---
date: 1998-11-09
title: November 9, 1998 Minutes
source: 1998-11/1998-11-09_November 9, 1998_Minutes.pdf
pages: 1
---

November 9, 1998

EXECUTIVE SESSION

EXECUTIVE SESSION
STOCKBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 9, 1998

DURDEN v. CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE. A. J. Welch, City Attorney, advised Council that the City was sued
by Brian K. Durden concerning the City Parade Ordinance. Mr. Durden filed suite in Federal Court asking
for a temporary restraining order. At a hearing before Judge G. Ernest Tidwell, Judge Tidwell denied Mr.
Durden’s request for a restraining order, which requires Mr. Durden to get a permit from the City to parade.
The City has not received a copy of Judge Tidwell’s order.

Mr. Durden came to City Hall on Friday, November 6, 1998 to get a permit and Ted Strickland told Mr. Durden
he did not need a permit until the Judge Tidwell made a decision. Mr. Durden told Mr. Strickland that he had
no knowledge that Judge Tidwell making a decision in this matter. Mr. Welch said Mr. Durden knew of Judge
Tidwlell’s decision because Mr. Durden’s lawyer, Michael J. DePrimo, told him that they had received a copy
of the order and he told Mr. Durden to get a permit.

Mr. Welch advised Council that he had discussed this with the Clerk and decided to have Mr.Durden file an
application for a permit to cover last Saturday and any other time he wishes to parade. There is no problem
with Mr. Durden getting a permit, the only question is that the City needs to know what is happening so the
City can have the police there to cover any situation.

Mr. Welch informed the Council that Judge Tidwell denied Mr. Durden’s application.

REGULAR MEETING

CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA NOVEMBER 9, 1998

The Regular Meeting of the Stockbridge City Council was held November 9, 1998 at 6:00 P. M. with Mayor
R. G. Kelley presiding. Members present were Harold Cochran, G. W. Evans, W.A.Gardner, Ronnie
Simmons and Fletcher Turner.

Harold Cochran made a motion to convene, seconded by W. A. Gardner, passed unanimously.
Harold Cochran made a motion to approve minutes of the October 12, 1998 City Council Meeting, seconded
by G. W. Evans, passed unanimously.

SANTA MARIE DEVELOPMENT OF KENNESAW, GEORIGA requested rezoning from R-2 (single-family
residential) unincorporated Henry County to PD (R-2, R-3) planned development City of Stockbridge, for
property located in Land Lot 5 of the 12th District on the east side of Flippen Road. The property contains
37.5 acres and the request is for an adult (55 years or older) residential development in the City of
Stockbridge. The request is for annexation into the City of Stockbridge. Henry County Planning and Zoning
denied request on October 8, 1998. City of Stockbridge tabled request on October12, 1998.

Cal McShan reported that the Council asked him to meet with the developer and workout specific conditions
on the property. He has met with the developer in terms of the original conditions and looking at the
development with a 3.6 density. The project has changed from 158 lots to 130 lots as specified in the report.
The recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board is that this project be approved. There are thirteen
conditions that the developer has agreed to meet on this project and the staff recommends to the Council:

1. The minimum lot width of fifty-five feet (55’). The purpose of this smaller lot size is to emphasize
the overall theme of the community as a no-maintenance retirement village.

2. The minimum shall be no less than 130 lots.

3. Setbacks shall be as follows:
q Front – 20’
q Rear - 25’
q Side - 6’
q Side (corner) – 20’, 30’ for corner lots along Flippen Road.

4. The minimum house size shall be 1,200 square feet, with at least fifty (50) percent of the houses
being no smaller than 1,350 square feet.

5. The lawns of all lots shall be sodded and landscaped, subject to review by Planning and
Development staff.
6. The developer shall install underground utilities, sidewalks (minimum width of four (4) feet on both
sides of all streets, and streetlights in the proposed subdivision.

7. An additional four (4) paved shoulder along Flippen Road, if necessary to accommodate a bike land.
Sidewalks along Flippen Road shall be five (5) feet in width.

8. If necessary, an additional right-of-way (ROW) of ten (10) feet along Flippen Road to accommodate
future expansion.

9. Along the south boundary of the property, a natural buffer of no less than ten (10) feet in width shall
be preserved where possible. The buffer area shall not be disturbed by grading or construction
activities, except for the planting of additional vegetation when necessary.

10. Connection to the proposed golf course/apartment development via cart path only at the adjacent
Southland Trust property to the south of this development.

