---
date: 2010-07-12
title: July 12, 2010 Minutes
source: 2010-07/2010-07-12_July 12, 2010_Minutes.pdf
pages: 1
---

July 12, 2010

MINUTES

STOCKBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL

JULY 12, 2010

City Council
Lee Stuart, Mayor
Mark Alarcon Ray Gibson, Assistant City
Manager- absent
Harold Cochran Vanessa Holiday,
City Clerk
Shirley Dabney
Fred Evans
Kathy Gilbert

The Regular Meeting of the Stockbridge City Council was held on July 12, 2010 at 6:00 P. M. Mayor Lee
Stuart presided and members present were Mark Alarcon, Harold Cochran, Shirley Dabney, Fred Evans
and Kathy Gilbert.

Fred Evans made a Motion to Convene; Kathy Gilbert seconded and passed unanimously. The meeting
convened at 6:00 P.M.

Fred Evans made a motion to approve minutes of June 14, 2010 Council Meeting; Shirley Dabney
seconded, and motion carried.

Dan Dickson gave the Invocation.

Mayor Stuart led in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Mayor Stuart: I’d like to welcome everyone here tonight. Again appreciate everyone coming out and
participating. So this is your City. We need to hear from you. And your participation tonight coming out in
this weather shows me that you really want to get involved and we want to hear from you, and hopefully we
serve you well. At this time we look. We have no old business on the agenda. And under the New Business,
I have Item #1. I have a proclamation that I would like to read here, and I’ll come down to do it there.

For the Light of the World Interdenominational Association has in Stockbridge to Bishop Ruth SmithHolmes,
and I believe Mr. Jerry Baker is--if you’ll come up here and I’ll present it to y’all here.
Okay, this is a proclamation:

WHEREAS, It has been the custom of every civilized community to bestow upon its members and such
others that deserve it, awards, honors and proclamations presented by the Mayor and City Council; and,

WHEREAS, the Light of the World Interdenominational International Association, established in 1994 under
the auspices of the Shiloh Apostolic United Church of Christ Worldwide Association and has maintained a
presence in the Stockbridge Community; and,

WHEREAS, the Light of the World Interdenominational Association strategizes with political, business and
spiritual agencies and organizations for collaboration and to most effectively meet the needs of the
community; and,

WHEREAS, the Light of the World Interdenominational Association, as part of its mission, provides financial
support, supplies, training and spiritual guidance to several countries; and,

WHEREAS, the Light of the World Interdenominational Association, under the current direction of Bishop
Ruth W. SmithHolmes has embraced the need to support education and mental health; and

WHEREAS, the Light of the World Interdenominational Association will celebrate Holy Convocation during
the week of July 11 through the 18th and that will include a community-wide Outreach Picnic on Saturday,
July 17, 2010; and

WHEREAS, the Light of the World Interdenominational Association will conduct a Book Bag Give-a-Way
providing book bags and school supplies to children from the community; and

WHEREAS, the Light of the World Interdenominational Association will provide free counseling by certified
counselors to members of the community in an effort to help them cope with difficult life situations or change
negative behaviors.

THEREFORE, the Mayor and City Council proclaim the week of July 11 through July 18, 2010 as Light of
the World Interdenominational Association Day for all to enjoy and celebrate.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have caused the Seal of the City of Stockbridge hereunto be affixed.
Done in the City of Stockbridge on the 12th day of July in the year of our Lord, two thousand ten.

Signed by the City Clerk, Vanessa Holiday and myself, Mayor Lee Stuart. (Applause)

Mayor Stuart: Thank you. (Applause)

Mayor Stuart: Okay, Item #2. We have is the City of Stockbridge Water Department. Have a presentation
by Jeff Bledsoe is the supervisor of our Water Department in regards to rehabilitation costs for the City of
Stockbridge, Georgia for wells T-2 and T-3 and services to be performed by Stephenson & Palmer. And
Jeff and I think Bill. Where’s…you’re doing it. Okay.

Kathy Gilbert: Bill’s here.

Jeff Bledsoe: Bill may help out if he wants to. That’d be fine.

Mayor Stuart: Yeah, you come on up if you need to …

Jeff Bledsoe: Well I guess for those you who don’t know me, I’m …my name is Jeff Bledsoe. I’m the
City’s Water Superintendent. I’m coming to you recommending that we rehabilitate our three existing wells
that we are using now due to the decline in the amount of water that we are pumping from those wells.

Just to give you a little history—back in--we started using these wells back in the year 2000, and I guess
since then till now, the wells have yielded probably about 20 percent less now than what they were at that
time. Basically due to just clogging, iron bacteria, things of that nature which we’ll, we can determine if later
on down by video, you know, later on down the road if you decide to do this route.

What really kind of sparked us to find this out was back in May--about the middle of May--we noticed that
one of our wells was pumping air, basically. So, basically not enough water was coming into the well.
Something, you know, either not enough water or something was clogging the fractures in the ground
keeping the water from getting to the well. So we’ve had to shut that well down to basically save the pump.
We don’t want to, you know. Air can do damage to the pump. And further, you know, we had looked at
that time, that’s when we noticed the 20 percent reduction, which was an average for all three wells. And
that’s kind of what sparked us to look a little closer to see what we can do to get those numbers back up.
Through working with Stephenson Palmer and Hydro Source Associates, which I believe you all have a,
the letter possibly in front of you that kind of outlines what this scope of work would be performed. It… they
kind of outline two different things—a chlorine treatment and an acid treatment. I recommend we do the
acid treatment just due to the longevity of it. It’ll actually help us further down the road. We will not have
to treat these wells again for a further length of time. The total cost for that would be $69,000 and I kind of
ran the numbers today. Over a year’s time, we would save $97,000 by spending this $69,000 in water that
we would not have to purchase from Henry County Water Authority. But it’s my strong recommendation
that we do all three wells and not just the one well that we have the, you know, the existing problem with.
It would definitely help us out longer down the road.

Mayor Stuart: So that’s where you came, yeah, 69 and I see 23,000 per well.

Jeff Bledsoe: 23,000 per well and…

Mayor Stuart: Okay. I got it.

Jeff Bledsoe: Yeah.

Mayor Stuart: Ms. Gilbert?

Kathy Gilbert: Yes, I do have a question. And I think we’ve discussed this--and I don’t know—Bill, you
might be able to shed some light on this as well. If I’m not mistaken, we discussed this probably about a
year ago, or maybe a little bit more than that, similar and we’ve not. Clearly, we did not do that. Is that
correct?

Bill White: Correct. When we first discussed this probably about a year and a half ago.

Kathy Gilbert: Is there any reason why we … Do you know of any reason? I mean, I remember the
discussion at the Council meeting. I don’t remember any reason particularly. I think everyone was pretty
much in favor of it. I don’t know what might have happened. Do you have any information on that?

Bill White: I don’t have any answer as to why the City didn’t accept the proposal. I’d like to make one
clarification on the agenda. The work will not be performed by Stephenson & Palmer. It will be performed
by Hydro Source.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.
Mayor Stuart: Correct. Okay.

Kathy Gilbert: Um, I see Ms. Brown, our finance individual is here. Do you know, have we budgeted for
this?

Nancy Brown: No.

Kathy Gilbert: It was not budgeted in the last year or in this year’s budget?

Nancy Brown: No.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.

Mayor Stuart: Any more discussion?

Mark Alarcon: Just some dialog with Stephenson Palmer and then your presentation here tonight. Kathy
is verifying that this has been an ongoing issue in excess of a year or two. The timing and performance of
the two that are running and we have completely burned out … that were used. Can you give an example
of how much, I think it’s $.83 or $.84 a gallon is what we can produce quarter at and what is the number for
purchasing it from Henry County?

Bill White: I believe you done a study not too long ago. It was around $.81 a gallon for us to produce our
own water from these wells and we are purchasing our water for $3.38 per thousand gallons from Henry
County Water Authority.

Mark Alarcon: Is that where you came up with the differential of the savings, using, you know …

Bill White: Yes.

Mark Alarcon: get them up on line
Bill White: Yes.

Mark Alarcon: I just wanted to mention that, you know, we do have some issues we’ve already talked
about. I think some of that might be tied up. I understand. I’ve been through this month’s and also changes
that I think Nancy has made. There’s monies in here that we can probably reallocate on something that’s
important as this. (Unintelligible)

Kathy Gilbert: I’ll second that motion.

Mayor Stuart: Any discussion? Any further discussion? All in favor of … the motion is to go ahead and
do all three?

Mark Alarcon: All three of them.

Mayor Stuart: The motion to go ahead and do the acid treatment for all three at the cost of $69,000. All
in favor? One, two, three, four, five. Alright. Thank you much.

Jeff Bledsoe: Thank you very much.

Mayor Stuart: Thank you, Jeff.

Mayor Stuart: Next item is Item #3, is the City of Stockbridge Sewer Collection Department. Be a
presentation by Dan Dickson, who is the supervisor for the Collection Department. Request approve up to
a $10,000 for camera inspections of 7,279 feet of sewer lines within the City. Dan, okay, there you are,
Dan. You want to...

Dan Dickson: Good evening. Bless, bless you all. My name is Daniel Dickson with Water Sewer
Collection. Our field pipes and everything. We have a problem here with some of our sewer pipes that
were installed before 1969. The average warranty is 20 to 30 years now, and the older pipe not that long.
And we have infiltration in our sewer pipes, making our pumps run. A pump should come on six times per
hour. When we have rainfall, we have them run 23 and 24 hours without cutting off. To rebuild a 10
horsepower pump, $3500 to $6000, depending on the pump name brand. Plus the wastewater plant
average daily flow of about 600,000 gallons. When we have a rainfall, it will run it up to about three million
gallons. And that causes shop loader and causes treatment water. So we’re spending numerous dollars
treating infiltration, rainwater, storm water, and the whole nine yards. We have done much work on finding
out what and where and we did like fresh-drain pump stations and now we pretty-much know where our
problem area is, but we cannot see in the pipe. Therefore, I‘m highly recommending that we get our sewer
lines camera’d.
Now the price of the camera, I got three bids from $284,000 for one and $289,000 the next, but we can get
the whole City done for around $120,000. Cause I have a bid of about $.55 per foot. But right now, you
have list in front of you. We have 7,259 feet of sewer line that are over 40 years that we know that are
giving us problems. And we need to get those camera’d as soon as possible to find out what is wrong with
them. And you want them camera’d. You have on your sheet what the camera does. It gives you the
exact location, where, what degree, you know, what the problem is, where it is. And then the purpose is
you can see to inspect locations. And the camera will give you all you need to know as to where on the
sewer line. Some of them four-foot wide and they’re 20-foot wide. The line may need moving over; it may
need pipe bursting; it may need replacing; but the camera will tell us all of that.

