Agenda work session to order, please.

First item is the May 11th agenda work session minutes.

You have motion?

Make a motion to approve.

Wait, is there edit?

There was an edit.

Um around, come around with the edit.

What edit did you have?

This one.

Yeah, there was an edit on the last page.

I think there was another one.

Right.

There should be another one on page seven.

It's on the way.

Okay, so yes, on page six, there should be another edit.

Uh no, this is from the meeting.

On the agenda work session on page six.

My disclosure that Miss Renfro is a client.

Although I was able to vote, my disclosure needs to be on here.

Okay.

Um it is number it doesn't really say an item number.

It's not an item number is added via suspending the rules.

Right.

It's the last item on the minutes.

You lost me.

So does uh Mr.

Mayor ask one question.

Um Councilman Richardson, you've already submitted you've already submitted that's the written disclosure in this into the city clerk.

I disclosed it at the meeting.

I didn't write it, I can write it.

It didn't keep me from voting.

It's just a disclosure that she's a client.

Um I will sit down and write it right now.

We can accept the verbal.

Okay.

Um for the sake of moving the forward moving this forward.

I make a motion to approve the um May 11th, 2026 agenda work session minutes with the changes noted as revised here and with the additional disclosure that Cheryl is currently writing and was verbally disclosed at the meeting.

Second.

Motion carries.

One, two, six.

Six.

Six, oh nine attendance.

I mean, motion carries.

Mr.

Kent, BOW report, please, sir.

Yes, sir.

We had a very good BLW meeting today.

Started out with uh Kim Holland, who's the director of water and sewer.

I'd never met her before, so that was uh pleasure.

She introduced three of her supervisors, Brian Bickers, who's a sewer supervisor, Josh Onby, who's the water supervisor, and Chris Reed, who's a meter maintenance supervisor.

This is an awesome opportunity for us to meet some of the staff.

Uh, and they get to meet us coming to the BLW board.

Um, Ms.

Holland.

Uh we had uh the BLW strategic business plan 2026.

Eric Patton, who's the director of electrical, gave a um a report on the survey that was taken 2019.

Uh which was favorable.

Uh they hadn't repeated the survey since 2019.

Um what they agreed to do going forward is is on a three-year cycle cycle through residential commercial key accounts and increase uh participation.

Uh most customers reported paying online and being satisfied uh with how bills are presented.

More than half rated the electrical value as good, excellent, and reliable.

Uh exceeded 90 percent.

Notable paradox though, most customers reported experiencing outages in the past 12 months, so even though they experienced outages, they still um found that the BLW service uh was favorable.

Customers asked for more proactive communication and easy access to information, website links, bill stuffers, and monthly emails.

So the the one area I think that was um I guess a concern with the survey was on uh being responsive and customer service, and uh according to Ron, they've had some shortages, and so that has created um some um some problems with being responsible people being on wait time a little longer than what they would like to be uh so that due to the short staff, so they're working on that as well.

Um recommendation going forward is to you know, I I had brought up to increase um the frequency of the of the of the actual surveys and also uh some incentive for the people to respond.

They only had two percent of over 22,000 uh emails, so it's about 400 and some people that responded, and um so going forward they may try some incentives, and I think Ron mentioned that they had in the past offered people a small, I guess, amount off of their electrical bill if they responded to the survey, or some type of gift card or or something or drawing for a gift card that would entice more people to respond.

We would like to at least I said that statistics show that you should, you know, try to get that number up to five or ten percent.

So let's see what else um uh customers did express an interest in time of use rate options and clear information about rates, uh, and also the deployment of AI development plan to enable hourly reads and off-time of use products hourly reads will support new rate offerings and customer programs.

Um that was some of the feedback and that they received from the report.

One of the questions I asked, and and hopefully we can address with the next surveys is how do we compare to our competitors?

Uh uh Cobb EMC and also um uh Georgia Power, and we were not looking.

Uh I guess the survey was not actually dealing with or uh uh putting up putting us up against those or being the best in class, or there is a um a standard called American Customer Satisfaction Index, which call EMC uh scores 92 out of 100 is what one of their last and uh Georgia Powell uses received, I guess a JD Powered top rating.

So would love to see how we compare and how we move forward and being you know the best in in class.

Next, Ms.

On the water quality uh report, the 2025 water quality report released digitally, and uh it has hard copies in the city lobster is available uh for mailing on requests, monitoring program run they run thousands of tests per year across treatment plants and distribution uh current results meet or exceed federal state standards.

New regulatory items highlighted lead and copper inventory, uh which I think they stated that we definitely don't have any at this particular time.

Uh all of our lead pipes have been replaced.

So that is in your BOW book, and it's some very interesting reading.

I would advise you to read it because even though we meet the standards for EPA, there are still some contaminants that are below the detectable or the allowable limits that are actually in all water, bottle water, and our water.

The next item that Mrs.

Covered was that we have approved the easement abandonment from Harris Farmers Market 50 Powers Ferry Road.

This is they have put in all new pipes and water, so we have in place according to Kevin easements on all the new water lines.

And that uh so they're releasing, I guess our liability is would be a part of that.

That was part of the of us releasing it.

We also are released with any liability because those pipes will still remain in the ground, but they would no longer be active uh supplying water and sewer.

So those were the some of the main items that were discussed before the finance.

So is Ms.

Tina.

I'm sorry, did I skip grip?

Yeah.

You can't write.

I was after water for all the no after the uh anyway.

Um this is a report for uh ending April 30th.

Uh water sales for the month averaged 83 million gallons a day uh compared with a um budget of 75 million.

Uh water sales revenue totaled 9.4 million, which exceeded the budget expectation by 696,000.

Um net income for the month was um 4.1 million dollars, which exceeded the budget by 1 million dollars.

Um year today date net income exceeded the budget by 524,000.

So that one was pretty close to their planning.

Uh year-to-date spending on capital projects totaled 24 million dollars on the date of the financial report with the remaining annual CIP budget commitment of sixty million dollars.

Cash reserved for CIP spend to spending totaled sixty-one point seven million dollars at the end of April.

So there's a lot of stuff gonna be have to be paid for next over the next year or two.

Uh year to date average rainfall as recorded by the water authority totaled 14.4 inches at the end of April, compared with an average of 14.7 in the same period, which is about 2% decrease year over year.

