Okay, the word hope is in there.

So that's what I would declare.

So it's a different organization, but with the word hope in there.

So that's very important to clear clarify.

So thank you.

That's helpful.

Anything else?

No.

Are they okay with this back on consent?

Yeah, Mr.

Thorpe.

I had uh no, I just wanted to I guess I'm going to um make sure I um I just want to make sure I I'm I'm clear too, because you know, I guess I got it twisted with uh people of hope in this Hope 139.

So this is no fault or anything of of the new owners there, because this went through I think a whoever owned the property donated the property to them.

This has nothing to do with the new project at all.

That is correct.

Are they not on septic?

They're not on septic tanks.

Oh man.

Um can we leave it off?

I just want to make sure I understand.

I'd like to leave it off.

Anyone else on this?

I do.

Yeah, Commissioner Fisher.

So um before you leave.

So if this um gets corrected, will it help the other systems, residents around there for us and hooked up to sewer?

Or just for that one particular It's for that development, but it is in a bigger phase coming up with the uh Sand Creek Basin.

So it's a bigger thing coming up, but it will help tie them some more.

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

And I guess that's Commissioner.

I guess that's what I was saying.

I know that when I talked to Bob about sewer in that area, and I knew that he says public works was working on um that basin.

So this will eventually connect to the bigger piece, but this is what needs to be done now.

Exactly right.

Yeah, I think you still have to remember also that this is a uh a forced main system, it's not a gravity flow, so it is limited in what can connect to to this particular system.

But yes, it isn't just for these, I don't know how many there's not very many houses initially connecting to it, but there are definitely more homes that will connect to it as they get built.

Okay, thank you.

Um manager Bob.

Do you mind explain the difference that you just um highlight it right there?

Yeah, so the difference the gravity flow line is you know, usually uh parallels a uh creek or and it just mimics the natural flow so that um as flows downhill and connects into the pipes of in some instances the topography doesn't allow that, and so you're actually having to put it under pressure um and actually move the uh the wastewater to usually some kind of well that actually lifts it up into the system that we have in place.

It was actually during that pressure testing that it failed.

Um you wouldn't necessarily you wouldn't do that for a gravity flow line, but uh a system is under pressure has to be watertight, and it was not um during tests.

Thank you Commissioner Myers.

One more question on that.

In the discussion of extending the sewer that is referred to and then was, you know, whatever the date was 15 years ago was taken out of the service delivery, you know, plan.

If that was in it, would that be a forced uh uh a force main as well, a sewer force main, like if you were extending it, it would be, wouldn't it?

Or would that be in that basin, I think it's gonna be a combination most of the time.

Okay.

Yeah.

Um you'll see you'll see more of that.

So the service, the revised service delivery plan will be coming forward in a in a few months, but alongside that too, we're also talking about a couple of independent kind of basin studies where we'll be looking at that in more in more detail.

But when you get into some of these areas where the topography is just pretty complicated, um you're likely to see both gravity systems and force main.

Those are the two kinds of systems.

Yeah.

Got it.

Commissioner Thor.

So when did this happen?

When did this was tested and and say started about two or three months ago testing to make sure that this development could come online?

Okay.

Um and then discovered the pipes just wouldn't hold.

So and you may not be able to answer this question.

But I assume then that is why the development has slowed down.

Because on the front end, there are people who are occupying two of those cottages.

But on the back, there's nothing going on.

So the people who are on the front end of Freeman, are they impacted by what you discovered, or it just you caught it and you're going to fix it?

We we caught it and we're gonna fix it as someone's okay.

Okay.

Yes.

Commissioner Link.

Yeah, so um so this is an entire length of pipe that needs to be replaced, right?

Do you I'm trying to see how how many feet of pipe?

And it's the whole the whole section of it.

I mean, can't remember the linear foot.

Um, it's about 880 in your feet.

880 feet, okay.

Um it runs along in it's in the in the public right away, the transportation right away.

Okay.

Anything else?

All right.

You Hollis, thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

All right, we'll leave this uh on discussion.

So uh if you have questions at the voting meeting in January, there's a lot of things.

Oh, you know what?

I I'm good.

I I it can go consent.

If the everybody else okay with this on consent?

Yeah.

All right.

So uh three will move back to consent.

All right.

All right.

Um five.

Uh we've uh had uh a lot of discussion around in this room and uh Doherty Street, the development agreement for the redevelopment of public and private properties around 295 East Doherty.

Anything further on this tonight?

All right.

Uh I'm assuming this won't be on consent.

No, off.

That's that's that's what I would imagine.

Uh all right.

Uh six uh regards 2415 Jefferson Road.

Uh that was just held over from last month.

So we off to see.

Anything further on this?

Uh Commissioner Fisher in his district and then Commissioner Culpepper.

Do you want to comment?

You know, and I would not be a good commissioner if I did not um let the constituents know all the options on the floor and and none of this is fear-mongling, but I do want us to understand if the um residents don't like the don't like the project, uh I understand they and I appreciate that.

But I do um want to um want everybody to understand if this project doesn't go through, um a developer can come in and build by right a five-story um project, and it does not have to come before the commission.

They can do it by right.

So I would not be a good commissioner if I did not tell you all that.

Um so need to understand.

I know last time we was here, um, I understand somebody said I was lying about that.

Well, that's why I asked Bruce Lynn to stick around.

But that's that's part of our orders, that's part of our zoning on what we got here.

For the um future land use, um, not sure when we're gonna vote on that.

It's not due to 2028.

So I'm not sure what we're gonna do, but I just I I just need um my constituents to understand um the options that are out there.

And that is one option that is out there.

Now, if this fails, another developer, nobody may not even come along for years.

And maybe the future land usually get approved, then we look at another development.

But I gather um I think it's you know uh is um it's own is on me to put that out there in front of my constituents, let them know that.

Commissioner uh Culpepper and then Thornton.

Yeah, so they talk about the existing infrastructure issues.

There's existing stormwater issues and existing sewer.

So if nothing gets done, that doesn't get fixed.

Is that correct?

Not necessarily correct on the on the sanitary sewer.

It is definitely one of the areas where there's infiltration um in the line.

So stormwater is getting into the the sewer lines, and that's what's causing the capacity issue.

So we're constantly throughout the entire system uh replacing and fixing those.

So I I couldn't say that that wouldn't get replaced at some point in time.

There are no immediate plans to do that.

The stormwater, I think it's accurate.

The the existing site doesn't have the stormwater detention on site and would just continue to operate in that fashion until something um came along to to address that.

And then what the developers proposing is fixing the problems with the existing sewer and fixing the stormwater.

Sewer, yes, um, I'd have to look to somebody else to talk about the stormwater um piece of it.

Can you all speak to that?

Somebody from the development team speak to the stormwater treatment on the proposal.

Yes, sure.

Um yeah, that that is what is unique here is this is a huge site, and there is no stormwater management whatsoever.

So what the neighbors have described is what you would imagine having something that much that much asphalt and it it dumps out into the creek back there, and it's a huge erosion problem.

What any redevelopment, including the P uh the planned development or even a buy right project would have to do and what we are showing is removing 20 percent of the impervious area of the site, and that immediately causes a big reduction in that runoff because we now have landscaped areas that can soak uh especially your your everyday rain that really over time causes a lot of erosion and damage, and then of course your big events that have you know more significant things, but in addition to removing that impervious, we also have thousands of square feet of pervious pavers, and that is not just something on the surface to you know look nice, it is an engineered stormwater system below that that is also taking that runoff, storing it underground, infiltrating some of it, bypassing some of the larger storms.

So that uh it is inaccurate to say we're not doing any stormwater management.

We we are doing some of it by just reduction, and we're doing additional by impervious systems.

Um and I do want to clarify the sanitary sewer.

So the infiltration that's taking place is not necessarily taking place on this site, it's taking place elsewhere in the in the watershed.

What their proposal is is to accommodate the development that's going on here and and through the storage tank that would release the wastewater at a different rate, not make the situation worse than it currently is.

So not fixing it, that's still going to require projects off site to be able to fix um ultimately the infiltrations coming into the system.

So I want to want to make sure that was clear.

But if the site does not get developed, the um stormwater issue does not get fixed.

It just remains because we can't make the the property owner fix something that's that you know, the parking lot or the impervious and all that.

So it's gonna that situation is going to remain the same if not get worked.

Right for the stormwater, that's correct.

Yeah.

That uh Commissioners Thornton Lincoln Johnson.

Oh, um.

Um and I, you know, I I think someone spoke to um we have too many apartments and already, and I think that is true.

And also that many of these apartments are not um fully occupied a hundred percent.

Bob, you may not be able to answer this question, but is this preparation of all of this growth?

Um is with the anticipation of the population growing to the 30,000 in the next um teen years.

And I got a part two.

Yeah, I mean, there's you know, certainly any new any new development, whether it's apartments, whether it's homes, whatever those may be, is trying to, from a market standpoint, trying to respond to two things.

One is whatever growth exists already, so just people moving around within the community, and then the growth that we anticipate is is occurring, and that growth is a combination of growth at the university, and it is a combination of people moving into the into the community.

So that's in effect what they're responding to with that.

Um I did want to clarify because I I know future land use map has come up a couple of times, and I'm unaware of anything in the proposed future land use map, and certainly not the existing either, that removes the potential or or uh desire to have any more multifamily or apartments.

There's certainly a part of the uh the future land use map as well.

I mean, that's that is a definite mix within our uh our plan, but but yes, that's what they're trying to respond.

That's what any developer is trying to respond to is what is the market potential today and what might the market potential be um ahead of time in capturing that.

And I guess um my thought is with the future land use and and you know we just kind of indirectly touched on it.

And now we're hearing about infrastructure problems or um situations in uh Homewood Hills off of Jefferson Road, and we know that we've heard about other infrastructure problems throughout.

Are we are we putting the cart before the horse?

We're anticipating and building and we are not taking care of our infrastructure needs.

Uh are we putting the cart before the horse?

We're buildings are going up, but we are not fixing what is below.

And I'm just I'm you know, I I'm not no fan of the future land use plan myself.

