>> It's on.
>> I'd like to call the Finance Committee meeting to order
first.
First item on the agenda is from the meeting minutes, July 28th.
>> All those in favor show by raising your right hand.
Next items we're taking -- motel tax, auto rental tax.
Again thank you Chairman.
So I will be reporting first on the Hotel motel for July.
So our hotel motel collection is for July, $350,846.
After normalizing the F125 agreement
the July collections were the lowest July
we've seen in the past four years.
Historically August is the highest month
that we see throughout the year.
We will take a look at those collections
because that will be for our July as they come in next month.
Looking at our 3% auto, auto rental revenue is a total $9,631
and it's slightly below the 12 month --
12 month average.
Our total distributions as you'll see on your chart,
our allotment exceeded our revenue collections
for the month by almost $24,000.
So we did utilize reserves to pull from that.
This of course has ebbs and flows throughout the year.
So for our initial month we were short
and that may change in the balance will come out
as we go through the 12 months of this fiscal year.
Moving to our general fund comment the general fund
collections for July total $4.2 million and this is an increase
of approximately $170,000 compared to July of FY '26.
The variance were in two major areas,
$121,000 was an increase in the franchise --
and the other was $99,000 that was also a time issue
in our franchise.
So we had additional receipts that came in our earlier
than the prior year.
And then the operational expenses doubled for our year
over year.
The annual -- for professional and technical services as well
as their contractual obligations,
accounted for 1.2 or $1.3 million increments and that was
just a change in practice.
I don't know if we had more obligations to --
that they entered into as far as conferences in the first month.
So looking at our golf on page three,
the golf probability was $600,000 higher compared to July
of 2025 and 2026 was higher -- the favorable variance was
primarily because of the $313,000 in capital.
So our capital investments were lower this year and our capital
gains were lower this year and the $146,000 of reduction
in equipment and storage facility --
so those were the primary contributors to the $600,000
difference.
And then lastly, on the memo page
you'll see a list of the major projects that are ongoing
for the finance department.
I can let you breeze through that
and if you have any questions I'll be happy to answer.
>> The only question I have is on the custodial management --
and what that is.
Whatever that means.
>> Okay, so for -- initially we went through a custodial change.
What that means is the bank that does our pension transactions
when we have investment changes was --
we had to change our banking -- our banking vendor
because initially we had a vendor that was bought out
so that migration took place and we were forced to do that
and that was implemented in January of this prior year.
We have had some issues in the past with that particular vendor
and in doing so, we've been out to market
to see what additional vendors are out there, talked to about
five different vendors to see who
would be the best potentially to transition to a second.
And we did find one -- we just held off on doing that
because at the time, we also -- our actual bank for our normal
transaction -- we had to do a full migration of all
of our banking in a matter of short months.
And that was effective as of July.
And so we put the other initial custodial transition --
in order to make sure that we can focus on the primary
banking.
And we just ask that it be received and filed.
>> I'll make a motion to receive the file.
All those in favor? (inaudible)
>> Thank you chairman.
This would be a movement that allows
for the acceptance of money donated to the tree fund
in lieu of planting the full trees for 1339 drive.
There's a company looking at the site
and they're going through a project on site.
And so the unit differential is approximately 16 units
shy of where they should be but they are well
within the prescribed required density of the trees
and so that's why the budget for $800 is (inaudible).
Does this request come in over the old -- under the old price?
Soon we will start to see the old but this is --
that was a good question.
Any other questions?
Motion to approve.
>> Yes.
Motion forward for approval.
I make a motion to approve the budget.
In the amount of $800. (inaudible) The ninth?
>> Second. (inaudible)
>> No objection.
That's all we have. (inaudible) we will adjourn.
>> Second.
>> Motion and second.
Hearing none all in favor so signify.
The next item is a Distinguished Service Award for Mark.
I'll entertain a motion on that.
>> I'd like to make a motion to honor (inaudible) with
a Distinguished Service Award.
>> I second that.
>> We look forward to do that.
I have a motion and second.
All in favor?
Can we put that on September 9th and vote?
>> This council decides to do so.
>> First off, (inaudible).
Any problem with doing this on the 9th of September?
Hearing none, hopefully we get that on the agenda.
Thank you. >> (inaudible)
>> I've got them covered.
Got it in the cabinet just looking for a --
the Board of Zoning Appeals -- this is on you also so I'll let
you take that. >> (inaudible) second.
This is to fill the unexpired -- all right.
We've got a motion and a second.
Any comments and concerns?
All in favor?
3-0.
Is this good for consent?
>> No objection.
Last item is the employee group benefits program.
As it says on here, (inaudible) as much as a disclosure.
I am an attorney representing -- and R Rock is our legal program
that the city uses as part of the benefits program.
>> Good evening.
So this item is the renewal of our employee group benefits
package for our 2027.
We're recommending renewal of all existing benefits
as is with the same carriers and plan designs
and for our Anthem health plan, they
are projecting a 2.3 increase based on the clients
experience and medical trends.
The Aetna Medicare Advantage Plan --
for eligible retirees and their spouses --
will receive an 8.89% increase and we're also projecting a 20%
increase to our premiums that we will have later on in the year.
Despite those increases, we were able to recommend
that all employee contributions stay the same again this year
which is a very positive thing.
And we recommend that there's an approval for all the renewals.
>> Ask a question?
2.3 increases -- is a 2.3% a 3% increase?
>> (inaudible) we may see a 2.3 increase.
>> Yes, sorry about that.
All right, any questions?
Do I have a motion?
>> Motion to approve.
>> Second.
>> Can we clarify one thing with our attorney?
Since this is -- can I vote or do I have to abstain from
voting. >> (inaudible)
>> Thank you.
>> Your vice chair so you're taking over the meeting.
>> We have a motion and a second.
Hearing none, those in favor please indicate your vote
by raising your hand.
2-0, one abstention.
Any objection to consent?
>> Thank you.
>> Nothing else coming before the personal Insurance
Committee, we stand adjourned.
I'd like to call the Parks and Recreation and Tourism
Committee.
First order of business is approving the meeting minutes
for July 2826.
Do we have a motion to approve?
Do we have a second?
All in favor.
Next up, 2009 Parks Bond report.
>> Good evening and thank you Mr. Chairman.
The report in your packet reflects the rebalancing
of funds that was approved at the last council meeting.
Since the last committee report, we've
received interest earnings in the amount of $873 and $0.57.
For the water conservation Plant fund --
we've received the full reimbursement of that with
the exception of the final 10% which is $50,000.