Um as far as the uh pipeline projects and the facilities projects, um and the ones in design pipeline projects.

We had five um working on five pipeline projects.

One was completed this year.

Um we've got five facilities project underway, and um we've got two in design and one that is fixing to come commence in design pretty soon.

Um you get a chance, take a look in the report of all the things.

That's some pretty good photographs of all that going on, all the work that's going on in the various uh pipeline projects.

Any questions?

Hey Andre.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The MIAG reports will be as of April, and then the financials are for the month of May.

So if you look at page one of the supplementals, the total MIAG project and other energy costs were under budget by 124,000.

The supplemental was over budget by 1.2 million, and all summed the total power costs were over budget by 1.1 million.

Calendar year to date through April, the total power costs are over budget by 3.3 million.

May I ask a quick question on this one?

For the month of April, and then overall, do we know what the generation was?

But do we have more generation, less generation than expected?

There was actually less generation than anticipated.

But we did have to utilize some of the other plants because of outages.

Thank you.

Okay, so looking at page two, looking at the BLW monthly and fiscal year to date.

The project and energy cost compared to our internal BLW budget reflects 1.6 million in additional monthly power costs.

The supplemental was $54,000 under budget, which resulted in power costs of $1.7 million over budget for the month.

Fiscal year to date, however, the total power costs have dropped below budget by $1 million.

Looking at our gas price, our gas prices, and this is on page three.

Our gas prices continue to fall below budget.

Lower market prices will continue to negatively affect the supplemental sales, and that of course has an impact on our overall cost.

So we're looking as you can see from January to March, a con January to April, a continual decrease, and we anticipate that to continue for the rest of the year.

Looking on page four, the spot market dipped again in the month of April.

The forecast for BLW anticipate the prices will resume to mimic the budget pricing.

However, today's prices opened at 31.9 MMBTU.

And the May prices dipped into the mid to upper 21 dollar range.

So it's indicating that there will be even lower dollar values associated with our spot market.

So although we anticipate it to go up, it may not increase as much as it has been forecasted.

Can I ask you a question there?

Yes.

That's that's basically what it costs if if we were buying electricity, not using our generated uh amount.

So the spot market is gonna give at a specific point in time, and the the overall gas prices is just shows the fluctuations as the market um moves up and down the potential um for to buy, but this um we have we allow for forward pricing.

We have a 48-hour forward pricing, and so we use those market prices to try to predict um what our needs were gonna be and where we will end up for purchase price.

So that plus the adder um for the fixed costs is where we try to land um when we are having to go out to the market to make sure that we're covering all of our costs.

Yeah, okay.

Um on this pay on this page here is and see that they're talking about a share two unit commitment starting 526.

I noticed that on the one the one day.

On this page on the unit status.

Yes.

Okay, okay.

Um how long was that commitment for?

It was just for um the 26th and the 27th.

Um that was out on it was scheduled for the 26th for shear two and 27th for shear one.

Shear one actually um was out for um three days instead of the one.

I'm gonna say it was utilized for three days instead of one.

Okay.

Um do we have other things that were out at the time or is it reason why Google is out?

Yeah, I'm sorry, hatch.

It was out.

Yes, hatch one and two were both out for a short period of time for um differing reasons.

If you look at um the first two lines were outlines um that they were derated initially um on for 530.

That's why shear one ended up going for three days, and then uh shear two that was scheduled for the 26 um had a commitment that lasted for about two weeks.

Has hatch one and two been rated back up at this point?

Yes.

Okay, so the test for the turbine the the uh the turbine valve testing went well on the control and the control routers are covered.

So they um they brought it back up to continue the testing and make sure that the um changes that they made, um, the maintenance changes were um had taken properly.

So as of right now, um I haven't seen any updates where there were any additional issues.

Okay, and so share should be offline at this point now.

Yes, unless it's up for um generation purposes.

If we um we just needed additional sales, but there were no issues that were requiring it to be brought on online.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, and so um moving to page 10 and page 11.

We're um looking at our non-coincidental peaks as well as our energy requirements.

Um both um the NCP as well as the energy um experienced new highs for the month of April, and this is actually the third month in a row for each that is um now um where it's the third month in a row where they've experienced new highs, and this is actually the four of the five months this year, this calendar year that has seen new five-year highs.

So um the only month that um did not was uh January.

I'm sorry, that's for the water.

Okay, these um the last three months, the past three months have seen new highs.

January did not for the NCP and the energy, but on the water, it was the four out of the last five months that have seen new highs, and that's on page 12 in February was the only month that did not, and so that concludes my report for the supplemental, and I'll move on to the financials.

So looking at page one, the financials, um, the May revenue fell short of the budget by 1.5 million dollars.

If you um exclude the use of reserves from the budget, and um the variance then reduces down to 300,000 for the month, and when I say excluding the um reserves, it was just where uh we anticipated you utilizing reserve funds from a budgetary standpoint, but we have not our actual.

So if you take away that assumption, then we have a three hundred thousand dollar variance for the month.

Looking at our fiscal year to date budget, it is a miss by five point five million dollars, and again, this is uh due to the assumption of um usage of reserves at the 5.5 million dollars.

So normalizing that we are under budget by 200,000 for the fiscal year.

Looking at um the BLW um monthly revenue year over year.

We are up for water and wastewater, our revenues while our electric is down by 2.7 million, and that's due to FY25 having 2.8 million in distributor contributions.

If you remove remove the distributor contributions from the operating revenues, it will reflect a six hundred thousand dollar year over year increase for the month of May from 2025 to 2026.

Now looking at our fiscal year-to-date revenue, it is down in total by 1.4 million year over year.

Moving to page two in your books, we'll see the BLW profit and loss the year to date.

We're looking at the actual versus the budget.

Looking at budget compared to the actuals for the month of May.

And so that has also reduced the monthly income from operations, which is 47% lower this year compared to it is 47% lower for the month of May for the actuals versus the budget.

Now looking at it from a um fiscal year to date PL, um the operational income is two million dollars shy of the budget projections, which are resulting from three million dollar high um higher than anticipated cost of sales, and so we will see that flow through the uh remainder of the financials for the year as well.

