HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 01/11/2007 - MINS 01 11 07 REG (Migrated from Optiview)Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 1 of 52
Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton was held on January 11, 2007 at 5:30 PM,
Mayor Joe Lockwood presiding.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Lockwood called the meeting to order.
ROLL CALL
City Clerk Marchiafava reminded everyone to silence their cell phones and pagers. Additionally, those wishing to
provide public comment during a public hearing or at the conclusion of the meeting under the public comment section
are required to complete a public comment card. They need to be turned in to the Clerk.
City Clerk Marchiafava called the roll.
Councilmembers Present: Councilmember Karen Thurman, Councilmember Julie Zahner Bailey, Councilmember
Bill Lusk, Councilmember Neal O’Brien, Councilmember Tina D’Aversa-Williams, and Councilmember Rick
Mohrig.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Lockwood led the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
City Clerk Marchiafava stated that staff had one item to add: A Resolution Amending Resolution No 06-11-14
Adopting the City of Milton Zoning and Use Permit and Zoning Modification Schedules.
Mayor Lockwood asked if there were any other items that need to be included in the amendment of the meeting
agenda.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he would like to add four items to the agenda.
Mayor Lockwood asked staff to go over the proper procedure of adding items to the agenda.
City Manager Bovos stated that the first thing he wanted to start with from a general overall scope is that one of the
goals of the retreat is to define an ongoing work plan within the organization. The challenges that the City has is
obviously making sure that we have communicated to the Council and then back to the constituents about the goals of
the first year. In addition to that, it is highly customary for the City to define what the work plan is included in those
goals so that at the end of the year the City can publish the results relating to any goals of the work plan that has been
defined. Earlier this week staff became aware of Councilmember O’Brien’s desire to add to the agenda.
He walked through the process so that everyone understood the traditional process in which things are done. On the
agenda tonight is the first reading of an amendment to the Rules and Procedures which addresses the adding of public
work sessions to the City Council schedule. Those are currently scheduled or anticipated to be the second Thursday of
the month. The City will go from two meetings a month to three meetings a month: 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Thursdays. Those
are opportunities for Council to address items specifically with staff and with each other about goals, projects,
activities, action items that one may have with respect to things that are not on the work plan. In the event the Council
concurs that those items need to be added, the staff will come back and amend the work plan and move forward with
those specific items. At this point and time, the City obviously does not have a solidified and approved work plan
because we have not met in retreat yet. One of the goals of the process that was put in place to ensure that staff, City
Attorney, City Manager in particular, and the Mayor have the ability to review and brief items to be sure all have a full
understanding of the outcomes or anticipated work associated with items moving forward. All this has been
communicated, but he would like to reiterate for the record that for the meeting of this evening, agenda items were due
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 2 of 52
to the Clerk’s office by noon on December 26th. The goal of that was to begin the internal process. The City Clerk
first reviews each of the agenda items for completeness and it is her job to be sure that numbers are completed, the
agenda packets are completed, and she creates what is called a blue back. Blue back is a legal term that signifies it is
time for that document to go on for legal review. A cover memo is attached to each agenda item at that point and it
moves forward to City Manager and legal review. The City Manager’s process and legal review is to be sure that staff
submitted items, as well as Council submitted items have been scrutinized throughout the organization to be sure that
everybody is aware of what is occurring and being sponsored through the City Council. That review occurred on
December 29th and concluded on January 2nd. The Clerk receives those items back on January 2nd, the 3rd and 4th was
responsible for accumulating any change as a result of any part of the process, completing those changes within the
document, and then preparing and posting the agenda packets. The goal is to always prepare those agendas packet a
week in advance of the particular meeting. This is to give the Council time to review in detail the agenda that has been
presented. Again, the goal is to distribute those one week in advance, as a matter of fact, later on this evening the
agenda packets for next week’s meeting will be passed out. It gives everyone seven (7) full days to review the agenda,
provide comments, ask questions, and provide feedback to the Council. Staff can then respond to those and make any
last minute adjustments to subsequent agenda items. That would be the traditional process which the staff has defined
agenda items moving forward from the City Council.
Mayor Lockwood asked if there were any other items that needed to be included in the amendment of the meeting
agenda.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that notwithstanding City Manager Bovos’ comment, several days after submitting
for consideration several items that he believed would be of value to the community and he has been advised he has
considerable support. Since staff has been apprised some days ago and his colleagues have had a chance to see them,
if the Council could indulge him as an exception.
He stated that the first would be a Resolution Immediately Administratively Disestablishing and Defunding the
Position of Executive Aide to the Mayor of Milton. The second would be a Resolution to Voluntarily Mandate, as City
Policy, no Provision for Medical/Dental or other Supplemental Benefits or Salary for any Part-time Employee or
Elected Official, Without Unanimous Approval of Entire City Council and Mayor. That would be expense
reimbursement accepted on an as-needed basis only. The third would be a Resolution Establishing protocols leading to
Development of Policies, Procedures and operational Philosophies Which Meet or Exceed the Georgia Municipal
Association Guidelines for the “Cities of Ethics” Program, Leading to Milton’s Designation as a City of Ethics.
Finally, a Resolution to Change the Name of City of Milton to “Town of Milton”.
City Clerk Marchiafava asked if there was a motion to approve the meeting agenda as amended with the four
resolutions just stated.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she had a few questions based on the staff report that was just provided.
She asked City Manager Bovos to confirm whether or not the four resolutions that were just stated into the record, if
the Council has copies of those as part of their documentation tonight.
City Manager Bovos stated that staff did not receive those in order to distribute them to the Council last week. It is
his understanding that the City Clerk did receive those late this afternoon. They were forwarded in an email.
Councilmember O’Brien brought copies for everybody.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that staff received those today according to the City Manager’s statement just
now, but they are not a part of the packet before them this afternoon. She asked for confirmation as to whether or not
City Manager Bovos has reviewed the resolutions and/or whether or not it has gone through any of the process that
was just described.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 3 of 52
City Manager Bovos stated that he reviewed three of the four preliminary. The fourth one came in after he left the
office today to arrive here onsite. The resolutions have not been through any of the traditional process that was
described earlier.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that in terms of reviewing them and receiving them, she was at least aware of
what was stated the City Manager regarding the approved process. She stated that for herself, she has not had the
opportunity to review the actual resolutions and she wanted to understand whether or not this Council had received
them through staff. She heard the City Manager indicating that no, they did not receive them through staff and they
have not gone through the process that was just described as the required and approved process as outlined by staff.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct and the City Clerk did forward those through email once they were
received. They did not go through the process that was described earlier.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked would it be fair to say that they have not gone through legal review as well.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams asked for clarification on whether the Council was about to vote on adding them
to the agenda.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that to reassure Councilmember Zahner Bailey, these resolutions were essentially
summation of a lengthy discussion that was provided by him to all members of the Council and Mayor and have been
rather exhaustedly discussed by his colleagues in the last week or so. He wanted to reassure Councilmember Zahner
Bailey that there is no surprise here. It is presented in a smoother format from the discussion that was offered some
days ago. With the time criticality, especially of one item as it pertained to preserving resources of the City or Town,
if that is the ultimate outcome, he thought it was worthwhile to address them and he would ask that the Council do so.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked for another point of clarification. In terms of a timetable, she asked City
Manager Bovos under what circumstances would something be time sensitive and could he comment on that relative to
the four items that were just mentioned.
