---
date: 2009-12-23
title: December 23, 2009 Minutes
source: 2009-12/2009-12-23_December 23, 2009_Minutes.pdf
pages: 1
---

December 23, 2009

CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE DECEMBER 23, 2009
HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA SPECIAL MEETING

A Special Meeting of the Stockbridge City Council was held on December 23, 2009 at 4:30 P. M. Mayor
R. G. Kelley presided and members present were Harold Cochran, Shirley Dabney, Fred Evans, Kathryn
Gilbert and Vernon Moss.

Harold Cochran made a motion to convene; Fred Evans seconded, passed unanimously.

Mayor Kelley welcomed guests.

POLICE PRECINCT AND MUNICIPAL COURT BUILDINGS

Mayor Kelley - noted that this meeting was called to discuss/approve bids for remodeling of the Police
Precinct building and the Municipal Court building.

Buddy Welch, City Attorney - noted that Jim Vann with JTV, General Contractor had the documents and
that he (Buddy Welch) had prepared a resolution for the Councils’ consideration. The resolution gives you
a report of all the bids that Jim received and those are on Exhibit A page 1 and 2. And then Exhibit B is
Jim’s recommendation and I’ll let him explain all that to you.

Kathryn Gilbert – Asked if there were copies of all of the information.

Buddy Welch – I would hope that you do. You don’t?

Kathryn Gilbert – No sir, I do not.

Buddy Welch – Can we get some run off?

Merle Manders to Buddy Welch, – I don’t think that we received the information in time to make the copies.
Buddy Welch – Maybe not, because all of the figures were being put together this afternoon for us to attach
to the resolution. But Jim can start with his explanation of what he has.

Jim Vann – First when you see it I’m going to apologize for the print, the type print because it’s very small,
and my eyes are already starting to go. So, I can blow it up. But it was really hectic trying to go through
what we have. As you can see we had quite a turnout of bids yesterday. So I’m very happy to see that.
Basically what we tried to do is we took the documents for the two buildings and tried to use economy of
scale and put them out as one bid package. And essentially we had fourteen bid packages and we’re
recommending a total of nine separate companies that would be issued contracts directly with the city and
then JTV would be the construction manager. Basically what we tried to do is when we broke the bid
packages up, we tried a again to use the economy of scale and break them into sections where we wouldn’t
have fifty different contracts that the city would have to manage because your risk mushrooming. And say
for example, toilet partitions or toilet accessories, you might have a one or two thousand dollar item and by
the time some of these guys who don’t even have bonding set up, by the time they charge you to go to set
up bonding, it would be more than the accessories are; lockers and those kinds of things. So we lump those
into bid packages. You kind of get that and get the economy of scale on it.

Essentially, good news, bad news. The good news is we had a great turn out. We’ve got the bid packages
broken down in there. The construction management fees, general condition fees and then furnishings,
fixtures and equipment.

Right now I believe the judge is using a small hand held recording to do all of the official recordings of all
court proceedings. This is very burdensome. The judge and I went to McDonough to observe several of the
court systems there. We have actually received a quote from them where they will have a court recording
system that they will be able to start and stop. They will have a clock up on the bench so everyone can see
officially when they’re on the clock. When they’re on record/off record. The court clerk will be able to help
the judge and start and stop things, and everyone will be recorded on a PC and really be able to speed
things up which I think will be a big thing. It’s amazing how busy that court is nowadays. I can’t believe the
traffic that’s going there. It will be a huge improvement.

The other thing that we had, we were able to reuse your server and everything from the old city hall building
currently the court, and the phone system as well, bring that stuff over. We have an allowance in there for
that, but we gave them the alternative specs. So we should have everything in the FF and E covered.

The last item that I was recommending is we are in the process of getting all of the documents down to
Henry County to go through all of the departments to get the proper permits issued. What we recommended
was a total contingency of about $150,000; $75,000 per building. And that will give us a little room to make
sure we are in good shape.

So you will recall, the building that we are doing this similar package system on right now, we’re getting
ready to call for a final on that one and we’ve ended that project without a single dollar in change orders.
So I was very happy to see that happen. If we could have that happen here that would be great. I think the
big thing is getting past the fire marshal hurdle and making sure we’ve got everything.

Kathryn Gilbert – By the current building you’re talking about the little community center? With absolutely
no change orders on it?

Jim Vann – Sure, Zero dollars. I know that was a big thing for us to make sure that we did that. Believe me
I have spent many countless nights up trying to make sure that we have everything covered on these two
projects as well. There’s a lot to these buildings. Especially the old library building and trying to make sure
that we have everything covered. That’s why I’m suggesting the $150,000 in contingencies.

But, in general, if we look at the two different buildings, on the police precinct we have a total cost on the
police precinct…..

Buddy Welch - That’s page 2 – A2.

Kathryn Gilbert - A2 is the police precinct?

Buddy Welch – Look down at the bottom it says, one million six ninety eight.

Kathryn Gilbert - Correct.