The revenues um are increasing, so we are seeing that um serve as a way a slight rebound from what we anticipated um three months ago, and then lastly, we'll take a look um at the Pells um for fiscal year to date, looking at year over year actuals, it'll carry forth the trends that um we just spoke about the revenues are down, costs are up, and this is reflecting the slight drop in our margins, and so operating revenues are down by three million, and that's and the cost of sales, um and and the cost of sales are up by 1.8, so that accounts for the 4.8 million dollar total variance year over year.

And then lastly, looking on page six, looking at our overall reserves, we have a uh surplus reserves total of 31.4 million, and that concludes my report.

Any questions we need to receive and follow?

Yes, sir.

So next we had the mayor's report.

We had a a lot of this discussion around if I can summarize it.

Under the mayor's report, we um we're in a unique position now.

We have no excess.

The BOW is usually the first contact with people that want to buy our services, and when I say no exits, it I guess that really would take six years, but I think yes.

We kind of asked, do we consider that as committed?

You know, both for the uh the large load that we're furnishing in South Fulton, and then the one that's still in negotiation, you know, for 108.

And then the reason that comes up is basically we're in the hole if you call those committed.

Just food for thought just to give us heads up if something ever came.

Well, we had to make a decision committed subject to another vote someday to just 108 or is it still gonna be first come for sure?

If that comes about and then but like say we just kind of guidance for our sales department, you know, when it yeah, with no excess, I mean should have come to the city council first.

I mean I'm just I I guess if I could I I thought the decision was is that we would serve our residential commercial and then go out on the market for the large load and the other customer was contractually what we said we would do it's not if you if you want to purse opinion that's what we did that was to go on the market and the one that we that we're probably gonna do that on which he means also going to market rather than us going to debt and buying some.

I mean buying generation, but the one that we voted out on the broker, real estate broker has gotten no takers.

That's my point.

I mean, if so if that falls through, then we're not we're undercommitted, we still have more.

No, but the with the one in South Fulton, the one we're doing with College Fort.

Right.

That'll take away all our excess probably in the next okay.

Is that a fair statement, Ron?

Yes, sir.

Yeah, the mayor's correct.

The uh data center at South Fulton will take up all of our excess and then some, so we'll have to get some generation for that, but the other data centers that we're looking to serve will be a capacity deal through market where they would have to put the money up front for the energy, and we would serve them that way.

Not in the until MiAq bought you know, built generation, and we would decide if we wanted to buy in or not, and pay that cost would be the uh paid by the uh data center as well.

But we wouldn't buy excess generation initially, we would go just to market for anything over it that we need, and they would pay market plus.

Correct.

Okay.

So it'd be a combination of market and and Miag has a pool of of energy, probably I think maybe about 80 megawatts that we could tap into in addition to market, but yes, these would be capacity deals and not it's not generation assets that we have on the ground running because we it's all all committed at this point, and then some with any of those contracts, of course, there's being structured so that we're not going the uh there's not going to be a negative rate impact on any other residential or other commercial customer.

It is the cost of this generation cost of this power that we're providing that is to that particular data center customer or large load customer or whoever it be, and it's at a cost plus.

So whatever our cost was if we went on the market, whatever the market was plus the mark plus the margin.

Is that correct?

Is that correct?

That's correct.

And in addition to that, they pay all the cost to serve.

So if they've got a upgrade a substation or build a substation or a grade transmission lines, I mean all distribution lines, they've got to pay the full freight for all that.

So none of that costs relative to data centers or large loads would be passed on to the customers of Marietta.

We've had no tackers on the market right.

I mean, I mean the big boys either have the money or they build their own plant.

Correct.

But I'm just which is the point of the conversation that yeah, because I mean the BLW, I think ought to get business, but yet we're not the ones that will issue the debt.

I mean that I mean that's that's the big deal.

Even though assume me, I guess it's our debt.

We we issue that we're responsible for the bonds.

Yes, if we if we buy generation, that's correct.

Buy buy into a generation plant, yes.

And then the we kind of asking the board do we feel that we're committed to what we're negotiating?

What if somebody came in and we're committed to sell that 100 megawatts in the next five or six years?

South Fulton project.

South Fulton, yes, we've got a contract for the entire load, but Bells Ferry, we don't have anything.

There's no no contract, no customers, everything's kind of kind of dead in the water right now, so to speak.

And another thing that's in the foreseeable future is they have Ron's up here.

There could be people coming in asking for 15 to 18 megawatts, smaller ones.

And yeah, what with and they might have a chance for the market because they they won't have to buy they won't have to capitalize it like what we're doing now.

Correct.

Yeah, if if we get one of the smaller ones, we can serve that with our generation.

But don't on the switch.

Yeah, we I mean we can serve it now with our generation because vantage is not using it, but once Vantage starts using it, it'll be really it's it'll be spelled out in the contract, they've got to go to market, and they know that they've been told that.

So if they make it forward, um we'll have that covered.

May I have a question?

Yeah.

When does Miag anticipate anticipate new generation coming online for BIAC cities?

Six, seven years.

They're in the process now of doing a uh IRP integrated resource plan, and when they get that back, then they will kind of poll the participants.

The last number I heard they needed like 300 megawatts, and in the near well, in the future, so they're talking about building a 600 megawatt plant, maybe a two, six hundred megawatt plants for some of this load.

But I know Le Grange has got a 200 megawatt data center.

We've got the vantage, we've got most of that covered.

We still when they're fully fully loaded, uh, we'll we'll have to get some, but it's gonna be six or seven years before they can let's say build something small.

I mean, some of these you know, battery storage or some of these something like that could go a little quicker, but a generation plants, gas turbines, probably six, seven years.

If I may, sir.

I mean, it wants the we have sites to build two six hundred megawatts.

But under federal law, the most you can use is 40 percent of it.

Currently, yes, sir.

You're correct.

So that's we're gonna have something very sacred if it's that's bizarre to me that you could only out of 600 only use 240.

It doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?

Yeah, hopefully they'll change that, but who knows?

Ms.

Mayor.

Is that a federal or state?

Federal.

Federal.

And that and that's even if you did a combined cycle, which does that reuse so that you can get you get more get more generation out of it, correct?

Even on a combined cycle slowly still got another 40 percent.

Yes, they're talking about combined cycles, yes.

Yeah, and also go back to Carlisle's question about spot.

You know, when I came on the board the spot market was eight cents.

I mean, you know, now it's three and a half.

I mean, we've had a run because of fracking if they did away with fracking, then gas wouldn't be near as attractive.