11. The proposed development will comply with the Henry County Subdivision Ordinance.

12. The ROW shall be reduced to forth (40) feet and street width shall be reduced to eighteen (18) feet,
subject to county engineer and Planning and Zoning approval.

13. Any deviation from the submitted site plan relating to future development regulation, shall be subject
to review and approval by Planning and Development, the Henry County-Municipal Planning
Commission, and the City of Stockbridge. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City
of Stockbridge, which shall include the above-listed conditions.

W. A. Gardner made a motion that the thirteen (13) conditions be included in the Development Agreement
and the zoning will be conditional upon the developer executing a Development Agreement with the City and
a copy being attached to the Ordinance, seconded by Ronnie Simmons, passed unanimously.

SHORT TERM WORK PROGRAM ELEMENT (CIE) 1998-2003. Cal McShan explained that his staff has
been working on this program for Henry County, Stockbridge, McDonough, Hampton, and Locust Grove to
maintain each government’s Certification as a Qualified Local Government.
Ronnie Simmons made a motion to adopt a resolution to approve the 1998-2003 Short Term Work Program
Element (CIE) of the Henry County/Cities Joint Comprehensive Development Plan, pursuant to the Georgia
Planning Act of 1989, so as to maintain Certification as a Qualified Local Government, seconded by Fletcher
Turner, passed unanimously.

HENRY COUNTY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND HENRY COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE. Council
has asked A. J. Welch to update and prepare Resolution to adopt Henry County Subdivision Ordinance and
the Henry County Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Welch advises that both ordinances must be advertised, presented
before the Henry County Planning Board, and then brought before the Stockbridge City Council for approval.
The notice of the Planning and Zoning Hearing and the notice of the City of Stockbridge hearing will be printed
in the newspaper in December for their respective meetings.

Harold Cochran made a motion to authorize A. J. Welch and Cal McShan to present to Henry County Planning
and Zoning, seconded by G. W. Evans, passed unanimously.

BOY SCOUT TROOP 115. Mayor Kelley welcomed Scout Troop 115 and Wm. Robert Robinson,
Scoutmaster. These Scouts are earning merit badges in “Citizenship in the Community”, and
“Communications”.

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS. A. J. Welch has been working with the Georgia Municipal Association on
an agreement that will be used by all cities served by Charter Communication. Georgia Municipal Association
recommends the Council adopt the Ordinance and authorize the Mayor and Council to sign the document.

W. A. Gardner made a motion to approve agreement with Charter Communication, seconded by Harold
Cochran, passed unanimously.

HENRY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH APPOINTMENT. Ted Strickland’s term as Public Health
Consumer expires December 31, 1998. The Henry County Department of Public Health request the Council
reappoint Ted Strickland for another six (6) year term beginning January 1, 1999 and ending December 31,
2004.

G. W. Evans made a motion to reappoint Ted Strickland, seconded by Ronnie Simmons, passed
unanimously.
WALTER WAY. The new section of road that connects to the existing Walter Way is being named Walter
Way.

W. A. Gardner made a motion to name the new section of road, Walter Way, seconded by Fletcher Turner,
passed unanimously.

RENAME SPEER ROAD TO DAVISON PARKWAY. Speer Road is being changed to Davidson Parkway
to make Davidson Parkway a complete loop from Georgia State Route 138 East to North Henry Boulevard.

G. W. Evans made a motion to rename Davidson Parkway, seconded by W. A. Gardner, passed
unanimously.

HENRY COUNTY WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY AGREEMENT. The City of Stockbridge currently
has an agreement with Henry County Water and Sewer Authority to provide water and sewer service to
certain areas within the City of Stockbridge. The agreement is being amended to be in compliance with
House Bill 489.

W. A. Gardner made a motion to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign amendment to the Water and Sewer
Agreement between the City of Stockbridge and henry County Water and Sewer Authority, seconded by G.
W. Evans, passed unanimously.

STOCKBRIDGE OPTIMIST CLUB TURKEY SHOOT. The Stockbridge Optimist Club asked permission to
relocate their annual turkey shoot from R. W. Smokin’, East Atlanta Road to Signs Incorporated, 4231 North
Henry Boulevard.

G. W. Evans made a motion to approve new location for turkey shoot, seconded by Harold Cochran, passed
unanimously.

1999 PROPOSED BUDGET HEARING. Mayor Kelley asked if there were any questions regarding the
Proposed Budget. There were no comments and Council was advised to study the budget to make final
adjustments so the Proposed Budget can be adopted at the December 14, 1998 Council Meeting.
LEELIN, INC. dba EAGLE LIQUORS AND KILROY’S BEER AND WINE, MICHAEL K. O’CONNOR AND
JACK S. KURTZ have requested a hearing under Alcohol Ordinance section 9.04.220(B), Notice of Denial.