City Manager Bovos stated that traditionally, items that are added at the actual meeting itself are items that are time
critical in nature. Meaning, there is a need to move those items forward outside of the traditional process where they
were not ready during the normal process. One of those items tonight is sponsored by the Community Development
Department. The difference in that is that although they were not distributed in your agenda packet, for the most part
they have gone through internal review. Certainly, he understood Councilmember O’Brien’s need to get one specific
item that he has talked about on the agenda for time sensitivity. The overall goal here is from a procedural standpoint is
not to set a precedent about the ability to bring items forward the night they are suppose to be voted on. What that
does is engage staff and Council in a considerable amount of discussion via email and work has occurred in the past
week with respect to items not necessarily programmed in the pipeline. From staff’s perspective, that is really the
concern. There is no way for staff to receive an item at 2:00 in the afternoon on the evening of a meeting and be
prepared to respond in any such manner to provide Council any guidance with respect to what it means. He would
hope that this could be avoided in the future unless there was a specific emergency need to do so.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked a question in regards to public involvement. As a transparent government
where the public has an opportunity to know what is coming before the Council for discussion and consideration., the
Council is all concerned about making sure that the public has an opportunity. She asked City Manager Bovos to
speak to the typical process for advertising or publicizing certain information that is part of the agenda. It is an
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 4 of 52
important issue when the Council has an item or items that have not been previously noted for the public nor have
those items been publicized or included on the agenda.
City Manager Bovos stated that at the same time the packets are distributed to the Council, the City Clerk forwards
the agenda packet in Adobe PDF format to the Communications Department and it is at that point in time published
and available on the website. The goal being that a seven day advance notice is provided to the public about what is on
the agenda and the associated documents of those business items. Traditionally, governments do not do it in a seven
day period. Early on, staff decided that was the best avenue to make sure everybody including the public did have
time to review and have the ability to provide input on business items that the Council would be voting on.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that she had not had the opportunity to review the resolutions. She
thought that the Council was compelled to review everything that is coming before them. If this was something that is
going to be acted upon tonight, she required additional review and asked that the City Attorney review these as well
and offer his legal judgment on whether or not we should go forward with the resolutions. She stated that once again
she has not had the opportunity to review the specific resolutions, only the emails that came in earlier this week.
City Manager Bovos stated that the staff is not allowed to migrate from policy. The Council’s action tonight is really
the action of the City Council to add these to the agenda. It is not staff’s. He wanted to make sure the distinction is
clear. In the event that a staff member had come to me at 2:00 in the afternoon wanting to put an item on the agenda, it
would not be taking place this evening. But, the Council has the ability to override the decision at the Council level
and make that decision for you. The City Attorney can provide comments with respect to his ability to review the legal
nature.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked if it was the recommendation from City Manager Bovos and staff’s perspective
that these resolutions not be added to the agenda this afternoon based on the policy that was just expressed.
City Manager Bovos stated that he felt he could not make a recommendation from the standpoint of Council, but he
could say how he would address it as staff. It would not occur from staff’s perspective because simply it had not gone
through the process. This team would not be able to stand before you and make a presentation that had not gone
through the entire process, which is really designed to be sure that staff is doing their complete job before it gets to the
Council.
Mayor Lockwood asked the City Attorney if he had any comments as far as precedent.
City Attorney Scott stated that his only comment on the issue is that if these were ordinances, he would be much
more concerned about them because the difference between a resolution and an ordinance is that the ordinance has the
force of law behind it. The resolution is more of an expression of the intent of the will of the Council. Ultimately, it
is the call of the Council. He had the chance to look at these this afternoon and he did provide the Mayor with a
memorandum of the issues of actions by the Council. He does not have an opinion to give the Council. It is their call
as to whether this is something to do today.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she had not received the memo. She is assuming that when City Attorney
Scott mentioned a memo it is not something that has been distributed in terms of a legal opinion to the full Council.
City Attorney Scott stated that it was prepared for the Mayor at his request.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he finds it somewhat ironic that truly there was sufficient time for his colleagues
to consider this. He prepared a thorough explanation of the spirit and intent of the notions advanced by these
resolutions. In fact, since Councilmember Zahner Bailey seemed particularly concerned, it is ironic that one of the
resolutions specifically is intended to reassure the community that an agenda that was brought up with no notice and
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 5 of 52
not shared with the Council, in fact two which were not seated at that time. It was his desire to reassure the
community that there is an unequivocal degree of respect for the resources provided to the Council as they move
forward in the infancy of the community. He thought there was little substantive objection. It is more procedural and
that is a concern, but he would beg the indulgence of those present, particularly the staff, if he has compressed the
timeline. His intent is the best interest of the City and the preservation of resources and to establish standards beyond
those of our neighbors. In that spirit, he asked his colleagues to consider whether it would be legitimate to consider
these resolutions. The Council is not making a decision to pass them at this time, just merely to consider them tonight.
He stated that he was most aware of City Manager Bovos’ concerns and he will heed them.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that what most concerned her was that she did respond to the email, but
has not received a response in four business days. She had some questions as to the resolutions so her concern would
be that they have not had an opportunity to discuss it. She understands from Councilmember O’Brien that he had a
majority of the Councilmembers that have had an opportunity to review it. She does not believe that the entire Council
has had the opportunity to review it so if these resolutions were to pass, they would be doing a disservice to the
community without thoroughly reviewing them.
Mayor Lockwood asked what the process was with the resolutions. They are being just considered now versus
passing them.
City Manager Bovos stated that the motion in front of the Council currently is a motion to add them to the current
agenda. The City Clerk, at the point and time in which New Business scheduled is completed, would read these into
the record.