And that will be received once the National Park
Service completes their review and releases those funds
but all of that is in progress.
Then the. -- the process of replacing the damaged drain pipe
with the primary maintenance road and as mentioned
previously, that will replace with a bridge and those are
our current projects.
Mr. Chairman, this report is presented with information
(inaudible) unless you have questions.
>> Any questions?
Seeing none we will go to recreation facilities
annual report.
>> So this is the report for fiscal year 26.
This was for the fitness center and playground in the Franklin
Gateway sports Complex.
On your report you'll see the attendance and revenue totals
for all three facilities for fiscal year --
Fitness Center and we increase the total gross revenue
from the fiscal year by 2% over the previous fiscal year.
(inaudible) open for the season of May
and then we'll continue towards the end of September.
The total gross revenue for the playground was essentially
the same as last year so the same --
we did see an increase in the total number of people who
attended this past fiscal year.
We had an additional 600 people over the previous fiscal year
for just over 27,000 people attending for fiscal year 26.
And the sports complex -- we increased total gross revenue
for fiscal year by 7% over the previous fiscal year.
So we have nice growth there as well.
And then all three recreation facilities we have --
we're off to another -- just one note on this report,
we first started giving this report quarterly in 2018 right
after we opened (inaudible) and that made sense at the time.
The intent was to measure the growth of those new facilities
and --
and how we're expanding our offerings.
After eight years of quarterly reports,
with no issue by council-- this becomes more of an annual report
-- so this is -- requires no additional action.
>> Do we have any questions on this report?
Seeing none we'll go to the next item which is Motor Vehicle Tax
distribution.
>> I'll kick this off.
So this -- yes sir.
This is not just the tourism contract stuff.
(inaudible) this is an item that was first
discussed at the January Parks Recreation Tourism Committee
meeting.
And in February as you'll recall staff
presented the project for discussion
and a copy of that presentation is in your packet.
The memo that you have in front of you
lists three projects being requested by staff.
One is -- and two are Robbie Hall.
Additionally the memo contains a request to Chairman Waters
by the Marietta Chamber of Arts.
And also as part of that conversation,
several council members also request several projects
and those projects are included as part of the presentation.
Those are in there as well.
Chairman waters pointed out that the council plan document
was a previous version of that and it wasn't the final version.
I apologize for that.
The funds available -- (inaudible) rather it should be
one pot of -- and the current total funds available is one
man, $55,036 available.
And for projects and -- this is presented for discussion
purposes.
Thank you.
So one thing I'll note, it's also --
so the bottom three on here are --
(inaudible) To take that building down and to move on.
Or as a group.
And then the other two I think d (inaudible).
>> In your packet is a paper version.
>> I'll talk to the rest while we're --
the three things they brought forward is --
and I think something very interesting.
The Hall return on investment that was just talked about --
can you shed light on that?
>> I'll ask Mr. Cummings to come down if he doesn't mind.
>> Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Yes I can.
As you all know -- several different functions come at one
of which is houses are Gone with the Wind Museum and gift shop
and also the area that we think we have the most room for growth
is in the event space.
There's limitations with the event space as it currently is
with the house because of the collection cannot be used
to have events.
So when we look at the improvements specifically
for the bridal room, which is -- (inaudible) we feel pretty
confident that we'll be able to increase the revenue that
they're bringing in for events pretty substantially with this
investment, so more getting us up to very conservatively
$40,000 per year.
Just through the bridal events that we'd be able to take on.
Also looked at what that wedding does to the hotel.
And so we looked in the average room rental block from it
has come for them.
For weddings it comes to Grundy Hall is 20 rooms.
20 rooms at $200 a night -- for one wedding it would be $8,000.
So we're thinking somewhere around the 12 wedding mark --
also what I think we are extremely conservative numbers
put together by our director -- if 40 people go to the wedding
for dinner, because they are here in Brumby Hall and then
they're going to the square, assuming they spend at least $50
which --
pretty small amount -- (laughs) that would be approximately
$2,000 per wedding of additional economic impact coming
to the square to businesses, functioning as that tourism
piece that we all are focused on.
So the 12 weddings come would that be an additional $24,000.
96 plus $24,000 plus the additional revenue --
staff is very bullish on the potential of this investment
to have a huge impact on tourism.
>> It's a very low economic development forecast on that.
>> The first conservative economic development forecast.
>> Is that the total cost or is that that -- >> Yet.
The 175 is the estimate from the bridal suite.
That's what that would be and then there's the additional cost
of -- which is really more for beautification of the grounds.
(inaudible)
>> It's still in here.
We're trying to get these knocked off.
It's not gone.
It's just -- (inaudible).
>> (inaudible)
>> Kirby is in that packet.
>> Is here.
>> $40,000 and it shows -- >> Kirby is still here.
(inaudible) so then the final Museum of Art --
Octoberfest.
Ask Sally to speak to that.
So the total hall --
175?
250.
>> Signage up front.
>> Then you've got the 39,000 --
I'll go ahead with that.
>> You thought we can handle that outside of this?
Okay.
All those other smaller projects will also
get done, so other than building the outdoor pavilion
space for inclement weather, every other project
related to Brumby Hall will be done.
So that's the only thing that's left.
That's a big dollar item.
We have these other projects such as --
(inaudible) and everything else.
250.
And then finally, can we ask -- to come down?
Is that okay?
Do you want to come talk for a second?
>> Okay.
I guess I'll go ahead and ask.
I would like a little bit more money for Octoberfest.
I think we are the second largest event on the square
and people love it.
I just copied u and Andre on an Instagram post
that was sent to me by one of your chalk artists from Italy
and they're doing a chalk festival over there
and there were at least two people that
had shocktoberfest T-shirts on.
It just has put Marietta on a map and --
and I would like to request for more money for Shocktoberfest
this year.
We were able to use points last year
that we don't have this year.
And you can see the requests.
Maybe have any questions from the committee?
Any questions from the rest of Council and mayor?
For her part?
That's not this -- it's not necessarily --
correct me if I'm wrong.
>> Which bucket were you all -- is it 3% auto?
I was looking at both of you.
>> Exactly.
We're still in arrears.
>> You have extra money sitting there.
Yes sir. >> (inaudible)
>> I made you a believer.
>> The story goes back a long way.
Any other questions?
Do we have a motion to approve?
>> Motion to approve.
>> Motion and second.
All in favor?
>> Thank you. >> That's my expectations.