Kirby A. Glaze, attorney, representing Leelin, Inc. This is an appeal from a letter written by Mr. Strickland on
October 15, 1998 in response to a letter written by Mr. Glaze on behalf of Leelin, Inc. on October 12, 1998
requesting that the City Council issue a license to Leelin, Inc. for the retail sale of distilled spirits. In order to
explain the reason they are entitled to a license, he needs to note portions of the ordinance that were adopted
by the Mayor and Council on August 31, l998.

Section 1 of that ordinance sets forth the requirements for a license to be issued in the City of Stockbridge.
Section 6 of that ordinance sets forth a procedure for the issuance of licenses and provides, therein, among
other things, that only completed applications shall be considered. It goes on to say that any incomplete
application shall be returned to the applicant and shall not count for filing purposes until all information is
complete on resubmission. It then says that the licensee shall be considered on a first come, first serve
basis, and that there shall be issued a maximum of one license per permitted area.

The ordinance does not in Section 6 specify how the Council is to consider, if there is more than one
application for the same area other than considering the applications on a first come, first serve basis. So, it
is their understanding of the ordinance, and their position to the Mayor and Council that on October 5, 1998,
the time the Mayor and Council considered the outstanding applications, they were to be considered in the
order of filing for each district in which there was to be issued a license. Section 1 also provides in 9.04.180,
that any application shall contain in subsection (F) a survey indicating the location of the business and
distance to the nearest school, church, alcoholic treatment center and closest distilled spirits retail dealer.

Section 9.04.201 of Section l of the ordinance also provides under subsection (A), any material omission left
out of original application shall be cause for denial. Under subsection (B), any information, which changes
or becomes obsolete shall be reported immediately. Under subsection (C) when any license is issued on the
basis of an application containing misleading or untrue information, or omitted or unreported changed
material information, such circumstance shall be cause of revocation of the same.

On October 31, 1998, Eagle’s Landing Bottle Shoppe, Inc. submitted an application for a license for distilled
spirits at a location designated and Country Club Drive in Stockbridge. That application included with it a
survey of the proposed premises and the proposed site. The survey did not include on it the distances to
any of the required establishments set forth in the ordinance. There was attached to the application a map
of the city and on that map of the city there were stars indicating various locations, and attached to that map,
a sheet that had typed in various distances in millage to those locations. That sheet was not certified by the
applicant, a surveyor or anyone else.
On September 4, 1998, Leelin, Inc. filed it’s application for a liquor license within the same district. On
October 5, 1998, the Council considered those applications. At that time, those were the only two applications
that has been accepted the by City for a liquor license in the area between I-75 at Hudson Bridge Road or
Eagle’s Landing Parkway and 42 Highway. At the time the Council considered those applications, Mr. Kirby
inquired of the applicant for Eagle’s Landing Bottle Shoppe, Inc. as to whether or not they in fact have the
site for which they have made application, and the applicant advised that they did.

On October 8, 1998, the applicant for Eagle’s Landing Bottle Shoppe, Inc., filed with the City a letter
requesting a change of location, and again, submitted to the City a survey that did not contain any of the
distances that are required in the ordinance to be contained on the survey, and again, submitted a City map
that showed by the designation of a star, various locations and the distances to those locations from the
proposed site, which was not certified by the surveyor or the applicant.

On October 12, 1998, on behalf of Leelin, Inc., Mr. Glaze wrote to the Mayor and Council advising them that
they had found out that the applicant for the location on Country Club Drive did not on October 5, 1998, in
fact control that site or have the site for which they had made application. Therefore, in their opinion, Leelin,
Inc. was the only qualified applicant to be considered on October 5, 1998.

On October 12, 1998 that evening at the Council Meeting, the Council considered the change of location and
such was granted and October 15, 1998, they received a notice from Mr. Strickland that their application was
the seventh (7) application filed. Three licenses had been issued, therefore, theirs would not be considered
and returned the check they had tendered for the license fee.