Now I want to do a DVD and give it to our engineer to make sure we do the right thing short-term, but also
be a part of our long-term plan. We don’t want to do it and then have to re-do it. And the camera will tell
me just what I need to get done to kill part of the infiltration that’s ruining our plant, and ruining our pumps.
I know it says on this cheat sheet here is says $4,000, but we’re looking at about $10,000 at my calculation
today, because the average cost is $.55 a foot, depending on who you get. And that’s in more line that you
have blockages we do and determine also some man-holes need finding. This short-term and our long-
term altogether in Stockbridge you have 179,000, umm, 173,938 linear feet of gravity sewer. You have
25,230 feet of force-main, but the force-main you don’t have to count it; you just clean those. And that
170,000 feet, my goal is, it ties into the entire City camera, closer to creep the whole neighborhoods--all
with the new camera. But the 7,000-plus feet need doing right now. We know it’s a problem-- and no doubt
in our mind.

Mayor Stuart: Any questions?

Mark Alarcon: What was the cost of the cameras to purchase? Or is this something you have to have a
specialty to do?

Dan Dickson: I have three bids here now. I looked at them; I seen them, because I want to compare that
we can get the best bang for our buck. I have two cameras at $189,000, at $289,000 and one camera at
$284,000. That’s almost $300,000 for a camera truck. These cameras do a lot of things for you. They do
a lot of things for you, but at $.55 a foot and 173,000 feet, you’re talking about $123,000 to have it done.
Now I would love to have to have a truck if y’all want to buy one, but really we could do it a whole lot cheaper
by having it done.

Kathy Gilbert: What is the cost that we are proposing?

Dan Dickson: Well, now we have to for emergencies, now we want to spend $10,000.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay. And who’s going to do that?
Dan Dickson: We can get these—I checked with two people. I checked with C.M. Rogers and Sons, they
want $.55 a foot. The County wants $.55 a foot, plus $80 per day. And I checked one more, but I don’t
have a bid on it.

Kathy Gilbert: You said the County was, wanted $.55 a foot, plus what?

Dan Dickson: Plus $80 per day.

Kathy Gilbert: $80 per day.

Dan Dickson: Yes, ma’am.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.

Dan Dickson: Now these prices we’re providing—we go ahead and we clean our own lines. We clean a
couple of days and they come behind us with the camera.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay, but we don’t have bids for this at this point in time.

Dan Dickson: What now?

Kathy Gilbert: We don’t have actual bids for these?

Dan Dickson: For the truck, yeah, but for the job…

Unknown: Two.

Dan Dickson: we have two.
Kathy Gilbert: Okay, so we can’t actually award anything at this point, because we don’t have the
information as to what is the best way to proceed. Is that correct?

Dan Dickson: Well, yes, but now I don’t have all three in writing, but I’ve talked to the people and know
it’s going to be $.55 a foot, at a minimum. But I can get you three bids be about the same thing.

Kathy Gilbert: Mr. Welch, can we proceed without a resolution and bids?

Buddy Welch: I’m not sure it’s on. Do we have the money in the water and sewer fund? Nancy?

Nancy Brown: Yes.

Buddy Welch: You could approve up to a certain expenditure of funds for exactly what he asked you for,
provided they get the three bids and they accept the lowest responsible bid. Okay? And he can get that
documented by calling and get that. If he contract’s directly with the County, you do not have to do that,
because you’re contracting with a public entity.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.

Buddy Welch: So, if he picks up the phone and contracts with Henry County to do it, you don’t have to go
through the bid process. If you’re going to go out to public bid, then he would have to go out to people that
are qualified and have the equipment and can provide it based upon when he needs it. And Nancy says
you have the funds in the water and sewer fund, not in the general fund.

Kathy Gilbert: Right.

Buddy Welch: So you can use that.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.

Shirley Dabney: Now this is…

Buddy Welch: So
Shirley Dabney: I’m sorry.

Buddy Welch: Is that…Yes, ma’am?

Shirley Dabney: And this is just to go ahead and take care of what you need as of today, correct?

Dan Dickson: You get the 7,259 feet.

Shirley Dabney: Okay, and that, you’re saying that it shouldn’t cost us any more than $10,000.

Dan Dickson: Yes.

Mayor Stuart: On the sheet there it says, he’s got roughly four grand.

Buddy Welch: If you…

Shirley Dabney: (unintelligible)

Buddy Welch: If you … The appropriate motion would be that you authorize expenditure from the water
and sewer fund $10,000, not to exceed $10,000. If he contracts directly with the County, then he would not
have to go out to bid. If he’s going to go out to public bid, he’s got to get at least three bids from bidders
that are capable of providing the service when and where he wants it. So he’s going to have to write that
out--what the service is going to be. And then he’ll have to present that so all of them are bidding on the
same service.

Kathy Gilbert: And that would significantly delay the process, because we would have timing issues with
advertising and what-not.

Buddy Welch: Well, you got to write the specs, is what you’ve got to do.

Kathy Gilbert: Right. Right.
Buddy Welch: You know, you’re going to have to be there within three days call notice. You’re going to
have to do this, and you’ve got to have a certain type of equipment and all of that.

Kathy Gilbert: Probably the most expeditious way to do this would be to simply go with the County, even
though they are charging, they’re charging the same amount per foot. It’s the per diem charge, the daily
$88, I believe you said, per day that they would charge?

Dan Dickson: Yes. Now, with the County, it may change. About a month ago Mike Craig told me that
they didn’t have time. That may change. I don’t know. He told me they don’t have time.

Buddy Welch: Well…

Kathy Gilbert: Okay?

Dan Dickson: To come and do it for us. I can call him back.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.

Mark Alarcon: My question is you’ve collected two bids. You’ve got verbal on a third one.

Dan Dickson: Yes.

Mark Alarcon: Any of those three bids from the Henry County. One of them is?

Dan Dickson: Yes.

Mark Alarcon: Okay. Go ahead and make a motion to get the $10,000 expenditure in place, but then
you’re going to have to get the three documented bids.

Dan Dickson: And I will have those for you before the week is out.
Mark Alarcon: That’s fine. We can go ahead and authorize that, right Mr. Welch?

Buddy Welch: That’s right. Unless they elect to go…if you make the motion that they don’t…If he doesn’t
elect to go with the County, then he has to write the specs and everybody has to bid on the same specs.
Then he can get the three bids and you can go forward with the lowest bidder, the lowest responsible
bidder.

Kathy Gilbert: Do, do we have a list of specifications as far as the bid is concerned right now? Do we
have a written list of specs? Mr. White?

Bill White: We can assist them to write that spec. Another point of clarification, rather than call them bids,
I would call them quotes.

Kathy Gilbert: Quotes?

Bill White: I wouldn’t go through advertising. We’ll just obtain three or more quotes.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.

Bill White: By sending them the requirements and specifications. Not a public advertised bid.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.

Mayor Stuart: But you can help him write the specs? What’s on it?

Mark Alarcon: The question is: have you gotten that timeframe or any kind of guestimate from the County
as to how many days that much footage normally would run us, because if this is going to cost $300-500,
the expeditious portion of this seems to be more important, is what you’re telling us.

Dan Dickson: Now, the verbal, the verbal that Mike Craig of the County told me he could come and do a
couple of hours for us. That won’t help me too much. I need someone to come and camera the 7,259 feet
of sewage and get me a DVD and give it to him so we can find out tell you what we need to get it fixed.
Kathy Gilbert: I make the motion that spend no more than $10,000 from sewer funds to get the inspection,
camera inspections done of the sewers and that these be a minimum of three quotes. Is that appropriate?

Buddy Welch: Could maybe I state the motion for you?

Kathy Gilbert: You may. You may, sir.

Buddy Welch: I think the appropriate motion would be that you authorize from the, first of all, from the
expenditure of the water and sewer fund, a sum not to exceed $10,000 for camera-ing sewer lines. I think
that’s your first motion.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay. I make that motion.

Fred Evans: I second.

Mayor Stuart: Mr. Evans second. Any discussion? All in favor? Two, three, four, five. Okay.

Buddy Welch: The second motion would be that if the Water and Sewer Department can agree with Henry
County Water and Sewage Authority for the providing of the service, then they would not have to go out for
either bids or—what would you want to call them?

Bill White: Quotes.

Kathy Gilbert: Quotes.

Buddy Welch: Quotes. But if he elects not to do that, the specs would have to be written and they would
have to get the quotes from three reliable contractors that provide this type of service and they would be
authorized to accept to go forward with the lowest qualified bidder.

Kathy Gilbert: I will make that motion as well.
Mayor Stuart: Ms. Gilbert makes the motion. Have a second?

Shirley Dabney: Second.

Mayor Stuart: Dabney second. Any discussion? All in favor? One, two three, four, five. Okay.

Dan Dickson: Thank y’all very much.

Mayor Stuart: You’re welcome.

Mayor Stuart: Alright. Moving to Item #4. Is a Short-term work program presented by Stacey Jordan,
Planner II. It’s a resolution to approve the request to transmit the Capital Improvements Elements and
Short Term Work Program Annual Update to the Atlanta Regional Commission. The Short Term Work
Program for 2010-2014 and Capital Improvements Elements Update has been prepared by the City of
Stockbridge Staff and the Henry County Planning and Zoning Department to update the status of the
projects undertaken to accomplish the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with
the Development Impact Fee Compliance Requirements of the Georgia Department of Community Affairs
and the Minimum Planning Standards and Procedures for Local Comprehensive Planning established by
the Georgia Planning Act. A public hearing is required to transmit the STWP/CIE to the Atlanta Regional
Commission.

Stacey Jordan: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Each year the Georgia Department
of Community Affairs requires this update and so we have to allow 90 days for their review. And we have
to provide the adoption of the update to the Department of Community Affairs by October 31st of each year.
And so, I worked together with the City staff to update the documents and so we respectfully request that
you adopt the resolution to transmit the documents to the Department of Community Affairs through the
Atlanta Regional Commission. And so that’s our request for this item tonight.

Kathy Gilbert: I make a motion that we adopt this short-term work program and annual update.

Mayor Stuart: I have a motion by Ms. Gilbert. Have a second?