The first one that was read was the Executive Aide resolution. With respect to that, the Clerk would read the caption
of the Executive Aide resolution, there would be a motion to approve and second the resolution, and then we would go
into discussion about that specific resolution. What is before the Council now is just adding them to the agenda so that
they can be discussed and called as resolutions as if they were scheduled on the agenda.
Mayor Lockwood stated that part of that is once they are on the agenda, are they to be reviewed now or voted and
acted upon.
City Manager Bovos stated that they would be added to the agenda as a business item this evening to have a vote.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated her concern procedural. She appreciates Councilmember O’Brien’s interest in
a number of these and there are obviously some things worthy of discussion. Her concern is that because the City is in
the infancy of a new government and because process is important to the Council in terms of efficiency and in terms of
being able to handle the process that the public can understand, respect, and anticipate, these are truly her concerns.
Several months ago, if one was going to a Fulton County Board of Commissioners meeting, and if there were items
placed on the agenda that the public had not had an opportunity to preview, based on her personal experiences, she
believes the citizens of this community would be very concerned. She truly has the interest of process in mind based
on the questions and answers that you provided as we set forth procedures and policies. To Mayor Lockwood’s point,
these items are not merely for discussion purposes but are being asked to be added to the agenda for purposes of voting
on them tonight. She would ask if perhaps another consideration would be if they could have a discussion about these
items now, or in the future, if things like this are appropriate on the agenda they should be a staff or Council report and
then be discussed at a work session. Therefore we could have a thorough review. Again, her concern is process and it
is about the need for thorough review and making sure that all those varieties of reviews that typically would go
through professional staff and legal actually take place and that the public is aware of the items on the agenda. This is
the basis of her inquiry.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 6 of 52
Councilmember Mohrig stated that there is one especially, when they received the email probably a week and a half
ago, the resolution about “town” has costs associated with it if it is deferred. If it is deferred, will the Council incur
additional costs because the City is going further down the path of signs, uniforms, painting of trucks, cars, and those
types of things. The Council needs to at least take a look at this and if it is deferred and it went two weeks out, does
the City really need that time. And also, will the City incur additional costs in making that decision where today it
may be minimal or nonexistent as far as the cost if the City made that change.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that is the type of discussion they have not had the opportunity to have.
That specific resolution would be the one in question that we have not had the opportunity to ask our citizens what
their opinion would be.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that as far as the issue that Councilmember Zahner Bailey is alluding to, perhaps a
precedent, he would suggest that this issue pertains to a lesson learned procedurally, but not a precedent. Certainly, we
have and will make minor errors, both the Council and staff. He thinks they have experienced a couple of errors from
a parliamentary standpoint already. Certainly in that spirit, he thinks that this would be a manageable enterprise. But,
his point to the Mayor was that if they add this to the agenda it could be a discussion and tabled or we could pass or
not. He is willing to allow the merit of the resolutions to prevail and he would hope that there is the same concern on
the part of the other Council.
Mayor Lockwood asked if there was any other discussion.
Councilmember Thurman stated that all we would be doing is adding the items to the agenda, not necessarily voting
yes or no. We could vote to table it if we wanted to, but this would allow us to discuss the item as part of the agenda.
City Manager Bovos stated that is the motion in front of the Council.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that the motion is to add it and then when we get to those individual resolutions, as we
discuss one by one, we can decide if we really need additional time to review it. At that point and time, we could if the
will of Council is that we need to defer this for more time then we could put it out to a later date. At least we have put
it on the agenda and we have discussed it. He asked for a timeline to submit items to staff.
City Manager Bovos stated it is to be turned in 2½ weeks prior to a meeting including the week of distribution. The
packets are to be passed out a week in advance.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that for future reference, if they want things placed on the agenda, they needed to be
turned in 2½ weeks prior to the meeting. Also he had a question on procedure, if they have something they want to
discuss and it is not a resolution, but it is a request for staff to go and look at something and come back and give
feedback to the Council, is that appropriate to bring up in these meetings.
City Manager Bovos stated that it was appropriate.
Councilmember Mohrig asked what would the appropriate time be to do that.
City Manager Bovos stated that if you want to direct staff to actually go and do an action item, our preference would
be to actually have that done during a resolution. If it can be done through a resolution, discussion should be added to
the meeting agenda so there is a vote and concurrence in Council that that is how they would like to direct staff to
move forward.
Councilmember Mohrig asked if that would be appropriate under the staff reports or is that something that they
would have to add to the meeting agenda.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 7 of 52
City Manager Bovos stated that if you would like a motion, a second, discussion, and direction to staff, that would be
done during the meeting agenda.
Councilmember Mohrig stated for us to continue with the first item and he would like to add a couple of things or at
least bring them forward to be considered.
Friendly Amendment: Councilmember Thurman stated that she would like to make a friendly amendment to move
the appointments and confirmation of the bike and pedestrian path committee to the beginning of New Business rather
than the end of it.
City Manager Bovos asked Councilmember Mohrig if he accepted the friendly amendment.
City Clerk Marchiafava wanted to clarify that there were five resolutions to add to the agenda; one from the staff,
four from Councilmember O’Brien, as well as the friendly amendment.
Councilmember Mohrig clarified that if he had a couple of items that he wanted to add to the agenda for discussion
purposes and a vote on whether to direct staff to look at something, would now would be the time to do it.
City Manager Bovos stated that it could be done through a friendly amendment.
City Attorney Scott stated that it could be through a friendly amendment or a subsequent motion.
Mayor Lockwood stated that the motions should be separated.
City Clerk Marchiafava stated there would be another amendment for Councilmember Mohrig. Right now we are
voting on the five resolutions and moving of the item to the beginning and then before approving the whole agenda,
Councilmember Mohrig will be allowed to make another amendment.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to amend the meeting agenda by adding the following items:
1) Resolution Amending Resolution No 06-11-14 Adopting the City of Milton Zoning and Use Permit and
Zoning Modification Schedules.
2) Resolution Immediately Administratively Disestablishing and Defunding the Position of Executive Aide to
the Mayor of Milton.
3) Resolution to Voluntarily Mandate, as City Policy, no Provision for Medical/Dental or Other
Supplemental Benefits or Salary for any Part-time Employee or Elected Official, Without Unanimous
Approval of Entire City Council and Mayor.
4) Resolution Establishing protocols leading to Development of Policies, Procedures and operational
Philosophies Which Meet or Exceed the Georgia Municipal Association Guidelines for the “Cities of
Ethics” Program, Leading to Milton’s Designation as a City of Ethics.
5) Resolution to Change the Name of City of Milton to “Town of Milton”.