[inaudible conversation]
Everything here Elizabeth -- (inaudible)
Did we decide on what's going to happen -- >> Yes sir.
We presented several options and this should be --
>> Yes sir.
Thank you sir. >> Quick question for you.
For Elizabeth Porter Park, is that something --
ready for next spring? >> (inaudible)
We're still studying bids for demolition now.
(inaudible) the splash pad has its own --
probably shoot for end of -- right now we don't have anything
on paper. (inaudible)
>> So the size of that pavilion -- (inaudible)
>> With those it will leave you a little over -- >> (inaudible)
[inaudible conversation]
Remember what would be the timing on --
what's the best timing here to do something like this?
Trailhead --
[inaudible conversation]
>> Any other questions?
[background chatter]
>> Next up, summer camp funding.
>> This is a separate quest for approval for submission
of funding in support of our 2027 summer camp.
We have a funding opportunity available for that
to permit these funds are available through the BOOST
grant programs administered through the Georgia
After School Network Association.
We applied for and are awarded funds
out of the same program for 2022 through 2024 and also again
in 2026.
All those were in support of our summer camp and in 2025 that
funding wasn't -- approval and acceptance of the funding --
our agreement to -- first is the Georgia Department of Education
common conflict of interest and disclosure policy in the second
is the Georgia Recreational Parks Association Memorandum
of Understanding, both of those documents are --
each previous year that we received funding
through this program required us to approve these same two
documents.
The language in both documents for this year were unchanged
from the documents that were -- so they're exactly the same.
No changes on that.
And these documents will only be signed when funding is approved.
The question we had last year was if we would be able to meet
all the requirements of --.
So at this time staff would request a motion to approve
submission of the 2022 --
>> Do we have a motion and a second?
Any further discussion?
Motion to approve.
In the community Park -- (inaudible) and I am in Ward
two.
Yes sir.
>> I apologize for that.
So the park advisory Committee was approved at the last council
meeting.
The purpose of the committee is to work to develop
a new park on Franklin Gateway.
The committee structure was approved for a total of 14
members to be awarded by Council and --
(inaudible) so the packet -- (inaudible) and at this time
staff would recommend a motion to approve the members
of the committee --
>> I have my third name -- (inaudible) which is a partner
with Park Street Elementary. >> (inaudible) so he is definitely
tied into the -- what's going on in Franklin gateway --
>> (inaudible)
>> Eldridge, E l d r i d g e.
>> Thank you.
The committee first -- any other questions?
Anything else you want to add or say about this?
Council and Mayor? >> (inaudible) Of him I think from
the scope of the meeting -- (inaudible) I understand what
you're saying. >> (inaudible)
[inaudible conversation]
>> Do we have a motion to approve the members?
Do we have a second? >> (inaudible) And this is request
by staff for temporary street closing --
which occurs on September --
March 6th 2027. (inaudible) request the other street
closures in January.
For this event that can't leave us enough time
to plan for the event to occur in March.
So for the past few years this event --
of what a level three street closure it looks like.
And so as the event has grown more popular comment this year
we are requesting a level four street closure and a diagram
of a level four street closure --
level four Street closure would also include closure of West
Park Square and portions of -- (inaudible) Church Street
and Mill Street.
Other events with -- include Marietta, 4th of July and --
and chalk Tober Fest.
The 2026 Marietta gathering which occurred on Saturday
saw an attendance of 9000 people.
Well attended.
By way of comparison, this of the 2025 Art in the Park
had an attendance of 7000.
So we had 28% more people at the gathering which is of course
a very well attended -- (inaudible) that has become
quite large.
So the street closure would allow opportunities
for additional arts and crafts vendors,
more program space as well as additional space to --
and that comes to that event.
Also, that event utilizes -- for programing --
the street closure would close the entirety of the event
and the program space and it would eliminate the need
for attendees to go back and forth across West Park Square.
So this time staff would request a motion to authorize street
closures on Saturday March 6th, 2027.
>> (inaudible) own properties in the downtown area of.
>> Any further questions or discussion?
A motion to approve.
Motion and second.
>> Second.
>> All in favor?
All right. (inaudible) three.
Consent?
>> Consent to. >> (inaudible) Thank you.
So this item was requested by Council member Anderson
through the Tourism Committee.
This item was tabled.
Since that time Council Anderson and I had the opportunity
to speak and as a result of that conversation we updated rental
policy for the fields, not only Custer Park Sports Complex
but also -- and so at this time we're presenting that
for discussion purposes.
[inaudible conversation]
>> I can do it right down to the -- essentially the policy --
Council member Anderson was asking --
some of the rental policies -- of a sports complex which
allowed for an unlimited number of rentals that were --
organizations and teams -- this allowed them to rent --
and so -- (inaudible) on a quarterly basis and they can
rent fields for games up to one year.
(inaudible) if you like I can do a detailed breakdown but those
are the --. >> (inaudible)
>> I can do that.
>> Yes sir. >> (inaudible)
>> Mr. Anderson, you brought this --
>> I think we went over pretty well --
gathering these details -- (inaudible).
It covers everything to where these Marietta --
and actually make a schedule --
>> Okay.
Any other questions for Council?
can we have a motion on that?
>> If you're ready to approve it.
At the work session I can bring a --
so you can see very specifically what we changed.
>> Do we need to bring it there or do we need to --
maybe the best way to handle this policy?
>> (inaudible) so I think the only thing left --
you probably move it to the Monday meeting. (inaudible)
>> It would be open to everybody.
If anybody wants to preserve -- it just allows --
because they can't really do their schedule --
>> We all know how work -- (inaudible) we can't favor
Marietta residents over county residents.
We have a motion to move this to the work session?
All in favor?
>> Park and tourism is adjourned.
Call to order the -- (inaudible) June 23rd, 2026.
(inaudible) is there any further discussion on this item?
All those in favor please rise raise your right hand.
Motion carries 3-0.
Next item of business is the Travel and Training Code
amendment.
Thank you chairman.
>> So this is a code amendment for the travel and Training Code
section -- the travel and Training policy provides
(inaudible) reimbursable travel and related expenses
for our city employees.
Last policy revision that we had for this section was in 2007.
The current proposal, we are looking
to update the administrative verbiage in the code
to align with those everyday practices
as well as updating some of the allotment and mileage
to coincide with some of the present day pricing.
You should find in there the redline copy all of the edits
that we have.
I will briefly go through the major modifications
that we included.
One is that we have increased our approval from $500,
our initial -- for anything $500 or more we typically go to city
manager or his designee for final approval.