Mark Alarcon: Second.

Mayor Stuart: Mr. Alarcon second. Any discussion?
Stacey Jordan: Mr. Mayor?

Buddy Welch: You have to ask for public comment since it’s a public hearing.

Mayor Stuart: Okay. Have any public comments in regards to the short-term work program update?

Stacey Jordan: Mr. Mayor? I’d just like to clarify that at this time the motion would be to transmit the
document and that in October we actually ask for you to adopt the document.

Kathy Gilbert: I’ll correct my motion. We are transmitting the document.

Mayor Stuart: Okay.

Buddy Welch: That’s what the written motion says.

Mayor Stuart: And Ms… Have a second?

Mark Alarcon: I second.

Mayor Stuart: Mr. Alarcon is second still. Discussion? Any further public comments? Any other
discussion? If not, all in favor? One, two, three, four, five. Okay.

Stacey Jordan: Thank you.

Mayor Stuart: Thank you, sir.

Mayor Stuart: And Item 5. Whoops, you doing that, too?

Stacey Jordan: Yes, sir.
Mayor Stuart: Okay. Item 5 is a variance for the Ingles Markets of Asheville, North Caroline requesting
a variance for property located at 3701 Walt Stephens Road in Land Lots 24 & 25 of the 12th District.
Request is to vary from the development regulations for signage. Again being presented by Mr. Jordan. I
have a request for variance from Chapter 8.2 Sign Regulations of the City Code which limits the number
of signs, the size of the signs, and the aggregate signable area.
1. Increase the number of wall signs from three (3) to five (5), totaling 360 square feet.
2. Increase number of ground signs from two (2) to three (3).
3. Increase the width of the two primary ground signs from 15 to 16 and
4. Increase the signable area of the two (2) primary ground signs from 100 square feet to 193
square feet and the third to 144 square feet.
5. Increase the aggregate signable area from 500 square feet to 890 square feet.

Stacey Jordan: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, if I could direct your attention to the Staff’s Report.
The request by the applicant is for typical Ingles signage. It just so happens that this building totals
approximately 80,000 square feet. And it’s a rather large building. It sits on nearly 13 acres and so they
require a lot of signage typically; however, they exceed the amount that is provided for in the City Code
and so they’re requesting a variance.

Their specific criteria for evaluating a variance request according to the City Code and the first, if I could
direct your attention to Page 2 of the Staff Report and Criteria A: All signs and structures within the
business development are in conformance with this article. At this time, we are all very familiar with the
Ingles site. It’s under construction and so there are no signs out there. But I did note that the proposed
signage would exceed the limitations set by the Code.

Criteria B: The variance, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to other property owners or
tenants, or to the public good, nor would it impair the purpose and intent of this article. It’s, it’s not
expected that this variance, if you choose to grant it, would harm the public good or other property
owners. I listed three of the intents that are listed in the City Code. One is to balance the right of
individuals and entities to convey their message through signs and the right of the public to be protected
against the unrestricted proliferation of signs. Another is promoting economic development. And
another is ensuring the fair and consistent enforcement of sign regulations.

On Page 3 of the Staff Report, Criteria C says the city council shall consider at least one of the following
three factors:
1. The size of the buildings.
2. The potential to subdivide the Lot, and
3. The number of different tenants occupying the buildings.
There is only one tenant and that will be the owner, Ingles Markets, but even if there were multiple
tenants, it still wouldn’t provide for the amount of signage that they need for the site. Number two, there
is a very great potential to subdivide the lot. The site will have a fuel center, and if you’ll notice the site
plan, there is a future area that’s reserved for an automobile wash. So it’s very…there’s a good chance
that this lot could be subdivided. The way the City Code is written, if a property is subdivided once a
variance is approved, the variance becomes null and void. And what that means is that whatever signage
that they need has to be accomplished through this action or in the future it could become null and void.

That leads me to the Staff’s recommendation. It’s unique for me in my experience as a planner to receive
a request that I don’t think goes far enough. And this request does not address the future car wash area
of the site plan. And if the Council were to grant the variance strictly based on the proposed signage,
there’s no signage that’s proposed for this potential out-parcel. And so, there are a couple of different
options that I wanted to bring up. The first is that there is a development agreement for this site that was
included in the Aberdeen Village Development, which was hundreds of acres, and this 12 acres was just
a small portion of the larger mixed-use development. However, it may be problematic to bring together
the parties of this larger development agreement.

Another option is to provide for a master sign plan that could be approved by staff, by the City. I’m
thinking that this would provide the most flexibility and allow for the applicant to accomplish its purpose
without the potential for having to come in for another variance if the first is rendered null and void.
Regardless, in its current form, the staff recommends denial of the applicant’s request.

Mayor Stuart: Is there anyone from Ingles here? State your name, please.

Chad Priest: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Council members. My name is Chad Priest. I’m with Rainbow
Sign Company. We do all the sign work for Ingles. We are excited to open this new store. We’re hoping
to get it open before Thanksgiving. As Stacey mentioned, the store is about 80,000 square feet. We’ve
got a lot going on the site. In addition to the store, as you know, we’ve got a fuel center; we’ve got
multiple entrances on the property; the store has multiple functions in terms of a pharmacy, café. So
there’s a lot of things going on. Main thing I would point out, Stacey really clarified everything that we’re
requesting. At the time of our variance submittal we were not aware of the issue with regards to future
separations of out-parcels and the issues that that could create. I would point out that us forfeiting the
variance or getting denied the variance in lieu of that would, could potentially create some issues for us in
terms of our construction schedule, things like that if we had to resubmit for a variance. I believe in the
discussions that Stacey and I had a provision for a master sign plan appeared to be the most efficient
way to work this out. But, again, if you have any questions for me regarding—I believe you have
drawings of everything that we’ve requested. And again, that’s all standard Ingles signage. We have
standard sign packages we do in all of our stores.

Kathy Gilbert: I don’t believe we have any pictures of the signage. Oh yeah, I’m sorry. We do. We do.
We do.

Chad Priest: Okay.

Kathy Gilbert: I found it.

Chad Priest: And another thing just to point out. The way that the site is organized, got a fuel center
there on the site. If, for instance, that parcel was a separate piece of property in front of our store, and
say, Exxon or BP purchased it, they would actually have their own sign. So we are asking for a third sign
for that parcel or for that, for the fuel, but understanding that if Ingles happened not to own that, that
station would also be allowed its own sign. And the signs that we are requesting for the store are what
would normally be allowed under the ordinance in terms of the number of signs. We would be allowed
one at each major entrance.

Mayor Stuart: Any discussion?

Mark Alarcon: Well, I just wanted to say that I’m very familiar with, you know, this property on this
corner. It does bring a whole set of difficulty (inaudible) great deal back on that property. That’s exactly
what I was going to convey is that if it was a BP gas station, and Ingles would it would really be a
variance

Chad Priest: Yes, sir.

Mark Alarcon: (inaudible) my concern is that going ahead and doing the Master Plan with the economy
or any kind of business (mic fading in and out)
Failed business you guys coming in investing in our community. I want to try to support that as much as I
can. But as far as the multiple ways that property can be subdivided if anything bad came to pass, car
wash or anything like that. I don’t want them to have the opportunity, like you said, to do something
(inaudible) car wash. I’m very excited about getting our variance and wait and see what the economy
does and wait and see, hopefully

Chad Priest: Absolutely.

Mark Alarcon: very successful…We in the City support you like going with the Master Plan. I would like
to move with a motion to go with a variance under the parameters we talked about.

Kathy Gilbert: I’d like to know if there is anyone here to speak in opposition to this variance.

Mayor Stuart: State your name, please.

Frederick Gardner: Yes, Sir. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Frederick Gardner. I
reside at 410 Gresham Drive, Brentwood Park Subdivision, which is adjacent to this piece of property in
question. I really would have loved to see exactly what they’re proposing in terms of the signage. And
also, as was mentioned by staff, there is a development agreement that controlled Brentwood Park and
Monarch Village that was done back in the early, late 1990’s. And I was wondering if that requirement,
did that development agreement have any requirements as it relates to signage. And if not, my other
question would be they’re asking for three ground signs. And there are two major entrances into the
development. The third ground sign is for?

Chad Priest: The, the fuel station.

Frederick Gardner: There is no way to advertise the fuel station as part of the overall huge sign that’s
just going to be proposed for the two entrances to …

Chad Priest: Should I …

Frederick Gardner: to combine?

Chad Priest: (unintelligible)

Mayor Stuart: Do you have copy to show

Chad Priest: I…

Mayor Stuart: Go up …

Chad Priest: If you like, I can show you

Mayor Stuart: Let him show you what he’s got.

Chad Priest: And another thing I’ll point out is when you hear the numbers on the square footage of
these signs in terms of the ground signs, they do sound large, but one thing to keep in mind--all the, all
the empty space around these things is all counted as part of that, so when you hear that number.

Mark Alarcon: Clarify for me something ..

Chad Priest: Yes, sir.

Mark Alarcon: If I understood you correctly earlier. The signs you’re proposing are not much larger or
any larger than your standard signs.
Chad Priest: These are exactly our standards.

Mark Alarcon: So if you put in these by an Ingles, this is a standard sign.

Chad Priest: Correct. Yes. And again, you may disagree, but I would argue that it’s a tasteful sign. It’s
not a—there’s no flashy LED on it or anything. It’s tastefully done and it matches the storefront, the
architecture of the building. You know, we’ve designed these carefully to, you know. We’ve never had
any complaints over the aesthetics of the signs or anything like that.

Mark Alarcon: Mr. Welch, can you give us any input or something on this?

Buddy Welch: The…It’s been the history of the City when they’re dealing with this type of industry—
Wal-Mart is an example—to go with their standard signage because they’re all packaged and designed in
a certain way, but you have to give variance in order for that to be accommodated. Now Wal-Mart was
not given all that they were asked for on the Superstore at Hudson Bridge because of some height issues
that occurred as a result of the --of how high it was on the hill when it all started, I guess is the best way
to put it. But normally, their standard signage is what the City has been granting. If they go outside of
that, then there have been, the history has been to deal with that on a case-by-case basis, so the
entrance signage, I think, is a matter of course. Unless you want to change the direction of that course,
should be granted as far as a variance is concerned. If there is any additional signage, I think you have
to take that on a piece-by-piece basis to stay consistent with what the Mayor and Council has done over
the years with their signage ordinance.