Second and Vote: Councilmember O’Brien seconded the motion. There was no Council discussion. The motion
passed 5-2, with Councilmember Zahner Bailey, and Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams voting in opposition.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to amend the meeting agenda by adding the following items:
1) Discussing and preparing an amendment to change the meeting time of City Council.
2) Council to direct Staff to take a look at Franchise Fees.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 8 of 52
City Attorney Scott stated that he knows that the other issues have been brought up and discussed earlier this week
and he is trying to help out. He asked Councilmember Mohrig if it was a motion to amend the agenda to add
resolutions.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that it was not. He was not asking for a resolution, just discussion. One would be a
discussion to an amendment next week on Chapter 2. We will have first reading, but he would also like to bring up an
item that falls under Chapter 2 and that is the time of City Council meetings. The second item has to do with asking
the staff to take a look at franchise fees.
Second and Vote: Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. There was no Council discussion. The motion passed
unanimously.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Lusk moved to approve the meeting agenda prior to amendments. Councilmember
O’Brien seconded the motion. There was no Council discussion. The motion passed unanimously.
Appointments and Confirmation of the Bike and Pedestrian Path Committee.
City Manager Bovos stated that nominations to serve on the bike and pedestrian path committee are the result of a
grant that the City of Milton and Johns Creek received for the study of expanding interconnectivity of bike and
pedestrian paths. The resolution was voted on to create the committee at the last meeting. Each Councilmember has
one nomination and the nominee must reside within the Councilmember’s district. They must be 21 years of age or
older and must agree to serve on the committee with no compensation. Total committee members are nine; seven from
the Councilmembers, the Mayor’s nominations are at large, and two from State Representative Jan Jones, in which he
would read into the record now. Her first nomination is Brian Maloney. He resides at 14430 Wood Road. That is in
District 1. Mr. Maloney is currently a plastic surgeon, a parent of three daughters who attend Summit Hill Elementary
and Milton High School. Her second nomination is Craig Warner. He resides at 16080 Henderson Heights Drive.
That is in District 2. Mr. Warner is a track-and-field, cross country coach for Milton High School, both boys and girls.
He is the parent of three children; one who is on a scholarship at Furman University and two at Milton High School.
He asked the Clerk to please accept each of the nominees by District at this time.
Craig Warner and Brian Maloney were recognized in the audience.
Mayor Lockwood stated that he would entertain additional nominations. He nominated David Deutsch. He lived at
615 Athlone Court, Milton, Georgia. He has known Mr. Deutsch for at least 10 to 12 years. He has been a resident of
Milton for 20 years. He is married and has three children; two at Milton and one at Northwestern. He has been an
entrepreneur for the past 12 years; an avid mountain and road biker. He has been a Peachtree Road racer since 1984
and has also been responsible for community partner programs that funded the Milton High School cross country trail
system.
Councilmember Thurman nominated Mike Moss to the committee. He lives in the Kensington Farm Subdivision at
210 Burkshire Lane. Mr. Moss is an investor and entrepreneur and has lived in the area for at least 10 years. He is the
parent of four children; two at Milton High School, one at Northwestern Middle School, and one at Crabapple
Crossing Elementary School.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey nominated Bill Shellhorn to the committee. He lives at 225 Orchid Bend Trail. He is
a senior sales consultant with UCN, Inc. He has been in software sales and telecommunication industry for the last 23
years. Bill and his wife Tracy has lived in this community for over 14 years; initially on Freemanville and now on
Thompson Road. They have three children; all of whom have gone through the local elementary schools. Two are
now at Milton and the older child is at Perimeter College. Bill is a long time marathon runner and has done a
tremendous amount of training and running throughout Northwest Milton, now Milton. She thinks Bill prides himself
on finding every unique place to run as he trains for marathons throughout Milton. He brings a tremendous amount of
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 9 of 52
energy and community involvement. He is interested in bringing connectivity for both pedestrian as well as walking
and bicycle pathways. His family is involved in the equestrian community as well. He brings that unique component
of looking at the trail way and greenway system from all perspectives.
Councilmember Lusk nominated Suzanne Cassada to the committee. She lives at 902 Post Oak Close in the City of
Milton. She is a long time resident of the area and a full time mother of three, a part-time teacher, and has been a
dedicated marathon runner for over twenty years. She is currently training for the ING Georgia Marathon which takes
place on March 25, 2007. When she spoke to him on Monday, she had just completed her daily eighteen mile
workout. She loves the area and the potential that is has for recreation. She knows the area at the grass roots level.
No one that he can think of has a higher level of interest to promote the implementation of the Milton Bicycle and
Pedestrian Pathway System than Suzanne Cassada.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that his nominee is a fifth generation of this area with an extraordinary record of
accomplishments, a longtime advocate of paths and similar community amenities. He has the where with all to
implement the vision of the provider of this opportunity. Most relevantly, his nominee has a peerless record of
selfless philanthropic and benevolent participation in Milton. He stated that his nominee is a board member of the
local YMCA, as well as the North Fulton and Metro Atlanta YMCA Board, the Leadership of Atlanta alumnus, several
fortune 500 and Aztec corporate boards, the University of Georgia Arts Foundation Board of Trustees, and is the Chair
of the Board of Deacons of Northside Baptist Church, President and CEO of one of the most admired, respected and
well-known real estate companies in the State of Georgia, a parent, neighbor and tremendous advocate of Milton and
our future. He nominated David Chatham. Mr. Chatham’s expertise, integrity, success and vision will be an
invaluable addition to the group dedicated to the implementation of the bicycle and pathway system in Milton. He is
personally grateful for the opportunity to serve and looks forward to his superb leadership. He is pleased to have Mr.
Chatham and others like him in the Milton community ably and enthusiastically volunteering their time and talents.
Thank you all and Mr. Chatham.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams nominated Travis Allen to the committee. He and his wife live at the preserve
off of Cogbourn Road across from Hopewell Middle School. Mr. Allen came to her several months ago when we first
started down the path of developing a greenway space. Now it has developed into more of a bike and pedestrian path
committee. He has stayed in constant contact and is passionate about hiking. He was here earlier this evening, but left
for a weekend of hiking with his wife.
Councilmember Mohrig nominated Heidi Sowder to the committee. She is a mother two children; one currently at
Alpharetta High School, the other high school that some of our City of Milton residents attend. She resides at 525
Sunflower Court, Milton, Georgia. She is a full time mother and a very active walker and hiker. She has been
committed to the formation of the City of Milton. She served on the Highway 9 Overlay committee. She has been
active on a couple of committees on the formation of the City. She also is an officer on BARA, Bethany Area
Residents Association.