Buddy Welch – Line 78, it says to the left of that, police precinct.

Kathryn Gilbert - Thank you.

Jim Vann – In that set of documents, we have one alternate in there and that is; when you come into the
entrance of the old city hall, where the mayor’s office used to be, that wall will become where the secretaries
offices are. There will be two walk-up windows there. And then directly in front; I don’t know if you’ve ever
been to the headquarters in McDonough, but there is a place where officers sit. Basically in case someone
has a question about a report or something, they can come and talk to an officer there. But we would make
both of those two walls those and the walls themselves bullet resistant up to class 3 bullet resistant which
is pretty stout. We gave that alternate. That’s basically a $40,000 alternate. $43,233 to be exact. With
everything in there.
Essentially, this project, we had a budget for that building of $1.5 million dollars. We also have an insurance
claim. What we tried to do is, when we put the roofing package out for bid, we included re-roofing that
building. And I believe Nancy, that they have agreed that they are going to add another $15,546 on top of
that to reimburse you all for the roof on that building. So we essentially have $1,529,546. 00. My brain is a
little fried with all of these numbers today.

Kathryn Gilbert – I’m confused. Where is the roof? What’s with the roof?

Jim Vann – The existing shingles and flat roof over there have been leaking on that building. So we filed a
claim with your insurance company and they have agreed to reimburse the city for a new roof. $29, 546.00.

Kathryn Gilbert – On the library or on the old city hall?

Jim Vann – On what will be the police station. The old city hall.

Kathryn Gilbert – Okay.

Jim Vann - There were roof leaks on the flat roof as well as on the shingles. From what I understand from
the industry, with all of the hail damage that they’ve had on roofs, that that building is basically seventeen
years old. I was kind of surprised that they didn’t prorate it for the life of what you’ve had. However, they
agreed to pay for the entire roof. I imagine because you have probably had a lot of insurance premiums
that have been paid….that’s very unusual. So we’re taking the $29,546 adding it to the $1.5 million to get
to that number.

One of the options that we have on that building, and I don’t mean to speak out of turn, but, essentially,
we’re taking the inside of that building of the existing portion of the police station and renovating it for them
and then building another 9,000 feet on the back. It will be a two story section. Basically, all it’s going to
have in there are locker rooms. There is currently an elevator. That’s all on the bottom floor. We’re going
to make an extension between the two buildings so it will all be one building. We’re going to add a sprinkler
system to that building because of the wood roof structure and the wood walls on the existing building. They
will require a sprinkler system on it. But, basically, we’re going to put lights in the rest of the unfinished area
on the bottom floor; and then the upper floor will be completely unfinished. We have an elevator shaft in
there and all the electrical, elevator and everything in the number that I’ve given you. However, looking at
where we are on the budget, it can easily be added that the elevator itself, which is $35,850, that item could
be removed from the budget. And it could be done at some point in the future. It would be nice if we could
get it in, but when we’re looking at the overall budget of that basically $3,029,000 if you look at that front
page our total of $3,120,000.00 we’re slightly over on that. So, we could cut that elevator out and pick up
basically $36,000 on that.

On to the old library building, new municipal court building. That building will be probably 94% fully
improved. There will be a section on the top floor. The courtroom and everything will be on the bottom
floor. So we will use the parking lot from this building. Create a walkway down and around to the back of
the new courthouse building for people to come in. We’ll have van access. Right now, one of the things
that the judge told me was a real problem is, when you go in that building now, there’s very little security
for it. If you think about what they are having to do and kind of the way most court facilities are, the prisoners
kind of come in through one area, and come in the back area away from the public. Apparently they have
a big issue with the relatives getting close to the prisoners. And sometimes it can get a little intense. Even
though it city court, sometimes some of the people who may be in city court may have a violent history or
have other issues. You don’t really know what you’re going to get. What we would do is take the existing
parking lot and bring in the prisoners in the vans to a cul-de-sac area in the back of the building. They would
go immediately into a holding cell that would be basically in the back section of the courtroom. So they
would go directly out of the parking lot to a holding area before they go before the judge. This is going to
make it a whole lot more secure. And outside of the court itself, we have an area where you can add a
point in the future metal detectors and x-ray equipment and all those things which would be difficult to do
in your current location as well.

The other thing is, right now, we have the main offices on the top floor. And then on the bottom floor is
basically all of the court services. There would be the courtrooms, attorney meeting areas where I guess
they do all of their negotiations and those kinds of things, and then a cashier’s office. We are going to reuse
the drive up window tube that we have in the old city hall building; the old pneumatic tube that would take
the money. That would be a secured area as well. When people come directly out of court, the first room
they would see would be a cashier where they could pay their fines. At the end of the day, the monies
could be placed in the tube that would go upstairs to a safe; it would never have to go out into the public
area. And we wouldn’t have to pay for it since we have it in the other building, and is not going to get reused
over there. It’s being taken out as that area will be part of an office.