Mark Alarcon: The gentleman’s question

Buddy Welch: Yes. In answer to his question,

Mark Alarcon: Monarch Village and all that.

Buddy Welch: To answer your question, the development agreement did not have any reference to
signage specifically in it. It zoned it C-3, C-1, according to the zoning regulations at that time.

Frederick Gardner: Just one more concern. The building signs—great. The ground signs, monument
signs, the two entrance signs—great. As somebody who is also in the business, a third ground sign that’s
a pylon sign so as you drive down—and I assume this is going to be on the Walt Stephens side—is where
the Ingles gas station is going to be on?

Chad Priest: Correct.

Frederick Gardner: So it’s on the Walt Stephens, so as you driving down, and you come on Walt
Stephens to the intersection of Walt Stephens and Speer Road and Blackhall, you’re going to see a
ground sign that says Ingles that’s going to be 25 feet tall and before you get to the end of the
intersection, you’re looking at another sign that’s 23 feet tall that says ‘Gas’. I mean it’s almost sign
clutter to some degree in such a short space. There should be provision under the Ingles sign for them to
be able to advertise Ingles, Ingles Gas, and as you see across the street, if you’re familiar with that
intersection, where the BP Gas Station is, they’re able to put their fuel prices and change their fuel prices
out. They can make allotment for, for those, for that provision for the Ingles. That way you don’t have –
and if they change names and become Shell, it’ll have a small provision under it that says Shell and
Unleaded Regular and Premium at this, this price and you won’t have a need to address to have one 26
high sign and one 30 foot, or 23 foot high sign as you’re driving down the street. And you’ve got the sign
clutter in a short period of space from, basically, where their drive is to the intersection is—can’t be no
more than four or five hundred feet. That’s a lot of signage to put in right there in front, Oops, right there
in front of somebody’s face. Sorry, Counselor. (Laughter)

Mark Alarcon: Drop a…

Frederick Gardner: But that’s just a lot of sign from a resident who is former vice president of our
Homeowners Association. I mean, we want our character. We love Ingles coming in. We’ve been
waiting for awhile to see somebody come in. I wholeheartedly agree. The City is basically runs on sales
tax, rather than property tax--I understand that. My chief concern is: do we need two primary ground
signs at 20-plus feet within that span of period to address the advertisement of the gas station? I didn’t
call the other signage. I agree with, and to control the car wash.

Kathy Gilbert: Would you

Frederick Gardner: They…

Mark Alarcon: background

Frederick Gardner: All they need to do is come in and get a—I mean the property is really, really wide
open. You can’t miss it, so the gas station could be controlled by just having a building sign. You don’t
need--the car wash would only need a building sign there. You can’t miss it. So that’s just all I wanted to
say. Hopefully, you guys will understand that as a resident, we don’t need the sign close. We got a lot of
commercial on the residential corridor more than we need. But past position, past Mayor and Council.
We just hope that you guys will address that issue for us.

Kathy Gilbert: May I, may I make an observation here? I can certainly understand your concern about
the pylon sign. If, if I were going to approve a third sign, I would want it to be a monument-type sign as
opposed to a pylon sign and much lower.

Chad Priest: If I may make a suggestion, if you’ll notice the schematic for the third sign, you’ll notice that
there is seven feet of post before you get to the signable area, which would leave 16 feet of actual sign.
So, perhaps if it’s pleasure of the Council to approve the variance, I would suggest that you allow for
outparcel signage that should be monument-based, and not to exceed 16 feet in height.

Kathy Gilbert: Is that a better option for you?

Frederick Gardner: I—and I love Ingles, don’t get me wrong. I still think that if BP on the other side of
the street can address their signage with a ground sign, and if I’m quite correct, I think their ground sign is
probably no more than four or five feet. I’m still saying you’re driving in that short period of time, and
you’ve got a 16-high foot sign, a 20-foot sign, and then you’ve got the intersection. You make a turn and
there go another 26-high sign on an area that’s not vegetative with large-growth trees, so they can see. I
mean, we can see, so I think somehow Ingles could incorporate the gas station with the existing sign or
something that’s much more smaller ground-mounted sign that address the issue of the fuel station that’s
right there in the wide open and you can see it from all the intersections as possible. Not over 16 height.
I mean, as a person who regulates sign ordinance that is excessive--in terms of signage. But, you know,
we will bend to the rule of Mayor and Council.

Kathy Gilbert: Your preference would be for a monument-type sign much lower.

Frederick Gardner: Yeah, I mean, it’s just a fuel station.

Mark Alarcon: Let me throw in a further comment. I just want you to know, I mean I’m in business as
well, like I said, and if I’m driving. You know, I drive a truck, if we’re on a pylon and talk about posts going
in at a certain height, about seven foot, before the sign starts. I don’t know, I drive around, you know, a
seven-foot or above vantage point in our vehicle…

Frederick Gardner: Yes, sir.

Mark Alarcon: So I think, if I’m not wrong here, and the reason that to be that stop sign because it is a
corner sign, it has a disruptive view of the corner from traffic and everybody seeing it flow. You know, I
agree with you. The only thing I want to ask each of you to clarify for me is what is the actual distance? I
think it’s more than 500 feet, to be honest with you, from the entrance to that corner.

Frederick Gardner: To the intersection.

Mark Alarcon: It’s a huge property—it’s a 13 acre property and I’m just asking. It’s not like we can’t use
this. I don’t mean to be combative.

Frederick Gardner: No, no, no.

Mark Alarcon: We can’t use the BP scenario with a quarter-acre property to go against this tremendous
property, that’s all I’m say.

Frederick Gardner: And I quite understand. I still think that if you’re looking at, if you’re coming to the
intersection and you’re looking at a 26-foot sign, it says Ingles and it’s less than a thousand feet between
that intersection and the entrance on Walt Stephens, and there might be measurements that show it, but
at that point, I think a monument sign that’s very much low, that doesn’t give you the visual and you come
to an intersection which has a stop light. So, it’s not like it’s a thoroughfare that you’re driving down and,
yes, you would need to have that signage. You’re coming to either a stop or, if you’re obeying the speed
limit, you shouldn’t be doing any more than 35 miles an hour. You’ll be okay with being able to see a
monument sign, you know, if you’re higher up. I just think that, you know, for someone that is invested in
this neighborhood and this community, we’ve got an excess amount of commercial on our corridor. And I
oppose the one across the street in front of Monarch Village. There is one that came with Monarch
Village that’s undeveloped. I have one in front of my subdivision. And I go to the gym and I go to the
store, the Jamaican Store and eat food, Jamaican food, but I’m still saying when you look in that area,
that much signage is truly excessive for that, just that small intersection, right in there is a lot of sign to put
in. And I think you’ll have a lot of folks come complain after it’s built when they realize you’ve got all these
signs sitting on the corner. And once you give to them a variance you’re going to have all this. The City
Attorney said you’re going to have to give to somebody else, so if any other redevelopment of the BP Gas
Station in the future comes up, we’re looking at that as becoming an issue and now as a community we’re
dealing with all these other issues, so I would hope the Mayor and Council would see that and make a
good decision as to protecting the character of the neighborhood. Thank you.

Kathy Gilbert: Are there any other residents here who want to address this issue? Or are you the sole,
are you the sole person?

Chad Priest: I’d like to make a quick comment. I completely understand and appreciate his concerns.
The only thing I might point out again is we’ve got a bit of a unique situation in that we’re operating both a
fuel station and a grocery store on the same piece of property. So I would just point out again that again,
if Exxon came in and bought that property, they could put up a sign—that’s 30 feet high? What’s the
maximum height?

Stacey Jordan: Typically, it’s 35 feet in the City.

Chad Priest: So they could, if Exxon or BP bought that property--I can’t speak to why the sizes—the
sign across the street. I don’t know. But, right now as it sits, they could throw up a sign that’s 30-35 feet
high. And again, you know, we want the community to be happy with us being here, too. I can’t speak
completely as, you know, I’m the sign guy for Ingles, but I do a lot of work with them. But I just wanted to
point those things out.

Mark Alarcon: From a standpoint, and like Mr. Welch pointed out earlier, when you have big
corporations that have , you know, just a contracted-style signs, how would making an adjustment this
late in the game…

Chad Priest: It could, in terms of the fuel sign, specifically; it does cause some issues, just in terms of
getting specific. We have a standard size normally used that’s across the board to all the different fuel
manages the same size, so if we were to need to adjust the numeral size, so if we were to adjust the
numeral size, we like to keep those uniform. The company, itself, just …

Mark Alarcon: (inaudible) though, would be (inaudible)

Chad Priest: I would think it, in lieu of not having one at all, absolutely. We want to work; we would like
to work with you, too. I had hoped maybe I could have somebody with Ingles with me to kind of work this
out, but if you guys would like to, you know, propose something, you know, we can certainly work, you
know, discuss it.

Mark Alarcon: Like I said earlier, I want to support you guys. And I think this is great, with him coming
up because I honestly, you know, I frequent that intersection, but I don’t live there, you know, so…I’d like
to do something to make a motion to allow the variance and to lower the overall height to maybe what you
mentioned in your expertise to 16 feet. Would that impede all the different components that you have?

Chad Priest: I think if those are the parameters we can work within them. You know, I’m sure I can work
with Stacey to come up with something that he’s

Mark Alarcon: less???

Chad Priest: Sure, sure.

Kathy Gilbert: I..

Chad Priest: I would…I’m sorry. Go ahead.

Kathy Gilbert: If I may, would you also include in your motion that in the gas station be a monument sign
or any outparcel be a monument-based sign?

Mark Alarcon: A monument sign or a post sign

Kathy Gilbert: I think that it, given the character of the neighborhood, the monument sign would be more
appropriate.

Mayor Stuart: Hear from our planners here.

Kathy Gilbert: You have a motion.

Mark Alarcon: As to the question prior to this information I have no problem amending my uh…

Buddy Welch: May I make a suggestion? Why don’t you make it two motions? One motion to approve
the entrance monuments as designed and then let’s deal with the other one
Kathy Gilbert: Separately.

Buddy Welch: Cause you, separately, cause you can

Mayor Stuart: Do two, then.

Mark Alarcon: Yeah.

Buddy Welch: You may want to leave some latitude in there for staff to vary that five percent, ten
percent, something of that nature. And if you’re going to make it monument, make it monument. If you’re
going to make it stilts—as I call them—then you know, you may want one stilt, not two stilts. So…and
they got these signs all over that are not that high. Exactly what he’s talking about.