We raise that amount to 1000 just because of volume --
related to the number of travel and training requests received.
The removal of the travel agency booking requirements --
that was something that was previously done in years past.
We handle all of the travel and training in Parkway now.
I wanted to remove that portion from the verbiage as well.
And then we also now have incorporated a credit card
for emergency purposes as well as for training materials.
This does not include any lodging, airfare
or transportation for employees.
All of that has to come with the expense of the employees to be
reimbursed but it does allow for registration materials
and emergency services that may come up in the event of a travel
and training emergency and then the expansion of our lodging
to include short term rentals, previously --
it was just for hotels only.
Because of some of the variations and options
that are available to us.
Wanted to expand that portion as well.
For our mileage, the use of personal vehicles --
we expanded from 100 miles to 400 miles.
The reason for that is it allows for the outskirts on our county
line to the longest distance to the state line --
so this is for all in-state travel.
It's 370 miles so -- for up to 400 miles for personal vehicle
use.
That was for in-state.
Ground transportation -- we just expanded that to include
Rideshares.
Previously just had taxis and things of that nature.
So updating the terminology for a present day use.
Current ordinance -- also increases our reimbursement rate
for employees.
They like to have that effective as of October 1st --
it raises it from $40 to $50.
And then our mileage from the current $0.40 to the current --
and it would then follow the IRS rate adjustments each year
and that would also coincide with how the mileage calculation
for -- for our other areas that are calculated.
So that would adjust each year with --
>> I will have questions before --
(inaudible) anything you all want to start off with.
>> I have issues with a couple grammatical things I want
to address. >> (inaudible) To start off with,
stuff under 500 -- how does that --
is the current process just they don't have to get prior
approval, they just have to -- ?
>> The approval process is still the same.
It starts with the employee and goes to either the --
supervisor if there is one and then the park with
the department head.
All of those got to take place prior to being moved forward
to the budget division.
This is for prior approval as well as approval
after the training.
So the difference here is anything under $1,000 currently
is under $500 would then be moved to the City
Manager's office.
At this point anything under $1,000 can stop at the budget
office and not have to have the additional City Manager
approval.
>> (inaudible) maybe there's still that paper trail and that
ask.
>> Yes sir.
Yes.
>> That's the part I was trying to get at. >> (inaudible)
On the short term rental, that's mostly for going to conference
or -- or if employees go to the conference.
It allows for short term rentals to be added in.
What are the consequences of that?
Do they still have the same hotel tax exclusion --
is that still an issue? (inaudible)
>> We reviewed them all on an individual basis.
The employees should pick the most economical route
for their travel and training.
If sometimes that has been, especially
if there is a group or different regions,
the short term rental has been a more economical option for them.
We do review them in advance to make sure that from a safety
and risk perspective -- that that is in compliance.
From an economic standpoint, that is in compliance --
it goes through the same review process -- (inaudible)
>> The more so is what I was looking for.
It's not exactly the same.
So that was where my concern was.
I understand seeing -- (inaudible) just concerns it
could also go to the non-economic range.
>> In the mean time it would come up is --
somebody is going out of town and --
(inaudible) and the hotel they're having the meeting in is
more expensive than -- (inaudible) maybe even
if the Airbnb -- they just kept their reimbursement at the rate
of the hotel?
What if you would just prefer to stay in an Airbnb
and you can do your own cooking and you would feel
better that way? >> (inaudible)
>> Right, and it's just capped at whatever the rates --
>> (inaudible)
>> As far as the review?
>> The economic parts -- more expensive hotel options.
>> The economic part is -- (inaudible) >> (inaudible)
the hotel motel tax -- (inaudible)
>> In most cases they do not.
At the same time, they don't necessarily
have the additional taxes.
It's more so flat fee when you are doing the Airbnbs.
Short term rentals. >> (inaudible) when you're adding
that in -- these places and it was done in -- one still kept --
(inaudible) for the sake of differentiating -- (inaudible)
>> That was the intent.
[inaudible conversation]
>> One suggestive word change on --
it says receipts for such services must be provided --
(inaudible)
>> There's some math as part of this as well.
It didn't add up for me.
It's over on page six.
>> Under subsection B -- the previous math I also wasn't sure
-- the previous one when it was $40 --
(inaudible) A 15 for dinner. (inaudible)
>> The $8 for the tips to $10 -- (inaudible) where that
difference was in Y -- $10 for tips.
>> The you gave -- (inaudible) $50 a day with a luncheon rate
-- the luncheon is provided as part of the registration.
(inaudible) Wouldn't that be 50 -13?
>> Yes.
>> Right now the example is off.
And there is some additional grammar stuff --
(inaudible) it does need to be corrected.
And also getting consistency throughout --
(inaudible) or their -- but he has been kept in --
(inaudible) and their designee.
There's a shift in some things -- also requesting --
(inaudible) and I'm not sure that's appropriate.
The IRS rates -- the language used right now is -- ambiguous.
It talks about being in accordance with the Internal
Revenue Service standard rate effective July 1st.
It just keeps -- the rate for the IRS goes in effect --
(inaudible) which July 1st are you talking about?
(inaudible) on adopting that rate as part of the budget cost
essentially.
So the rate only goes up within --
otherwise it keeps it the previous year --
>> Although the IRS --
I kept it a little bit ambiguous because I did not
want to tie specific rates because we have
to change the code each year.
>> I understand and agree with that.
>> (inaudible) so it shows what the current rate is.
(inaudible) almost like a schedule update.
In case you have a bad year -- >> (inaudible) Right now
it's just -- it doesn't say current though.
(inaudible) What we're trying to get at.
You're trying to get at -- (inaudible) it needs a little
bit of wordsmithing.
>> Would you be okay with -- it does appear in other places.
>> Would you be okay with -- and have a link to that and then
take out the --
>> The only concern I have on that is --
our budgets get tied to this rate whenever --
we usually get our update in March.
For the council rate.
Even though the rate theoretically starts up --
it probably should be tied to -- (inaudible) so we have
a definitive date and we can plan our budget around that.
I think the reason you put July 1st is -- >> Yes.
I can't discard that because -- if council approves that rate --
(inaudible) typically that goes into effect --
Council reviews it and -- and it takes effect in March.
It can be part of the overall budget process and automatically
you know -- is going to take effect July 1st when the budget
is -- (inaudible) and that would go back to having it stay most
current Internal Revenue service and mileage.
And removing the July 1st date.
>> As long as we get tied down --
>> (inaudible) that's kind of what I was getting
at. (inaudible) for the council side of this?