I mean, there's a challenge a week in the in this business.

But uh just is it fair to say that somebody in July might come to us asking for 18 zoning for them?

We've got people talking about it, but you look at the difference in cost about me and how quick you could do it.

I think we can anticipate.

Yeah, they say they can be ready pretty quick.

Yeah, they would have to they if they've decided to come forward, they'd have to come forward to the council with the zoning request for a change.

Yeah, yeah.

But but they'll be but they already already conversations have started, so we'll see.

Correct.

I mean that's uh but by winds at first, right?

And the other thing we kind of brought forward is I had a little operation, so I had a chance to read my emails.

There are a lot of comments still about this uh large lows and uh you know, like the it is a hundred and eight megawatts large when they but yet they talk about the one in Virginia, which you said what was close to eight hundred megawatts.

Yes, sir, seven, seven is some change, but yes.

Well we have five or six now, and they're around two and a half to five that are qualified as data centers.

We've got one that's uh 2.5 megawatts, and then we've got uh customers asking for 18, potentially another 12 down the road.

So we got two, they've got yeah, well, I won't get into that, but yeah, we've got we've got two smaller ones, potentially one that one that will be coming forward but I believe.

But a sense of fairness, should we have different classes of data centers?

I mean one that does two and a half.

Well, technically, I guess.

That's true.

Yeah, I think we we kind of do have a little bit of a classification because they've got to reach a certain threshold to get on the large load rate until that point they'll be on the general service rate.

So you got uh you got that break.

So just for clarification for everybody, the um the one that was being talked about with Bell's Ferry with the 108.

That was a proposal that they had submitted at that point to go to 108.

That's gone.

Um, and so the last conversations we had with anybody about that site was a bit uh and just not being any more than that, but that's dried up also.

So 180 is 108 has, and the 50 has even at this point.

We're we don't have anybody that we're actively talking to.

When it's coming does we make a commitment for to the property, maybe not necessary to the vendor.

I mean is that in per perpetuities.

I mean, I'm just talking about being an honorable business dealer.

They got the zoning, right?

Uh yeah, and the zoning goes with the property, so um that doesn't matter if they have a client or not, you know, at this point with it.

So doesn't zoning have like a time frame that if you don't do something on a rezone, it goes away.

That's a variance.

The zoning is permanent.

Yeah.

It does not revert based on time or inactivity.

They they are they did get a zone site specific.

Yeah.

So that's and the number actually came up in the site Pacific.

So that if they changed a different situation.

But one of the issues with the the amount of uh energy use there is uh substation or not.

Um if they go lower on the megawatts, then you don't have to have the substation.

Right.

Yeah, we can as Ron said, we require up front on anything like that that's going to be done with a large load that they've got to pay all of it up front.

Uh so there isn't any burden on the local customers.

So we could always intervene and tell them we just we can only serve up to you know 12 or you know, set a number.

Yeah.

Um I think 12 is what we can get get by with now, much larger than that, then they'd have to go with the a new transformer.

Yeah, just I'm not pushing four gifts, other than the order changed now that we don't have excess.

Usually when somebody opens a business, they just go up an account.

I mean, this is talking about what I'm gonna need the next six years, this extraordinary large amount which attracts a lot of attention.

Yeah, and we and we do have some uh generation we're gonna lose, so it does kind of go up and down over the next years, um, where we lose some generation and then we're gonna pick up generation eventually.

With it be a blessing with the two uh nuclear plants, but and we do have all that mapped out, so anybody else take a look at that Addison plant, I think it's the one that's we're going to be losing in 29, I believe.

And then we should get online with Vogel 3 and 4 in 2043 and 2044.

Yeah.

That's correct.

We'll start paying it before then, but that's correct.

236 or something like that, correct?

Correct.

Anything else, Mr.

Mayor?

No, sir.

We have the general manager's uh report.

We had a couple of items.

Uh you want to yes, sir.

We had the uh bring forth every year the uh voting and alternate voting delegate for the Miag election that's coming up.

They've got four seats that'll be open.

Uh I misspoke earlier.

I said three, but there's four.

You got uh Tim Houston from Ackworth, Chad Warbington from Albany, and Greg Thompson from Monroe, and then Terrell Jacobs is resigning because he's from Albany also, and you're gonna have one participant can have one person on the Meg board.

So there'll be four seats.

I know there's at least three uh candidates that are have submitted letters uh announcing the candidacy in addition to the incumbents, so um but the voting delegate was uh the council member that's on the boards typically what we do.

So they recommended that that uh Carl I'll be the voting delegate and that I would be the alternate voting delegate at the annual meeting at MIAG.

That's that was the recommendation to come forward to the council.

Um for the uh for the vote, is that something we need to do for June, or is that something that we'll be sent to sending through personnel um for a vote in July?

We need to give it to them now.

Yeah, I think they had a deadline of uh like a couple weeks.

Yeah, I'll have to look at the deadline, but yeah, this is in July, so we need to do that.

So you need to do it before then to get it to them.

Okay, so I'll need to add it to the agenda.

So we added to Wednesdays agenda.

Yes.

Um, we need to vote a motion on it.

Yeah, yeah.

The B.O.W.

recommended it.

Right.

So it would take them.

Is there a motion?

Um move it forward.

Make a motion to spend the rules to add an item to the agenda relating to the voting delegates from me for me agreed.

All those in favor, please raise your right hand now.

The motion make a motion to accept the recommendation from uh the BLW and appoint M.

Carlisle Kent as voting delegate and Ron Mull's alternate vote delegate for the PAG election.

All those in favor, please raise your right hand.

Motion carries.

All right for meal consent.

No objection to consent.

No objection.

Thank you.

On the agenda, the board approved.

So we cover that.

You want to explain what that is?

Yeah, that's it.

The Marriott High School.

Uh, we've got uh our logos up on the scoreboard, and we've been a member of the uh touchdown club sponsor for multiple years, and they've kind of changed the format, they increase the sponsorship just a little bit, and it's instead of annually, it's a three-year commitment.

So the board approved to do that.

Um we'll start this year with the new new budget.

So that's $10,000.

Yes.

And that helps more than just the high school football, that's their entire football program.

You know, they've got the kind of feed, they got feeder programs within the school that come up, so it helps a lot of a lot of students.