Mark Alarcon: Mr. Welch, I believe that’s a great way to approach it, so I would like to put a motion to go
ahead and approve the variance in one motion and then (inaudible)

Mayor Stuart: Okay, Mr. Alarcon.

Buddy Welch: Two entrance motion. The two entrance signs is your first motion.

Mayor Stuart: First motion.

Buddy Welch: To approve the variance as it applies to the two entrance signs. Is that right?

Chad Priest: So they’d be approving everything, with the exception of the fuel sign.

Stacey Jordan: Would that include the wall signage for the building as well?

Buddy Welch: That’s correct. That would be your standard form.

Stacey Jordan: Okay.

Kathy Gilbert: I will second that motion.

Mayor Stuart: Ms. Gilbert has the second. Do we have any discussion? All in favor of that first motion
for the two and the wall signs? Two, three, four. Fred, are you? No. Four. Opposed?

Buddy Welch: Umm…

Mayor Stuart: Fred, are you opposed?

Fred Evans: Yes, sir.

Mayor Stuart: Okay. Four and one.

Buddy Welch: The other sign for the fuel station. The only concern I would have on a pole one versus a
monument sign is to whether or not it’s going to block visibility on the entrance, and I don’t know whether
anybody can tell us on that.

Chad Priest: I don’t believe. I don’t believe the location of this one is actually, because of the way the
fuel center sits, I don’t
Mark Alarcon: (inaudible)

Chad Priest: Because we’re talking about putting it right there. I believe we’re far enough away from the

Stacey Jordan: It may be 150 or 200 feet.

Chad Priest: It’s far enough. I’ll let him speak to that, too, but I believe it’s far enough away not to
impede any visibility.

Stacey Jordan: Right. And if you remember the site, there is a 20-foot landscape buffer along Walt
Stephens and there are mature crepe myrtles, so the crepe myrtles would impede the visibility more than
the sign would.

Mayor Stuart: Okay, so we have a second motion, or

Fred Evans: Anybody moved on that?

Kathy Gilbert: Not yet.

Fred Evans: I make a motion that we approve the second one.

Mayor Stuart: Have a motion by Mr. Evans to approve the second motion.

Kathy Gilbert: As presented?

Mayor Stuart: No, the variance

Mark Alarcon: I want to recognize that that’s a variance of anywhere from 25 to 16 foot as long as it does
not impede their standard signage.

Buddy Welch: I thought you were limiting it to 16 foot in height.

Shirley Dabney: Yeah.

Buddy Welch: As long as they could get their lettering in. If they couldn’t get the lettering in, then staff
would have the ability to up it whatever was needed so they could get their lettering in.

Mark Alarcon: That’s my intent. I don’t want them to have to go out and get custom signage for this
particular sign.

Buddy Welch: And I think that’s what Mr. Evans was saying.

Chad Priest: Can I make, just a quick comment? Yea, the only thing I would say, if the signage area and
height is 16 feet so as a monument sign, it would have a base, so it may put the overall height of, you
know, depending on the size of our base, you know to 17 or 18 feet with a small brick base.

Mark Alarcon: (inaudible)

Buddy Welch: That’d be fine.

Fred Evans: So moved.
Shirley Dabney: (inaudible)…18….16

Kathy Gilbert: 20 feet is pretty high for a monument sign I would think if we’re taking

Mark Alarcon: But what he is saying is their standard sign is actually the components assembled is

Kathy Gilbert: 16 feet

Mark Alarcon: So there has to be a base whether is a monument or posts, there’s gotta be some kind of
foundational uh, height. So that’s going to elevate it. Yes sir?

Buddy Welch: He’s showing 23’ on the drawing though.

Mayor Stuart: Wait a minute, we still got a motion

Chad Priest: That’s a pylon type sign

Buddy Welch: Okay

Mayor Stuart: Hold, hold, hold a second. Look, you already got a, Mr. Evans got a motion in here. We
have a second and then we can have the discussion.

Kathy Gilbert: Well, we have to have a second before we can discuss.

Mayor Stuart: We have to have a second before we just do, do I have a second?

Shirley Dabney: Second.

Kathy Gilbert: Shirley has a second.

Mayor Stuart: Ms. Dabney has a second. Okay, now we’re up for discussion.

Frederick Gardner: Mayor and Council let me say this. I, you know, I think what you have to look at, too,
is, any company that’s coming into your community will conform to your regulations. It’s not that they have
a typical set of products, because if they were going to Hilton Head, the product would be different. It ain’t
typical. Okay. If they were going to Suwanee, the product would be different. Because Suwanee allows
for certain things and so they won’t come into a community and say this is our typical sign. They tell you
that, because that’s what they want to get you, but I think that you should look at what’s going on in the
community. I think a 16-foot high sign right next to a 26 foot high sign is truly excessive. And, yes, Ingles,
Wal-Mart, Publix would all tell you that’s our typical, right until they walk into your community and you say
this is what our standard is. And they’ll go by whatever your standard is. Unless you decide to vary below
that standard. Then, they’ll take it. But I think you have to look at, in this area, I mean we’ve been
bombarded with commercial in our residential area. And now, we’re gonna be bombarded by a bunch of
signs, which typically you don’t need. And I’ll give an example. In the City of Griffin, where I work, you can
only have two primary signs. Or one primary sign per road frontage. That’s it. We don’t allow two.
Because it becomes clutter. And they conform to that standard. So, we’re asking for them to put two
primary signs. One at 16 feet high, regardless of whether it’s monument or not. And one at 26. As you
come and you slow down to an intersection. My God, what are you gonna miss? It’s not that you’re doing
75 mph and you got to see a sign up there saying, “Hey, here I am”. You’re slowing down at an
intersection. You need to make a left hand turn, a right hand turn or go straight through at 35mph.

Kathy Gilbert: Here’s my suggestion on this. Uhm, in looking at this sign. You’ve got the Ingles Gas
Express Unleaded for the cost of the gas. And then you’ve got another kind of an announcement board
below that. I think that announcement can go on the Ingles grocery sign that says gas with yetta
whatever. And you can eliminate that portion of the sign, which gets us down 12 feet and you put simply a
sign that says Ingles Gas on a monument. That’s the sort of thing that I would find acceptable.

Stacey Jordan: If I may respond. The features of this particular site include a grade separation between
the road and the level that uhm, the level of the grade where this sign will sit. And you’ve got a 20 foot
buffer of blooming crepe myrtles. So, perhaps, we could limit the height of the sign. But instead of limiting
the height of the sign from grade level, perhaps we could limit the height of the sign to the closest
travelled lane of Walt Stephens. And that way it would be up there, but it wouldn’t be any higher, at least
not substantially higher, than its neighbor across Walt Stephens.

Kathy Gilbert: I think that’s where I’m going. And I would like to see it closely; more closely agree or
match the street, the sign across the street.

Stacey Jordan: Okay, well, because if you look at the schematic, the sign portion that says Ingles Gas
Express is 5 feet high.

Kathy Gilbert: um, hm.

Stacey Jordan: Perhaps if it’s the pleasure of the Council, you could limit the height of the sign to 5 feet
above the elevation of the closest travelled lane of Walt Stephens. That means the sign may be 12 feet
high. It may be 16 feet high from grade level. But it would only be 5 feet high above the level of the road.

Mark Alarcon: And that’s been a practice in a lot of municipalities.

Stacey Jordan: In addition to that..Please

Buddy Welch: That is the reason you have the Wal-Mart signs the way they are, based upon exactly
what he just said.

Stacey Jordan: In addition to that, uhm, in discussions with the Director of Planning & Zoning, Ms. Cheri
Hobson Mathews, we’re concerned that this is a thirteen acre site, and that you could potentially sub-
divide outparcels, uhm, and we’re talking more than just two. And if each one of these outparcels has its
own access to the public right-of-way, by right, they could have a 35-foot tall sign. And so, we would like
to suggest again, that the approval for the variance would include the stipulation that there be a master
sign plan to include all of the signage that will be approved on this site. And so that would limit the height
of the outparcel signage to whatever motion that you make. And that would give a larger measure of
control to the City.

Mayor Stuart: Further discussion?

Buddy Welch: Does that involve the entire site?

Stacey Jordan: Yes, sir.

Chad Priest: The only, I just want to point out, I know Stacey might have suggested the five feet in
height, just based on that one panel. Uhm, I would probably, I would like to request, you know, the section
with the numbers which is the key, and you know fuel sales are completely driven by price as you well
know. Uhm, the, if the total height were at least 11 feet, that would give us enough, you know, sufficient
room to advertise both the Gas Express and the price of the fuel itself.

Mark Alarcon: Let me ask you this, if you were to support a height, it’s a huge property and you’ve
already got two entrance signs, what would be the hurt in rotating your price of gas, putting Ingles
underneath it and leaving the five foot maximum for pricing at the highest level, if that’s your main
concern. Everybody there up to this point knows that you’re Ingles. I feel like, you know, you’re enlarging
the signs. We’re working with you on that.

Chad Priest: No, I understand. I think if you were to give us a general—from my previous experience
just in the signs that we’ve done in the past—I know for a fact Ingles is going to want to put their name at
the top of that sign. If you give us a height to work within, we’ll probably work to get it all in there in that
height. You know the name and the price. But I’ve never, I’ve never seen a site where we’ve just done
the price and then the name down lower, or anything like that. But if, if you know, Council was to just give
us a height limitation that we’ll work within and then we’ll work within that.

Kathy Gilbert: Mr. Mayor?

Mayor Stuart: We’ve got another citizen down here wants to speak, I believe.

Samuel Valme: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and City Council. My name is Samuel Valme. I’m actually a
resident of Monarch Village. My concern is that you’re giving a variance for signage. However, I think
there should be a standard as far as the community as far as what we’re going to do in future signage so
that we don’t have this same variance discussions at a later date. We should have a standard and they
should conform to our standards.

Kathy Gilbert: Which is, I believe what Mr. Jordan is suggesting is that we set a…

Mayor Stuart: Master Plan.

Kathy Gilbert: …that we set up a Master Plan for this parcel.

Samuel Valme: Okay.

Kathy Gilbert: Is that correct, Mr. Jordan?

Stacey Jordan: Yes ma’am. It turns out that the standard for the community would allow a 35 foot tall
sign. So with a 13 acre piece of property, they could simply sub-divide it. And then you’ve got several 35-
foot tall signs. Unless there’s a Master Plan that would give the City a measure of control over the whole
property.