We bring it up and we update -- so then we know getting --
we can adequately plan for that going forward. >> (inaudible)
>> I've been here 60 years. (inaudible) maybe I'm sorry?
>> (inaudible) what you're doing is looking up the --
>> Absolutely.
>> There's no individual motion.
We incorporated by reference.
We are not changing anything other than the budget,
right? >> (inaudible)
>> We want to do the same thing you all are doing.
>> (inaudible) they are dealing with a different --
if you budget it you'll go over it.
Or somebody comes who is -- (inaudible)
>> We have to watch that.
>> So what are we saying? >> (inaudible) still needs to be
updated regardless -- (inaudible) I think we can all
disagree on that.
F >> (inaudible)
>> We're arguing about when the rate goes into effect
essentially.
[NO AUDIO]
>> So what do we need to do?
>> I guess my question -- why do we need an effective date
at all?
The mileage reimbursement rate (inaudible)
with the current IRS standard mileage rate. >> (inaudible)
>> If it went up-- we're trying to just tie it to that rate.
Even if it goes up in the budget year, it's going to be pennies.
At the end of the day we'll do a whole lot of reserve
which we'll never know about because it will be pennies.
>> (inaudible)
>> You said in accordance with the current rate.
You're going to go hop in your car and drive.
>> We've got forms that are used to calculate --
was it changes we just changed the form. (inaudible)
>> Are the forms online?
>> Yes.
>> The travel and training forms are online and the IRS code
rates are available online through the IRS as well.
>>
(inaudible)
>> And I will link that.
>> Current rate is 72.5 cents.
I have to take a look up whenever --
I got a form that had no rate on it.
I do agree that we do need to get up from where it was --
because 2007, 2026 is quite a bit different in terms of --.
>> (inaudible) to make sure everything is caught up.
Page two.
On number eight -- up above -- why was all that taken out?
I think the point was to try to -- >> (inaudible)
>> It is -- it was just because of --
it was a question marks and it was asking questions versus
providing information.
Didn't necessarily provide additional guidance.
Just simplified it. >> (inaudible)
>> It doesn't change it. (inaudible) on scheduled
training events. (inaudible)
>> I think that last sentence in there was --
(inaudible) with what people actually did --
that last sentence that got added in (inaudible).
Be prepared to show proof.
I'll add that back in.
So that first line that kind of outlines --
in a little bit more detail -- >> (inaudible)
>> If you're worried about the rest of this stuff -- >> Okay.
Part of it is trying to make sure --
that's the reason why the city is paying -- (inaudible)
>> Add that back in.
Under 4434-04 Definitions B, the line was removed talking about
-- prior to any events being issued -- why was that removed?
(inaudible) is it because you thought it was extraneous or --
>> It's because there are some situations where they are rare
but they are situations where travel and training is approved
by the department head due to the timing and they will go
on the training prior to the approval and we --
we don't encourage that but there are cases and this
particular line item kind of excludes that and there have
been questions as to whether or not -- >> (inaudible)
>> The emergency was related to the credit card.
And so they would go on the training com and pay for it
themselves -- it wasn't necessarily they were using
the credit card but -- they didn't allow enough time
for prior approval before they took the training.
As I've mentioned, that's -- in most instances but there has
been some questions as to whether or not the travel --
>> All approvals must be obtained in writing --
(inaudible) so that usually means I'm getting payment before
going to -- >> Yes.
>> Correct. >> (inaudible) they went and paid for it themselves
and --
>> I can absolutely add it back in.
Maybe I'm just trying to cover -- (inaudible) understood.
>> Yes sir?
>> Going back to item number eight --
>> Which page are you on?
Page two.
>> Oh yes.
So the request was to have the verbiage -- keep adequate --
and training offered to take and complete it,
including attendance -- on schedule training events period.
And then next line item would be the add in for the employees may
be required to provide -- for registered courses when
available.
>> It's page three where the other reference --
>> I'll update that throughout --
>> That was most of my stuff --
Is there any other discussion? (inaudible)
>> I make a motion -- maybe motion made and seconded.
Is there any further discussion on this item?
Hearing none all those in favor please raise your hand.
Motion passes 3-0.
Next item of business is a data center ordinance
of Georgia Tech.
>> Good evening.
Thank you.
After last month's meeting cycle Council
asked staff to go back and look at the ordinance that
was presented.
The ordinance was revisited.
We took the comments that Council had at the last meeting
and tried to incorporate as many of those as we could
in the draft that's before you.
This draft ordinance is -- for discussion.
Staff has talked about it internally.
Planning and zoning if you've looked at it.
With some more comments that aren't --
(inaudible) and then you also have the Georgia Tech proposal
in front of you and that's something that you would like
to consider.
I know there's several questions about the draft proposal.
I had conversations with Georgia Tech
to address some of those questions.
And I'll be able to talk about the ordinance for the proposal
--
>> I'll ask committee members -- the Georgia Tech proposal or --
maybe I guess my question -- are we looking to vote on this draft
ordinance?
>> No.
>> This is almost like a buffet.
>> We do.
>> Yes, we do. >> (inaudible)
>> So addressing the Georgia Tech --
(inaudible) I don't think we're at the point where we need
Georgia Tech.
If we need to hold a town hall meeting there --
two town hall meetings --
I think we can do that. $52,000 for them to do something --
>> Mr. Chairman?
>> I see two other questions.
I saw your hand up.
>> Sure.
I think when we look at --
I think we should look at both.
We should decide on tech first before we start
going down the other path.
If we're going to go with tech, that
will help guide the other discussions.
If we start trying to write the ordinance now, then
what are we doing with tech?
If we're going with tech, that's the conversation --
are we or are we not going to go with them?
In two parts.
That's helping with policy -- but my question I think would be
what do they do with town halls?
What's the difference between us and a town hall?
What does it look like?
So those are the questions I had around Georgia Tech.
I think that's the direction we should go in because --
for a lot of reasons.
>> Very similar thoughts.
I would not like to look at our own -- right now.
I would like to give Georgia Tech --
provide some of this community engagement.
They looked at several different types of data centers
and several different types of --
they've got policy and staff ready to go.
Their subject matter experts.
So (inaudible) allowing them to run
the lion's share of engagement.
And from that flow the coordinates that --
that we can all weigh in on to get where we feel comfortable.
>> (inaudible)
>> I think their scope is -- where LAX is in the technical
expertise.