Um it's a description in the back of the B.O.W.

manual of uh what the that's the hall of fame level.

Is that yes for yeah?

We get some marketing opportunities.

We get a 30-second video if we'll highlight Marietta, Marietta Power combination.

Um requested one of those parking spade just but it's only for football, correct?

Just kidding.

This sponsorship is only for football, yes, ma'am.

Yes, um, we've got other sponsorships that come up that come along that that we participate in with the school as well.

Two notes on the on the minute side of this waters and alternate okay.

You've already caught if you already caught that on page three and four, then we're good.

So does this need to be added to the agenda?

It's already on the agenda.

No, that's this is BOW.

Yeah, BLW approved that.

So that's just council just has to ratify it.

Yes, sir.

Uh BLW.

No objection.

Objection.

Consent adoption of proposed budget for 2027.

So at the um finance committee meeting we presented the FY27 budget.

Went in quite detailed, uh quite some detail um regarding the budget.

Uh there was a um desire to hold off on uh putting it potentially on consent until after we had the opportunity to have public hearings.

We did have uh two public hearings um in the time in the time frame between the committee meetings and now one was held on June 1st at 12 o'clock here at the council chambers, and then um the others the other was held on June 3rd at 6 p.m.

here as well.

The second one was recorded and it is posted online as well as the entire um recommended budget book at an account code level.

So during the budget hearings, um we the first one we had one citizen plus staff and one council.

Um at the second, we had um two citizens, staff and um a council member.

We had no um objections.

There were a couple of questions, um general questions surrounding how the structure the budget was structured um and some of the um how um money is carried into other funds, so but nothing that um was objected that um any of the citizens um indicated they had any objections or concerns regarding the budget, and so with that um I would ask council to um consider approval of the FY27 budget as presented I make a motion to approve approval of an ordinance adopting an annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2026 and ending July 30, 2027 for the various funds of the City of Marietta and enacting the tentative advalorm tax levies for said financial year for support of the city of Marietta, governmental operations and other public purposes and debt service obligations.

Second I know we met all the requirements, didn't any comments or on answering questions about the budget at the public hearings?

No, sir.

That's good to know.

Thank you.

And any further discussion really quickly with the but with the budget as presented, there's no millage rate increase, correct?

That is correct.

Okay, thank you.

No other questions.

Uh all those in favor of moving this forward, please raise your right hand.

Is it better to have a vote or can we like to put on consent or this one's not a public hearing, is it?

No, sir.

Yes, sir.

Any objection to consent?

No objection.

Objection.

No objection.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Mayor.

My disclosure relating to the SPLOS that was on last month's agenda does apply to this item here as well.

And which also includes the partial abstention.

This is Mr.

Mayor, this is the uh intergovernmental agreement for the 2028 SPLOSS with Cobb County.

Um this IGA will allow Cobb County to collect the revenues for the 2028 SPLOSS and distribute the proceeds to the city and monthly installments.

Um 2028 SPLOS subject to the approval in an election to be held on November 3rd, 2026 would continue for six years with collections beginning on January 1st, 2028.

Um the proposed 2028 SPLOSS is expected to generate 13.038 million dollars annually for the city of Marietta.

The um IgA framework is basically the same as all the previous IGAs, step updating for the years and the um projected revenue projections as well as the addition of the new city uh city of Mapleton for and the disbursement schedules relating to that.

Um it also has the attached project list and the distribution list attached to that as well.

So um we would ask that you move this forward.

Yes, sir.

Um with regard to the project list, I don't think it got up.

I think it's still well, we were replacing the project list for Marietta with the one that we approve on Wednesday.

I know there are there, I did see some differences here and there.

Yeah, we'll we'll update all that once once we know what that final list is that's approved on Wednesday.

But subject to that it'll be the same.

So it's probably better to have the public hearing first and then this item essentially that would be my recommendation.

Yes, to have this after on the agenda after the uh public hearing.

Okay, and it not be on consent, subject to that.

Okay, ask a political question.

What worries me is I love our governor, but it's going out talking about additional sales tax.

I mean, that's what bad timing for this.

Would there be an advocate group stand up?

We can't do it.

Right.

You would think so.

There's already a group.

Yeah, they've already got one.

Yeah, if people think that they're gonna pay an extra four percent sales tax in this, yeah.

I don't think that's gonna help sponsor all of the great state of Georgia.

I think um I think Greg Teague is the chair of the advocacy group for the 2028 SPLOSS.

Yes, sir.

I'm going to go back to more of the contract, the underlying contract.

And this is more of a question, I guess, more for Bill and Doug.

The contract, is it very uh fairly similar to the one from 22 or basically near the exact language with it being replaced with 28?

Very close.

Yeah, they're just they updated it, but it's very close.

Any concerns with the any of the updates?

No, everything looked good.

Okay.

Um and the Cobb chamber, I think, is the one uh Cobb changer chambers one leading the thing with the 28s, and for the now back to the more political one that Mr.

Mayor, the Ms.

Mayor was talking about.

Um that additional penny sales sites they're talking about that that would be one that they have that the uh General Assembly has to do through local legislation to call for a referendum.

Am I correct?

Right.

Um so we take our local delegation working through that essentially.

Um and I think they know that we have the SPLOS vote coming up.

And is there an e-splos to vote next year?

I guess in the next two.

Yeah.

I don't know if it's one or two years after that.

Got it.

Thank you.

Yeah.

You know, our hands are tied about saying it, but I hope there's an education in this.

Any further discussion?

Um has there been a motion?

Please do.

I I can't make the motion in this case.

I'm partially abstaining, so I can't make it.

Like the move to approve the 2028 sploss intergovernmental agreement with Cobb County.

Second.

That just ended it.

Thank you.

All those in favor?

Motion carries.

All right, we can see it.

Non-consent because of the fact that it needs to be passed after the uh public hearing, right?

Yeah.

It's not a public hearing on this item, but we've got a public hearing for the actual list itself.

Um, so that during the regular meeting would be first, and then this would be passed after that, after y'all approved the list.

Just in case there's any changes.

Motion carries a movement forward, no consent.

Thank you.

City council, Mr.

Sands will lead us in the invocation.

Anybody would like to present the single service award to Mr.

Martin.

Oh, I would.

Please do.

Looks like they got a good looking class of the police citizens academy.

Yes, sir.

We have four scheduled appearance.