Sure.

But I do think that um we're gonna have a lot more of these situations uh come before us, and we're gonna have the same concerns about infrastructure.

I am also concerned again about the rezones.

We do too many rezones for and not taking care of our infrastructure.

So I don't know if you can speak to that, or I'm just making a statement.

And I the first thing I say is we are, you are all and definitely investing in the infrastructure.

So we absolutely are putting in new lines.

Most of those projects are actually to take care of existing problems.

Um either existing capacity issues where we know there needs to be additional capacity for growth, or in many cases, this infiltration issue where there's stormwater getting into the system.

A lot of the system is old and it has to be replaced.

So the majority of the money is actually going toward that.

Um there are some projects that the money is going toward that are really totally new extensions that are designed to accommodate new growth.

The challenge that we have is anybody that looks at kind of a if you remember on the future land use map, it has kind of the lines that are drawn around that show the sewer service area.

There's not much rhyme or reason um as to how that was all kind of done over decades really of extensions, and so we've had a lot of lines in a lot of different places with a lot of different ages.

We have in city areas, which are a combination of septic systems and sewer systems, and so um there are many, many pockets of areas, much like what you're seeing here, where there are isolated problems that have to get addressed along the way.

Um and though there are quite a few of those um as we go.

So that will continue for the forfeit foreseeable future, that will continue to be an emphasis that has to be a part of the the sewer, um, the sewer work more so than the water.

Somewhat streets when you're talking about infrastructure, same kind of thing with the transportation system, but it really is predominantly around um kind of the sewer areas and taking care of where those bottlenecks are and investing in those.

But but you all actually have been putting quite a bit of money into those, they just still exist.

So where is Homewood Hills in the our sewer system infrastructure and if if we had uh a chart, where are they at timing-wise?

Yeah, uh timing or yeah, yeah, and I and I'll ask Hollis if he's still back there.

Yeah, I'll ask him to come up because what it really will be is don't think of it as Homewood Hills as much as it is the basin that it's in, because it's the entire base that's in the middle.

But that's my point.

That is my point exactly.

If developers are having this vision of being able to accommodate all of these new folk, it need to be in line with the um infrastructure repairs.

We're inviting folk here, and even when they get here, if those if that infrastructure is not, we're still going to have a problem.

We may not have a big problem now, but we will have a big problem later as you have more development.

Yeah, so your your service delivery plan should link very directly with what the future land use plan is.

Now they're not gonna not everything is gonna evolve in exactly the same time, but they should be they should be able to see that.

And our developers should be able to see that and be able to address it and constituents will fit feel like you know you're not just dumping something on them.

So where where are we, um Hollis?

So we we made the recommendation to uh install a sewer stores, right?

But in the meantime, we're putting out flow meters in that area, and we're gonna get the capacity fixed by what we call um coding the lawn.

Um that's helped us a lot, especially on Barnet Shoals.

Um that's the goal.

Um we think we can reduce a lot of R and R just by coding the lines over there.

Is is our commissioner for that district aware of where you are in in or I should ask you, can I ask the commissioner mayor?

Can I ask the commissioner mayor?

Certainly.

I was not aware aware of it.

However, uh I met with um uh county manager yesterday.

He shared some information with me.

That's what it gave me an indication for how we look in from uh fuel capacity and water capacity.

So I got some ideas now for when we're looking at building.

And you answer well, I've been saying for months that in order for us to have a good uh future land use on the comprehensive plan, we gotta make sure that our um fuel capacity now water capacity can sustain the building.

So what do you shared with me yesterday?

Uh I see what we going.

Well, we need those, so it's gonna help.

And he's gonna share with the rest of us.

It just happened.

Hey, my meeting with him yesterday, it came up because that's that was a big concern about.

Um we continue to build.

Well, you know, we don't have the sewer capacity to support what we're building, so that's why you know we've mentioned about doing moratorium.

And that's where I was heading off to.

Uh this is you know, I I don't I don't know why the moratorium idea sank before it it got out the dock.

But it's it's for that reason alone, um, or one of that that you did try to address a moratorium.

Well, it doesn't fit this case, but it's going to come up again.

That's why I'm bringing in the case.

And I think a couple thoughts is one is we will be to the commissioner's point.

We will be coming forward with a work session that is on the service delivery plan.

Yeah.

And that work session is where we're gonna be able to talk about a number of these pieces.

And that's big picture, that's not just this basin.

The the other is um when we talk about capacity, recall that our treatment plants have an abundance of capacity.

We have no issues there, where we've got or some of these bottlenecks predominantly caused by um by infiltration coming into the system, occasionally caused by the size of the pipe.

So sometimes you'll see a developer who's ready to actually take action on development will actually advance an investment that we might have made five, six, seven years from now because they want to move forward in the development.

In other instances, they're trying to do something to offset the limit, like in this case with the with the um storage tank uh associated with it.

But it really is incumbent upon what's in the service delivery plan and what we're investing those literally tens of millions of dollars in over the next few years to try to address those issues, and that's a part of what we'll be discussing with you when they come to seek the approval of the service delivery plan update, which should be this this spring.

Yeah.

But I just want to go on record, I know it's not gonna happen, but I think that we need to do the moratorium, we need to revisit the moratorium until we get the service.

And the reason why the I mean there's all kinds of reasons why the moratorium is is a challenge, but the principal reason is because in most of these instances, and we've got two projects actually currently in this process.

You've you're talking about the core project, and you're talking about this particular project where the developer is offered a solution that actually enables the development to take place.

If you have a moratorium in place, that places you at some legal risk.

Doesn't mean you have to approve the rezonings uh.

Oh, I'm no, I uh no, I wouldn't even consider um core or Homewood Hill being a part of but this is going to happen again.

Yeah, I just use those two as examples where there is a there is a way in which the development has identified to overcome what the limitation was.

And and there may be some of those that can't.

The thing is, if that's the case, they actually can't develop.

So if there's actually an instance where they cannot overcome whatever the limitation is, the rezoning can't be granted because there's actually not an ability to develop, and in some instances the bry right activity can't even occur because they can't actually develop those pieces.

So I've got uh commissioners link, Johnson Myers, and again Culpepper on tap.

I will note that um the the mechanism proposed here is a mechanism that we've looked at ourselves for a SPLOSS project of our own uh on the advantage campus.

So it's a common which I think is actually in the same basin, right?

Yeah.

That's gonna come.

Um Commissioner Link.

Yeah, um, I think Commissioners Culpepper's questions about the storm water kind of got my answers.

So the storm water issues on that property will actually be improved by this development.

There'll there'll be more porous surface, and it'll be less likely that you're gonna get some of that washout in the creek and some of the soggy ground and in the cottages back there.

Yeah, that that's certainly what the uh the applicant's engineer is indicated.

Yeah, I mean I I am really concerned about the sewer and the porosity of that public line that it will be feeding into.

Um I also have concerns about the height.

I understand people's feelings about tall buildings, you know, within their viewshed.

Um I think I could be comfortable with this project if it were brought down a story that would remove some of the density, allowing that density to possibly be used in a phase two.

Um you know, it would lower the risk for that that sewage um tank and it might lower some of the traffic capacity.

I'm interested in in learning more.

I think I I did reach out to the manager in TPW um asking some questions about GDOT's plans for that corridor and specifically that area because they have done a study and do have plans for improvements over there.

So I I'm I want to um get get some of those questions answered.

Um but I do want to talk to the developers about you know some compromise.

I I really believe in compromise.

I understand what can go here by right, and it could make things a lot worse for a lot of people.

Um, you know, I'll it I think this is a a a nice project.

I do have concerns about the infrastructure and and the traffic, and I understand the aesthetics behind tall buildings.

Um, you know, I once had a big giant tall building proposed for effectively in in my backyard, and there was a lot of neighborhood outrage about it, and we ended up with another project that proposed a slightly less tall building that got very little objection.

Unfortunately, that project hasn't gone anywhere, but um you know, I I I really believe in in compromise, and and I I would hope that there's room for that here.

And Commissioner Fisher and I have had some conversation, we'll be having more conversation, but you know, I do understand by right what could go down here, and and there are some solutions being proposed to address some of the problems on site.

Um that and that sewer line, that's our responsibility.

I I would like to hear from PUD about the timeline for the improvements to that public line to assure that you know we're not risking some kind of catastrophic failure if we do add a couple hundred bedrooms to this site.

Commissioner Johnson.

Thank you.

So I think I'm gonna just say a few points that I think I heard, and I want to make sure I understood it correctly that there is an ongoing sewer issue at that at that property location.

Not at this property location within the basin.

There are constraints.

Because they're developing this property, they need to take that into account as we work toward the improvements that Commissioner Link just referenced.

Um, because once those improvements are done, at least in the immediate term, that limitation would go away in parts of the basin.

This feels like we're expecting developers to fix our issues.

This is a this is a ACC infrastructure issue.

I'm curious where it falls in line with the service delivery plan.

When were when were we going to get to the issue and address the issue in the basin?

It puts developers in a position where they feel like they have to.

I mean, we say gratuities, we can't do that, but it puts developers in a position where they have to dangle the carrot.

We'll fix your sewer if you let us because that's what's going on downtown, that's what's going on.

A carrot with this.

And it shouldn't be in that order.

This is we have a service delivery plan, the public utilities department is a fee for service enterprise fund, so our fees pay for this infrastructure.

I just don't know why we're we are openly discussing a project, a process that's backwards and putting the responsibility, at least with my limited knowledge, on a developer.

And that's why we having so many variances.

I agree.

Uh I I think discussing a moratorium would be very helpful and very healthy and necessary.

There's a reason for it.

This is not how this is our responsibility.

I mean, we can work with developers, but to say we will grant this if you do that, that doesn't sound any different from a gratuities um violation.

Yeah, I mean, in this case, it's actually an expense to the developer.

Uh it is.

Not so they're not receiving any benefit.

Um the they can't actually consider redevelopment of this property without that issue being resolved.

And yes, I I I don't disagree that this ultimately ensuring that the infrastructure is sufficient to accommodate what we anticipate for growth and development is front and center one of our responsibilities within the organization.