Motion: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve the following nominees to the Bike and Pedestrian Committee:
1) David Deutsch
2) Mike Moss
3) Bill Shellhorn
4) Suzanne Cassada
5) David Chatham
6) Travis Allen
7) Heidi Sowder
8) Brian Maloney
9) Craig Warner
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 10 of 52
Second and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. There was no Council discussion. The motion
passed unanimously.
Mayor Lockwood asked all nominees present to stand so that they may be acknowledged.
He also welcomed and introduced Commissioner Rob Pitts from the Fulton County Board of Commissioners.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Russ Deutchman, Esq., representing Skip Gray, Milton, Georgia, stated that his concerns were about franchise fees
and his solution of alternative revenue sources for the City of Milton. He is a Business Officer over at Integrity Bank.
He is ready to present his ideas to the Council at a future date when the Council thinks it is appropriate.
Jose (Joe) Creamer, 125 Windstead Circle, Alpharetta, stated he was proud to be able to speak to the Council
tonight and appreciated their hard work to get the City to this point. His comment is on the noise ordinance. He had a
chance to review the draft and is happy with that, but there is one section he wanted to comment on. Particularly, the
section that allows for a variance to the noise control ordinance if it is passed by the Council. The wording as drafted
is fairly wide open. It does not provide for any limits to the timeframe for a variance, how long it can run or how
many times it can be granted. It also provides for a five business day window that the City Manager can approve or
deny the variance and then it provides a three business day window for public comment. There is no provision for
public notice of a variance application. The result being someone could apply for a variance for any time period or as
many times as they want and the public would not know about it. He asked the Council when they review this agenda
item to consider putting some sort of notice provision in there and he thought the applicant should bear the cost of that
notice to the public.
REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
Legislative Update by Representative Jan Jones.
Mayor Lockwood stated that she was not able to make it tonight.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of the November 30, 2006 Special Called meeting minutes.
2. Approval of the December 1, 2006 Special Called meeting minutes.
3. Approval of the December 7, 2006 Regular Meeting minutes.
4. Approval of the December 13, 2006 Work Session minutes.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Lusk seconded
the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
ZONING AGENDA
Mayor Lockwood stated that there were no items under the zoning agenda.
FIRST PRESENTATION
1. Approval of an Ordinance Establishing Noise Control within the City of Milton, Georgia.
2. Approval of an Ordinance to Adopt and Approve Chapter 8, Parks and Recreation, and providing for inclusion
and identification in the future developed Code of Ordinances for the City of Milton, Georgia.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 11 of 52
3. Approval of an Ordinance Adopting Amended Rules and Procedures for the City Council Meetings and Public
Hearings for the City of Milton, Georgia.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to approve the First Presentation items listed above.
Councilmember O’Brien seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Approval of an Ordinance Adopting an Open Records Policy. (Second Reading)
Ordinance No 07-01-01
City Clerk Marchiafava stated that the City of Milton is committed to conducting City business in a manner that
complies with all legal requirements, fosters citizen confidence in City government, and promotes efficient and
effective government operations. Requests for public records as defined in O.C.G.A 50-18-70 through 77 called the
Georgia Open Records Act that established the right of every citizen to inspect and take a copy of all records except
those specifically exempt from being open. This policy outlines guidelines for those requests to include ownership of
public records, which are records created and acquired by an employee of the City of Milton in the course of
conducting government business and are the property of the City of Milton and of the State of Georgia. This policy
addresses the release of information procedures. Formal requests for information should be made in writing and
verbally to the City Clerk. Pursuant to O.C.G.A. 50-18-70, if an individual has the right to inspect a record, he/she
also has the right to make extracts or to make copies of the records under the supervision of the custodian of the
records. Mayor and Council approved the retrieval fees for these requests in the recently adopted budget. There are
several types of exempted documents that are not subject to disclosure that are defined in O.C.G.A. 50-18-72 and the
exempted documents are listed in the policy.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Zahner Bailey moved to approve the Ordinance Adopting an Open Records
Policy. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. There was no Council discussion. The motion passed
unanimously.
Approval of an Ordinance Granting a Franchise Agreement with Georgia Power.
Ordinance No 07-01-02 (Second Reading)
City Manager Bovos stated that we did previously adopt an ordinance with Georgia Power extending and granting a
franchise agreement with the City of Milton. Georgia Power was requested at that time to pay fees quarterly into the
City’s treasury. They do not have any franchise agreements across the State of Georgia that require them to pay
quarterly fees and told the City of Milton very specifically that they will not make that exception for the City of
Milton. In the event that we wanted franchise fees from Georgia Power, they would pay those into the treasury
annually. Unfortunately, the City had no option but to agree to those terms; however, they did state that they would
provide an advance payment of 25% of the annual fees in order to assist the City of Milton with the cash flow which
was the primary reason the quarterly fees was asked for. The only changes in this specific franchise agreement is the
term is 35 years, the payment frequency is now annually, the fee is 4% on gross sales of electric energy, not shown on
customer bill, and the effective of the agreement is December 1, 2006. There is an additional Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) that Georgia Power had agreed to with respect to mutually agreeable terms that the City and
Georgia Power may deemed appropriate to amend the franchise agreement over a 35 year term period. The City
Attorney was able to have concurrence with Georgia Power that they would execute the Memorandum of
Understanding once this franchise agreement was adopted. What that MOU allows the City to do is simply in the
event of a 35 year term, if we need to amend that document, we can through the MOU versus having to negotiate a
new franchise agreement.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 12 of 52
Councilmember Mohrig asked if today anyone received a Georgia Power bill was being assessed in the rate structure,
and that is not something new or additional in the formation of the City of Milton. He asked if it is spread across the
entire customer base.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams moved to approve the Ordinance Granting a Franchise
Agreement with Georgia Power. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. There was no Council discussion. The
motion passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
Approval of a Resolution Supporting the 2007 Legislative Agenda.
Resolution No 07-01-02
City Manager Bovos stated that these are items pertaining to those actions that are currently being taken or potentially
may be taken through the 2007 legislative session at the State level. A few of the things that Council will find
routinely that staff does is review pending litigation that has been sponsored through state delegations that effect city
operations or municipal powers. The resolution before you has four specific items that we are sponsoring.
The first one is a potential amendment to House Bill 36 which was passed in the 2005 legislative session. This
amendment deals with the Scheffer amendment that was attached to House Bill 36. In it, we are specifically asking for
clarification with respect to what happens to Special Service District Funds when previously unincorporated areas are
now wholly incorporated and there is a remaining fund balance held by the County.
