Work Session Meeting - March 2, 2026: CIP, Stormwater, and Tree Policy
Work Session Meeting - March 2, 2026
The Johns Creek City Council held a work session on March 2, 2026, at 5:00 PM to discuss the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), stormwater utility rate adjustments, and a proposed policy on tree removal and replanting for city infrastructure projects. The council reached consensus on several items and directed staff to return with additional analysis.
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Discussion - FY2027-2031
- Assistant City Manager Kay Love presented a prioritization of 38 projects based on council retreat rankings. Four projects received consensus (4+ votes): land acquisition, police drone first responder program, recreation center, and stormwater grant program. An additional pond dredging program was also consensus with a $500,000 placeholder.
- The total for consensus projects was $18.15 million, with $15 million earmarked for land acquisition. The remaining $2.9 million of approximately $20.1 million available was discussed.
- Councilmember Dilip proposed consolidating the makerspace with the recreation center to achieve operational savings and synergies. He suggested parking $2 million in the rec center and delaying the makerspace decision by 45-60 days for further study. Councilmember Bob supported limiting land acquisition to $7 million to fund smaller projects (e.g., pickleball lighting, disc golf). Councilmember Stacy requested adding the police command vehicle and pickleball lighting to the funded list. Councilmember Tunki preferred to park the $2.9 million delta in the rec center project. Councilmember Chris supported the consensus list as presented.
- Key Outcome: Council consensus to fund the four consensus projects and the pond dredging program, with the $2.9 million delta parked in the recreation center project. Staff will explore the feasibility of combining the makerspace and rec center and report back. The land acquisition amount was not finalized; further discussion will occur in executive session.
Stormwater Utility – Progress and Inflationary Rate Update
- Kay Love reported that since 2021, the city has completed $13 million in repairs using a worst-first approach. The original $32 million program has increased to $36.8 million due to inflation. Three rate increase options were presented:
- 2.52% increase (MCI index) – $1.76/year per bill, raising $80,000 annually.
- 1.7% increase (3-year MCI average) – $1.18/year per bill, raising $54,000 annually.
- 14.84% increase (catch-up) – $10.33/year per bill, raising $473,000 annually.
- Council discussed staff capacity, the need to avoid overburdening residents, and the possibility of using CIP funds to accelerate stormwater work. Councilmember Chris supported Option 1, rejecting option 3 as enabling federal inflation. Councilmember Bob questioned the effectiveness of a large catch-up given capacity constraints. Councilmember Stacy requested a clear communication plan showing past work and planned projects.
- Key Outcome: Consensus on Option 1 (annual MCI-based increase) for the 2026 billing cycle. Staff will provide an analysis of how a one-time capital infusion could address the funding gap and whether additional staff or contracts could increase capacity. Further discussions will continue during the FY27 budget process.
Policy Proposal – Tree Removal and Replanting for City Infrastructure Projects
- Councilmember Skanner proposed a policy to include replanting and beautification costs upfront in infrastructure project budgets, citing public concern over tree removal on Barnwell Road. The policy would apply to city projects only, not private property.
- Council discussion raised legal constraints on requiring private property owners to replant, though the city could plant in the right-of-way. Councilmember Aaron suggested integrating the concept into existing project workflows rather than a rigid policy. Councilmember Bob inquired about public objection rights to replanting plans, noting that once road plans are finalized, objections have no legal validity. Councilmember Chris preferred a guidance approach over a formal policy, citing fiscal and legal complexity.
- Key Outcome: Council consensus to have staff evaluate the current practices, legal constraints, and options for improving tree replanting on city infrastructure projects. Staff will bring back recommendations for potential changes.
Routine Business (Non-Discussion)
The agenda included items on the Chattahoochee Greenway supplemental agreements, boards/committees updates, TSPLOST implementation, and a traffic control center contract award. These items were listed but not discussed during the work session.
Executive Session
- A motion was made and seconded to adjourn to executive session to discuss land acquisition, legal, and personnel matters. The motion passed without objection.
Meeting Transcript
Thank you, Mayor. We're recording. Thanks. Would you lead the pledge? Under the municipality and justice for the Mayor's remarks? Thank you. The first item under strategic priorities. This is a capital improvement plan. We have assistant city manager love for presentation. Good afternoon. Sorry. Good afternoon. At the retreat, if you will call, we talked about capital improvement program, and you began talking about prioritizing projects. So we're gonna pick up where we left off in your memo for this item. You can see that we had four projects where there was a consensus of the council where four or more council members prioritize that project. And I've given you a discussion worksheet, uh, which is the same information that's in the memo, but it's just on one page. It may be helpful for the discussion as we get into that. But those projects were land acquisition, police drone is a first responder program, recreation center, and the stormwater grant program. And then we had four projects where there was almost consensus whereby there were at least three council members that prioritize that project. There were seven projects where two council members prioritize those, and I won't read those off, but you can see those there. We had 12 projects that received one vote by a council member, and then we had another uh 12 projects that received no votes. There were 38 projects in total for consideration. And we discussed approximately 20.1 million dollars being available from a variety of sources that the council could consider for allocation uh for those capital projects, depending on how you wanted to set aside funding. Additionally, during this discussion, there was consensus related to establishing a separate dredging program, pond dredging program, and as a placeholder for the discussion, staff put in 500,000, which is a like amount for the stormwater grant program. Obviously, council can up or down or change those amounts. So in total for consensus projects, there are 18,150,000. And during that same discussion, the council it was consensus to put aside 15 million dollars for land acquisition. Uh there was some discussion uh related. A couple of council members wanted to pull forward or earlier the bathrooms uh at boardwalk. That was not a consensus, but it is noted in here. Um then in your memo you can see the chart uh that shows the funding request on those projects that were uh not consensus and how many votes they received. Um those ones that received three votes totaled 1.4 million, and those that received two votes uh totaled 2.8 million. So there's a 4.2 million dollar uh group of projects that were two or three. Uh Mr. Mayor, I don't know if you want to start with consensus projects or go around, or perhaps there might be some questions about projects. Yeah, uh I think it's probably up to each individual member, but uh, I'll just say for myself that you know I think that what we have in front of us with the consensus items is large. And considering the recreation center is something that would need funding into the future past this next funding year. Uh I'm satisfied to stick with those that are at the top of the list. I know that there are a lot of things on this list that are worthwhile, but gotta make hard choices. Yes, I agree. I don't feel pressured to allocate the remaining the difference um between the 20 million and the 18 million we've already allocated. So that discrepancy could either be put into land acquisition or it could be put somewhere else that you know as a placeholder until we get to the budget cycle this summer. I find with either of those. Okay, so uh some of these items. The bottom two will are definitely worth the considering again that we can uh address those in the 27 budget. Again, that we can address those in the 27 budget. So the delta of 2.9 million dollars. We will need another 20 million for the rec center. So would it be possible to make another like a project account, like recreation center? And that 2 million that we already assigned, and what is the delta 80s right now?
openpublica.com