It is not necessarily practical, and this would be true everywhere, any community.

It's not practical to the point at which the entire service area is going to be without limitations.

You're always going to encounter some of those.

I think what what you're reacting to, and I agree, is that there have been a series of those from downtown to a couple of other properties.

And that's a conversation I've had with utilities to make certain that the updated service delivery plan that comes forward is much clearer in how we're addressing those as they work through.

I think also that there's there have been a lot of improvements that have been done to address these very kinds of issues that frankly the Commission is just not aware of because there are projects that we don't talk about.

I mean, they're projects, they're not like a new bridge that opened up or something else.

It's some sewer line that we actually lined that now doesn't leak and therefore there's capacity.

So part of what we need to share with you all when we talk about the service delivery plan is what actually has improved because of those investments over that period of time.

But but yes, I mean part of what you're saying, I totally totally agree with, and it has to be a part of our focus, the utility focus as it goes forward.

Yeah, I would think the the um what is that called the service commitment plan?

Service service delivery plan, yeah.

Thank you.

The service delivery plan would actually tie in and fold in with the future land use.

It does.

It does.

The catch though is remember your your service delivery plan is at most for five years.

Five years, right.

So your future land use plan is trying to define what you're going to do over the next 20 years.

So there's a timing element attached to that.

So it should never be assumed that everything that's event that's shown on the future land use plan could be implemented tomorrow, based for a bunch of reasons.

And so, yes, but definitely there has to be a connection between those.

So we should be in part basing our future land use plan on the availability of infrastructure existing in plan.

And similarly, we should be actually planning our infrastructure based on what the future land use plan calls for.

Um those two have to be closed.

Transportation has to be right next to that as well.

Yes, I I agree.

I and I one last comment.

I'm you know, when I went through orientation, I met with um the director and the assistant director, and the assistant director was very motivated and had all this data, and I'm into data, and so he knew every question, every answer to it, the question.

And so he he made a comment at the end, you know, thank you for your patience and being so interested.

But I was, but he said, I know everything.

I know the history and I know the condition of every you know, sewer line.

So we have that knowledge in our own department, and I would be curious how this affects the neighboring area, their sewage, their their sewer um capacity bill.

That you know what I'm saying?

Because that is something I've received calls on, and I cannot explain the math.

And in this in this situation, if there's an existing problem.

I don't know if Commissioner Fisher receives questions or people, you know, it's just too complicated to get into it.

I don't know, but I'm curious how their sewer capacity bills are evaluated with that existing issue.

You talk about their their bills for their service.

Like was this the sewer um bill that's that we can water.

What is it?

So yeah, that there's a line item for a sewer bill and line item for a water bill if you're a public utilities customer.

Yeah, I mean the the sewer and water.

So part of the bill that we all pay for those utilities goes toward operations, and part of it goes toward these capital um projects.

So certainly the more capital projects we do, the more revenue we need, and that's part of the reason why you'll see adjustments in your utility bills is to actually be able to and again the majority of that capital is to take care of existing lines and fix existing problems.

There is also expenditures that are done to actually extend services.

So, yes, a piece of it you can't really break out kind of I mean you can when you look at the aggregate, so you know how much revenue we take in, how much of that's going toward operations and how much that's going to capital that's in the budget.

For an individual, it's not as easy to break out that piece.

But people want that, that's what I was talking about.

I get the revenue part.

I do understand that, but when neighbors want to know why their how their sewage, you know, that bill is calculated.

I heard the the description tonight when others were talking about um overflow and whatnot, the impervious surface.

I know that that is a figure that's that's considered in the calculation.

You're mentioning stormwater, which is a very important thing.

Yes, I think.

But it would affect that though.

That's as a former commissioner Carl Jordan called cause.

So it's a separate piece.

So you've got really in effect three utilities water, wastewater, and storm water.

And each of them have kind of their own calculations, and each of them have really have their own planning.

This doesn't affect that.

Correct.

Thank you.

I sorry for the learning moment for me.

I've got uh Commissioner Myers, uh back to Culpepper and then Thornton.

Yeah.

Um just following up on this other discussion briefly, you know, with this service delivery plan.

I'm I'm sure you will present us with the uh the finances about that, because it's one thing approving the pay land and the the other thing is having the money to implement the plan, which requires us to uh requires a lot of political cover uh courage in terms of increases in money coming from somewhere.

Um in terms of this project, though, I wanted to ask two questions uh or a couple of questions here.

The developer mentioned um the storm the the strategy for uh addressing the stormwater and that it would be improved.

Um I I did notice I have a couple of things.

One is is that what kind of technical analysis is done of that from store from our end, you know.

I mean, you guys might be great, but like you know, we have to double check these things, right?

So what kind of what kind of analysis was done at our end?

Also, and I don't know if this was just a misstatement or misreading, but uh um you mentioned um removing 20 percent of the impervious um surface, right?

Right there.

But on page th on page 37 uh of the your of one of these documents that I opened it, it says that there's a 7.2 percent reduction in impervious, which will bring the site into compliance.

So I don't know which one it is on that.

But also so the just the one question on the technical analysis that we do at RN to verify that, yay, you know, we think they're engineers are doing the right thing.

And then the second thing, and I know I asked about this the last time, but perhaps um planning director Lonnie can send me something with something circled on it in red, which shows that 75 percent water buffer, because I looked in on the documents again.

I haven't, you know, the the the reaction after we discussed this last week was such that I wasn't sure where it was going.

But when I'm looking at the documents on page 77, it refer and the narrative also refers to the state 25-foot water buffer, but not the local 75-foot water buffer.

So um and the maps too.

I see reference to a state 25-foot buffer.

I think uh Director Lonnie is directing he will send that to you.

Okay.

And send it send that to the whole group so we can see the river and buffer indicated on the map.

And then for you, Bob, you know, the question is sort of what is technical review look like for new stormwater infrastructure and a redevelopment site.

So any project that comes in is going to be reviewed by a host of different staff members.

So our stormwater division within TPW will review this, does review the stormwater plans.

And what they're looking at are a couple of things.

They're looking at um obviously how much impervious surface there is, they're looking at if if required, the detention calculations and verifying those from the design engineer.

They're looking at the sizing of the pipes that actually take the stormwater away from the site to make sure they're consistent with the calculations that have been provided by them.

So our our folks are not, you know, they're not engineering the site, they're not, they're just seeking, they're just determining compliance with the ordinance.

Is it really up to the design engineer to actually propose the ideas for doing those?

And that would be true with any development, um, whether it's a single site or whether it's a full subdivision um component of it.

But at what stage does that get verified?

Reviewed.

Yeah, that that's gonna get done when the civil engineering plans come in through the process.

So typically that a cursory review of some aspects of that will be done at the rezoning stage, which we're at now, at the period at which that's approved and construction has been authorized, if you will, to move forward.

That's when your civil engineer plan engineering plans come in, and that's when those detailed calculations and and the review takes place.

Do do we ever send things back and say, look, this isn't working?

All the time.

All the time.

Probably more times than any of the folks that are back there that are engineers and designers would prefer us to do.

So yes.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Got the Commissioner Culpepper and then Thornton.

Yeah, this is just one quick comment.

So you talked about coding the pipes.

That what the the problem that we're talking about is the groundwater getting into the pipes.

When we're coding the pipes, that's keeping the groundwater out, and that's increasing our capacity, correct?

Correct.

And so that's a lot cheaper than putting in new lines.

And we don't know what sort sort of capacity that does, but it's a lot easier and cheaper solution to increase our capacity for our sewer system.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Thank you.

My caveat to that will be because it needs to come up in the and they know because I've talked to them about it, is we we should we should be addressing that for a couple of reasons.

I know we're talking about it right now for capacity, and that's important.

But the other reason is whatever stormwater is getting in that system is going straight to our treatment plant, which means we're treating we're treating stormwater, which does not need to be treated, which is has a cost attached to it.

And so the other reason to be doing this is certainly to s to increase capacity, certainly to decrease overflows as was talked about at manhole locations, but it's also to get the stormwater out of our system so that we're not treating it just because of the expenses.

And it's using up capacity at the plant that someday we may we may need.

Commissioner Thornton.

Two questions.

Uh what is the life span of these pipes, um, Howlis?

Well it's put down anywhere from 25 to 50 years.

Okay.

What we're putting in now is 50 years.

Okay.

So I guess I'm going back to Commissioner Culpepper's um question about coding.

Are we coding pipes that have probably just needs to be replaced or when do we code?

We start coding when we find the issues like this with capacity issues.

We can draw two, three hundred thousand.

So you're not going by the actual year.

No.

You got to look at the coding of the pipe itself.

We got some codings that don't exist really in some areas.

Commissioner Thornton, uh, public utilities has some lovely camera footage of uh of lines that they viewed from the interior.

Oh, yeah.

You see all kinds of fun stuff in there.

So that sounds like a lot of things.

So uh Hollis, you may want to provide some of that as a commissioner.

I bet you are going to change these retreats and give us kind of uh more uh this kind of information.

It'll just be uh video presentation.

Okay.

But now, Kyle, tell me, you um uh public uh work works is uh enterprise, right?

Yes, ma'am.

How much money do you have in your enterprise?

Uh we can certainly get the budget and that'll be a big part of this situation.

I can see right now we don't want this to be public.

Send me it is public.

It's in the budget.

Send me an email.

Okay.

Okay.

She says Section E.

Yeah.

So we'll remind everyone.

And in there you'll see what the revenues are.

And again, you'll also be able to discern what goes toward operations and what goes toward capital with it.

But thank you, though.

Wait, you feel like you don't hardly come.

You say I ain't coming back no more.

No, thank you, seriously.

Appreciate everybody's input.

Um I think everybody's learned a lot here in the conversation tonight.

You know, what I would note, I think both for members of the commission and for the public, you know, is that oftentimes there's a neighboring property that's been in some state of affairs based on something constructed in 1960 or 70 or 80.

Um, and in most cases, that's really not the limit of what could be on that property.