Expertise -- (inaudible)
>> I think there's some expertise --
(inaudible) I think one of the things that --
(inaudible) we put all this money somewhere --
>> Georgia Tech center for Economic Development --
provides the fiscal and economic -- underlying this engagement.
Property tax structure -- and local planning requirements.
These are economic developers -- (inaudible) but if all we are
going to say is is it good economically,
we're going to have issues.
>> We the question was asked at the last --
>> After your questions --
I did ask were these the only experts that --
and they said no, they will bring in other experts.
They let the process define who they bring but if we would like
to request specific experts at the beginning --
so what they like to do is engage the community and council
and discussion, see where that discussion goes and where there
are gaps if you will where they need to help educate or maybe
even go back and research certain topics.
I did say probably from the beginning based on conversations
that we've already experienced, we would need somebody with
expertise in public health, somebody with expertise in noise
and acoustical engineering, and I specifically asked because I
know a lot of what I heard from community members were
the things with the low noise sounds and how those affect
the vibrations --
they would bring those experts in.
The proposal is centered around that development
but they would bring in other experts
depending on how the conversation moves and turns.
They can bring those people in directly at the beginning
if that's the request.
And that doesn't change the scope or the price.
>> I would say if we're going to do this we need to outline this
in the proposal from the beginning so that when we are
approving this proposal that we actually have that --
>> The other thing was when he was putting this proposal
together, they have one contract vehicle per year.
Even when they're producing this --
this is last year's contract vehicle --
and this is last year's pricing --
I just told him I needed something
before that last meeting.
They were definitely willing to go back and give me the actual
pricing which they said likely would be less than the number
of --
(inaudible) from their contract group.
Just to get something to you guys before the deadline --
this is what they gave.
Or provided.
>> Are there any questions from --
>> Comments but not questions.
>> Comments are accepted as well at this point.
>> I think that could be -- independent technical standards
-- (inaudible) to go through all the detailed -- (inaudible)
>> Sure.
>> And I can go back to them and say in addition to what
we've already talked about -- the public health concerns --
and if there's other expert fields or fields of expertise
that you like to see somebody come they have those people --
for your suggestion request.
>> Comments, questions?
>> I have a comment.
I can comment now?
I just really think on this issue
if we're going to leave and lean on this issue,
use the best resources out there that we can.
And I think that a lot of angst out in the community
on both sides of the aisle and there's
a lot of lack of understanding of what we're looking at.
And the better understanding we can
shed light on and the better job we
do in understanding this issue, we're doing our part.
All we can do is our part. (inaudible) maybe the comment I
was going to make is I think --
(inaudible)
>> And this did start with their sample ordinances.
I did pull --
I can talk to them and tell them what we did
and tell them that we took your comments
on the last stipulations you put on the most recent approved data
center we tried to incorporate these as well
and see if they want to go that route to.
But I think they would rather do the meetings and input first --
and maybe use this after those --
>> I feel like you're going to say something --
>> I've said how I feel. (inaudible) They are not all
the same.
They are nowhere near all the same.
(inaudible) I'm not happy with it.
You do what you want. (inaudible)
baby I respect what you're saying.
My question is this.
What ordinance are you referring to?
>> (inaudible) this is their kind of draft all put together.
>> (inaudible)
>> I went on their pages.
So I went and I looked on their pages and just a simple thing --
colocation data center is a server room.
It is a server room.
>> I agree with you.
>> They throw it all in there like --
>> If they look at this like one size fits all, that --
that's not what we are looking at. (inaudible)
>> That is like saying a -- at the distillery.
It isn't.
>> How we ask them that question?
>> I can.
Sure.
>> I think it's an oversimplification.
>> (inaudible)
>> It's a lot like -- what you did when we did --
when we do breweries, distilleries --
we literally broke it down by each thing because they are
similar but actually different.
And we looked at them each category.
We can do that.
>> That's the direction we give them is --
this what is the scope of work and what we're asking you to do.
We're asking you to look at all these different types of --
a big world of data centers and I don't call them all data
centers.
Server room, data center -- we want to look at all of it.
Don't look at everything the same way.
They're not capable of doing that
but we need to ask them that question.
I assume they are.
They're smart folks.
They're smarter than me.
[laughter]
>> I guess they would be smart enough to draw the line --
(inaudible) I think one of the things that still --
(inaudible) is what is the long term --
(inaudible) >> (inaudible)
[NO AUDIO] I got a question.
Have we reached out to anybody else --
did the city of Marietta?
>> No one has reached out to me.
We've had some citizens who have encouraged
us to attend some events. >> (inaudible) Our best
are only option right now?
You don't want to make -- we don't want to go through
our data center -- we have to have a third party --
(inaudible) we know more about data centers than we ever
wanted.
We are still not experts.
When we take the science or the environmental side
and the financial side, Georgia Tech
is able to put all that together.
We need somebody -- to the public for us because we
don't want to say yeah, this is what --
so I don't know if Georgia Tech is our only option.
Or if they're the best option. (inaudible) the same concerns
you have -- the financial side of it --
is not a concern to me because we know those and we're trying
to -- but it's more -- need to be able to make sure that
Georgia Tech can diverge into each one of these cells to bring
them all together -- we are not an expertise panel.
>> There are probably other places --
Georgia Tech is typically more of an independent group
and I'm sure they are consulting groups out there.
But it could explain how independent they are.
I have not looked into this. (inaudible)
but it is probably more economic development focused.
So typically a consulting group, if we don't know --
(inaudible) this is sponsored by the state of Georgia.
I know it's expensive but -- we're not seeing the full cost
of the study.
The state is picking up part of the cost.
But they're asking that we pick up part as well.
I'm sure UGA is scaled the same way
and I can certainly reach out to UGA
and speak to them before Monday.
If you want me to look at a third party --
but I would imagine -- it will be hard to determine
their independent nature. >> (inaudible) and again,
if everything --
>> So I think it is -- sounds like Georgia Tech might be it.
(inaudible) as well as the economic impact.
>> They did already -- so that is one technical -- like I said,
they promised -- public health official --
so some of those other things that are outside of just --
and I can get them to specify that. (inaudible)
>> Can I send you my list of questions?
>> You can.
>> Before I start up --a questions from anyone?
>> I come from a -- (inaudible) I don't like the fact --
(inaudible) looking to supply this particular --
(inaudible) No matter what of the 45 counties we got all
excited -- (inaudible) we got in the game quick.
(inaudible) they're going to have to redo the transmission
lines. (inaudible) it's coming.
They pay for the right to have an option.