Kathy Gilbert: Which I believe is what our Assistant City Manager was suggesting in his suggestion to
us--His concerns relative to this parcel. My concern now is that we have a motion on the floor, with a
second that does not, in fact, address the Master Plan that you are speaking with.

Buddy Welch: Mr. Mayor?

Mark Alarcon: Mr. Welch, correct me if I’m wrong, but we’ve already voted to approve the variance on
two of the signs and the associated signs on the building. And I agree with your concerns. I don’t want
anybody to feel like I, me personally, have any vested interest here. It’s just that, this is an exceptionally,
unusual piece of property because of its size.
It might be across the street from BP, the other businesses, I mean, JSI here you know I don’t know of
any other place in all of Stockbridge that owner of a single building that has 13 acres associated with it.
That’s why we’re having to spend so much time on this particular property, but I do appreciate and
understand. We do have, I think, good sign ordinances, but we’re having to visit this because this is an
unusual situation. With that being said, the Master Plan—correct me, Mr. Welch, if I’m wrong here—The
Master Plan, we’re being told, is the best route to go because we can then take (inaudible) property, but
if we don’t do a Master Plan, we vote on these three things, and then if Ingles—God forbid—you know,
doesn’t succeed, or they decide they have to subdivide, this becomes null and void and we revisit this
issue. Is that incorrect?

Buddy Welch: I think you’re correct, if I understand what you said, but I would suggest to you that if
you’re going to go ahead and give them the two monument signs, since there’s so much disagreement
with this and you’ve got the County expert recommending that you do a Master Plan Signage for the
entire property that you simply postpone a decision on this. Let them get the Master Plan together and
bring it back to you for approval, which would include this fuel sign if they want to go forward with it. So,
and then, you know, to be very frank, I think the City’s got some leverage to deal with the overall part of it.
And I really think that his recommendation of having an overall signage agreement makes a lot of sense,
but you understand, he is from the company that puts up the signs. He’s not the property owner.

Mark Alarcon: I realize that. I was…

Buddy Welch: So we have to have the property owner to consent to whatever is going to be agreed to.

Mark Alarcon: I agree and then, I mean, I knew his position as being the sign company, but, like I said, if
they don’t have that in front of us now and both of them admittedly said that this (inaudible) construction
and scheduling because that’s going to come into a very big expense as well. We’ve already conceded
to the enlargement of two and we are trying to work through this third one. I don’t know if y’all want to go
back and do a Master Plan to include the other signage, you know another month or two down the road. I
mean, that’s where we’re heading with the Master Plan.

Chad Priest: Speaking from my point of view, in terms of construction schedules, it would put a bit of a
burden on us, just in terms of our timelines, but I understand.

Mayor Stuart: So we have the motion here by Mr. Evans and Dabney. What are we going to do? You
got discussion?

Kathy Gilbert: You can call the motion. Call the motion.

Mark Alarcon: I make a motion that we …

Kathy Gilbert: We have the …

Mayor Stuart: It’s already…

Kathy Gilbert: No, no, no. We have a motion.

Mayor Stuart: We already have the motion.

Buddy Welch: We already got a motion.

Mayor Stuart: Call for a vote.

Kathy Gilbert: Restate the motion, please.

Fred Evans: Pardon?

Kathy Gilbert: Could we restate the motion?

Buddy Welch: Can I, can I help?
Shirley Dabney: Yes.

Buddy Welch: As I understand, the motion, the last motion is, was to approve it and it not be any more
than 16 feet high--the signage, itself, but if you went to a monument base, there would be allowance for
the monument base that would not be included in the 16 foot of signage. That is the motion as I
understand it on the floor that has been made and seconded.

Kathy Gilbert: I call that motion.

Mark Alarcon: (Inaudible) in my opinion, guys, there’s two things we need to consider that are there.
Their cost-effectiveness in moving forward, getting the signs in place in a timely manner. The reverse is
then critiquing or downsizing some of the faces or something to make it work inside of the 16 foot
maximum, which is what they will adhere to. So there is a pro-rated expense that they, you know, need
to take into account.

Kathy Gilbert: Mr. Mayor?

Mayor Stuart: Yes.

Kathy Gilbert: I’m going to ask you to call the motion.

Mayor Stuart: All in favor? One, two, three, four. All opposed? Okay. There a different, a third one you
want to do on it? Variance. You want to make a motion for the …

Kathy Gilbert: The motion has passed. There’s nothing, there’s nothing more to act on.

Shirley Dabney: Yeah. It’s done.

Mayor Stuart: Okay. I guess #6.

Henry County Planning and Zoning Representative: Excuse me, Mr. Mayor. I just want to make one
point of clarification. Because the variance was approved, the applicant will still need to come to the
planning and zoning office and submit a signed application to our staff. The way the ordinance is written,
is every signed application that is submitted to our department has to be approved by your City Council,
so it will have to come back to you all for final approval. So that could delay it as well. I just wanted to
make that for the record.

Kathy Gilbert: Thank you for that.

(Fred Evans excused himself at 7:15 p.m. and was absent for the remainder of the meeting)

Mayor Stuart: Okay. Item #6 This has to do with zoning modification of a parcel. This is for a medical
clinic. The request is eliminate two conditions, Conditions 1 and 2. Again, Mr. Jordan will be presenting it
here. The subject property was rezoned by the Stockbridge City Council from R-3, which is Single-Family
Residence, to C-2 (General Commercial) on the 14th of April in 2008 with the following Conditions of 1 &
1. Condition 1 - The facade of the existing single-family structure shall be renovated to consist of
brick or masonry product on all four (4) sides.
2. Condition 2 - Dumpster(s) shall be placed on concrete pads and enclosed on three (3) sides. The
enclosure shall be constructed of brick, stone, stucco or any combination thereof provided it is
consistent with the design features of structures on the site and shall not exceed eight feet (8’) in
height.
The Zoning Advisory Board held a public hearing on June 10, 2010, and recommended denial of the
request to eliminate Conditions 1 & 2, but approval of the following changes to the wording of Conditions
1. If the existing structure is replaced or improved, the exterior product shall be of brick or masonry
product, and
2. Should a dumpster be placed on the property, it shall be placed on a concrete pad and enclosed
on three (3) sides. The enclosure shall be constructed of brick, stone, stucco or any combination
thereof provided it is consistent with the design features of structures on the site and shall not
exceed eight feet (8’) in height. Mr. Jordan.

Stacey Jordan: Mr. Mayor, Council. I’d like to start with Condition #2, and of course, the applicant had
requested to eliminate both conditions and the applicant apparently had a misconception about Condition
#2. The applicant thought that the Condition required a dumpster and he asserted that he wouldn’t need
a waste facility as large as a dumpster, so the Zoning Advisory Board recommended a change in the
wording that said ‘should a dumpster be placed on the property’, and so forth. Condition #1 The house
appears to be in reasonably good condition and the applicant was concerned that if he was required to
change the siding that it would affect windows and the eaves, and perhaps the width of the footings for
the brick with the masonry. And so the Zoning Advisory Board recommended a change in the wording to
say ‘if the existing structure is replaced or improved upon, at that time the exterior product shall be brick
or masonry product.’ And for the record, Mr. Mayor, I’d like to say that the applicant cannot be here
tonight. The staff actually failed to notify the applicant besides placing the required sign on the subject
property and the applicant had other responsibilities to attend to tonight.

Mayor Stuart: Okay.

Kathy Gilbert: That being the case, unless there is an overriding urgency to act on this matter, I would
suggest that we table this until the applicant can be here to address the issue.

Buddy Welch: I think you would have to, and you would have to re-advertise it.

Mayor Stuart: He’s not here to petition on it.

Kathy Gilbert: So I will make a motion that we table this item until the applicant, until the next meeting
and the applicant can be present.

Shirley Dabney: Second.

Mayor Stuart: Motion by Ms. Gilbert and second by Ms. Dabney to table it. Any discussion? All in favor
of tabling it? Mr. Evans had to leave. Be 4-0. Okay.

Stacey Jordan: Thank you.

Mayor Stuart: Thank you.

Mayor Stuart: #7 is the LCI and we’ve been asked to postpone it until the, this months, or until the
Working Session. Will be meeting, will be presented at the City Council Meeting on August the 9th.

Mayor Stuart: And then we have Resolutions and Ordinances, Agreements. Mr. Welch is #8. We have
an Ordinance to amend Title 9 of the City of Stockbridge Code of Ordinances regarding “Licensing and
Regulations”; to amend Chapter 9.04 thereof entitled “Alcoholic Beverages”; to prescribe procedures for
the review of alcohol license applications; to amend existing provisions.
Buddy Welch: You had requested that we update the Ordinance to accomplish several purposes. We
have listed all of those changes in the draft that was sent to you. The main procedural change is that if
the applicant meets all of the requirements of the Ordinance, then the Clerk would be authorized to issue
the application, or issue the license from the application and it not have to come to the City Council for
every vote on the issuance of the license. If the license was denied by the Clerk, then they would have
the right to appeal to the City Council.

Mayor Stuart: Do I have…

Buddy Welch: My recommendation, Staff recommendation, that you approve that tonight.

Mayor Stuart: Do I have a motion?

Kathy Gilbert: Mr. Mayor, if I may… Mr. Welch, does this also include some language relative to the
manufacture of …

Buddy Welch: Of

Kathy Gilbert: …wine or beer on premises?

Buddy Welch: It does. It does. Y’all had requested that also. We put all of that in the respective
amendments.

Kathy Gilbert: I make a motion that we approve this Ordinance.

Mayor Stuart: Have a motion by Ms. Gilbert. Do I have a second?

Shirley Dabney: Second.

Mayor Stuart: Ms. Dabney second. Any discussion? Further… No discussion. All in favor? One, two,
three, four. Okay. Thank you.

Mayor Stuart: #8. No, after eight, is I think it’s yours, Ms. Gilbert. City Council Discussion of Website and
Software Timeline.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay, um, Mayor and Council, you have a timeline that was created relative to the
adoption or to the building of the City’s website and getting some things up and running. We talked about
this at the Community Relations Committee Meeting. Uh, our recommendation is as the lowest proposal
was presented by Triality that we go forward with them, uh, so we can get this up and running and it
appears that, based on the information I have with, in front of me that we could have something up and
running by the first of September, which the, the website was a huge priority issue. We wanted to get this
taken care of as quickly as possible. My question, Mr. Welch, for you is, given the fact that we had a, a
RFP, and we had three proposals presented, um--Triality is the lowest of the three—uh, and our
recommendation was that we go forward. We do not have a resolution uh to vote on. Can we move
forward with a resolution or a proposal for a resolution?