And of course, in this case, you've got a CG zone.

And so combining what we know about what's available in zoning, so 65 feet of height, you know, 10-foot buffer from a residential neighbor, and also knowing about what's going on in our economic development space, you know, among the things that we're seeing growth in are things like medical providers, so that's an enormous growth in in in our employment base, uh, and and even hotels, we've recognized that we've got this several hundred room hotel deficit.

So the buy-right conversation has come up tonight, but combining both what's allowed by zoning code and what we know is currently really very marketable in the community.

The the two towers, for example, could be a hotel that somebody could pull a permit on tomorrow, or could be a medical building that somebody could pull a permit on tomorrow.

So I think it's important to recognize that in this conversation, certainly recognize you know the very rational notion of change in the view shed and the experience you have as a neighbor, but um that that's part of what we will be experiencing more of in the years and the decades ahead, and so it's important just to recognize that as we look ourselves in the mirror.

Um appreciate everybody's conversation.

Uh we are going to move on to item seven.

Um I know Commissioners uh Myers and Fisher, you've submitted a commission-defined option for this.

I don't know if Commissioner Myers, you just want to kind of outline that, and uh then we can pursue the discussion that follows.

Yeah, um Commissioner Fisher and I submitted a draft of a CDO that's linked to on the agenda tonight that it is a draft to provide a hundred percent of the connection fees uh for the uh the waste water uh for the mental health route.

That's a theme this tonight, isn't it?

Uh uh for the advantage mental health recovery facility being built off of uh Mitchell Bridge Road.

Um the attorney's office is still working on developing the needed ordinance language that will be inserted into the final CDO that we'll be voting on in in January.

Um I think it's just uh you know that we we changed our ordinance about the contribution level uh about a year and a half ago when we had a very a development that required I think it was up to 800,000 dollars um for the full uh for the full payment of the uh for that waiver.

Um this one would put it up to I think it puts it up at 100 percent to like 140,000.

I don't have the right number in front of me.

147,000.

Um but this is a this is a a spLOS project that's been talked a lot about.

It's it's long term, it's permanent supportive housing.

Um there'll be a lot of our uh folks who are uh some homeless, some with mental health and addiction um issues that we've talked about as a community.

Um I've been impressed that Advantage Behavioral Health has already sort of uh value engineered or uh reduced the cost by a million dollars.

Um, but the overall cost of the project has gone from 11 million to 21.

They've they've gone and tweaked some things so you can still get the same quality project, but are saving a million dollars.

So this is just uh it's a little bit more to help them with this much needed project.

Anything further, Commissioner Fisher?

Uh yes, uh a little bit and thank Commissioner Myers for um drafting this um CDO and again we'll get the ordinance um in January.

Do you want to add it will be a um adding 60 more beds um to that particular campus uh for people with mental health issues and substance abuse?

Um and we you know we went back and forth because I know we do some of these 100 percent um water and waste connection fees when we do economic development, but we called them some of the bague engineering that went into this and some of the things that advanced was trying to do is get this done, we thought it would be you know worthwhile to get this done and get this facility built, really try to help people in the community who's dealing with addiction and mental health issues.

So um so I do support it, and of course it is in my district that do support us moving forward with this, and I hope my colleagues will do the same.

Anything further?

Can we put it on consent?

Yeah, I'm sorry, yeah.

Well, we don't have the we don't have the final horror.

Yeah, we've got to wait till the ordinance.

I think uh Commissioner Johnson wishes to leave it off, so we'll leave this on discussion.

Yeah.

Anything else?

I was just gonna add this is a separate and a part, but just sort of a preview into a um sort of a budget discussion that will accompany this this kind of request.

So there a couple of commissioners have asked in previous waivers, sort of what are the implications to the enterprise fund that we just mentioned.

And so part of what we'll be talking about as we go further into budget discussions are how do we do these kinds of things which are important and yet not compromise the work that needs to be done inside utilities.

So just kind of file that away that we'll we'll have that conversation because I know a couple of uh a couple of you have asked that question when some of these have come up before.

All right.

Uh moving on to new business.

Uh item eight is our transit service comprehensive plan.

Um we uh uh you use an agency to help us do that, because of course we're not doing that every year, so much like the service delivery plan that we just discussed for public utilities.

We we have a long-term plan for um public transit as well.

Um and and this will look both at kind of routing and costing.

So this will include a discussion of the uh fares, so that will be a part of what goes into this this piece of it.

So everybody okay with eight on consent?

Yes.

Okay.

All right, move eight to consent.

All right.

Uh number nine is um uh item that pursued the uh process that this body developed for naming of uh public facilities.

And so this is naming the East Broad Bridge over the North Acooney River as Weaver D's Bridge, automatic for the people in the full title there.

So uh Commissioner Davenport.

Off consent.

Um nothing against I spoken with um Commissioner Weaver D.

So about two years ago, Barbara Barnett um came to us and she's doing a petition to name that bridge after her mother.

Um back before um urban renewal.

Um she petitioned to have that bridge so black people can cross and go to the cross the the river to get into downtown and go to the market.

Um I know weaver, he's I know he's upset, a little upset, but I did speak with him about a few months ago and asked him to collaborate with um Barbara Barnett to name renamed that bridge after Jesse Barnett who petitioned for that bridge to be there.

And maybe we can work something out on a name change on road or something.

But um, I would like to put this off consent and potentially uh put it on hold in January.

Uh just uh a note of infrastructure as it exists now.

There are two separate bridges, and so you know, if if there should be some desire for two separate namings, um we got two things that we could name that are right next to you.

Uh yeah, yeah, there's uh uh there's a bridge that's part of the Greenway Network as well as the vehicle bridge.

So just uh just that's what we've got.

Uh Commissioner Johnson.

Before the next meeting we make any decisions, I I do recall several years ago, maybe four or five years, where the leisure services department then presented a process and a policy for renaming.

And I don't I would like to have that discussion about how it came to be, who made the recommendation, who it's more than just us, but I would just like to know more about that process.

Did it go through the process?

Uh-huh.

Stuff like that.

Madam Clerk or maybe somebody from the manager's office.

Could we pull up that agenda report and just make sure Commissioner Johnson has that that way?

And it'll give you the kind of fixing issues and history.

I just think it needs to be uh, you know, like the history of the process, the policy.

I don't and include it in the new stuff.

Yeah, yeah, we can pull up from when the agenda report uh team to develop that process.

Right.

It has the history and the minutes from those committee meetings.

So it doesn't look personal or favoritism.

Yeah.

Like we have a process in place.

We do, we do.

Commissioner, are you asking how this particular request went through or the overall policy?

So just generally, I think it should be combined, folded in with the um narrative.

Okay, to explain like so it doesn't look like a a favorite.

So just rolling it into the description in the based on a process and a policy that had been approved in the past.

Got it.

That's right.

That's important for everybody to know that this has followed that standard process that's utilized commonly.

I've got uh Commissioner Lincoln Thornton.

Yeah, um I I remember being on that committee that came up with that naming policy, and um one segment of that policy was that we would not rename something after someone who was still living.

There was a certain number of years, and I think we did end up reducing the number of years.

Um I'm wondering if anybody has any insight into that aspect of the case.

So there are two separate policies.

There is one for leisure services facilities, and there's another for um for for roadways.

And the public infrastructure portion of it does not have a deceased clause.

That's right.

Okay.

And I would assume I guess I will speak now.

And I would assume for this to make the agenda, the signatures that were required.

I assume that those are in order.

Because I know there's so many, I don't know how many signatures, but I do know that uh Barbara Barnett was trying to get signatures um at an event I was at recently, but I know that this application has been in, but I'm just trying to say the signatures were a crucial piece.

I'm assuming that the signatures that are needed.

And we'll have to verify.

And actually also noticed that the policy that was being referenced was listed as an attachment, but does not appear to be an attachment.

So I understand.

So thanks.

Yeah.

All right, leave this on discussion.

All right.

Uh item 10 is an amendment to the collective bargaining agreement and implementation of the fire classification and compensation study.

And so um, the way that this modification would work, we would fund the first half fiscal year uh with this agenda item, uh, creating uh a sort of new classification system, um, you know, and starting salary and and in fact midpoint and and high salary for each of these categories.

Can you put this on consent?

Yeah, I would okay with consent?

Consent and great going 10 to consent.

Uh oh to talk about this uh item 11 uh is the uh right-of-way use ad hoc committee report.

Um committee is still meeting and gonna be I I think uh looking at an additional recommendation.

Uh but this uh ordinance change is their first recommendation.

Um this effectively pursues the diversity of uh opinion that sometimes you would get from people in public safety about what it means to have a clear right of way where you can pass uh unobstructed.

Uh and and this uh makes explicit that the full breadth of the right-of-way from one private property on the east to another private property on the west is a place for people to move, move their feet, move their bikes, move their vehicles, uh, but not a place to sit and lie upon that surface.

So uh Commissioners uh Davenport and Myers and Fisher, I very much appreciate your work on this.

Uh any of you have any comments that you'd like to make at this point.

Can one of y'all give a positive comment first before I get my negative?

Yeah, give go for it.

Commissioner Myers.

Oh, um, yeah, positive.

Okay, yeah.

I just want to, you know, really to summarize this.

It it expands and clarifies a lot of instances of public right-of-way so that it's clear, it's not just a sidewalk, and you can read it.

It goes on in great detail for that.

The other thing is that the uh I think before, and I was trying to find the right wording here.

Maybe one of my fellow um members can find it, but it was before it had to be a real like clear interference, where now it's an what's the transfer obstruction.

It's an obstruction, right?

And so those which gives the police officers a little way, a little leeway.

But I do want to repeat that there's a warning for a first offense.

So no one is going to be like pilled up, put pulled up off the street and you know, cited for this.

There's always a first offense.

Um I will follow that up by saying that um this is voting on the ordinance.

What we had a meeting yesterday in which the Athens Homeless Coalition talked about uh locker program for uh homeless folks downtown, uh a pilot program somewhere at some location to be figured out.

There's the homeless coalition is gonna put together committee here.