The second one, O.C.G.A. 15-21-90, is the jail construction and staffing act. That act in particular does not allow
cities to collect an additional dollar fee on municipal court fines to fund a jail or staff a jail. The City is asking at this
point in time for all of the new cities created in north Fulton County to revisit that particular section to allow an offset
to costs paid by the defendant in case they are incarcerated.
The third one, House Bill 719, which was introduced in the 2006 legislative session, particularly sponsored by the City
of Atlanta, changes the maximum fines that can be charged in municipals courts, with the state raising that fine from
$1,000 to $2,500. This is in keeping up with the consumer price index. Lastly, O.C.G.A. 36-74-40 is a local
government code enforcement board which Councilmember Zahner Bailey attended a meeting with Commissioner
Lynne Riley. The goal is that local enforcement boards should have the same capabilities as those created prior to
some amending legislation. The goal is to ensure that any board created by the City of Milton would have the same
ability and control of power that previously created boards would have.
He mentioned that he and the Mayor will be attending a lunch tomorrow at the State Capitol with respect to legislation
and will be presenting these items to Fulton County delegation for discussion.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to approve the Resolution Supporting the 2007 Legislative
Agenda. Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams seconded the motion. There was no Council discussion. The motion
passed unanimously.
Before moving on, City Manager Bovos wanted to make sure Council was aware of a document that the City Clerk is
currently circulating. It is imperative that the Council read this and in time staff will engage Council in discussion
about pending legal issues at the state level. But today, notification was received from GMA who sponsors these
session notes about some particularly disturbing legislation that is being considered at the state level. As additional
information is developed, the staff may be asking the Council to sign letters or pass resolutions with respect to the
City’s position on these specific items. He wanted to make sure everyone knew they are available through GMA and
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 13 of 52
on a weekly basis will update staff with respect to any items they oppose or support that deal with municipal
operations.
Councilmember Mohrig asked if this was something new in addition to these other four items.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked what the timetable was that the Council’s input was needed. A comment was
mentioned about time sensitivity to their responding to what was going to be circulated.
City Manager Bovos stated that at this point there is not a timetable. The staff will keep up with GMA and through
their legal counsel; the City will be updated on where those pieces of legislation stand. GMA sponsors the call for
action. At the point when they sponsor the call for action, we will schedule a resolution on the formal agenda, do a
briefing about the specific legislation and then ask for us to take a specific position.
Approval of a Tax Anticipation Note (TAN).
Resolution No 07-01-01
City Treasurer Wolfe stated that staff’s recommendation tonight is to adopt the resolution authorizing the issuance
and closing of a tax anticipation note in the amount of $5,155,000. A tax anticipation note is a short-term borrowing
tool designed to provide working capital borrowed against anticipated tax revenue. The operations staff have
completed a cash flow model and the recommendation of the $5,155,000 is a result of operating capital needed to fund
operations January through December. A Request for Quote was let on December 21 and advertised with interest rate
quotes due back to the City on January 5. Only one rate quote was received and that was due to feedback we received
from financial institutions on carrying the risk of floating a note with an organization with no financial history. The
quote we did receive was from Wachovia Bank at 3.84% interest, which staff feels is an excellent interest rate.
Closing papers have been prepared and reviewed by the City Attorney as wells as Hunton & Williams, who is the legal
counsel for this specific transaction. Signatures are prepared to be effectuated tonight so we can have funding for this
transaction tomorrow.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve the Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of a Tax
Anticipation Note in the Amount of $5,155,000. Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams seconded the motion. There
was no Council discussion. The motion passed unanimously.
Approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement with Fulton County for the provision of 800MHz radio system
access.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that this is an agreement with Fulton County to access their 800
MHz radio system. This system already exists in Fulton County is simply Milton’s ability to attached to that radio
system. This is an agreement that could extend for a period up to 10 years. The City will receive 150 licenses but we
will be billed only for the radios attached to the system. At present deployment the City anticipates 58 radios attached
to the system. That would show up as a cost of $172.58 per year being equivalent to $10,009.64 for the year. The eight
months, which would occur in 2007, will be $6,673.10. Basically, the fee is the pro rata share of the estimated cost of
the replacement of the core system and the actually annual maintenance cost.
Councilmember Lusk asked how long the rates were guaranteed.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that the rate fluctuates by the year based on the annual maintenance
contract. It is not anticipated to fluctuate much outside the $172 range, but it can fluctuate by the year and its actual
cost.
Councilmember Mohrig asked if this was in line when the City originally did the Public Safety budget.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 14 of 52
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that is and was budgeted.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Zahner-Bailey moved to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement with Fulton
County for the provision of 800MHz radio system access. Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. There was
no Council discussion. The motion passed unanimously.
Approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement with Fulton County for the provision of fire and rescue services.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that this is an intergovernmental agreement between the City of
Milton and Fulton County for the provision of fire and rescue services particularly fire suppression, fire protection,
first responder non-transport emergency medical services, hazardous materials and technical rescue. This agreement
would commence on January 1. It has the option for early termination on May 1. That is the earliest we could
terminate it if we gave a 30-day notice. The Deputy Chief of Operations would oversee or act as the City’s liaison to
fire services during this transition period. The equipment and personnel uniforms will all be provided by Fulton
County as well as the ancillary services. The County would continue fire safety inspections for our code enforcements.
There is a reporting mechanism in place where the City Manager where he would be updated every month on the items
and calls for services, anything that happened in the City of Milton. There is a performance measurement as far as the
response time built into the agreement. It shows an 8-minute or less response time 90% of the time. This IGA calls
for a smooth transition and specifies what would occur at the notice point as we intent to deploy our own fire services.
And presently it shows a rate at $347,423.00 per month. The cost is specifically itemized in the packet. The staffing
would remain at the three fire stations that exist: Fire Stations Nos. 10, 14, and 18. There will be a minimum staffing
level of three firefighters at each station and a shared Battalion Chief between the City of Milton and Johns Creek.
Councilmember Lusk asked if there was a penalty for an early termination.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that the earliest the City can terminate this IGA is on May 1 if we
give notice on or before April 1.
Councilmember Mohrig asked if we were still on tract for May 1 target date.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that the City is on track, but there are some challenges that come
along with that. At this point, we are driven by equipment delivery. The City will be ready to take over as soon as that
is complete.