One of the better benefits on the bottom floor also is probation. One of the points that some of those helping
us out has been the discussion of night probation. Many of those on probation are unable to come in during
the day for fear of losing their jobs. So there will be an area where those individuals could come in at night.
The rest of the building would be locked. They would be in their own area. The rest of the building would
remain secured. There are a lot of benefits to this building.

On this project, we have a couple of different alternates. The first one is adding a fence. If you look at that
parking lot, you can see where the trees between the church and the library, the roots have puckered up
the parking lot everywhere. We’re going to need to take all of that out and recompact all of the subgrade,
and repave that area. But to separate that office, that area from the court building from the church, we could
give it an alternate in there to put an aluminum fence. Similar to the fence that you have around this building
here. The black aluminum fence that you have. Basically to secure that area. That’s a $21,095 add. And
that would basically tie back in to your fence that you have on the other side.

Ted Strickland – Jim, could I just ask something?

Jim Vann – Yes sir.

Ted Strickland – Yesterday the Baptist preacher called and they normally use the parking lot there for senior
citizens to park and go into church. If we fence that in, we would probably need to leave an area where
senior citizens can park on Sunday and go to the church. A little opening where they can get in. If council
approves that. If the mayor and council don’t have a problem with it.

Kathryn Gilbert – Would that compromise the security of the court building? I’m not entirely certain.

Jim Vann – It’s basically a two-sided fence. So, it would basically keep the traffic from….I would think I
guess as far as the church might be concerned, it might keep people from the public property from
wandering on…..you know let’s say whatever they have happen on a court date, remembering we having
current parking on your parking lot. But some people may try to park in the court parking lot, the old library
parking lot, and overflow into the church’s and that would stop them from being able to get on their property.

Kathryn Gilbert – What I believe Mr. Strickland is asking is that evidently there are some church parishioners
who park in that parking area. The old library parking lot and could walk through to the church.

Ted Strickland – That’s all.

Kathryn Gilbert to Ted Strickland – And you are suggesting that we put in a gate in that fence of some sort?

Ted Strickland – Gate or just leave it open where the senior citizens can walk through if the council has no
problem with it.

Kathryn Gilbert – Based on what I was understanding, you were telling me that that old parking lot area is
going to be the cul-de-sac turnaround for the prisoner drop off. Is that correct?

Jim Vann – No ma’am. The parking that’s there will basically remain in that same configuration. But directly
behind the library building, there is a big flat area there, that will be where they will have a cul-de-sac there.

Kathryn Gilbert – And access to that will be from this parking lot?

Jim Vann – No ma’am, it will be from the library side only.

Kathryn Gilbert – Okay. I was just concerned that if there was a break in the fence that it might compromise
the security.

Jim Vann – I don’t think it’s a security fence. It’s really more to keep……
Buddy Welch – Why couldn’t you just put a reverse lock on it and give the key to the church and let them
open it. Because people open the churches early in the morning any way and let them just open it as part
of their open up, and it just remain locked from the outside.

Jim Vann – My only suggestion with the fence is really to keep cars from turning in to just call it the new
court parking lot, seeing that it’s full. And when you come out of there, because it’s on to such a busy street,
that will be a right turn only out of there now, because of the danger of trying to turn left. If they don’t really
want to park in city hall’s parking lot, they may just wander over to the library, and I can assure you, from
knowing them, they will be all over you if you have bleed over into their parking lot. Even though they are
using your parking lot now. I can understand they’re going to be upset about it.

Ted Strickland – We’re just talking about Sunday.

Jim Vann – I think we want to try to make sure that we block it off where…

Kathryn Gilbert – During the weekday?

Jim Vann – Yes ma’am. People from the court cannot use the parking lot of the church.

Kathryn Gilbert – Right. So it needs to be some sort of gate access as opposed to an opening in the fence.

Jim Vann – Could be done either way, but yes.

Merle Manders – How many parking spaces are going to be there?

Jim Vann – I apologize, I can’t remember exactly. But it’s either 22 or 27 stalls that are currently there and
we are basically using that same configuration with the section of a 24’ wide driveway taking up a few
spaces to make the turnaround in the back.

Vernon Moss – Jim, do I understand now. The trees that are over there now, are they going to be taken
up?

Jim Vann – No sir, I believe those trees are actually on the church’s property line. We have a discrepancy
in that property marker, so we’re just wanting to make sure that we don’t have a problem with it. It’s the
roots that are migrating under the asphalt.
Vernon Moss – I go to church there. My thinking is, and we can think about this a little later on, but if those
trees were taken up, and you brought the fence inside, we could go down our driveway and park in to the
fence, in towards the fence. That would probably give us 12 – 15 parking spaces, and that may be all we
need. It’s just something to think about. So let me talk to them about that.

Jim Vann – Okay.

Fred Evans – Jim, let me ask you something. What did you find out once you got down to the footing on
that building?

Jim Vann – Glad we dug that up because there’s some block in the existing walls that were cracked and
broken. And that’s part of the reason that you have water pouring into that basement right now. It’s a mess.
The footing that’s on that building, I know codes have changed, but the footing that is holding up that
perimeter wall, a 1’ x 2’ footing, that’s a little bitty footing. So we’re adding a new footing around it to support
the new brick on the front.