Um members of the committee here or commissioners talked about the need or the desire for this not to be a uh ongoing ACC full responsibility, but real cooperative uh venture between the government and nonprofits and faith-based communities as well, um, so that people have an opportunity to put their stuff somewhere so it's not interfering with everyone else, but also so it gives them access to do what they need to do, take care of appointments, take care of any issues they have without having to lug and keep an eye on their their uh on their belongings.

And so that's something we expect to get back something from the homeless coalition about the beginning of February on that.

One other ordinance change was the 24 hours versus 96 hours for abandonment.

Oh, thank you.

Yes, what was that the the 24 hours?

One other um ordinance, proposed ordinance language change was that um currently the ordinance defines abandoned personal property as personal property that's been left unattended in the right-of-way for 96 hours.

Um and the committee heard some feedback from the homeless coalition, which did some conversations with people experiencing homelessness in downtown.

Um, and they stated that if they were not nearby or not close enough to see their items, then they didn't need them anymore.

And so um, so the discussion was uh was along the lines of you know, after 24 hours, if someone is not next to their items or within uh eye shot, I guess would be that basic line of sight of their their property, then um then they've abandoned it.

Yeah, and and and I think we should put special thanks to the homeless coalition and Mike uh Moss.

Moss and the homeless coalition for sharing that uh like the lived experience and being the connection with people who are on the street um to help really give get their perspective into what we were we discussed.

So I appreciate that very much.

Commissioner Davenport, do you want to follow up?

Yes, so um I'm I'm gonna be a hypocrite here, so I'm gonna um you know say it like it is, but so we we started this this process to talk about obstruction.

Um people obstructing the sidewalks, and I thank the mayor and my colleagues for working together, and I did help craft this thing.

It just um it seemed like just my conscience is we it's this is mainly just for homeless people, and we're criminalizing essentially.

I mean, we're doing yeah, we're since we're criminalizing homeless people, and the best way to solve homelessness is through services.

And um, I will be supporting this.

I just want to say that um, you know that you know we have a real issue in this community, and this ordinance is going to help, but it's gonna help, I think, in a more negative way where we're potentially gonna be putting more homeless people um in much more dire straits than providing them wraparound services or home.

But I do want to say that departments currently have if there are debris or their items left out, they can take those items now, or if they feel that that that let's say somebody hope has a whole bunch of bags on the the transit bus.

So transit can take those items.

They don't have to necessarily wait 24 hours, they can take those items and dispose of them or handle those um differently.

Um so I do want to mention that, but it troubles me.

I just uh just I just feel slippery slope, but I do want to thank my colleagues and staff and everybody who worked really hard on it.

It's a it's a good policy, but um housing and wrap around services are what's needed.

And I want to chat, well, I'm gonna miss something real quick.

I want to challenge y'all to do, I do this every now and then just to there's no swiping anybody, but just to drive up 30 miles outside of Athens, up 72, 129, east and west on 78 to other towns.

And I want y'all to look in the bushes, look on the side of the road, go to their grocery stores and see if you notice any homeless people.

So just we're footing the bill for this, but just want to mention that.

Okay.

Um so yeah, I think Commissioner Davenport touches on some of my concerns about you know the slippery slope towards criminalizing homelessness in a time when we're only gonna see more homeless people due to the federal government's, you know, abject unconsideration of people in poverty and and the rising cost of housing, the continually rising cost of housing due to multiple factors in our community and nationally.

Um, I I you know, if we're gonna pass this, which I agree something like this is needed, you know, there occasionally are situations where um items or even people pose you know some obstruction to the right of way and and you know potential dangerous conditions, and then definitely, you know, there are concerns from business people um you know regarding access to their establishments.

Um I you know, if we're gonna pass this, I'd like to see some commitment towards finding some solutions, like maybe we can ask staff to identify um logical locations for lockers, and we can then maybe in the budget determine how to acquire those kind of lockers or how consult with the homeless coalition on how a program like that would work.

Um, you know, I'd like us to make some positive next steps on accommodating these folks instead of just outlawing their behaviors.

It's good.

Got uh Commissioner Fisher and back to Myers.

Yeah, and um to Commissioner Lynx, um, some of your questions that you asked.

We did have those conversations um with um homeless coalition about you know how we get this done and stuff.

And I think one of the things we talked about though when we had these meetings was not to do not to criminalize our homeless population.

But I can tell you, I've been visiting businesses downtown, and you you all need to go in and talk with some of those um people own those establishments.

You got people right there in that door.

Go ahead.

And you know, they can't, you know, and they either won't move or to call the police because of what we got now because it's public.

The sidewalk is public property.

But it's not fair to those landowners.

I'm sorry, those um business owners downtown to help people camp down in front of the establishment.

All of us own home.

We won't we wouldn't want anybody to camp out in front of our house.

So I think we need to show them the same type of courtesy when we're looking at that.

But one thing we did, we we stressed out a lot though.

That's why we had the police officers in there, we had the solicitor in there.

We talk about not criminalizing those individuals.

Like I said, we'll get warned, but we can't keep going down this road where um downtown is where people uh literally sleep in front of people's businesses affects their livelihood.

And it's not fair to those individuals.

As for um with the lockers and stuff, again, um, one thing we talked about, we did not want this to be an ACC GUB finance.

Um, that we finance this deal.

We mentioned talk about bringing our face-based communities, maybe our business communities who maybe um who may want to take part in this, but that's not something me personally wanna what we got a line item where we're buying lockers.

Because I think it, and now one of the things I did mention yesterday, you know, we have a bunch of warehouses here that don't get used.

That possibly can be some options where people can uh put their belongings on, but um I don't want us to get into the business where there's a line item, but we'll we're footing that bill.

Got uh Commissioner Thornton, Commissioner Myers.

Um I I'm glad that um um commissioner um Fisher Um brought up the financing.

Um again, I you know, I listened to Commissioner Myers said was a partnership, and she said um between the nonprofits and the government and developing the project.

Yeah.

But most of the nonprofits we fund.

So it's not no, it's not really, so I would be interested in February on what a budget would look like and and the options that um they're gonna come from.

Because again, I don't want to crimp criminalize anybody.

I know Ricky Chastain would be happy about this, but um I don't want to penalize anybody, but I don't know, maybe because I've gotten older, I'm real, I'm I'm really getting a stickler about money.

And you know, when you're going to fix income, you be trying to cash every dime.

So I I and and and I'm I'm going to go back to the email I sent you guys about some money that I really felt was not being handled properly.

And this is an example of how money can be used instead of a survey.

So I am going to be anxious.

I'm going to support this for Ricky Chest thing, and um, but I I'm I'm this part, but the the lockers, I would like to know more detail about budget and where you know where they're gonna be located and who's gonna actually pay for it, what kind of budget we're gonna see with that.

And and that of course would be part of a future agenda item.

Yes, sir.

Or potentially just a report, you know, if if the government has uh really no role in that, you know, but certainly I appreciate the committee having engaged so thoroughly with sort of the every constituent member, including the homeless coalition themselves.

So Commissioner Myers.

Yeah, I I do I want to clarify for anyone listening to this as well, um, and for my colleagues, that we are not we are not really, we are not making new re ordinances.

We are revising existing ordinances.

There already is an ordinance about um obstructing the right-of-way, and this just changes to interfering with the right-of-way to sort of help a little bit more with uh our police officers and everyone, that this is not a uh there's a warning first as well.

Um so a lot of this is this is not a new, I I would say it's not a new criminalization, and in fact, some people might feel that it is really not doing anything significantly different than what we have now.

So I don't want it the public or my colleagues to be misled into thinking that we are putting into place ordinance that is you know radically different from anything we have now.

This is a fine-tuning of the language in here mostly.

Um and in terms of the locker program, um, you know, my use of the the word uh what was the word you were pointing out?

The core coordination, um, you know, some of that was I think there might be someone from staff listening, but uh one of the things I really emphasized was that I think this is the kind of project that would be perfect for our faith communities um who are wanting to do make a difference.

And you know, if if anything, I mean, I I would not be uh against a nominal token token contribution to the start up of this, but I really am putting the word token in that I think that there's a lot of people in this community who are concerned about homelessness, concerned about what's going on now with the weather and such.

There are tons of faith communities.

This seems like the perfect thing that I was raised in my Catholic church years, uh Catholic school years to do onto others and to help the poor and the needy.

So um I'm hoping that the community as a whole could really take the leadership in any kind of financing of a program like this.

And we do have some documents and I'll share them, and we'll get make sure we get them and share them with the rest of the um uh the rest of the commission.

Commissioner Davenport.

Yeah, I would disagree with that assessment, um, but um I appreciate the comment, but like the people who you know depended on if you are concerned or bothered by it, but I get the downtown businesses, you know, no one should be sleeping in front of people's doors.

But essentially, if you're on the sidewalk at the block now hanging out, talking, chilling, you would be considered interfering under in the right-of-way of that sidewalk.

The people at the library who hang out in the front.

If I'm wrong, because I see some hair shaking, people who hang out at the front of the library, um, you know, the yeah, the back of the street library, you know, their artwork in the front, they will be considered um interfering in the right-of-way.

So those harmless activities where people just gather and socializing would be considered wrong.

Okay.

I do want to note that if you read the text that's in front of you, that there are exemptions that include sitting on a bench, for example, uh, and and so there are uh plenty of opportunities for people to to sit, you know, in in the sort of casual and transitory way that we all do at times.

Um and that really, if you're thinking about the sort of human behavior, you know, that's most sort of thoroughly identified as something that we wouldn't want you, it would be that lying or kind of sitting upon either the pavement or the asphalt.

So uh some discernment there.

Um, and certainly, you know, regarding your early comments, Commissioner Davenport, I I couldn't agree more about the need to do a breadth of things.

I think all of us recognize that um the reason that you have a toolbox is because you need a lot of tools in it, and uh those include uh I would hope additional funding in the years ahead, uh some additional wraparound services, and and most of all housing is we have learned uh nationally that those communities that are most housing challenged are also those communities uh that see the greatest propensity of homelessness.

So uh couldn't agree with you more on that front.