They pay $33 million.
What's going to happen when -- will have to start building
plants --
I think this might be the -- (inaudible) took 18 years
and was twice overbudget.
That's one reason why I like --
there's so many unanswered questions. (inaudible)
are any of them even running?
I know they are in Virginia.
[inaudible conversation] The way I'm feeling on this collar I
don't -- (inaudible) >> (inaudible) maybe do one
and a half gigawatts.
It will be a sponsored city because they can't allocate
the power from that machine -- (inaudible) so we would have
to buy in at.
Also -- (inaudible) Those people were just bankrupt.
(inaudible) even though they say they are guaranteeing it --
(inaudible) with the underlying guarantor to use that
electricity. (inaudible) They built the buildings but they --
I just -- 18, I think we made the right choice.
(inaudible) I think we priced ourselves out of the market.
They had to put a new equipment.
There's nobody standing in line (inaudible).
And if they get down to 50 or 60,
they probably can't afford -- (inaudible) Rohn is still
getting calls.
Especially the small ones that we've been looking at.
They want to increase in size now.
(inaudible) Maybe nothing would slow down. (inaudible)
>> (inaudible)
>> That's another question.
If they came to us and we just said we don't --
they say fine and then -- (inaudible) There are other
models out there.
So I'll send you something that I received from Massachusetts
and that way we can look at all these different models.
I don't think we're in a place to make a decision today.
But there are models that work.
That way you can -- you guys can look at it.
Just another option. (inaudible)
>> Okay. >> (inaudible) the moratorium per se is not good
but the moratorium -- just like you said.
I'd like the question answer -- (inaudible) Seeing them
on the ordinance side, (inaudible) some more additional
stuff.
On the Georgia Tech proposal, it sounds like they're still
questions we need answered before --
if it doesn't include certain things,
it becomes a question of --.
Versus if we get more experts or -- as it relates to Marietta,
more specifically, maybe using collaborations --
it might save costs on some stuff which --
and having them help out and --
>> I think either T or Jason said --
experts that we feel need to be --
and have all that put into this -- before we say yes to it.
>> (inaudible) but to look at who we think needs to go
in there and make sure -- yes to this agreement.
It's an agreement that will -- taking in all the environmental
-- and all those things.
Add that into this and see if they say --
>> That's kind of where I'm at. (inaudible)
>> To be clear, did you say you had confirmed the --
and electrical engineer health experts?
>> They said they would include those.
>> Okay.
>> And we also as a council want to let him know what we are
looking for in terms of -- >> So we can just ask the questions --
looking to see if that is -- (inaudible) and in that case,
(inaudible) we've heard some of the things --
is there anything else you want to ask?
In terms of what we might be looking for? >> (inaudible)
>> Yes sir.
>> I think it would be good if -- (inaudible).
Just take -- if someone said we got the perfect spot,
all we need is --
I think we have to be as cautious (inaudible)
we are the owners and we just say -- let them help us.
They do a lot of research -- (inaudible) A lot of clients ask
for non-disclosure agreements. (inaudible) Which is everybody
but one now. (inaudible)
[inaudible conversation]
At this time are there any other directions or instructions --
or is this something that needs to be --?
(inaudible) I'm not hearing any opposition to that.
This will remain on the agenda for next month.
The item will be on the agenda next month.
If you have any questions (inaudible),
probably get together with Ronny.
Does that make sense? >> (inaudible)
probably better to have a motion.
Entertain a motion to move this to the next >>
For clarification, just the Georgia Tech proposal?
(inaudible)
>> Bring back everything. (inaudible) just keep us
Apprized of the ordinance stuff because --
send you something as well.
So just forwarding this to the September Committee,
and all those in favor -- is there any further business?
Hearing none come that meeting is adjourned to.
>> I call to order the Economic Development Committee.
First order of business is to approve the minutes.
>> Approve.
>> Second.
>> All in favor?
Motion passes 3-0.
>> Kelsey, how are you?
Doing well.
Our next order of business is the fiscal year 25 CDBG CAPER.
>> This is our end of year program report for program year
2025 and it's currently out for public comment until September
11th.
We have a public review meeting scheduled for 11:00 on Tuesday
September 8th.
This doesn't require a vote to.
It's just a presentation.
Just a brief overview of our funding from last year.
We received over $417,000 in our yearly allocation and then we
had some rollover from prior year's.
We had about $583,000 to work with and we spent a little over
$468,000.
15% of our budget is capped for public services which is roughly
$60,000.
And we had six recipients that expended that.
All of this money has to be spent
on city of Marietta residents that are low to moderate income.
These are the six recipients we had and their outcomes.
So the center for Family Resources
served six households which had 15 individuals
and they provided emergency rental assistance
so everyone they provide assistance for
is received an eviction notice and is
on the cusp of becoming homeless and they provide assistance
to prevent that. (inaudible) for children and their parents
and they provide services to abused and neglected children.
(inaudible) 14 individuals through their Glad program
which provides domestic violence counseling.
An extension serves 62 homeless women through their residential
substance abuse program and -- through their after school
program.
All of that done just with a $60,000,
which we always like to talk about.
We had a little over $97,000 left over from prior years that
we had allocated for public facilities and improvements
and we finally got to spend that.
CDBG money paid for the installation and equipment
of the playground.
We're really proud that that funding got in.
And got some money that we've been holding for a few years.
For housing rehabilitation and this is our largest program.
We expended a little over $228,000 serving 12 households
and then we had three households that we spent money on that were
not yet complete.
All in all that was a little over $151,000 of grants provided
to mostly senior citizen households.
All but two of our households served last year or 62 or older.
The average income of those 12 households was right at $24,000.
>> Can you tell me the acronym --
>> ELD is elderly and disabled.
We do grants up to $50,000 for households that are extremely
low income and elderly or disabled.
These are people on the very bottom of that income range.
LBP is lead based paint.
We have to test any house built before 1978
for lead based paint.
If it tests hot we have to abate that.
We did one lead based paint project last year and five
emergency projects.
>> Sure.
Most of the time they include some sort of plumbing issue.
We actually got one a few weeks ago from Marietta Water.
Somebody had a $5,000 water bill and they called us and said
clearly he has a leak.
It's on his side.
Can we help?
We were able to go in within a week
and fix that and get him back on track.
Some of the others are if an elderly person
doesn't have heat or air conditioning comet
we consider that an emergency.
What we usually do is we bump them
to the top of the list for that and then most of the time
they have other issues and we put them back on the list
and when we get to their order we complete the rest.