Fred Evans – In other words, it’s as bad as you feared.

Jim Vann – Yes sir, it sure was. It was unbelievable. I thought my structural engineer was going to pass out
when he saw it. But, I think we’ll be in real good shape.

The other option that we’ve given you, currently in the base bid, we have taken the front of this building,
and putting a new brick façade on it and a smooth stone, not precast. It’s an actual block. That would be
on the front section only. The other three sides, you currently have brick. You actually have, they don’t build
things this way anymore, but it’s a triple wide. You’ve got brick, a 4” block and another brick and that is the
structure for that building. There are no columns on the outside or steel whatsoever.

What we are proposing is, the existing brick remaining and using a stain on three sides and putting a new
front on it to try to save some money. And then putting a new standing stained pitched roof on the structure.
This would give that building a lot more mass. Right now you have the driveway that comes in the front.
We would be doing away with that turn area in the front which the judge was real concerned about having
a vehicle that could come right up to the front door. It would give you some green space in front that you
could make the new height of the building. Give it a grassed area where it’s not overcrowding the side or
looking bad. I think with the new 24’ drive in the back, the fire marshal will be able to get a fire engine in
there, maintain his access in there. We’ve made that cul-de-sac oversized so a large pump and truck could
do a turnaround in the back as well.

One of the other options that we gave you is to take the three sides in the basement that is standing and
put a brick exterior on it. So putting all new brick on the outside of it and continue with a new footing on
those three sides to support the load of a new brick. That’s an add of $53,359. I have a couple of different
thoughts on that. Obviously budget is the main consideration from where we are with our overall number.
But I just want you to be aware that when we come in and stain this brick, we have a number of openings
that are going to be closed. There are a number areas were we’ve taken off and handicap ramps that we’ve
taken off and we’re going to be patching that brick. And then putting a stain over the top of it. It will blend
pretty well, but I’m going to need to make certain that the mason really pays attention to that before we
stain it to try to get it match. They don’t make that exact brick anymore. So we’ll have to find a brick that
matches or is as similar as possible.

Buddy Welch – Can you go ahead and stain part of it where they could see it, to see if that’s going to be
acceptable and leave the alternate out as far as the discussion tonight? They could add it on if they want
to, unless they just want to go and do it.

Jim Vann – Yes, we’re going to put a sample panel of the brick up anyway and that way we could make
that panel up close to where the stained area would be. That would be a good idea as a matter of fact.

Kathryn Gilbert – If we’re going to do additional brick on the exterior, we’re going to need additional footing
that we would not necessarily need…did I understand you correctly?

Jim Vann – Yes ma’am.

Kathryn Gilbert – And that’s foundation work, prep work that you would want to know as soon as possible
going forward.

Jim Vann – Yes ma’am. But I could put a sample panel up quickly, and stained.

Kathryn Gilbert – From a staining stand point, what sort of maintenance is required on that to maintain the
color?

Jim Vann – It will fade slightly over time. But, we have met with a number of different people that have
done this and they are telling me that even after 20 to 25 years, it should still look very good. It is going to
be a stained brick.

Kathryn Gilbert – Ultimately there probably will need to be staining going on going forward.

Jim Vann – That’s right. That’s right. The rest of the outside of the building there’s not a painted spec on
it, so the maintenance upkeep on that building will be very minimal, especially if you put the brick on them
for the long term for sure.
Fred Evans– You know you and I had talked about the way they stained Henry Medical Center when they
added it.

Jim Vann – Yes sir.

Fred Evans – I was talking to someone other there about a month or so back and they told me that stain
had an epoxy base or something and that there was a 25-year warranty on it.

Jim Vann – That’s right.

Fred Evans – Now the company might not be in business twenty five years from now, but still, I mean. And
they said so far, it’s holding up real well.

Buddy Welch – The thing they have to know to vote on tonight is if they want to add these two alternatives.
One is go ahead and add the brick, and the other is add the elevator.

Jim Vann – Yes sir.

Buddy Welch – Is that the only two alternatives?

Jim Vann – No sir. There are two other options. And they’re both bullet resistant options. One is the bullet
resistant option for the police station. The other is in the case work for the judge’s bench similar to what
Gwinnett, Henry and a number of different one have done is, they make the judge’s bench itself bullet
resistant as well. That way if anything ever happens, they can just duck behind the bench. It’s built in. That
option is $13,206.

Fred Evans – You can’t put a price on people’s lives though.

Jim Vann – So essentially, if you look at your summary sheet,

Buddy Welch – That’s B? That’s B now, the last sheet?
Jim Vann – No. I’m sorry that’s the front sheet. The last sheet I think is the municipal court. The bid results
from the municipal court.

Buddy Welch – The summary sheet on ours is marked B.

Jim Vann – Okay.

Buddy Welch – Which brings everything back together.