Well, the minutes on page three for May 13th.

Session or architecture consent.

I think there is a revision.

There is an amendment.

No amendment to this one.

Okay.

Just an item where um Mr.

Gaddis.

Um voting.

Is that one correct?

Ms.

Councilmember?

Because there's position.

Basic based off the uh based off the disclosure, I think, correct.

Right.

Then the other one I think was the uh just detailing out the amendment stuff on the Hope Creek.

I hope.

Yeah.

As amended, I have to be on consent.

No objection as amended.

No objection.

Uh public hearing for Webco Builders.

Z202607.

Yes, sir.

So this will be a request coming before you uh for rezoning of 544 Burney Street on Wednesday evening.

Um the property is currently zoned CRC and they're looking to rezone it to R4.

Uh the background on the property is that it was built as a residence, it has only ever been utilized as a residence.

Um, but it was bulk rezoned back in the 70s to a commercial use.

Um it lost its non-conforming, legally non-conforming status uh due to lack of use back in 2022.

Uh and there were all was also some pretty extensive renovation work that was uh found to be done without permits, and so that's why it's coming before you um on Wednesday night as a request.

Uh in order to fulfill this request, they would also need a variance which would reduce the minimum lot width from 75 feet down to 45 feet.

Um everything around it is CRC.

Yeah, there are some other properties that are CRC that are used as residences as well, but you're correct, all CRC.

Um, I yield.

I'm sorry.

I yield.

So are the other properties you said are used as residential, are they CRC with a variance to allow residential use?

It would be the continuation of the non-conforming status.

So they don't have a variance, they have not been rezoned, they've just consistently been operating in that fashion and have never transitioned the actual use to match the underlying zoning.

Okay, Mr.

Mayor.

Um this is something I remember from a few years ago, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

The one on North Mary, there's one on North Marita Parkway right near here.

I think we re-established a grandfathered use or something along those lines, is they couldn't expand past their point.

Am I remembering that correctly?

The corner of North Meredith Parkway and fairground?

Yeah, they were allowed to use it for uh for occupancy as a residence.

Um we think it's rented uh at this point is what an Airbnb at this point.

Yeah.

But we we did some something different.

It was a commercial with a special use.

Right.

I was saying that his son was going to live there to go to school, which he lied to us.

We can't put in the stipulations that this cannot be an Airbnb.

No, no, no.

Forty-five foot lot width.

Okay.

I said overlay if it's if it was in the overlay, we would allow down.

Um it isn't overlay.

The single family residential is exempt.

Yeah, Mr.

Mayor.

Mr.

Mayor.

Yes, sir.

Go ahead, please.

Um this is something you don't have to answer right now, just between now and Wednesday, take a look at what's the effect of that turning into a residential property versus me keeping commercial on the surrounding properties as well, considering they're all zones as commercial.

And knowing that I know that along the parkway there are quite there are once you get to the parkway, especially that you get a lot more commercial commercial pieces.

Well, yeah, if you if if you turn down the variance piece of it, yeah, they'd have to do something interesting in order to accommodate that that lot width issue, yes, sir.

I think we had to do that on Large Street with the Yeah, when it ran out, didn't it turn out to be three stories and very very narrow and long twenty-five foot house?

Is that the only variance necessary?

Yes, sir.

They're gonna meet their their side setbacks.

Yes.

Yes.

Pretty deep line, didn't it?

Well, the rear setback doesn't think it's gonna be a problem, but the size, you know, that's what we can we can double check that ahead of Wednesday, but at this point we believe that it would be an odd question, Mr.

Mayor.

Yes, sir.

Um re-establishment of the grandfathering is that's is that no longer possible because of the uh renovations that were done or city council has the purview to do that if you'd like, which would theoretically be under the same restrictions of again they can only renovate so they can renovate so much and they can't and the if the use isn't it discontinued for six months, they have to switch it back to the lever of the current zoning is correct.

Correct.

Well, wouldn't the problem with that be that they are currently in a stop work, so they're currently trying to renovate it, which means the moment we did it, they would go over the 50 and have to stop again.

That is part that was part of the reason I was trying to ask that question on that, because the only other way to do it would do a partial waiver and then re-establish the grandfathering thereafter.

Which would then not which would then reduce the negative impacts of the other ones and stall commercial around it?

Just food for thought between now and Wednesday.

In this picture, all the grass you exact where's their light in?

Is it probably we're looking at somebody else's light here too, aren't we?

That's right.

Yeah, you're looking at the lot east.

I think this is the when our comprehensive plan talks about preserving affordable housing, preserving it.

This is uh this is a house product that we don't see in the modern home building, which is a starter home.

I'm of the opinion we gotta preserve this as a residential use.

In addition to the future land use is uh community activity center, and that's a predominantly residential neighborhood and has been for a long time.

So I'd like to consider looking at future land use map in the future of maybe turning that back into residential instead of community activity commercial can you appeal to CRC loss?

Can you appeal to CRC loss?

I mean, could we revert it back to the CRC?

I mean to continue in the non-conforming status.

Yes.

And I'll defer to Mr.

Haney.

I believe that city council has that purview to be able to do that.

And the answer is yes.

Irrespective of what's in the application.

I'm just saying that was a good idea because this house looks worth saving.

And I guess the applicants here, so he's probably hearing all this uh discussion, correct?

I'm not nice if that's going to come up just asking just if he's here.

He's probably hearing everything, so we can probably take that consideration as they go forward on Wednesday.

All right.

Okay.

Any other quick questions from board five?

Riverstone Custom Homes.

Thank you, Mayor.

This is a requested rezoning of uh 187 Mountain View at the corner of uh Mountain View and Polk Street.

Um it's a request to rezone the property from R1 uh to R2.

Uh the property is uh one point three eight acres, currently holds two homes, um, and they would be looking to to rezone it to R2 for the purposes of subdividing the property and putting two different homes on the site and rebuilding that way.

So you can see the drawing that Shelby's pulled up, which reflects uh what their intent is to do with the property as well.

No variances are required.

Um, and the staff report notes that several of these concurrent properties are zoned R1, but in the general area, um, there's quite a bit of R2 and R4 as well.

Can we go back, shall we?

So they're not looking to add two more, they're looking to change the one into two.

They're not looking correct.

They are looking to keep the same number of homes that are there today, but they want which would not be allowed under the current zoning, those two homes would not be.