Councilmember O’Brien stated there was a discussion about overtime. He wanted to know if it was in the event as if
the City owned the staff itself due to vacations or staffing issues. Or would the City be vulnerable, for instance, if
there were some problems with the County, would the City have to bear the burden of overtime to cover gaps in the
staffing ability of the County, not at our level.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that there was language in the IGA for exceptional circumstances
that the City would be responsible for that overtime. That is something that at the staff level would have to be
managed and on top so that the City is no being unduly charged for it when there are other resources in the County that
should be transitioned into Milton.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that the staffing the City would enjoy under this IGA if in the normal course of
business an individual were on vacation, the City would have to bear a customary degree of overtime. But, if the
County was suffering manning a hardship, then we would not have to pay an extraordinary amount of money to cover
the stations that the City would operate.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that was correct.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 15 of 52
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that earlier they had seen a figure for $330,000 per month for this particular
IGA and she heard Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom indicate that it is $347,423. She knows there were some
changes within Fulton County with regard to some recent Board of Commissioners’ approvals for salary increases.
She asked Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom to enumerate the difference between the two figures.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that the City has been through several revisions of this IGA and this
is the most current number provided.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that her understanding was that the increase was due to across the board salary
increases.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that was not accounted for in this dollar figure.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked if the $347,000, on a monthly basis, based on the IGA would be higher than
the $347,000 before the Council now.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that he calculated those figures and would have to make the
assumption even though there is no hard data to get us there. This is the most accurate data we have as of this meeting.
City Treasurer Wolfe stated that from a budget perspective, the 4% increase is fairly significant on top of the IGA
cost we had originally anticipated and budgeted for. This is possibly an item the City can see in a mid-year budget
adjustment.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked would it be fair to say that the City is aware that Fulton County has approved
the 4% so we anticipate that the City costs will increase as a direct function of those County increases. Therefore, she
wanted to be clear that any cost adjustment was known today at this meeting and they did not have the specific figure.
Therefore, the adjustment to the budget would be a direct result of what we already know to be an anticipated increase.
City Treasurer Wolfe stated that these are budget numbers from Fulton County and we will pay actuals. The plan is
to go through a couple of months and look at the trend for actuals and there may not be a need for any budget
adjustment until the City really begins to see actual numbers to what it takes to provide the service.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked from a budgeting process would the current budget the City has already
approved allow for that adjustment as a direct result of that IGA or would we need to come back and reassess those
figures.
City Treasurer Wolfe stated if there is money appropriated in the line item to pay Fulton County for public safety
purposes, if we feel it is going to be adequate, and then we would not need any type of budget adjustment. If going
through a couple of months of paying actual invoices to Fulton County and it looked like the City will run short before
the May 1 deployment, then additional appropriations would be needed.
Councilmember O’Brien asked about the benchmark cost of 2005. He wanted to know if the City has reached that.
City Manager Bovos stated that in respect to House Bill 1470, extensive meetings were held with County Manager
Tom Andrews and representatives from his finance department to review 2005 costs to determine true 2005 cost versus
2006 budget in comparisons to the IGAs. The issues with 2005 costs are that there are increases in costs that
governments as well as businesses incur. People get merit increases, the cost of fuel may increase, the cost of
uniforms may increase, etc. The goal was not only to tie those expenses together but services as well. The dollar
reflected in the IGA is consistent with 2005. There is a difference in saying consistent and the exact. We can have
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 16 of 52
2005 exact costs in the IGA, but we as an organization need to adhere to reduction in service as a result of that. You
can no longer provide the same level of service at the same level of cost. There are different opinions about the same
level of service at the same cost in House Bill 1470. It was something as staff that we did not want to begin to litigate
simply from a fact that it did absolutely no good. From where we are today, staff feels extremely solid with the
numbers that are presented, understanding that we have not changed the deployment or staffing level from 2005.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that it sounds like the staff is very satisfied and it is a beneficial mutual agreement
and the premises have been met.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement with Fulton County
for the provision of fire and rescue services. Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams seconded the motion. There was no
Council discussion. The motion passed unanimously.
Approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement with Fulton County for the provision of police services.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that the Police IGA is very similar to the Fire Services IGA. It calls
for consistent staffing with what exists today. The police precinct would continue to operate out of Fire Station #18 on
Hickory Flat Road. The IGA calls to sustain public safety and protect life and property within the City through
enforcement of local, state and federal laws through the use of County law enforcement. This IGA has commenced on
January 1, 2007 which an early termination clause on or later than May 1 with a notification on or before April 1. He
would like to administratively change Section 4.2. The word “fire” appears and it should read “police.” The City
will have a person as a liaison and that person with the Fulton County police will be either a Major or a Captain and
will be known as our City Commander or a person we can go to during the course of this agreement. The equipment,
personnel uniforms, services, criminal investigation division, record keeping reporting and any ancillary services will
be maintained by Fulton County. This is an all encompassing agreement that will provide for public safety through
law enforcement in its entirety. There is a reporting component to this as well which is monthly to the City Manager
with options to settle disputes should those exists. The staffing schedule will remain consistent with what it is today,
three shifts of eight hours with three officers and appropriate staff. It does call for performance measurements based
on response time; Priority I calls within five minutes 90% of the time and Priority II calls within 12 minutes 90% of
the time. Priority I calls are calls where life or property are at risk. Priority II calls are more routine response calls.
The monthly cost is at $321,144. That cost is calculated prior to any increase which may or may not occur as a result
of a cross the board living adjustment.
Councilmember Mohrig asked from a staff level was that a fixed number of officers that would actually be patrolling
this area versus a floating number that could be pulled to other parts of the County that would be dedicated to our city.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that generally that is a correct statement. There is a clause in the
IGA as there should be for emergency circumstances and what would be provisions those people could live the city.
He did not want to say that there would be absolutely three cars in Milton at all times but that is the spirit and intent of
the IGA.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember O’Brien moved to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement with Fulton County
for the provision of police services. Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. There was no Council discussion.
The motion passed unanimously.
Resolution Amending Resolution No 06-11-14 Adopting the City of Milton Zoning and Use Permit and Zoning
Modification Schedules.
Resolution No. 07-01-03
Community Development Manager Tom Wilson stated that the City Council approved Resolution No 06-11-14 on
November 21, 2006 to approve schedules and it included Zoning and Use Permit Schedules and Zoning Modification
Schedules. Since the approval of Resolution 06-11-14, there is a need to make changes to the schedules dates of the
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 17 of 52
Zoning and Use Permit Schedule and Zoning Modification Schedule to consolidate as many meetings as possible on
Thursdays. The schedule for the Community Zoning Information meeting was not a separate schedule approved but
was imbedded into the Zoning and Use Permit Schedule. Because of legal advertising deadlines it is necessary to
change the zoning agenda from the 1st Thursday Council meeting to the 3rd Thursday Council meeting of the month.