Jim Vann – There are some items that we have. We try to sort of give a little bit of room when we have a
renovation because when you look at a contingency of $75,000 per building, we put in I believe $14/yd for
carpet, and a fairly generous, I think $5.00/sq. ft. for the tile. So, we have a little bit of room. And then where
I think we will probably have the biggest pick up will be in the finished hardware. We have $650 a leaf for
the finished hardware. That’s a big number. There are a lot of doors in these two buildings. There more
than likely will be some extra contingency money essentially coming back for that. But, it’s kind of like we
did on the other building. We don’t want to get in a situation where we have a bunch of change orders on a
project. That’s our main concern. Just trying to make sure.

Buddy Welch – I just want to make sure they know what the bottom line figure is. And if you’ll look at this
with me Jim and make sure that I’m reading it right. Because when they vote, they need to make sure we
have what they want. Okay?

Total price including the $150,000 contingency figure is $3,120,712, right?

Jim Vann – Yes sir.

Buddy Welch – We had planned on spending $3,000,000 on just the precinct building alone when we were
going to do that?

Jim Vann – Yes sir, that’s correct.

Buddy Welch – Now they add the alternates to it, one is the aluminum fencing, that is $21,095. That’s
alternate 1. Alternate 2 is the 4-sided brick and that’s $53,359. And then Alternate no. 3 is the bullet proof
resistance at the police station is $43,233. And then the bullet proof bench is $13,206. So what they’ve got
to do is to pick, if they decide to go forward with it, they don’t have the low bidders of $3,120,720 and then
they have to select whether they want alternate 1,2,3 or 4 or all of them.
Jim Vann – Yes sir. And just to sort of say about the bullet resistance at the police station, one thing that
Major Nale mentioned to me is, I know that they are going to be staffing up if they have this facility because
it’s a much bigger facility. From what I understand from talking with the people at the headquarters, they
are talking about bringing an investigative unit and all kinds of stuff up here which will be a huge asset for
you all. But currently there are times when there are only maybe one lady and then officers coming in and
out and there’s a lot of traffic inside there. So, Major Nale was concerned about the safety of the lady being
in that building by herself. I promised Major Nale that I would bring that up to you.

Kathryn Gilbert – If I may Mr. Mayor?

Mayor Kelley – Yes

Kathryn Gilbert - I had some questions when we first began this project back early in the fall. About lead
certification or sustainability. Was there any consideration given to that in these…..?

Jim Vann – There was. And we tried to take advantage of as many of those as certainly possible. It is not
a lead certified building. But we tried to take as many of the items that we could into consideration, especially
with the budget consideration that we have.

Mayor Kelly – Any more questions?

Jim Vann – If there’s one other item I need to bring before you all, we’ve gone through all the bid packages.
There was one bidder that is an apparent low bidder. It’s a fire sprinkler company. Their bid is half of
everyone else’s. It was very alarming. When I opened the bids, it was glaring that they had a problem. I’ve
since talked to them and they did indeed have a mathematical error on their bid. If you look, their bid focuses
on the police station breakdown. It is…….

Kathryn Gilbert – Item 12?

Jim Vann – Yes ma’am. Item 12. Professional. The 2nd bidder is $37,904 Roberts Fire Protection.
Professional Fire is at $20,270. He has requested that he be allowed to withdraw his bid proposal. It would
be my recommendation that you all accept that. He does have a bid bond that you could actually make a
claim on. But it would probably be a long drawn out thing. And with the glaring error, I’m not going to speak
legally as an expert, but I think, for the amount of money, 5% of a $20,000 bid, it would really not be worth
anybody’s time to go through the hassle. And I think in the long run, they are going to be looking for a way
to try to make up a huge sum of money any way along the lines. And they’re a good company. We’ve known
them going on twenty years.
Kathryn Gilbert – Essentially, they would withdraw their bid and be out of the process entirely with no
penalty?

Jim Vann – Yes ma’am. The numbers that we have used are with the second bidder in there. So, there
would be no change in what you have.

Fred Evans – Police precinct, that’s the unfinished area on the second floor. It will, the sprinkler system
will be put in right?

Jim Vann – Yes sir. Yes sir.

Kathryn Gilbert – I’m sorry I couldn’t, I didn’t hear you clearly Mr. Evans. I couldn’t understand what you
asked.

Fred Evans – I asked him would the sprinkler system be put in on the 2nd floor of the unfinished area.

Kathryn Gilbert – It will be or will not be?

Fred Evans – Will be.

Jim Vann – Yes ma’am, it will be. The fire alarm system up there as well. Throughout the building. We have
minimal lighting that’s in there. Basically, what the police department is planning on doing in some of the
unfinished areas, there is a lot of unfinished area on the bottom floor as well. They are going to supply and
finish their own weight room which would be directly across from the locker rooms. That we have lights and
fire protection and those kinds of things in there with those items to make it fully accessible.

Kathryn Gilbert – Do we need to take these items individually, some of them or?