So got uh Commissioner Link.

Yeah, I did notice that clause about um sitting on chairs and benches.

I'm wondering if maybe we could fine-tune that to include um you know, knee walls or or uh retaining walls.

Um and and also you know to commit to maybe providing more benches.

Um, you know, we don't have benches along Prince Avenue, uh except where we have bus stops um, you know, and in West Broad Street and places and on the east side.

The only place we really have benches is downtown, which is probably part of the reason that more homeless people congregate downtown because there are places for them to sit and and chill.

Um but a lot of people are coming and going to services up North Avenue and down Prince Avenue.

Um so maybe as a community we need to commit to more places for people to sit, including regular normal people.

I mean, I'd like to take a little seat once in a while on my mile and a half walk downtown.

Um, folks with small children who are walking often need to sit down and get their kid together.

So I I think we should commit to you know, providing more public seating outside of the immediate downtown area.

That uh Commissioner Fisher's only spoken once, so I'm gonna call on him and then Commissioner Myers.

I'll be fine.

Yeah, just uh uh clarify the commission from Commissioner Lake.

One thing we looked at when we start talking about think we really was thinking about the bus stops.

Um we have a people congregate at our bus stops alive.

We've got more, all of us got pictures and stuff of people congregating at bus stops.

So that's one of the reasons this part with the benches came into play because people congregating them at the bus stop.

I do uh one thing I'm gonna do next week, and I will ask any of my colleagues, they want to know I'm gonna ride the bus for the next two weeks all over Athens.

Um just get a feel because again, we've been getting pictures, we'd be getting um emails about people congregating.

I want to, you know, get a birth eye view myself and just take a look at what that looks like and what our riders, you know, some of their experience.

I'm gonna be income about baseball camp or whatever.

But I want to just make sure that um that that the community uh overall uh feel comfortable getting on the bus and and taking out taking out transits though.

That's something I I talked to Bob about it and um reached out to Biggs, so um on next Tuesday almost start my first track of um riding the buses on around town.

So I I know we don't uh charge riders anymore, but when you see that guy, Vic, you know.

Special costs.

Special costs.

All right, uh Commissioner Myers.

One last point here.

No one from this ordinance is going to get a citation for hanging out in front of a store talking to their friends, whether that's downtown with UGA students or or you know, men, women on the block.

I want to just read this out loud.

This is interference with ingress or egress.

It just means going in or out of a building.

Well shall mean storing personal property, standing, sitting, lying down, using property, or performing an other activity where such activity materially interferes with the ingress or egress from the buildings or any other real property that has a limited number of entrances.

So this is not like you can this is this is not an ordinance to keep people give citations to people who are hanging out downtown or anywhere around this.

So this was language that the solicitor and the police officer, police department looked at very carefully.

I do not want anyone to get the impression that this is going you know, you'd have to work really hard.

I mean, and we put all sorts of exceptions in here, because I was like, man, when I'm lying, you know, sitting over there on uh on Barnett Scholls waving a sign that says go vote.

Um am I gonna be, you know, is this gonna apply to me?

How about people in wheelchairs?

There's a whole lot of exceptions in here as well.

So um please everyone make sure to read that carefully.

This is this is uh this is this is not prohibiting hanging outside.

Okay.

Last time question.

So if you continue reading that paragraph.

It says unless haven't I concede.

I'm not but if you continue reading that interference with the passage along driveway streets, sidewalks, alleys.

You know, but okay.

I'm not in a way.

It's a good ordinance.

We're gonna pass it.

Let's move on.

Thanks everyone for playing uh debate in City Hall.

Yes.

All right, uh moving on to item 12.

Uh and uh Otter Hasmer is with us.

This is the investigative audit of our organizational structure.

So would you like to say a couple words by way of introduction?

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

So first I'd like to thank our staff for their hard work as well as the manager's office uh for their cooperation.

This type of audit was timed purposely uh to provide the manager with an overview of the departments that report to him and provides points of interest rather than traditional findings and recommendations.

To his credit, the manager has been receptive, and I appreciate his willingness to consider the potential changes already.

Um just to review our scope a little bit.

We looked at uh comparison of similar jurisdiction jurisdictions, organizational charts.

We tracked historical growth of our own government.

We listed the number of departments, divisions, including key positions in totality throughout the document.

And we calculated the percentage of department staff encompassing administration, supervision, and frontline um positions.

A few things we analyzed.

Span of control, for example, the height and the width of our organization, how many reporting layers there are between the frontline staff and the department director versus how many employees are supervised by each supervisor.

We took a look at the centralized and decentralized model of operation, basically is the human resources function fully contained within the human resources department, or is it sporadic throughout other departments that then also report to and cooperate with the human resources department as one example?

We also looked at the variation in department structure amongst similarly sized uh departments divisions and how that can vary even amongst departments that are of a similar size, that there essentially is no department that is a one-size-fits-all comparison for all the others.

A few stats to highlight the document.

Um for example, the staff to citizen ratio, basically the number of staff per citizens in our county is actually currently less than at unification.

Um this is mostly due to the faster population increase of our county from that of our actual government.

So it can sometimes be a misconception that the number of positions allocated with each department with each annual budget is sometimes growing at an unconsiderable rate with the number of positions that we're creating when in fact we're not.

We're actually lower than where we were at unification in terms of a ratio.

Um facilities.

As many of you know, uh we have a number of facilities that the government owns.

A hundred and three of those are actually occupied on a daily basis by staff, twenty of which serve as uh administrative headquarters for various um departments.

And they are spread out geographically uh throughout our entire county.

BACs.

Um there are obviously a number of BACs, 35 of which functionally are under departments in terms of liaisons that report directly to the manager's office.

One of the interesting statistics that we found was that by far the number of departments that have more than one BAC that they assist with are actually the smaller departments in our government with nine or less employees per department.

They're the ones that bear the most responsibility for BAC liaison.

So those are just a few things, but um happy to answer any questions you may have between now and the voting session.

Thank you.

Commissioner Fisher.

Yeah.

Thank you.

And I really want to thank um Gavin and his team.

I'll thank the audit committee with Commissioner Myers and I both sit on and and um if y'all get opportunity um to my colleagues read this some good information, especially from a historical perspective, possible you know where we might be going in the future, but uh some good stuff in here.

I know probably everybody had have not had the opportunity to read this yet, but over the holidays, if you get a chance, read the information when we come back in January.

You may have a lot of questions then, but um I did a yeoman's job putting this together, you know, and I guess if there are some takeaways and to Gavin's point and actually I somebody had told me I would disagree with with them at without doing the audit, but you know, we all we get criticized that we got too many employees, but then when we start looking at the number of people in this community, the number um uh employers we got, you know, the ratio it doesn't match.

Then you look at other um what I call um unified governments, we have eight um in the state of Georgia.

Um we're sort of a little bit behind.

Now some of the numbers a little bit like Kalamas and Richmond County and um some of those a little bit bigger um population, but when you look at our population and the number of employees we got, um, I think um and again, and I think what we have to look at though, where are those employees at, you know, and then how do we spread those up and then what the benefits that they bring to our department.

I think that's gonna be critical as we move forward as Bob continue to get into looking at um his structure, what that's gonna look like, but uh but I just want to thank them for the job that they're doing and what they did to bring this to our attention again.

But um take a look at if you don't read anything, read the historical perspective.

I could get a little bit out of that though.

Uh uh Commissioner Davenport and Link.

Yeah.

Um thank you, Hasselmurder.

Um one of the pages I marked it down at home.

You said there we can get a copy because from your office or the clerk of commission.

You can get it from our office.

We'll be happy to provide.

Um when this is not towards you.

Um we had discussed a report, our study on organizational, what you call it?

Space modern space modernization.

Is that due soon?

Yeah.

Now I'm gonna try to remember what Andrew had told me because we just talked about this yesterday.

So it is due soon, but it is not due immediately.

How's that?

Okay.

So I think it'll come in, I believe it'll be after the budget has been uh decided for this upcoming year.

No, we're using some of the information already um in order to make some decisions like allocations within the courthouse and some things, but the final version of it will still come toward probably this time next year, I think is what it is.

And now a component of that obviously has to do with the the courthouse and the municipal facility.

We'll be having a work session in the first quarter of the year to look at that.

Anything else, Commissioner David?

Oh, on this Commissioner Link.

Yeah, um, Kevin, this is incredible.

Thank you.

Um this I mean, I would love a hard copy of it, and I want to encourage the public to um take a look at this and refer to it, especially anybody in the public who has a keen interest in local government.

I mean, I feel like everybody behind this rail should be.

I mean, this is like a you know full resource manual for how this local government works and the history of how we got to be where we are.

Um it's really I mean, I'm yeah, I'm just skimming it and um I'm learning things, just you know, picking up bits and pieces here.

Um so yeah, this is really impressive, and I feel like this should be like on all our shelves at hand's reach from here on out.

Gavin didn't you didn't know that you'd author that time's best.

A how-to manual for Athens Clark County government.

You'll be reading about this globally before you know.

Commissioner Myers.

Yeah, yeah, right.

Um, you know, everyone should get this printed out, wrap it up, put it under the Christmas tree.

Um anyone who's running for office should print this out and look at it.

Anyone who's taking that ECC Gov101 should get a copy of this.

I'm just loading up these copies here.

I also want to highlight the uh organizational charts at the end.

There are many, many, like there's paid there's one for the whole, you know, the whole government, but there's one for each department.

And included with that is a description of what the mission of the department is, what their budget is, and what their personnel compensation is, as well as some other stuff.

But it really gives you an idea of the complexity of the government.

I think you know, as I'm starting to listen to podcasts of people running for office, you know, we all have big ideas and problems and such, but there's this government structure that is working uh in a very complex way and covering a lot of things that we don't think about, like all those sewer lines we talked about today.

But this gives a you know, not only the history, but this description of what is actually in place right now.

So uh, you know, hot cop, you know, copies here.

We could be like making a little extra.

We got we got well, I got it right now.

Yeah.

Commissioner Thornton.

You know, Gavin, I always send you those little emails.