What they would like to do is rezone so that they could rebuild two different homes, subdivide the property, and rebuild two different homes on that property.

But not add.

Correct.

Not going from two to four.

No, net neutral.

Yes, sir.

So they're gonna divide that one lot and make two homes.

Yes, sir.

Make two lots and two homes.

And Mr.

Mayor.

So the if approved and subdivided, the uh one would go out onto either Polk or Mount or uh Mountain View there, and then the other one would uh go out to Mountain View Ridge or how the driveways work, just out wondering.

That's the current condition today.

Um I think that would be a good question for the applicant on Wednesday evening.

I'm not totally sure if that's their intent or if they're planning on consolidating the driveways and splitting off.

We don't have that level of detail at this point.

Okay, just curious right now.

Thank you.

Yeah, the three houses to the west of it, they're they're big field in houses, aren't they?

Pretty soon after that, yes, sir.

Questions for tonight?

Mr.

Anderson here any questions?

Um, no, I'm okay with it.

Here's another one in four.

David Floyd.

Justin Knight and Yes, sir.

So this one's uh 353 Campbell Hill Road.

Um this is another one uh that's currently zoned commercial, it's zoned NRC, which is uh a less intense commercial use.

Um currently holds a building that uh has been held as an office for quite some time.

Um what they would like to do is renovate the existing uh commercial space into a residential space and also to uh build an attached garage onto the property as well.

Once again, Shelby has pictures up on the screen that show you current imagery of the existing building that they would be renovating, and then also the site plan uh that would show uh both an addition on the back and also in an additional um two-car garage that they would like to add as well.

Uh I will note that we do have a few changes from the variances that were provided uh on Friday within your packets based on some additional information um that has been uh realized since then.

Initially it was somewhat murky to staff as to whether the existing garage would be attached or detached.

And so if it's detached, then there were two additional variances, numbers five and six uh that would have been required.

Um but since it's attached, those two variances are not required.

Um and additionally, variances three and four had been modified uh as well.

Um it says variance to reduce the front setback of the existing structure from 25 feet to two feet because of lack of exact measurement um and the request that was received.

Uh that request is now from 25 feet to zero feet with the existing building.

And the same for number four, where there's the rear setback for an addition uh of the primary structure from 30 feet to zero feet.

Um staff doesn't have exact to the letter um uh drawing to know what that those what those exact spaces are at this time, and those were the requests that were received.

Okay.

Between now and Wednesday, is there any way to get those measurements?

Because these are that's for one's for an existing structure.

That one should be fairly you should be able to figure out from the where the right-of-way is, figure out where where the uh thing is or tie tying it directly to the site plan of part of it.

Um the addition is going to go all the way to the property line then for further than where the current even where the current shed is?

Yeah, what we would believe is that the additions would get very close to the property line.

If you'll see on the the screen with the plan that's uh currently shown, there's just a very small space, and so that's we can get with the applicant and see if we can get some more exact measurement that the applicant's comfortable committing to, um, and also get that front set back as well.

So we can make an effort to do that between now and Wednesday.

Yeah, just the concern comes from the fact that again when you grant a variance all the way to the thing, that goes for whatever goes on through, it can go all the way to the property line.

Anything new unless it was tied specifically to any kind of site plan or something.

And just as comment, this is about the third house has done that.

I guess in the last three years.

It that's gone from the business to a very small retailer or law office of residential.

So I I have a quick question, Ms.

Mayor.

So with that garage, are they planning to do like a um an apartment up there?

Yeah.

Well, the whole thing looks like an ADU or looks like it.

Yeah.

Is the back structure's gonna be taller than the front, it's gonna be bigger than the front.

The whole thing looks like an ADM.

Yeah, it it would appear, um, it would appear that there will be some type of living space up there.

Or some type of space occupied space.

Is that require a second permit?

Like a mother-in-law house or if they have to be connected by the well, in this case it would be attached to walkway.

In this case, it would be fully attached, and so it would become an extension of the home.

So with that said, um is that a part of their plan that they're they've submitted?

That they'll use that as a an ADU basically.

Well, and just to clarify, because it's it's not an accessory, it wouldn't necessarily be an ADU, it would just be a part of the existing living space because they would be connected.

Um I'll have to get back with you on that, and we can ask them and see what their intention is to do with that space.

I suspect that it is, but I don't want to speak for them without being certain.

Okay.

Thank you.

Anything else for tonight?

Don't think so for tonight, but we'll have questions on Wednesday.

Yeah, I'll ask one more question on one day.

Occupation code amendment.

Thank you, Mayor.

This was an advertised uh code amendment um that city council considered uh several months ago and it has gone through planning commission at this time, so it will be before you once again in a public hearing.

Uh the primary change that this uh amendment seeks to address uh would be looking to uh prohibit alcohol uh alcoholic beverage manufacturing for commercial sale um as a home occupation.

And then there were a couple of other items that would be considered by staff to be primarily cleanup items uh to reflect current practice.

Um but no changes uh to what council saw last time, but happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Um number 13.

Um previously said the Department of Development Services must approve all business licenses, which shall be recertified annually.

Now it just says Department of Development Services must approve all business license for phone home occupations, or is there still going to be an annual recertification as part of this?

Yeah, there would not be.

Um part of the reason why that change was suggested initially the first time is that has not been common practice to be done.

Uh if council would like to keep it that way, that's something that staff can modify practice and conform to any other questions.

Thank you.

Carl, I you can help me with this.

Carl and I forgot to ask this council add something to the agenda from the BLW.

After months of waiting, well the person board member that lives in the county but works for somebody that has a BOW meeter.

We have a good prospect, but we would like to have some speaker for the BLW, we'd like for the personnel committee to take that on as soon as possible and maybe go ahead and advertise with authorization.

I suppose we could do that in personnel.

Yeah.

For the open BLW position for the for the non-Marietta residents, but resident of Cobb County who has a business or works who hasn't worked for business that gets power for Marietta Power.

Is that correct?

And it's a motion to advertise that, and we'll take it will take that.

Would you like a motion?

Motion to suspend the rules and add an item.

Second.

All those in favor?

Motion carries.

Question.

So we are we changing the rules on residency from just adding that personality.

Just now going to advertise.

Yeah.

That's the most confusing part in our code section.

I don't know who came up with that.