Buddy Welch – A motion should be made to take the base bid plus any of the alternates that you deem to
be appropriate. So your motion is, we accept the base bid plus any alternate. If you don’t want any of the
alternates, you simply leave it out.

Kathryn Gilbert – I will make, if a motion is in order, I will make a motion to accept the base bid, plus the
both bullet proof items and the fence with modifications, as we need, whatever we need to do with that
going forward. And I’d like to leave out the 4-sides brick at the moment.
Buddy Welch – So her motion would be the base bid alternates, 1,3 and 4.

Mayor Kelley – Well what is that going to do to the brick?

Jim Vann – We’ll proceed as quickly as possible. Put a sample panel up and get a stain sample as close
to it as possible so you can see what it will look like.

Mayor Kelley – And then decide.

Jim Vann – Yes sir.

Mayor Kelly – So, it’s not going to hold you up?

Jim Vann – Right.

Mayor Kelley – Okay.

Jim Vann – What can happen is in the contract with the masonry package, there could be a line item added
that says you lock them in at this number now, and the city has the option to invoke that at their discretion,
and we could come up with a date or something that would be that trigger point for it. And it would not be
included in but it would be locked in so the numbers are firm.

Fred Evans – The brick bed does not include the footings for the brick?

Jim Vann – Yes sir, it does.

Fred Evans – It does?

Jim Vann – Yes sir.
Fred Evans – And if we stain it, we’re looking at 25-year life of it?

Buddy Welch – How much do we save Jim if we don’t stain it?

Jim Vann – If you leave it the way it is…….

Buddy Welch – If you just put the brick up

Jim Vann – It’s about a seventeen or eighteen thousand dollar number if you just left it in that yellowed
color. Yes sir.

Buddy Welch – No, no. If you don’t stain it, if you put the brick up, you’re not going to stain it, right?

Jim Vann – Yes sir.

Buddy Welch – So you would get a deduct?

Jim Vann – That’s in that package. There’s a credit coming back for the staining. The brick itself would be
more than that $50,000 number. If the staining number…from the guy that met with us he was saying it’s
about a $17,000 number.

Buddy Welch – Okay.

Jim Vann – That’s a credit coming back already reflected in that overall add.

Fred Evans – So, we’re only saving $17,000 by staining it?

Jim Vann – That’s right. It’s costing $17,000 to stain it.

Fred Evans – Okay.
Jim Vann – So, basically, when you look at the number for the 4-sided brick, it’s $53,000. It would be
$53,000 plus $17,000 if you were to stain it and then decided that you wanted to come back and put the
brick on over the top of stained brick. See what I’m saying?

Fred Evans – No.

Buddy Welch – Alright, well listen, that doesn’t make sense to me either.

Jim Vann – Probably doesn’t but I’m just saying…….

Buddy Welch – No. If they told you tonight, they wanted brick, okay? Would there be a reduction in their
bids because they don’t have to spend any money for staining?

Jim Vann – No sir. In the bid documents we were very specific that they had to issue a credit back for the
staining.

Buddy Welch – So you give the credit back in the $53,000 figure.

Jim Vann – That’s right.

Fred Evans – That’s what I’m asking, what would be the difference?

Buddy Welch – So it would cost…?

Jim Vann – It is already given back in the fifty three number.

Fred Evans – Oh. Okay.

Mayor Kelley – So, it was originally $70,000 then? Or roughly.
Jim Vann – Essentially.

Fred Evans – Basically you just put 25-yr period life span supposedly of the stain, the brick would cost us
$2,000 per year over that twenty five years?

Jim Vann – Essentially that’s right. $2,000 per year. To get to the point, and you would have a product that
you wouldn’t have to touch at the end of twenty five years. So if you re-stained that brick for another 25
years, that $2,000 comes way down even more. Do you see what I’m saying?

Buddy Welch – If you want to add number 2 in, then you would have to amend her motion to add alternate

Mayor Kelley – Well, I guess we would take Kathy’s motion and 2nd and let it go. And then……

Buddy Welch – Yes.

Mayor Kelley – Pass it and then we wouldn’t do anything, but if it doesn’t then he can make his motion if he
wants to.

Buddy Welch – Yes, he can do it that way too. Probably better.

Mayor Kelley – Okay. I have a motion to accept the $3,127,712 plus items 1, 3 and 4. Is that right Kathy?

Kathryn Gilbert – That is correct.

Mayor Kelley – Leaving off alternate 2 then I assume then, yes. Do I have a second?

Motion fails, no second.

Mayor Kelley – Any other motions?
Fred Evans – I make a motion that we take all four of the alternatives. I mean we’re looking at a long time.
Twenty five years, I may not be here. I mean, why do it again? Why have to keep going back and staining
this thing?

Mayor Kelley – In other words, you want the all four. That’s replacing all the brick, Jim?

Jim Vann – Yes sir.

Mayor Kelley – Tearing off all brick. Putting on new brick.