I told you I was gonna stock, I think.

Let's get jealous.

But um in the future, and I know we're in, I know we are in the um uh the time of um erasing DEI.

I I know that is but there's two things that I'm wondering if we should be looking at, and I would love to hear if we haven't done customer service um surveys.

Um I don't know if if you guys remember when we had two complaints back to back about the water department.

Um and I'm just wondering, uh and and as I've talked to some of my constituents that have had to call different departments.

There's you know, it's not handled very professionally.

In the future, can you just put that on your list of uh something that we could look at and address?

I'm not trying to get nobody fired.

I I do think that customer service should always be the pinnacle of of government.

The gov our our constituents pay us and pay staff.

So I do think that over the years we've had complaints, but we've never addressed them, even when people have come and spoke before the podium.

The other thing, uh I'm I then I guess this is my was my DUI um introduction about race and gender within our local government.

I don't know how you word it, so we don't get in trouble, but I really would like at some point for us to talk uh for us to be know how employees are feeling in relationship, because it also goes towards who gets promoted, who gets trained.

So I would be very interested somewhere down the line that we look into the work set and relationships based on rage.

Well, like I said, we better not use that stuff.

Trump will come in and shut this whole commission down.

But whatever wording you can find, because I still struggle with our disparity study.

Um we did that before all the craziness happened, but it but it means something.

And I don't think because what is going on in the federal government should we should say, oh, we don't have to take this serious no more.

We just need to find a new way to address some of those concerns that came up in our disparity study.

Uh any other questions for Gavin about uh this argument in front of us.

All right.

Good job.

Appreciate it.

All right.

Everybody's got some reading ahead of you.

Uh confess to not having read this one yet.

Um last item of the evening is our T S PLOS 2026 final projects list.

We know, of course, we are on a timeline given the need to have this on the referendum in May for the public.

Um we had a good uh conversation in the recent work session about this.

Uh Commissioner Davenport.

Off consent, work on our um as a group over the Christmas holidays.

Let's do emails and talk with our community members and doing a six-year adding 42 million dollars to the pond.

So we're gonna incorporate some Winterville, the Greenway, and some of these other projects, including um uh Timothy Road to the bucket.

If y'all will work with me over the holidays, we can get it done by January 2nd is our meeting.

Um, but don't don't bother me doing Christmas week, though.

All right.

I think that's a great idea.

Got the uh got Commissioner Fisher and then Link.

Yeah, and to Commissioner Davenport point, I I do want to also, I think I brought this up that I know we got the final say, but we may want to look at that each commissioner gets something in there in their district.

I like to see let's take a look at that and pull some things out that each uh 10 of us would get something out of the T Splash project.

Like I said, I put in four um requests, and none of them got on the list.

And again, I want to um thank T Splash Committee because they do the great job, and so I'm not criticizing them, but I do, and I know because I said most of those projects pretty much on the east side, but I do want to sort of take a look at it may not be much money to take a look at whether something that each commissioner may get in their particular district.

Got uh Commissioner Lincoln Myers.

Yeah, I'm I'm concerned about um some of these projects.

You know, when we get to the tiering process, there are projects that fall to the end of the tier and don't get done for several years where there's more potential to get them done more quickly using TAD funds that might be already available.

So I'm interested in having that discussion um, you know, taking a look at some some projects that might be um eligible for the East Athens and the North Athens TADS, and that might free up some funding towards some of these projects that got off the list.

I'm real concerned about us not having any greenway money on here.

Um I don't believe District 2 really got anything.

Um so yeah, I'm I'm really looking forward to putting our heads together and coming up with a list that um you know does consider some of the projects, the really important projects that got left off and might actually you know enable some of these projects to get done more quickly through other funding sources.

Uh Commissioners Myers and Thorne.

Yeah, um after I make a few comments, I'd like to ask the manager to address some of the points that are brought up in the facts and issues about um there are a couple of projects that are mentioned as possibilities for being built with exist uh the present T Splos program um and then also some of the the uh staff uh questi the questions here.

I love uh uh Commissioner Davenport's um enthusiasm for working on this, that'll be great.

I'll uh check in from for uh on my text and messages while you work on that.

Um while I'm with my grandchildren.

Um, but I will, you know, I'll be back January 2nd.

Um but I do want to say something about like I think the Greenway 2 is a program that we've been there should be a little bit there in that greenway.

We've been working on that.

I I think also the Timothy project, which we've seen some uh money is a significant amount of money has already gone into the development of that project, and it just makes sense to continue it.

I I would, you know, I would like to, you know, ask my colleagues to look at how these projects have been spread out.

This is the third T Sploss program, and right now there are some projects on the East side on Barnes Hills College Station and Gaines School Road in that area.

But those are areas that have not had any, that area has not had any projects in the previous two.

Um so I I think we have to be like careful about um, I mean, I'm I'm all for there being projects all over, but there are some I I don't want to um I I guess I just want to be thoughtful about what we've already invested money in in terms of geographical district distribution, as well as the fact that many of these projects are projects that will affect they're they're not like they're not in no one's district district, they'll be in a lot of districts when we look at the traffic signal intersection repl uh the vision zero intersection plan implementation.

Um, and that might be something if there is anything from staff, if there are any specific ideas or examples, the safe routes to school program.

Um so there are a bunch of programs in here, dirt road improvement.

So there's a lot in here that do not have a geographic uh designation, but they will actually be on the ground somewhere in some geography.

So just for us to keep that in mind as well.

Commissioner Thorne.

I really um do appreciate uh Commissioner Davenport stepping up because I I do have some concerns, and I shouldn't complain from uh because we did pretty well for our 2023.

But it's kind of what Carol Myers said, uh Commissioner Myers said, we had nothing in District 9.

So I do not feel guilty about anything I get.

Um, but I'm willing to share.

And I made a commitment in 2023 that District 9 would not support a 2026 T Sploss.

Um until we're included.

We paid the same penny like everybody else.

And I think what only thing we got in uh prior to 2023 was the extended bus line, which is definitely needed with all the growth out on uh uh 29.

And I have talked to Mr.

Josh Hawkins back there, so you might need to come up to the podium because my commitment is still the same.

I know that um the gentleman that and I've talked to you, so I'm not it's it's so don't worry, you'll you'll be able to answer this question.

Um the gentleman who was overseeing the T Splash projects, he's no longer with you with you guys.

And you you keep telling me things are happening, things are happening.

I need you to be a lot more um clearer for what is happening from 2023.

Um matter of fact, not even clear.

I need to see it.

We need to see it.

So hopefully um and I'm thinking about the lighting.

On Danielsville Road.

Uh on Danielsville Road.

Um it was something else too.

But um traffic call meaning on in a couple of neighborhoods.

Yeah, and a couple of neighbors.

I don't know what the holdup is, I don't know what the process is, but it's I mean just because I mean, and because these projects were approved, it just seems like it's taking like forever.

And so if you want to explain to me why things are, you know, I can meet you or but I it I my my word is still my word, you know.

We don't see anything uh other than what isn't you know that's not that's not gonna be my support for 2026.

We gotta get something in the ground for 2023 in District 9.

Ms.

Mayor Hurt.

We good?

I'll provide you an update.

Okay.

Why don't you provide me some light poles or something?

Okay, thank you.

Got Commissioner Johnson.

I'm not gonna be long.

I just have I I just wanted to say for the record, I agree with everything Commissioner Thornton stated.

And when I started in office earlier this year, it was made clear to me from my constituents.

There's no there's no carrot or motivation to approve T splots that doesn't affect anyone on the west side or the south side of Athens, like the periphery of the county line.

Um we have some needs.

We had a town hall, I had a town hall last week where people attended and talked about that not wanting more projects and development, and we need homes, right?

But they don't want that because we don't have traffic solutions.

And it it's not on the list.

There's nothing in District 6.

There is something in on 2023 T splots Stonehenge, but it's 2025 almost six, and it's been approved.

But I'm like a Vita, I don't like feeling lost.

I was in a neighborhood the other day passing out the Athens Clark County A to Z guide, and neighbors were asking when are they gonna take up the temporary you know, speed humps and when are they gonna start?

I would like to have an answer, even if it's a ballpark, like second quarter, third quarter.

We don't there's so much information we don't know, and it's difficult feeling dumb out there.

Appreciate everybody's enthusiasm for getting things done and and also appreciate the conversations we've had over the last few months, um, particularly in our retreat, um where everybody has demonstrated uh a willingness to see process improvements uh because I think that's gonna benefit us all.

We're gonna be able to see every project happen more quickly because there's not such an extended timeline.

Um and certainly some of that is being able to provide good information to the public too on the question of uh what a six-year provides us if we would continue to fund um pavement and transit as we've already outlined in the first five years.

Uh if we would do the roundabout in Winterville, we would somehow have somewhere just north of 10 million dollars uh that we could do other projects with.

Uh you know, graceful opportunity would be to look at that sort of Timothy and also Middle Coney area.

Um there are two significant segments of Greenway in the Greenway Network plan along the Middle of Coney, one from Ben Burton Park down to Beachhaven and one uh kind of head northward up to Bernie Harris Lines Middle School.

So um here we are it is 8 30.

Commissioner Myers?

Yes I I wasn't able to uh give uh the the manager a chance to respond to these items um that I had asked about what the the uh staff were particularly interested in and then also I think it's really number five and number six and maybe numbers number five has to do with projects that in the facts and issues about projects that could be paid that are on the list from but could be paid for with present T-Splust how you know maybe you could just get that information to us all speak to it shortly.

But then the other thing I mean there's this question of the TAD money and whether or not maybe this is a general discussion like do I don't have a TAD in my district but do people do these projects fit within the uh the TAD uh preferences that the TAD committees put in I mean I don't know if that's mentioned in here like whether they fit in those or not you know versus um you know I know like one of them wanted affordable housing obviously this doesn't have to do with affordable housing so um maybe that's a discussion too that could be maybe you could talk to that I know is Josh still here yeah so you had a meeting the other day with yesterday with East Downtown Pad to look at their list of on their community priority identified list and where there's some overlap with the T SPOSS that's right there.