Buddy Welch: If the Council approves the waiver of having the written resolution in your presence, you
can do that.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay. Uh, are there any…
Buddy Welch: An option would be to waive the requirement for written resolutions to be in your
presence. That would be your first motion. Your second motion would be a resolution to accept
whichever is the lowest bid.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay. I will make a motion that we waive the requirement for a written resolution on this
item.

Mayor Stuart: And have a second?

Shirley Dabney: Second.

Mayor Stuart: You?

Shirley Dabney: I second.

Mayor Stuart: second? Any discussion?

Mark Alarcon: I (inaudible) Ms. Gilbert is very well verified (inaudible)

Kathy Gilbert: Mr. … We’re talking about the requirement for a written proposal, written resolution. I
think any remarks would come from the second motion.

Mark Alarcon: She seconded it.

Mayor Stuart: She …

Kathy Gilbert: No, the second motion that will be made. After we decide whether or not we can proceed
without a written resolution.

Mayor Stuart: This is his discussion. This is his discussion of the waiver.

Mark Alarcon: That’s fine.

Mayor Stuart: No more discussion? Okay. No discussion. Do I have…all in favor? Motion for the
waiver. One, two. Two. All opposed? Two. Okay.

Buddy Welch: Mr. Mayor, you can vote since it’s a tie.

Mayor Stuart: I’m going to vote to oppose.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.

Buddy Welch: If

Mayor Stuart: And…

Buddy Welch: If you will, tell me which resolution you wish prepared, I will be glad to have it ready for
the next meeting.

Kathy Gilbert: The resolution is to move forward with a, with the Triality. Miranda, you can get the
information to Mr. Welch regarding the moving forward with Triality as the website builder, for want of a
better term.
Buddy Welch: Vanessa, do you have that stuff? Send me both. Send me all three of them and I’ll draw
it. Yes, ma’am, I’ll take care of it.

Kathy Gilbert: Thank you.

Mark Alarcon: Mr. Mayor, at this time, I’d like to uh all the citizens of Stockbridge here why uh I
abstain—objected, not abstained--but objected to using Triality’s number. Triality is more than qualified
and capable of doing us a great job, but if you’re going to bid apples and apples, and I’m talking as a
contractor--I’m a small business man and a contractor, myself--I do not believe they should be allowed to
bid on our package for the following reasons: #1 They are contracted by with the City by services and are
compensated extremely handsomely with no rent to use that facility. They are contracted to pay 12
percent of whatever they do. He’s, he’s a teacher, he’s supposed to one of the top three or five capable
internet-type people out there, and that’s not good. But I don’t believe that a person or a company that
has a vested interest that’s already getting a tremendous discount—I don’t know who owns a business
here--to lease a basement of several hundred square feet at Merle Manders Center free of charge,
except when you’re making money. I’d like that opportunity. So, I’m not saying anything derogatory
about the individual--I’ve personally never met this man. He might be a super-nice guy. I just feel like he
should have discounted himself from this bid opportunity because of his, I guess, packet that he already
has with the City. I just believe it’s a conflict of interest in my opinion and I think that we need to
investigate putting out three more uh opportunities uh the Mayor and Ms. Gilbert has even given me
additional qualified persons that we met at the uh…

Mayor Stuart: G

Mark Alarcon: GMA training down in Savannah that we went to. We found four State-of-Georgia
capable web designer and supporters. The numbers we got, citizens, is Triality, an outfit in Ohio, and I
believe New Mexico. I…

Kathy Gilbert: I believe that was Colorado and St. Louis.

Mark Alarcon: Colorado and St. Louis. So if I’m being told that, you know that’s the best support we can
get is from Colorado and wherever else, I got a problem with that. There’s too many capable companies
in the City of Stockbridge--if not at least in the State of Georgia--that would give us equal, if not better,
service that’s not being compensated. No wonder you’re getting that much more by that much more less
compensated, so that’s my problem with it and once the resolution is brought to the floor next month, I will
vote against it. But, you know, y’all can certainly prepare whatever has been asked of you.

Mayor Stuart: Okay.

Mark Alarcon: I’d like to amend the agenda just to (inaudible)

Mayor Stuart: Okay.

Mark Alarcon: We have an opportunity to hear from a young man, T. J. Marquette. He is an Eagle
Scout. He would like to come and present his Eagle Scout graduation or last--Sorry I don’t know all the
terminology-- his graduating project. He would like to present the City with his project to (inaudible)

Mayor Stuart: Okay.

J. J. Marchant: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council Members. My name is T. J. Marchant and I am
here regarding my Eagle Scout project. My Eagle Scout Project is at the Stockbridge Cemetery. My goal
for the cemetery is to help stop erosion and help with beautification. My project consists of building a
retaining wall to help stop erosion as well. And to build a picket fence on the back of the cemetery for
beautification. Also, I would like to plant lilies in front of the fence. Therefore, I am asking? I have all my
materials at my disposal and no money is required from the City; therefore, I am asking for permission for
the go-ahead. Thank you.

Mayor Stuart: If you would, or if I may explain a little bit from what your project, I understand this is, this
is not on the main cemetery side. This is…there are some maps, something we, we could show. It’s
the—if you’re looking from the park to the cemetery, it’s the right side of the road. That is City property.
And I believe, and they’re here. Mr. Thomas, Alphonso Thomas. There’s a family plot on that right side.
Other than that, the City owns all the property around there. I believe that you’ve been in coordination
with Mr. Thomas’ family for about a couple of months now as to what they would like to see done and that
y’all had coordinated all this together and, Alphonso… Mr. Thomas, if you would speak to tell them what
you’ve worked with him on the project and kind of clarify this for them.

Alphonso Thomas: Okay. Mr. Mayor.

Mayor Stuart: Thank you, TJ.

Alphonso Thomas: City Council, Good evening.

Mayor Stuart: Speak to the mic, if you would, Alphonso.

Alphonso Thomas: Okay. Um…This is an Eagle Scout project that would merit him his merit badges.
This is a community project that the Boy Scouts attempt to do. The project entails my individual family
plot. And there’s a problem with erosion of the soil and what the project entail is building a retaining wall,
bringing in some soil to level the land out and they plan to put a picket fence behind the project, build a
retaining wall, plant some flowers, flag pole and this kind of thing. It’s more of a beautification type of
project in this area and if, and I don’t know if any of you all are familiar with this site. You know, it’s in
pretty bad shape, but this is an on-going type of beautification in the cemetery project and they
approached me about this project and for the last couple of months, you know, we have been working the
details and the drawing. And I think, if I’m not mistaken, what we’re asking the City to do only is to
provide some dirt to correct the erosion. Other than that, it would not cost the City any other finances;
actually, you know to do this project.

Chrystal Marchant: Can I interject something, please?

Alphonso Thomas: Yeah. Mm-hmm.

Chrystal Marchant: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council Members. I’m Chrystal Marchant, TJ’s mom
and mentor. We actually are not asking you for dirt; we’ve already got the donation for the dirt. He’s
worked very diligently, and I apologize for not briefing you on this…

Alphonso Thomas: That’s okay. Okay. Okay. Okay.

Chrystal Marchant: …but we worked on it so over …

Alphonso Thomas: Okay.

Chrystal Marchant: …the weekend. I was busy. I’m in the Air Force and I had drill duty, so …

Alphonso Thomas: Okay. Okay.

Chrystal Marchant: …I apologize for not briefing you on that, but we have all of our supplies. So I…
Mayor Stuart: My understanding

Chrystal Marchant: We’re not asking for any financial donations from the City, other than permission to
start this project.

Mayor Stuart: My understanding is, if I’m correct, is you’re just really wanting permission to dump a load
of dirt…

Chrystal Marchant: Exactly.

Mayor Stuart: …on City property and y’all, or the Scouts, will wheelbarrow it into the private things and
you’ve approved that

Alphonso Thomas: Right.

Mayor Stuart: as the family people and you’re going to be working with them on it. That’s what your
project is really all about.

Chrystal Marchant: Exactly. And TJ has worked diligently with Home Depot and Lowe’s and some
other local merchants, and so he has all of his supplies. So he’s ready to go if we have your permission.
Um, as you know, the local merchants are very supportive of Eagle Scouts doing something to help the
community. We want to give back to the City of Stockbridge. Even though we’re from Hampton, we’re
trying to do something for the City of Stockbridge. So, we do have pictures if you want to see them—it’s
pictures of the erosion that he took—before pictures--showing the erosion that’s occurred at the
cemetery. So we have those available.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay. So we, we are, we are in fact, what you’re asking for is for area for the dirt to be
dumped, which is, in fact, City property surrounding the private property of the cemetery. Is that what I’m
understanding?

Alphonso Thomas: Well, the, the dirt would be actually dumped on my family’s plot.

Shirley Dabney: No. I think what she’s saying, though,

Mayor Stuart: No. When we looked at it, the truck won’t be able to get in there, so they’re going to have
to dump it on the City property on the other end.

Alphonso Thomas: too

Mayor Stuart: And it would just be hauled over to it.

Kathy Gilbert: Right.

Chrystal Marchant: Then we’ll wheelbarrow it.

Mayor Stuart: Exactly.

Kathy Gilbert: So that, that’s the only …

Alphonso Thomas: Right.
Mayor Stuart: And you guys have, you’ve told me, the Scouts have their own liability insurance that
covers you when you’re doing these projects and stuff like that so the City won’t be held liable for
anything like that there. Mr. Welch, your concerns with it?

Chrystal Marchant: And present here also, sir, is our Scout Master, Mr. Mike Katona, so if you have any
questions about liability insurance, but we’re fully covered with the BSA and my husband is here also as a
Scout leader, for support.

Mayor Stuart: Okay. Mr. Welch?

Chrystal Marchant: …to answer questions.

Buddy Welch: Will there be any City equipment used in the process?

Chrystal Marchant: No, sir.

Buddy Welch: Will there be any City employees used in the process?

Chrystal Marchant: No, sir.

Buddy Welch: Then you can grant permission as long as it’s a designated area and it’s for a designated
period of time and the area is restored so that you do not create a cost for the tax-payers. You do have
the authority to do that.

Mark Alarcon: Mayor, that clarification, I’d like to draft (inaudible) state that (inaudible) dirt on City
property (inaudible) the completion (inaudible) cause any other erosion problems or drainage issues
(inaudible)

Shirley Dabney: What would be the starting date?