Jim Vann – Actually, the brick that’s there would stay. Cause the cost to remove that brick it made no sense
to take it off to pay to take that brick off. The problem is it’s a triple wide masonry.

Mayor Kelley – You just brick around? Another layer of brick?

Jim Vann – You just put a layer on top of it so you wouldn’t mess with the structure.

Fred Evans – And it would be energy efficient, correct? Cause we got……

Jim Vann – Can increase your R value.

Mayor Kelley – Then you would add footings all the way around.

Jim Vann – Yes sir.

Kathryn Gilbert – And the cost of the footings is included in the?

Jim Vann – Yes ma’am they are.

Fred Evans – Yes, the footings are included. I make a motion that we go with all four of the alternates.
Harold Cochran – Second.

Mayor Kelley – I’ve got a motion and a second to accept the $3,127,712 plus all four of the add-ons. All in
favor. 5-0. Thank you. Thank you Jim.

Jim Vann – Alright, goodnight. I will see you all in about two weeks when I catch up on my sleep.

Kathryn Gilbert – Merry Christmas.

Jim Vann – Merry Christmas to you all.

Fred Evans – Merry Christmas to you Jim, and Thank you.

Mayor Kelley – Alright.

Kathryn Gilbert – Anything Else?

Mayor Kelley – That takes care of both of the buildings Buddy?

Buddy Welch – Yes sir, that’s got both of the buildings done.

Reeves Creek Trail Resolution – Moreland Altobelli.

Mayor Kelley – Okay. The Reeves Creek Trail Resolution.

Buddy Welch – Yes sir. You have a resolution before you to approve the Reeves Creek Trail Resolution.
We have approval from Moreland Altobelli. We’ve got the contract with them. They are ones that are
handling the funds. All of these are grant funds. And Jack of course has been working with them. This gets
all of the money part of it tied down with the D.O.T. We recommend that you adopt the resolution authorizing
the appropriate people to sign the agreements that were sent by Moreland Altobelli. This gives us until
December 31, 2011 to complete this project. They had originally had it at an earlier date. We got that
extended for you. So you’ve got two years to get it put in.

Kathryn Gilbert – The only question I have is, again we don’t have the resolution?

Buddy Welch – I can give you mine if you wish.

Kathryn Gilbert – Can someone email me a copy of it?

Buddy Welch – Ma’am?

Kathryn Gilbert – Can I get an electronic copy of it?

Buddy Welch – Oh yeah. You can. Here’s a contract to the back of it Kathy.

Mayor Kelley – Anymore questions? I have a motion?

Fred Evans – I make a motion to approve the Reeves Creek Trail Resolution.

Harold Cochran – Second.

Mayor Kelley – Motion and a second. All in favor? 5-0.

Facility Names

Mayor Kelley - Alright, one more item on the agenda. I’ve been asked to get prepared the resolution. I’ll be
glad to read these. The resolution honoring City Council member Harold L. Cochran,

Whereas Harold L. Cochran moved to Stockbridge, GEORGIA in 1948 to work in his family owned grocery
store and,
Whereas Harold L. Cochran married Betty R. Cochran and their marriage produced three wonderful
daughters, one son and seven grandchildren and,

Whereas Harold L. Cochran served in the United States Army during the Korean Conflict from 1951 to 1953
and,

Whereas Harold L. Cochran returned to Stockbridge after his military service and has been the owner and
operator of several businesses in the City and,

Whereas council member Harold Cochran served the City of Stockbridge as a council member since 1977
and still serving and,

Whereas council member has served on numerous committees and held the position of Mayor Pro Tem
and,

Whereas during his more than three decades in public office, Harold L. Cochran has diligently worked to
improve the quality of life, save tax dollars and prevent ad valorem taxation for the citizens of Stockbridge
and,

Whereas Harold L. Cochran played an intricate role in the design and construction of Clark Community
Park, Dabney/Hunter/Simmons City Park, City Hall Community Park, New Orleans Sewer Facilities, Merle
Manders Conference Center, The Cochran Library, Stockbridge Tag Office and the New City Hall and,

Whereas Harold L. Cochran helped facilitate the renovation of the Municipal Court Building, The Old City
Hall, and the Stockbridge Community Center and,

Whereas the public service career of council member Harold L. Cochran has been a credit to the City of
Stockbridge, Henry County, the State of Georgia and their citizens and,

Whereas the City Council would like to extend its highest commendation and appreciation for Harold L.
Cochran’s achievements by dedicating the Old City Hall facility in his name. Now therefore, it is now
resolved by the City Council of the City of Stockbridge as follows: Decoration of Appreciation. The City
hereby issues this resolution and appreciation for council member Harold L. Cochran’s public service to the
City. Decoration and naming of Old City Hall. The City declares that Old City Hall and its appurtenances
located at 4602 North Henry Boulevard Stockbridge, GEORGIA is hereby named today and henceforth
known as Harold L. Cochran Public Safety Center in recognition of his distinguished tenure as a public
servant. Execution of documents, the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem and City Clerk or Deputy City Clerk is
hereby authorized to sign all documents necessary to effectuate this resolution. Recordation: The City Clerk
or Deputy City Clerk is hereby directed to record this resolution in the official minutes of the city. Publication
of this resolution: A copy of this resolution be permanently hung in the reception area of City Hall. Effective
Date: This resolution takes effect immediately. This resolution adopted this 23rd day of December 2009.
To be signed by the Mayor and attested by Mrs. Manders.

