OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Johns Creek City Council Work Session - May 11, 2026

City CouncilMonday, May 11, 2026
BodyJohns Creek, Georgia
SessionCity Council
DateMonday, May 11, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:02

Yes, sir.

0:03

We're recording.

0:03

Okay.

0:04

I'd like to open the meeting.

0:06

John Screek City Council work session, May 11th at 5.02 p.m.

0:12

Thank you.

0:12

Would you lead the pledge?

0:14

Sure.

0:24

Which stands one nation.

0:33

Mayor Sharmarks?

0:35

None, thank you.

0:36

Thank you.

0:36

We have nothing under strategic priorities.

0:38

The first item of business under ongoing projects is the ethics ordinance update.

0:43

And I think we're down to kind of the final round before you.

0:49

Are is everyone having trouble getting online?

0:53

Okay.

0:54

Just making sure.

0:55

Thank you.

0:56

So you have before you the items.

0:58

We've summarized last work session, we made consensus on limitations regarding when someone is aware of, affidavit and verification language, the role of the hearing officer, the role of mayor and council, guidelines for action of mayor and council.

1:12

We're down to two points of that we need decisions on.

1:17

The first one is frivolity review.

1:19

Exactly who will conduct that.

1:21

And the next one is the frivolity penalty.

1:24

And as I wanted to point out that the legal department has done a little bit of extra research, so you should have had that in your inbox if there's any questions on frivolity review penalties.

1:36

So just from memory, I'll just say that uh I thought that it was good the first option where it was the clerk making a kind of the perfunctory format review, and then it going to the review officer.

1:52

And I think I was the one driving, or at least I instigated this idea of there being a penalty for a frivolous complaint, and I'm abandoning that idea just based on what I've read.

2:04

Thank you.

2:05

Aaron Yes, I agree.

2:08

Uh option one for the frivolity review and no penalty fee charge for number two.

2:13

Thank you.

2:15

Option one for both.

2:18

Thank you.

2:30

Do you remember?

2:31

Um right.

2:33

Yes.

2:34

Option one and for number one, option one and option two.

2:42

Uh you know, I don't want issue 50.

2:44

I don't want to be zero.

2:46

Would would the council consider having a like a fifty dollar administrative penalty if there is uh if it's if if it's uh not doesn't work out basically.

3:00

Frivolous if it's frivolous, a fifty dollar administrative fee versus two fifty.

3:06

Yeah.

3:06

Well, I mean I think based on what we've been reading that if it's frivolous, it gets stopped at the clerk level, and it pretty much has to go to a hearing officer.

3:17

Um it sounds like there are some legal issues.

3:20

Yeah, I mean I I was driving that, so I mean I was kind of hoping that maybe if I abandon it, maybe that goes.

3:28

I lean more towards zero, but I'm like there is time involved with staff, so I was like, if we are reviewing a bunch of frivolous uh complaints, there should be but then we could carry that to BZA and every other thing where we do a review.

3:42

But anyway.

3:43

All right, so I appreciate that.

3:45

Um Bob.

3:48

The reason why I think uh there should be some threshold.

3:53

You charge it up front, and if it's deemed frivolous uh uh serious, then you waive that fee of the reason why I'm thinking like that is because in in Europe, especially in Britain, this medical legal frivolous lawsuits.

4:09

They're not abounding like here in the United States.

4:12

They have 10% escrow fee.

4:16

If they win, they don't forfeit it.

4:20

Otherwise, they will fulfill it.

4:22

Uh that helped a lot of backlog of cases previously.

4:26

So therefore I uh I don't think it should be that just you know, like those billboards which you see on the highways.

4:35

We get paid when you get paid.

4:37

That just inwaites.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Engineering And Infrastructure█████████████████████21%
Community Engagement████████████████16%
Procedural█████████████13%
Active Transportation█████████████13%
Transportation Safety█████████████13%
Parks and Recreation███████████11%
Pending Litigation███████7%
Public Safety███3%
Economic Development██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Johns Creek City Council Work Session - May 11, 2026

The Johns Creek City Council held a work session on May 11, 2026, beginning at 5:02 PM. The meeting covered several ongoing projects, council initiatives, and routine business. Key discussions included updates to the ethics ordinance, special events planning, trail width options for Nesbit Ferry, an appeals notification process, and street lighting at major intersections. The council reached consensus on several items and referred others to staff or advisory committees for further refinement.

Ethics Ordinance Updates

  • Council considered two remaining issues: the frivolity review process and a penalty for frivolous complaints. After debate, consensus was reached on Option 1 for the frivolity review (clerk format review followed by hearing officer) and Option 1 for the penalty (no fee). Council member Bob initially proposed a nominal $50 administrative fee but later withdrew the suggestion, and the final consensus was zero penalty. The city attorney noted due process concerns and that the city has had only four or five such complaints in its history.

Special Events Options

  • Council discussed the 2026 special event schedule and staff recommendations. A majority supported sending detailed operational and logistic questions to the advisory committees (ACE and RPAC) for further input. Key decisions included: support for a final Johns Creek Symphony Orchestra concert (Councilmember Tapke recused), preference for not competing with new Medley events, and general agreement to scale back city events this year to allow Medley to establish itself. Council also favored cross-promotion with Medley for Diwali (same day, earlier time) and differentiation for Holly Jolly. The literary fair and arts festival were referred to committees. Councilmember Stacey expressed that the city should not fund consumable items like hot chocolate for Medley events.