Chrystal Marchant: Ma’am?

Shirley Dabney: The starting date.

Chrystal Marchant: The starting date? We need to coordinate with the Scouts. But if you give us a
time period, we can make it happen within that timeframe if that’s …

Kathy Gilbert: I think Mr. Welch.

Chrystal Marchant: limitations are. We’ve worked diligently to get this project

Kathy Gilbert: We could write the resolution for a period of 60 days from the start date to be determined.
Correct?

Buddy Welch: Yes, ma’am.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.

Mayor Stuart: Whenever they get the dirt in 60 days

Buddy Welch: It would start from the date that the dirt is actually placed on the site that you designate.
Kathy Gilbert: Okay.

Buddy Welch: Now someone needs to designate where the site’s going to be where I can put it as part
of the resolution and I will be glad to do that. Are you going to waive the requirement for the written
resolution and adopt it tonight or …?

Kathy Gilbert: I make a motion to waive the requirement for written resolution.

Mark Alarcon: Second.

Mayor Stuart: Any discussion? All in favor? One, two, three, four. Okay.

Buddy Welch: Alright. So I will prepare a resolution that says that there is a certain area that will be
designated and someone will give that on City property that they will be authorized to dump field dirt and
that from the date of the dumping of the field dirt, they’ve got 60 days to remove it and to restore the
City’s property and that they will maintain all the sedimentation controls during that period of time. And
there will be no City equipment, no City employees used in the process.

Mayor Stuart: Okay.

Buddy Welch: I’ll be glad to do that.

Mayor Stuart: Thank you very much, TJ.

TJ Marchant: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Buddy Welch: That needs to be in the form of a motion for a resolution.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay. We need to, we need to have that motion. I make that motion for the resolution
that Mr. Welch just articulated so perfectly.

Mayor Stuart: Ms. Gilbert makes the motion.

Shirley Dabney: Second.

Mayor Stuart: Second by Ms. Dabney. Any discussion? All in favor? All in favor of the motion? One,
two, three, four. Okay.

Kathy Gilbert: And good luck.

TJ and Chrystal Marchant: Thank you.

Kathy Gilbert: I look forward to seeing it.

Alphonso Thomas: Thank you.

(Applause)

Mayor Stuart: At this time we have public comments. Citizens are allowed to voice city related concerns,
opinions, etc., that are not listed on the agenda, during this portion of the meeting. All persons wishing to
speak for public comment must sign in with the City Clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. You must
sign your name, address and specific topic you wish to speak about or you will not be recognized. You
will be able to address the Mayor and Council for three (3) minutes. At this time we have Alfred Britt.
Alfred Britt. Okay, there’s Alfred.

Dr. Michael Moon: I’m Dr. Michael Moon, but he‘s Alfred Britt. I will let him do the talking, because my
voice is not as good as it used to be.

Alfred Britt: Good evening. My name’s Alfred Britt. I am the president and founder of the Cemetery
Research Group here in Henry County. We go throughout the county looking at all the cemeteries. We
take an evaluation of the condition. We look at any dangers they may be involved in as far as
development and as far as geological events, ground movement. We assess everything we can with the
cemeteries and post it on our website. And we have become aware of Mayor Stuart’s efforts at cleaning
the cemetery up at, across from Memorial Park. So we’ve been in contact with the Georgia Historical
Society and they have put it on their maps. They have done research and the research finds that this
cemetery is, indeed, historical. They have come to the conclusion that it is the first African American
cemetery in Stockbridge since it moved. When the City moved down the tracks by about a mile, where it
is today, this was the first African American cemetery established, and these people helped build
Stockbridge. This City would not be the great City that it is today if it wasn’t for those people, and they
deserve a clean place to rest in peace. (Applause) And we would just like to thank Mayor Stuart for
getting started getting the cemeteries cleaned up. As you can see by tonight, the young man that was
just here, what you’re doing is starting to spread. And it’s through your work that this happened. So we
would like to read and present you with a certificate of appreciation and it says:

The Cemetery Research Group of Henry County would like to recognize and commend Mayor Lee Stuart,
City of Stockbridge, Georgia, for his efforts in restoring dignity to the final resting place of those who
helped build Stockbridge, Georgia, on this 16th day of June, 2010.

Alfred Britt, III, founder

Dr. Mike Moon, Senior Researcher,

Linda Moon, Consultant, and

Michael Rowe, Consultant

And I would like to present this to you at this time.

Mayor Stuart: Thank you.

(Applause)

Mayor Stuart: Next we have Melody Connor, who is representative for Eric Charles, School Board
District 4. Oop. There she is. Okay.

Melody Connor: Good evening.

Mayor Stuart: Good evening.

Melody Connor: My name is Melody Connor. I’m here representing Eric Charles, School Board
Member of District 4. Um, we are coming to you this evening to propose an event that we would hold as
far as giving back to the community in reference to a form of a school supply drive. Um to be held on the
proposed dates of August 14th, which is a Saturday, from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. and the location is Clark
Park. Um, the event will be centrally-focused on students and the educators with the promotion of vital
importance of education and health awareness. We um, the participants will provide like pediatric health
and dental care information on that, sports and fitness, and nutrition, youth empowerment programs and
education and career exploration beyond high school. Um, we have a host of corporate citizens that
have been contacted, and we will follow up, um, pending the outcome of this meeting. And we are asking
to operate with the City of Stockbridge as a joint venture with Eric Charles um in providing location and
facility at no cost. City of Stockbridge Department representatives to maybe give some sort of
demonstration as far as the water, water purification or the importance of recycling. Again, because this
is a student-centered um event. And basically, that’s what we are asking on behalf of Mr. Eric Charles.

Kathy Gilbert: If I may, I spoke with Mr. Charles earlier last week, late last week and, essentially, what
he was--you’re looking to um get school supplies to distribute to students and you have corporate
sponsorship for this.

Melody Connor: Yes, ma’am.

Kathy Gilbert: My understanding when I spoke with him was there would be no requirement from the
City other than our endorsement of your endeavor.

Melody Connor: Yes.

Kathy Gilbert: And I, correct me if I’m wrong, would we have a charge for the use of the park or the park
pavilion of any sort? So essentially what we’re… you just need to schedule it and we endorse it and I will
make that motion. I’m sorry.

Vanessa Holiday: We do have a charge.

Kathy Gilbert: We do have a charge for the …

Mayor Stuart: If you’re using the pavilion. You’re going to be using the pavilion, right?

Melody Connor: Yes.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay. We would have to check and see whether

Melody Connor: That’s what we said, a proposed date, as of yesterday.

Kathy Gilbert: Right. Okay. I believe our Ordinances allow for a non-profit organization to use the park
facility at no charge.

Melody Connor: Okay.

Kathy Gilbert: Is that correct?

Shirley Dabney: Is it going to be at the … are you going to be using one of the pavilions?

Melody Connor: Yes, ma’am.

Shirley Dabney: Okay.

Kathy Gilbert: Okay.
Mark Alarcon: That’s depending on the schedule if you’re going to be using the pavilion or not. But
folks, correct me if I’m wrong here, (inaudible) the other candidates are (inaudible) you know, helping
with school supplies and all of those things.

Melody Connor: That’s right.

Mark Alarcon: And also, you know, you’ve got to be careful of, you know, doing a lot of campaigning. Is
there legal status as far as us giving an endorsement? (Inaudible) political portion of that.

Melody Connor: Actually, it’s specifically just a school-supply drive and specifically for the community,
giving the City of Stockbridge, investing back into the community.

Mark Alarcon: (inaudible) free-of-charge thing we’d have to talk about.

Buddy Welch: You have to waive that.

Mayor Stuart: But we have an ordinance

Buddy Welch: I just don’t remember us waiving that fee before.

Mark Alarcon: (inaudible)

Buddy Welch: What is, what is the fee?

Shirley Dabney: I think its $25.

Buddy Welch: $25.

Shirley Dabney: $25.

Mayor Stuart: But I thought Ms. Gilbert said that there’s an ordinance that would waive if it’s non-profit.
Do we know?

Buddy Welch: I don’t remember.

Kathy Gilbert: We would, I just sort of thought there was something to that effect. I know there is when
it comes to requiring a permit for solicitation, non-profits.

Buddy Welch: I would simply have to look at it. I would suggest, in order that they not be held up, that
you approve it contingent upon our review of the charge ordinance and the solicitation ordinance to make
sure they can do it at the park.

Kathy Gilbert: That, that would be my motion, that we, we go ahead and give you the permission,
pending so you can get the date set, if that’s okay. And we’ll wait on the opinion as to whether or not we
can waive the fee. If there is a fee.

Mark Alarcon: We also have to be cognizant…

Buddy Welch: Wait, you have to get the date.

Mark Alarcon: if not, then maybe we could have to get the (inaudible)
Melody Connor: Alright. Thank you, sir.

Shirley Dabney: It’s on a first-serve…

Mayor Stuart: We have a motion by Ms. Gilbert. Do I have a second?

Shirley Dabney: …on a first-come, first-served basis.

Kathy Gilbert: right.

Mayor Stuart: Okay. I still got the motion hanging here. I need a second. Do I have a second?
Alarcon second. Any discussion? Discussion? All in favor of it? One, two, three, four. Okay. We’ll work
the details out with you.

Melody Connor: Thank you so much.

Mayor Stuart: Thank you.

Melody Connor: Have a good evening.

Mayor Stuart: Okay, if there’s no other public comments, I’ve got a couple of announcements here. We
have the Building Committee meeting is tomorrow evening at 6 p.m. Finance Committee is Thursday, the
15th at 6 p.m. Community Relations is the 19th at 6 p.m. And the next Working Session will be the 26th
at 6 p.m. And then our regular Council Meeting next month will be the 9th. I also have a note here to
remind everyone that this week is early voting and it is available at the Strickland Community Center, and
it is from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. That’s over here at 130 Berry Street. And, other than that, I think we got it all.
Do I have a motion to adjourn?

Harold Cochran: I make a motion to adjourn.

Mayor Stuart: Mr. Cochran makes the motion to adjourn. Do I have a second?

Mark Alarcon: I second.

Mayor Stuart: Mr. Alarcon second. Any discussion? All in favor. One, two…4-0. Thank you very much.
We’re adjourned.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:53 p.m.

Respectfully submitted by:
Vanessa Holiday, City Clerk Lee Stuart, Mayor