Buddy Welch – You have to have a motion and a vote to make it official.

Fred Evans – I make a motion that we rename the Old City Hall and future police precinct the Harold L.
Cochran building. After we change the address back to 4545 North Henry Boulevard.

Kathryn Gilbert – I was going to ask about that.
Mayor Kelley – Yeah, that is written wrong. You are going to correct that right Buddy?

Buddy Welch – Yes sir.

Fred Evans – That is 4545. That is my motion.

Kathryn Gilbert – Second.

Mayor Kelley – I’ve got a motion and a second. All in favor? 4-0. Applause.

I have one more resolution honoring City Manager, Ted Strickland.

Whereas Frank Ted Strickland was born in Greenville, GEORGIA. Has been married to Nancy B. Strickland
since 1957 and is a father, grandfather, and veteran of the United States Army and

Whereas Ted Strickland has served Henry County as a public employee since 1956. First as a teacher for
Henry County Schools, Principal of Stockbridge Elementary, and the Superintendent of Schools from 1981
to 1988 and,

Whereas Ted Strickland has served the City of Stockbridge as City Manager since 1990 and through his
long tenure has always focused on the best interest of the City and promotion of its citizens’ welfare and
tirelessly fulfilled his responsibilities for executing the programs and goals and projects of the Mayor and
the City Council and,

Whereas as City Manager, Ted Strickland spearheaded the renovation of a new maintenance facility, the
updating of the waste water treatment plant, and environmentally friendly bio-solids program and,

Whereas Ted Strickland played an intricate role in the design and construction of Clark Community Park,
Dabney/Hunter/Simmons City Park, City Hall Community Park, Merle Manders Conference Center, and
Cochran Library, Stockbridge Tag Office and the New City Hall and,

Whereas Ted Strickland facilitated the renovation of Municipal Court Building and the Cochran Public Safety
Center and Stockbridge Community Center and,

Whereas Ted Strickland has been instrumental in obtaining millions of dollars in grants for the numerous
city projects and,

Whereas Ted Strickland has assisted the Mayor and the Council and promptly managing the public funds
of the City which has prevented the levy of ad valorem taxes within the City and,

Whereas the public service career of City Manager, Ted Strickland, has been a credit to the City of
Stockbridge, Henry County, and the State of Georgia and,

Whereas the City Council would like to extend its highest commendation and appreciation for Ted
Strickland’s achievements by dedicating the Stockbridge Community Center in his name. Now therefore it
is now resolved by the City Council of the City of Stockbridge, GEORGIA as follows: Declaration of
Appreciation. The City hereby issues this resolution and appreciation for City Manager, Ted Strickland’s
public service to the City. Declaration and naming of the Stockbridge Community Center. The City declares
that Stockbridge Community Center building and its appurtenances located at 130 Berry Street,
Stockbridge, GEORGIA is hereby name today and henceforth known as the Ted Strickland Community
Center in recognition of City Manager’s distinguished tenure as a public servant. Execution of Documents:
The Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem and the City Clerk or Deputy City Clerk is hereby authorized to sign all
documents necessary to effectuate this resolution. Recordation: The City Clerk or Deputy City Clerk is
hereby directed to record this resolution in the official minutes of the city. Publication of this resolution: A
copy of this resolution will be permanently hung in the reception area of City Hall. And effective date: This
resolution shall take effect immediately. This resolution adopted this 23rd day of December 2009. Signed
by Mayor Rudy Kelley and attested by Merle Manders if the Council approves.

Fred Evans – I proudly make that motion.

Harold Cochran – Second.

Mayor Kelley – I have motion and a second, all in favor? Motion carries 5-0. Thank you. Thank you.
Congratulations to both of you.

Ted Strickland – Thank you. There are many people that deserve it much or more than I do, Mayor.

Mayor Kelley – We appreciate the good service that both of you have done.

Ted Strickland – Appreciate it very much.

Mayor Kelley - I can tell you, I know. I’ve worked with Harold most of his years, he was here a couple of
years before I got here. And Ted’s been here for just about twenty years.

Fred Evans – Mr. Vernon, I thank you, buddy.

Mayor Kelley – Thanks Vernon for the short time you were with us, but we appreciate you for taking your
time out to do it. Have a motion to adjourn?

Kathryn Gilbert – So move.
Mayor Kelley – Second?

Harold Cochran – Second.

Mayor Kelley – All in favor? Thank you.

Kathryn Gilbert – Merry Christmas.

Fred Evans – Merry Christmas everybody.

Meeting adjourned at 5:30 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Merle Manders R. G. Kelley

City Clerk Mayor