>> (inaudible)
>> No, not currently.
They've never submitted an application for funding.
This is just a map of where the projects we completed last year
fall.
Funny enough, we tend to do things in clusters.
Will not serve an area for years and then we'll do three --
Roosevelt Circle is one of those.
We hadn't done a project in quite a few years
and then we did three their right almost beside each other.
And we typically have a concentration
in the Booth road area or the Tower Ridge area as well.
And here are some pictures.
Because we did a lot of emergencies,
we didn't have as many fancy things to show.
And with a declining budget, we pretty much tried to stick
to that $15,000 maximum because the money you can spend on more
projects than just doing one large project.
Another one.
And that is all.
Any questions?
We don't have to vote.
We just have to present it and there's still public comment
for the public to submit any comments or questions until
September 11th. >> (inaudible) Them it just has to be
presented.
That's what's in our plan.
No official motion or anything has to be taken.
>> Thank you.
You're doing good work.
>> You all have been very supportive and we always
appreciate it. >>
>> Any other questions?
All right.
With that said, we will adjourn the Economic Development
Committee meeting.
Call the Public Works Committee meeting for order.
First is meeting minutes from July 28th.
Motion and second.
All those in favor?
Passes 3 to 0.
Let's take the next three items in sequence. >>
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
2016 SPLOST -- I think you received the email from Rachel
announcing the ribbon cutting for September the 18th,
10:30 a.m.
Over at Aviation Park.
I'll try to get you a calendar invite out so you have --
but I hope to see all of you there.
We finally get it rescheduled and hopefully --
(inaudible) out in the sun too much.
We will have a ribbon cutting at that time.
That's all I have on 2016.
Do you have any questions?
No?
Okay.
2022, a few updates.
We are continuing to move forward with the intersection
improvements.
That project is being prepared to go out to bid.
Now we're finishing up the right of way acquisition.
Franklin gateway Ridge replacement --
we're waiting the contract now with the contractor.
So we can get that finalized and the start date on that one.
Same thing on New Polk Road and Wiley Road.
We're waiting for the contract to be signed.
We have had for crossing projects
finished in the last few days.
So Chestnut Hill Road, that crossing has been finished.
We've got a couple touch ups. I drove by today.
The contractor has finished up primarily on that one.
So that one is done.
Victory in the park was another one that --
(inaudible) so that one is done as well.
We already had mid-block crossings.
We just added our FBS, a little safer for traffic purposes.
So Cherokee and Dobbs --
First Baptist Church. (inaudible) plus you.
So we've got all of the signs and everything --
and they're now complete. (inaudible)
>> Again, which was already there --
instead of having a static sign -- electronic signs to help --
so all I have on the 2022 list --
I won't ask any questions. >> (inaudible) any estimate on when
that might be moving on?
I mean we are a little closer.
I've reviewed the first plan. (inaudible)
>> The performance report -- you have that in front of you.
Nothing out of the ordinary. (inaudible) inspection
or sanitation -- everything seems to be going steady.
A couple of other announcements as far as the department goes.
We do have a retirement for one of our long term
employees, John Edwards.
He's in our engineering division and we went a little
over 29 years in retiring this Friday.
He'll be on the second floor.
1 to 3:00.
If you have the opportunity we appreciate you coming by
and saying goodbye to him.
Did he decided to hang it up and move on.
He's been our stormwater inspector
for the last several years.
He is moving on now.
And then the Board of Zoning Appeals --
reminding me we have our construction Board of Appeals
as well.
A couple of you I've been in contact with.
We've got a couple vacancies that we need to fill.
But also all the rest of you, all the other regular
appointments are set to expire December 31st.
So you all need to look at your current appointments
and decide what you want to do with those.
We need all of that taken care of.
We don't have anything on the agenda but --
he will need a meeting sometime at the first of the year
for some code updates.
Some procedural things he needs to go over with the board.
(inaudible)
>> Construction Board of appeals.
>> They are set to hear any appeals related to building code
interpretations, construction codes -- or fire code.
For the Fire Marshal's office.
We preferred if people have some sort of construction experience.
It's not required but -- if you can find somebody,
that makes it go a little easier.
>> For the Construction Board of Appeals --
or the appointments in case -- don't want them to continue.
(inaudible)
>> November.
December.
[NO AUDIO]
>> All those opposed?
2 to 1.
All right.
>> I am in consent.
No consent.
Next item is donation of right of way.
>> During the review process for the redevelopment --
for Williams commercial Properties 1810 LLC.
Public works requested the right of way
be donated for sidewalk expansion in this area
as shown in the attached documents.
We have received -- for the donation of right of way from 80
1010 Williams Drive.
Quitclaim deed is from Williams Commercial Properties 1810 LLC
and consists of a total of 921 files
and square feet of right of way and this is located in Ward six
B.
>> Can I ask you a quick question?
>> Yes sir, we would have no plans to put a sidewalk on that
side.
I would prefer to have the right of way -- be my motion approved.
>> Yes.
[laughter]
>> I think that's the second.
>> There's a word in here that makes no sense.
(inaudible) if you look under the description, that's --
>> Oh jeez.
>> It doesn't invalidate it.
It just -- unless it's -- (inaudible) first page
of the quick claim -- all that track of parcel of land B --
exhibit A and B, attached -- incorporated herein
by reference.
>> I think it's meant to be here to. >> (inaudible) you've got
to do with that one says.
>> Can I offer a suggestion on this one?
(inaudible) ask our attorney to take a look through that and see
if it matches -- if it doesn't match then --
to get the correct language in there.
Maybe we have a motion and second.
All those in favor?
3-0.
Any objection to consent to?
>> I want to see the outcome of that first. >> (inaudible)
it might be better to just have -- on an updated form.
>> (inaudible)
>> Quite a few grammatical errors.
>> It says grantor has signed and sealed --
except there is no date
>> This has questions that need to be resolved.
Directions to the attorney?
>> I'll be glad to.
With that, I adjourn the public works meeting.
>> I like to call the special called Council Meeting.
July the 28th meeting minutes.
>> Motion to approve.
>> Second.
All those in favor?
Executive session? >> (inaudible)
>> I conclude the minutes -- going to consider that contract
--
I'd like some executive discussion and comments before
we take it to the -- maybe I'm what?
Maybe I'm beginning legal advice on -- (inaudible).
>> (inaudible)
>> It is. (inaudible)
>> All those in favor?
Opposed?
Motion carries. (inaudible)
have a good time. (laughs)