If you want to step to the mic and and I guess the general question is is is there an observed overlap between the unfunded T Splos projects or or even the recommended ones and uh what is coming out of the TAD committees around priorities.

And desire among colleagues.

So what I can say tonight is there's ongoing dialogue on a regular basis between staff on the projects that are envisioned by TADS on the project that are envisioned by SPLOS project teams and there are other projects within some of these geographies too.

So far we've been looking specifically at sort of inner east and then Newton Bridge but obviously there are other geographic areas where there's overlap as well.

So and and we certainly have identified some areas where you know if we're smart about it we can apply these resources and get more done where the TAD uh funds are eligible and spend spLOS dollars in on other projects that might be priority in that geography.

So that's kind of an ongoing dialogue about how to bring these different efforts together and use those resources well.

So you're asking good questions and what I want you to know is that staff conversation is going on.

And and I I will also add to that and then answer in two seconds the a part of the question that um the commissioner asked as well that um so part of as you all know there's a companion a couple companion efforts to this which include changing the way in which we deliver capital projects that we've talked about and and moving those forward.

You may remember in one of the work sessions we also talked about kind of the project selection process as well as the process that you we use to deliver projects and then after projects are done the process we use to actually take care of what it is that we've invested.

One of the things that I've had that I've noticed in some of our areas is that because we have been so successful over the years in securing Splost and T Sploss funds that there are other funds you've identified TADS but there are others too.

They may be funding through FTA for transit projects or others that were not we have not always been as aggressive as perhaps we need to be in pursuing those dollars to stretch these dollars further.

So that's another item we'll talk about when we get into the details of kind of how to improve the process because that's a piece I think that is also limiting a little bit what we're able to do with um with the dollars that we have the two second or two minute answer to the question about there may be some things that could be funded out of the current T Sploss that are on the list.

So there is an anticipation of getting more revenue than what was anticipated from the T Sploss 23 simply because of the way that it's being interpreted at the Department of Revenue and if that actually proves to be valid and legally sound meaning we have confidence that those dollars are ours to spend and available then yes there could be some projects moving forward and we'll have more details about that.

But that's what those items are referencing in there.

So Commissioner Thorne but we're going to be anticipating voting in next month.

And we're going to be anticipating voting in next month.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So everything that you and I don't know that we'll have a complete answer on that piece because I think they're end up having to talk more with the attorney's office because there's kind of there has been historically some competing sort of I don't want to say interpretations, but different views, not internally, but at the state level of what these dollars.

There's no question the dollars will come here.

The question ultimately is what can we use those dollars for?

So it so if we do it, so if we do broad categories.

Categories that could capture each of our districts, are you saying then that later on down the line, if we go after these dollars, we can make some shifts?

I think what's identified in this report, and and Josh, you can explain more of this, is that we believe some of the projects that have been identified in the 26 list could actually be paid for out of funds that we might receive in 23.

That that I think is what the item is is referencing.

And particularly in some of those very broad areas like pavement or intersection improvements, you you you've got similar things in 23 and 26.

So you might see more of those dollars flow into the 23 package rather than be delayed for the 26 package.

It and I and I guess one of my questions, uh one of the things I was disappoint thankful for what we got, but one of the things I what was disappointed in um extending um transportation out 441 for a lot of reasons.

So is there another pot of money?

Does transportation have money too?

Or is there that is not for transit for transit services?

I mean, it that is highly dependent on FTA funding.

So it really depends on because we take funding that we collect locally and we use it to leverage federal transit authority funding.

That like so many things at the federal level, that is very much in flux.

And so part of the challenge we have is we know more or less what we can do with the T Sploss funding, a lot of its operations and purchasing buses and those kinds of things.

Service extensions in a lot of ways are going to be dependent on what FTA funding ends up being.

And that will literally change year by year.

Okay.

Commissioner Culpepper.

So should we put a vote on the final list on hold until we know these different options?

Because we're voting on stuff that we don't know there might be money in other places for.

We're going to meet we're going to get this on the referendum.

Oh, we've got to have we've got data.

We need the final project that's pretty close to finalized uh by the third uh by the third work uh the third Tuesday in January, which is our agenda sitting meeting.

We have to vote on the resolution and the IGA approving the project list no later than the uh first our regular meeting in February.

So I mean that would which means you know I'm thinking maybe y'all should have a work session, like y'all need to think of it because this has got to move, you know, y'all gotta come together and use it.

What I'd want everybody to recognize is that should the 23 package produce more dollars than originally anticipated, items on those 23 project lists are going to be able to use those dollars.

You know, we've seen cost escalation, so you know, for example, if you've got um intersection improvements, we got a lot of intersection improvements that we can spend dollars on, which is an item on the 23 list if you're interested in seeing dirt roads converted.

We've got a lot of dirt roads that we could see converted.

So what we won't we will not lose out at all should we have the accrual of additional millions of dollars devoted to the 23 package before on the calendar we begin to pursue the 26 package.

I just I wouldn't feel the need to be worried about that.

We've got uh Commissioners Link.

Yeah, um could staff possibly provide us in an email in one place the blurbs from the TAD committee reports that lists the project preferences.

So we have all in one place project preferences that relate to transportation that could possibly qualify for T S PLOSS funds.

So we have all in one place those projects that those citizen committees have already asked for to be funded with TAD funds so we can kind of cross-reference them with this list to see if any of those projects qualify there when we're talking about reallocating funds.

Um, you know, and I'm also kind of interested in maybe bucketizing some of these to assure that we can be flexible with those funds if other funding sources do pop up that might pay for a very specific project that's on the T SPLOSS list.

Um, you know, just to assure that we can be a little bit more flexible with the funds if we do find these other sources.

Some of the um community identified priority lists are very specific, like with an intersection and a location, and some are more generically you know, covered by stops.

So yeah, I can send you the link.

Um for all things.

I mean, yeah, if we could have you know just the blurbs that specifically refer to any transportation oriented projects that are recommended by those committees.

Commissioner Thor.

Prioritized, um, I like the bucket idea.

Um another priority is Commissioner Fisher's idea, those districts that have not were not um did not receive um TAD dollars.

Um that should be one of our priorities.

And um the bucket list put you know, putting things together that could be in any district.

I think um when Patrick or or who when we all get together, we should know what prior and and and what TAD dollars are available.

I think those three things should be spelled out.

Uh districts that did not get any funding, um TAD dollars, and creating buckets.

Mr.

Myers.

Yeah.

And I I will repeat ask staff for this too, if any of the departments have a list of prioritized projects that would get funding from the safe routes, the traffic signal intersection, because that's like that's I don't know, those things are expensive.

And uh and the replacement, like I guess of from the vision zero for some of those, if there are any projects that would there, the area bus state uh the the bus stop improvement.

I mean, is there a list already of like just going down the list and find out where there are?

Not for that one, but there might be for the intersections.

Some yeah, some.

I mean, uh, and some are still in development.

So, for example, the vision zero, you might remember from the work session there was the discussion of the high high incident, high accident areas and stuff that we talked about doing some pilot projects.

So you can obviously kind of discern where those high accident areas are are likely to turn into projects that that vision zero would cover, and that would give you a sense of how those over time would be distributed.

Yeah, yeah.

Commissioner Link.

Yeah, um so it occurred to me that we've actually you know approved some funding for T S PLOSS projects from the last round, but we haven't had enough funds to complete them.

I'm thinking about the Barber Street project, I'm thinking about West Broad, where we you know have this list of nice to have, but they're probably not going to get done.

I mean, uh, do we just leave old T S BLOS projects half done because the we don't have enough funding from that bucket, or do we add them into this cycle?

I know that.

Well, it would then we wouldn't have had the money anyways, like the costs were through the roof and the asks were super expensive.

Um I mean, I feel like I mean the same thing with West Broad.

There's a whole bunch of projects on there that were in the nice to have that aren't showing up on this T S BLOSS that are never gonna get done.

Um so I feel like we should kind of go back at the old T S BLOSS list and see, you know, what were the projects that were only able to get partially done because of the cost escalation?

Because remember, those came through during COVID and you know, when we saw this big inflation, and consider you know, finding funding to complete these projects instead of leaving them dangling.

There should be another that should be listed with one of the priorities.

Yeah, and and just kind of to think about what we've done recurrently really with Boston T S BLOS programs passed.

It's not been unusual in one package to have a project come in dramatically under budget, the jail, for example.

You know, in other cases we have accumulated earned interest, and so this body decides where to direct those dollars when when there are extra funds.

Sometimes those decisions are made, you know, pretty soon after the initial version of the project was complete and and now we have the supplemental addition.

Sometimes there is a lag.

So but that's not been unusual at all, you know, for us to have continually evolving projects, and certainly, you know, it it it you know it won't be long before we're saying, well, geez, what are we gonna do with those 2031 dollars?

Um they'll be coming along before you know it, Commissioner Thornton.

You know, I guess the whole idea is to be able to promote and get voters to support support um 2020 um six um T Sploss.

project was complete and and now we have the supplemental addition sometimes there is a lag so but that's not been unusual at all you know for us to have continually evolving projects and certainly you know it it it you know it won't be long before we're saying well geez what are we going to do with those 2031 dollars um that they'll they'll be coming along before you know it commissioner thorn you know I guess the whole idea is to be able to promote and get voters to support support um 2020 um six um T Splash and I really don't know which ones have been completed um for some locations where T splash dollars were used to do something could we do signage that says this is where your T splotch dollars blah blah blah I see that in other places so folk can see where their dollars are they're there we already got them up we have signs that it is where where are they funded by splots 25 to just one in front of the Linden House for example a couple blocks from here you got to get out in the neighborhood I mean you got to get out we have been taking up some that are very old some that are so old that they're faded or you know no I'm talking about in our last 2023 T where projects have been completed there are signs saying this is how it was send me where they are so we can let somebody know and let's get some more up all right everyone thanks thanks for the conversation all right uh there's motion to adjourn is there a second second all in favor all right everybody please have a wonderful holiday thank you for this year or intersection yeah