Nesbit Trail Width Options

  • Staff presented four options for the Nesbit Ferry Trail between Brumbelow Road and Nesbit Lakes Drive: 10-foot trail, 8-foot trail, 5-foot sidewalk, and a hybrid 8-to-10-foot trail. Council expressed strong support for the hybrid option, noting it balances multimodal access, cost, and property impacts. Discussion also included: potential bike lane integration from Scott Road north (to coordinate with Roswell), use of existing acceleration lanes to minimize impacts, and thickness of concrete (4-inch vs. 6-inch). Staff was directed to proceed with the hybrid option and to explore bike lane connections while consulting with Roswell. Council also requested that transitions in width be smooth and that tree impacts be minimized.

Appeals Notification Process

  • Councilmember Tapke introduced the item, aiming to ensure residents are notified of their right to appeal certain city decisions (e.g., to the Board of Zoning Appeals or Construction Board of Appeals). Council agreed that the city should provide clearer notification in written decisions, but limited the scope to decisions affecting property rights. The item was sent to staff to develop recommendations, with a focus on material decisions rather than every daily interaction. The city attorney noted potential concerns about inconsistent notification across different types of decisions.

Street Lights at Major Intersections

  • Councilmember Aramelli proposed a pilot program to add lighting at two high-crash intersections: State Bridge Rd/GA 141 and Old Alabama Rd/Jones Bridge Rd. He cited statistics of 9,000 crashes in the past five years, including 1,000 at night, and argued that lighting can reduce crashes by 12–38%. Other council members (Powell, Skinner, Elwood) preferred a more holistic, data-driven approach through the comprehensive plan update, noting community concerns about light pollution and the need for public input. The city manager noted that lighting studies have been deferred in the past due to cost (annual electricity bill over $900,000) and the lack of a streetlight district. Consensus was reached to have staff conduct a triage review of lighting gaps across the city, including intersections, and to incorporate the issue into the upcoming comprehensive plan update for broader community feedback.

Key Outcomes

  • Ethics Ordinance: Consensus to proceed with Option 1 for both frivolity review and penalty. Ordinance to be brought back for formal adoption.
  • Special Events: Staff and advisory committees to refine details; council supported the symphony concert, and general direction to avoid competing with Medley.
  • Nesbit Trail: Council directed staff to advance the hybrid trail option (8–10 ft), explore bike lane connections from Scott Road north, and coordinate with Roswell. Design to consider smooth transitions and minimize impacts.
  • Appeals Notification: Staff to develop recommendations for notification of appeal rights in property-related decisions.
  • Street Lighting: Staff to perform a triage assessment of lighting deficiencies and include the topic in the comprehensive plan update for community input.

Note: The meeting concluded with an executive session to discuss a land matter, after which the council adjourned.

Meeting Transcript

Yes, sir. We're recording. Okay. I'd like to open the meeting. John Screek City Council work session, May 11th at 5.02 p.m. Thank you. Would you lead the pledge? Sure. Which stands one nation. Mayor Sharmarks? None, thank you. Thank you. We have nothing under strategic priorities. The first item of business under ongoing projects is the ethics ordinance update. And I think we're down to kind of the final round before you. Are is everyone having trouble getting online? Okay. Just making sure. Thank you. So you have before you the items. We've summarized last work session, we made consensus on limitations regarding when someone is aware of, affidavit and verification language, the role of the hearing officer, the role of mayor and council, guidelines for action of mayor and council. We're down to two points of that we need decisions on. The first one is frivolity review. Exactly who will conduct that. And the next one is the frivolity penalty. And as I wanted to point out that the legal department has done a little bit of extra research, so you should have had that in your inbox if there's any questions on frivolity review penalties. So just from memory, I'll just say that uh I thought that it was good the first option where it was the clerk making a kind of the perfunctory format review, and then it going to the review officer. And I think I was the one driving, or at least I instigated this idea of there being a penalty for a frivolous complaint, and I'm abandoning that idea just based on what I've read. Thank you. Aaron Yes, I agree. Uh option one for the frivolity review and no penalty fee charge for number two. Thank you. Option one for both. Thank you. Do you remember? Um right. Yes. Option one and for number one, option one and option two. Uh you know, I don't want issue 50. I don't want to be zero. Would would the council consider having a like a fifty dollar administrative penalty if there is uh if it's if if it's uh not doesn't work out basically. Frivolous if it's frivolous, a fifty dollar administrative fee versus two fifty. Yeah. Well, I mean I think based on what we've been reading that if it's frivolous, it gets stopped at the clerk level, and it pretty much has to go to a hearing officer. Um it sounds like there are some legal issues. Yeah, I mean I I was driving that, so I mean I was kind of hoping that maybe if I abandon it, maybe that goes. I lean more towards zero, but I'm like there is time involved with staff, so I was like, if we are reviewing a bunch of frivolous uh complaints, there should be but then we could carry that to BZA and every other thing where we do a review. But anyway. All right, so I appreciate that. Um Bob.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com