Yeah.

I was just Mr.

Johnny.

Yeah.

I love Johnny too much to be mad at the time.

Yeah, that's fine.

All right, I'm gonna let it go.

I was I was just confirming that I had the correct language down on what the requirements were for the position.

I wasn't trying to change anything.

It was just confirmed.

All right, you get to make the motion.

You said all those words.

I can't.

Oh fun.

Um make a motion uh to authorize staff to advertise the open Marietta borderlights water position that is for uh the top there if you want to.

If that works for me.

Second, uh yeah, okay.

There we go.

Second all those in favor.

We made it forward, the occupant on consent.

Objection.

Thank you.

We blame Carlisle for not doing that.

Yeah, the men on there, the tree replacement fund.

We've got a couple people that could answer any questions on that.

Y'all would ask for it to not be on consent when we were talking about it previously.

Yeah, I I asked for it not to be on consent because I wanted to look at some things.

And Georgia, unfortunately, does not have a per se law on damage to government property.

It has to be intentional.

Um there's I don't feel like making that fight.

Um, but this was definitely damage to government property, and all that's having to happen is money being paid into the tree fund.

Kind of bothersome.

It just leaves open for other people to just decide I want to cut down those trees.

The city won't do it, so I'm cutting it.

Yeah, I'll pay some money to the tree fund and I'm done.

So I was the hold out for consent.

There there are some things other things that are being done with that property that may be of interest.

Um Mark, if you want to say or Daniel, either one.

Yeah, so um had the opportunity to connect with Mark.

The handling of this somehow kind of rode the line between development services and public works along the way.

So one point just about the tree fund.

Um tree fund once again applies primarily to private developments that are looking to take trees down.

Uh and so staff actually uh between the two departments felt like the contribution to the tree fund was somewhat of a creative approach in order to apply those to get an amount that likely would be much larger than if we were to go through a municipal court route and get a thousand dollar fine or something along those lines.

Um the other piece is that this uh property has not been um has not had a allowance for a permits had it been under a stop work uh order for several months now, in part because of this issue and some other issues related to their plans, and so that's something that has been held back on, understanding that they had some things that you know they needed to make right in the process as well.

So um, and then the last piece was council uh requested a code enforcement look at the site because it was quite overgrown.

Um, and uh we've had some positive uh movement on that where they've gone by and addressed those issues as well.

Um so that just to provide a little bit of additional insight into context into how that was handled and why.

Thank you.

Well, I think if it's not on consent, we ought to invite the party to attend.

Wednesday night.

Let's do that if Wednesday won't be fun enough.

Yeah, so the part of the dental corporation is divided to a 10 the next four items are on consent.

Any objection?

No objection next item is the tourism grant is on consent.

Is hard to leave it on consent objection none.

The next item is beyond every pay and classification consent.

No objection boards on consent, civil service board was moved forward on the personnel committee with the selection of two or two candidates.

Yes.

The proposed splits is on the I guess the details of public hearing, right?

Right.

And then the motions.

Yes.

So that this will be the public hearing on the final public hearing on the list of projects for us.

So what day is that?

It'll be it on Wednesday.

Wednesday, yes.

Yes.

And the BLW is on consent.

Anything else?

We'll we'll need a fairly short executive session for property acquisition.

The BLW is on consent, you said.

Yeah.

Yes.

Yeah.

Not checked on the no, it never is until now.

Just on uh Steph, will you explain?

The people that sign up for the secondary, you have to sign up in it when you enter.

The first six.

I mean, we cut there's been a lot of talk about this, and newspaper interviews had to refute that.

We didn't want people to speak.

So but should we put up a little sign if you want to speak?

That was um my staff is usually out there with the forms that they fill out and that'll be for the schedule.

And you talk you talk about that as for the end of the meeting.

Right.

The only limitation is 30 minutes total, which is five minutes per speaker.

That's how the the group gets to six.

So uh then they'll register outside.

Just so they're not confused and think we don't want them to speak, just fine out, sign up.

They're telling people to speak for two to three minutes, so I don't know if that weighs into how many can sign up.

It says a total of 30 minutes, it does not restrict the number of speakers.

So if they go two or three minutes mathematically, it could be more than six.

Right.

Yeah.

Can the chair extend the time?

Um normally we do it verbally.

If if ten people want to speak, then they want to get to speak for three minutes each.

I mean, that's my knowledge.

That's been our precedent.

Yes, sir.

You do have Doug usually tells them to work that out among themselves.

Right.

And out of the four that we have, they're gonna speak at the front of the meeting.

We know at least one of them is gonna speak on that topic.

Um, I think it's just one, but Mr.

Gaddis's point says uh an extension to the public comment session may be granted by a majority vote of the council members present.

What's that again?

The uh Mr.

Gaddis said can there be an extension of time on the 30 minutes or the five-minute limit internally?

Says an extension to the public comment session may be granted by a majority vote of the city council members present.

What is extension mean?

You mean can we say another 30 minutes or 10 minutes?

I mean it's just up to us.

It's in your discretion.

Okay, correct me.

Okay.

At that time.

And also just to confirm, tell that this had a just accord to the blogs, a lot of interest outside of the city of Mary etiquette.

Anybody, we can't restrict it just the mayor of citizens.

That's correct.

It's public comment by anyone.

That's something we have to look at.

That's never seemed fair.

Can we allow the Marriott of residents to go first?

No, sir.

No.

There's a sign-up sheet.

Yeah, it's just the public.

No restrictions.

Sounds good to me.

Um as far as the meeting goes, too, just to kind of apprise everybody of it.

Um we'll have the fire marshal here.

There may be uh an excessive amount of people that come in here that really cannot be held in this room.

And if that's the case, we'll the fire marshal's office will be dealing with that.

Um, also because of different things going on, we're gonna be wanding people when they come in.

So uh we'll be taking care of that too, like we used to do.

So uh we'll have both of those.

But yeah, we may have a situation where we've got a lot of people that are outside in the lobby or outside the building, even um, that are thinking that they're gonna be able to talk or wanting to support, but uh so we managing the crowd may um be something we're working on that night pretty heavily executive session.

What in each executive session for property acquisition?

Make a motion to go in executive session for real estate acquisition.

Second, all those in favor, please raise your right hand.

Motion carries 6-0.

Can we go around back?

Y'all are fine to