Members of the Mayor and Council it is not their desire to attack any other applicant or to prohibit any other
applicant from doing business within the City. They did not establish the rules by which the City would
consider applications. The Council did that when they adopted the ordinance on August 31, 1998. Under
the terms of that ordinance on, applications must be complete before they can be considered. The application
submitted by the applicant for Eagle’s Landing Bottle Shoppe, Inc. was on its face, incomplete. It did not
contain the required provisions of the ordinance. It did not set forth on the survey the distances to the various
other establishments that were required to be set forth. In addition, on October 5, 1998, when the applications
were considered, it is our belief that that applicant did not control that site. We advised the City of such by
letter on October 12, 1998. On October 12, 1998 and he recalls that at the public hearing, the applicant
admitted that they did not have that site as of October 5, 1998. They had a contract on the site and the
contract had expired and they now have a different location.

It is their position that the Council, having established those rules, having one, made application sites specific.
Each applicant had to designate for the City that site for which they were making application. That applicant,
who designated a site, no longer had control of that site. That was a material representation and at the
moment, as soon as the applicant became aware of the fact that they no longer control that site, had a duty
and obligation to report that, under the ordinance, to the Mayor, Council or administration. Under the terms
of the ordinance, any incomplete application would be returned and the information must be supplied and
upon its completion, it would be counted in order of filing. As of October 5, when the Council considered
applications, there still was not contained with the application of Eagle’s Landing Bottle Shoppe, Inc., a survey
indicating the distances as required by the ordinance. It is their position that that application, at that time,
was incomplete and, therefore, not eligible for consideration. In fact on October 8, 1998, when the request
for change of location was made, it still did not include a survey indicating the distances as required by the
ordinance. Therefore, that license is, to his knowledge based on his request to the public records, still
incomplete and still not eligible for consideration. If that license is not available for consideration, the only
other applicant who had made application for a license in that district on October 5, 1998 was Leelin, Inc.
and they respectfully submit to the Mayor and Council that as such, they are entitled to the issuance of a
license. They respectfully request that the Mayor and Council issue such a license.

A. J. Welch asked if he could ask Mr. Glaze a few questions to clear the record. Before the Mayor and
Council considered the applications, there was an amendment to the ordinance that says that the licenses
that will be considered in the order in which they were filed and they could not locate in the area, they would
be given a reasonable opportunity to relocate in another area. He said he was sure he was familiar with it,
he was provided a copy of that ordinance. Mr. Glaze responded that actually that was not contained in the
ordinance. It was stated in the council meeting but it’s not in the certified copy of the ordinance. Mr. Welch
asked if the Clerk if Mr. Glaze was provided a copy of the amendment? The Clerk responded she did not
because he did not ask for it. Mr. Welch asked if he was aware of the amendment to the ordinance? Mr.
Glaze said that he was aware that the Council on the night that the applications were considered, this was
discussed but he requested the ordinance as adopted on August 31, 1998 and he was provided with a copy
that apparently did not include the amendment. Mr. Welch stated that obviously, you asked for the ordinance
adopted on August 31, 1998, she gave you the 31st and this was adopted in October and this would be a
different matter. The point he is trying to get to is that he was aware that the amendment exists and the
question is, what is your position concerning the amendment? Mr. Welch asked if they were seventh (7) on
the list? Mr. Glaze responded that they were seventh (7).

Mr. Welch asked Mr. Glaze to explain what their position is regarding the amendment. Mr. Glaze responded
that it is their position, that when the ordinance was adopted on August 31, 1998 and provided that the
licenses would be considered on a first come, first serve basis and that only three (3) licenses, one for each
of the three districts, as the results of that ordinance at that time. The policy would be that you consider in
order of filing by district. The amendment adopted related to, what do you do if one of those applicants does
not subsequently obtain their license, or if in some point their license terminates for some reason? At that
point and time, any of the applicants would go to the next license in order of filing and allow that applicant to
then request a change of location to district. But on October 5, 1998. Mr. Glaze does not believe the way
the ordinance read or the amendment read that the Mayor and Council could have taken the three first
licenses filed and if they all happened to be in the same district, the other two would have an opportunity to
look for another location. In spite of the fact that there were other licenses already on file for those districts,
because that change of location constituted a change in their application, which under City ordinance, made
that application date for filing purposes at the time the change was made. So, they could not have been the
first in line for that particular location. He thinks the Council had to decide order of filing for location first.
Then you may after those licenses are issued, then if other openings come along go back in to order of filing
without regard to location. That applicant when changing their location, their order of filing, would not relate
to the original issuance, it would relate to a reapplication.

A.J.Welch asked Mr. Glaze to state to the Mayor and Council what provisions of the ordinance he contends
control their appeal. Mr. Glaze stated that he believes that the provisions of the ordinance that relates to
their appeal and are dispositive of the appeal are first Section 6 of the ordinance as adopted on August 31,
1998 that deals with consideration of complete, only complete applications. The provision that says any
incomplete application will be considered as of time the completed information is filed and resubmitted. The
provision that says they shall be considered on a first come, first serve basis and that there shall be a
maximum of one per each district. He also believes that in determining the question of whether or not the
Eagle’s Landing Bottle Shoppe application as of October 5, 1998 was in fact……… Mr. Welch asked if there
were any other sections? Mr. Glaze said Section 9.04.180 (F), 9.04.210(A, B, C), and the provision date
relating to the transfer of location, and he could not remember that section number. It is their argument that
this provision is not applicable but to the extend that it would be considered by the Council. It applies only to
licenses that are already in existence, where there has been a license issued for an existing location and
then, subsequently, for whatever reason the applicant wishes to change to another location. This is under
Section 9.04.250, Subsection (D) Transfer of Licenses. It says that the Mayor and Council reserve the right
to authorize the transfer of a license by owner to another location. Owner of a license may apply to the Mayor
and Council for permission to transfer the license to another location. It is his position that that applies only
where there has been a validly issued license to begin with.

A.J. Welch stated that only part of the questions raised by Mr. Glaze was that if incomplete or inappropriate
information was given, that would only be cause for revocation under the ordinance, it would not be grounds
for reversing their decision without revocation notice and a hearing. Mr. Glaze pointed out that under Section
9.04.210 (A); it is a cause for an initial denial. It is their opinion that it, appropriately, should have been denied
to begin with and not considered. But, if considered and issued, and then the Mayor and Council determined
that the application was incomplete, or that the application contained information that had changed for which
they had not been advised, then it is a basis for revocation.

At the time of filing of the applications, Mr. Welch asked if they had evidence that the applicant did not have
the property in question under contract? Mr. Glaze responded that he did not know whether or not they
had it under contract as of the time of the filing of the application.

Mr. Welch asked what evidence, if any, do you have that you can state that they did not have an agreement
concerning the acquisition of the property or use of property? Mr. Glaze stated that the property that they
made their initial application for is owned by Mr. James Baker and his brother. Mr. Baker advised him after
the hearing on October 5, 1998 that they did not have a contract for that property, and believe that was also
stated by the applicant at the October 12, 1998 meeting.

Mayor Kelley advised Mr. Kirby Glaze and the Council would take this matter under advisement and let them
know the Council’s decision.
Gary Howell, applicant number four, asked to address the Council. Mr. Howell was not on the agenda and
was not allow to speak.

NITA INVESTMENTS DBA TEXACO FOOD MART, NITA SARDANA, 4475 North Henry Boulevard. A. J.
Welch advised the Council that Nita Sardana was notified of the hearing by certified mail. The document
was returned today undelivered. Council rescheduled the hearing to November 16, 1998 at 5:00 P. M.
Notices to be served by hand.

ALARM SYSTEM. Councilman Evans asked the status of the emergency alarm system. TedStrickland
reported that the application has been sent to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) but he
has had no response from them yet.

STAPLES MOBILE HOME PARK. Ted Strickland reminded the Council that several months ago this
problem was mentioned to them. He wrote the owner that their tenants are dumping trash on Spring Street
and several complaints have been received from residents. The owner was to have a specific location for
large items to be placed for pickup by the City. This plan is not working very well. Mr. Strickland suggested
to the Council that Staples Mobile Home Park be required to go on dumpster service because tenants
continue to dump on the street.

METRO GLASS, 127 ROCK QUARRY ROAD. Mr. Strickland reported that for the last three weeks, Metro
Glass had approximate 6,200 pounds of glass scraps. They are charged $15.00 per month, the commercial
rate. It is costing the City approximately $100.00 per month for this one account. Council needs to look at
the way we charge these large users. Mayor Kelley suggested the Council consider amending the
regulations. Mr. Welch said the ordinance adopted by the Council last month covers this matter.

Harold Cochran made a motion to go into Executive Session, seconded by G. W. Evans, passed
unanimously.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

Motion was made by Harold Cochran to reconvene, seconded by G. W. Evans, passed unanimously.

Motion to adjourn Regular Meeting was made by W. A. Gardner, seconded by Fletcher Turner, passed
unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 P. M.

Respectfully submitted,
Merle Manders, CMC R. G. Kelley
City Clerk Mayor