The following schedule is being proposed: City Council Meetings will remain on the 1st and 3rd Thursday of the
month, the Zoning agenda will be heard on the 3rd Thursday of the month, the Planning Commission will be on the 4th
Thursday at 5:30 PM, and the Community Zoning Information Meeting will be on the 4th Thursday of the month at
7:00 PM. These meetings will be held at the Milton City Hall at 13000 Deerfield Parkway.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that when she looks at the dates, some of them look a little different than the
ones that were emailed to the Council. She wanted to know if it was the most current date. She knew that staff had
tried to shift some dates so the community could participate even though there were some schedules that conflicted.
For example, some of the public school schedules conflicted with the meetings. The goal early on was to make sure
that as many meetings would be scheduled at a time the public could be here to address any items. The April 5th date,
as an example, is the first that she has seen this date. We as Council had talked early on about trying to meet the
citizens desire to have as many of those meetings available when the community was available to come and be a party
to those meetings.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that maybe it is as simple as which one is accurate. The one on the
computer has the 7 PM and 5:30 PM and this schedule does not. So it may be the one that was received in the email
was more current.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct. He cautioned the Council on that statement saying they have to formally
adopt a resolution changing the schedule that was previously adopted. That will happen at the February 1st meeting.
The City Clerk is preparing an amendment to the previous schedule for the first week in April and the July 5th meeting.
So in technicality, what the Council is seeing on their computer are the revised dates although they have not formally
adopted the dates as a Council.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams moved to approve the Resolution Amending Resolution No
06-11-14 Adopting the City of Milton Zoning and Use Permit and Zoning Modification Schedules. Councilmember
Zahner-Bailey seconded the motion. There was no Council discussion. The motion passed unanimously.
Resolution Immediately Administratively Disestablishing and Defunding the Position of Executive Aide to the
Mayor of Milton.
Resolution No. 07-01-04
Councilmember O’Brien stated that we have a Charter and apparently there are some legislative changes that will
take place. It had been mentioned that it was likely among the changes one that would bear on this situation. We find
ourselves in circumstances and clearly there is considerable interest right now from the community as to how we spend
money and stay within our budget. We are very fortunate that Councilmember Lusk had identified a substantial
savings recently with the cooperation of and assistance of our colleagues at CH2M Hill. He read the resolution as
follows:
RESOLUTION IMMEDIATELY ADMINISTRATIVELY DISESTABLISHING
AND DEFUNDING THE POSITION OF EXECUTIVE AIDE
TO THE MAYOR OF MILTON
WHEREAS, the position of EA to the Mayor is a new concept that was introduced in our Charter, with no
precedent for our established system of government; and
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 18 of 52
WHEREAS, to align more appropriately with our municipal peers, in the interest of cost saving consistency;
and
WHEREAS, it is anticipated that legislative action will remove the Mayor’s EA position from our Charter;
and
WHEREAS, with utmost respect for our Mayor, personally and organizationally, we can function without the
significant expense reflected in the job description, with a salary of $56,000; and
WHEREAS, we have the opportunity to send an unequivocal message of respect for taxpayer resources and
the desire to seek every opportunity to protect the interests of all Milton residents; and
WHEREAS, it is unfair and inappropriate on several levels to invite an individual to accept employment with
the Staff, only to face elimination of the position weeks or months later; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THIS COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA,
AND IT IS RESOLVED BY THE AUTHORITY OF SAID CITY COUNCIL.
By passage of this resolution, the City of Milton Mayor and City Council authorize the Mayor, City Manager,
and City Clerk to immediately effectuate a halt in interviewing, hiring or funding the position of Executive
Aide to the Mayor, in anticipation of legislative removal of that role from the Charter, out of respect for the
limited taxpayer resources available to the City and inability to justify the position as an unprecedented
perquisite of office in our municipality, to be effective immediately upon its adoption.
The City of Milton hereby calls upon the General Assembly of the State of Georgia to pass local legislation
removing the position of Executive Aide from the Charter of the City of Milton.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that in our Charter, this is a closely written position. It would afford the opportunity
for the Mayor to interview and hire for this position. This individual would report directly to the Mayor and
essentially he sees it exclusively supporting the Mayor’s efforts. Certainly, everyone has been very challenged by the
pace and workload and must emphasize that out of no disrespect for the Mayor, he believes that this was in an
insupportable expense for the community and perhaps the Council should consider that the wisest course in
anticipation of this position leaving the Council anyway, voluntarily resolved not to fill that role. In conversations
these last days with City Manager Bovos, Councilmember O’Brien stated that he is absolutely committed to ensuring
the staff has whatever resources they require to accomplish the mission of service delivery to the City. He was sure
that the staff understood that if they needed support administratively, mechanically or in any fashion, most of the
Council would be quick to find a way to provide that. As it pertains specifically to this issue, he hoped that the
Council would favorably consider the resolution or at least have some discussion on it.
Motion and Second: Councilmember O’Brien moved to approve Resolution Immediately Administratively
Disestablishing and Defunding the Position of Executive Aide to the Mayor of Milton. Councilmember Mohrig
seconded the motion.
Discussion on the Motion: Mayor Lockwood stated that he wanted to add to Councilmember O’Brien’s comment
about Councilmember Lusk working with CH2M Hill saving money. Councilmember Zahner Bailey was right along
with Councilmember Lusk and it was a joint effort on the insurance savings.
The Executive Aide to the Mayor is specified and included in the Charter Section 3.22-A. The Mayor shall be the
Chief Executive Officer of the City. Section 3.22-11 also says that the Mayor shall be the Chief Executive Officer of
the City. The Mayor shall select and hire the Executive Aide. In Section 3.26 the Executive Aide Appointment,
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 19 of 52
Qualifications, Compensation, Removal, it stated that the Mayor shall appoint an Executive Aide for an indefinite term
and shall set the Executive Aide initial annual salary subject to the confirmation by the City Council which annual
salary shall not be less than twice the annual salary of the Mayor, which would be $46,000. The Executive Aide shall
be appointed solely on the basis of that person’s executive and administrative qualities and qualifications. The
Executive Aide may be removed from office at the discretion of the Mayor and the Executive Aide shall continue to
receive the Executive Aide salary until the effective date of removal. In Section 3.10-C stated that except for the office
of City Manager and Executive Aide to the Mayor, the City Council may…. Per legal advice from our City Attorney.
He does not believe we can change our Charter at this level. The Mayor felt very strongly this position, whether it is
called Executive Aide or Administrative Assistant, has always been in the organizational chart for our entire City staff
and would greatly influence the workload within our structure. When our City Manager was hired it was under the
guidelines of our organizational chart as far as staff support by a Governor’s commission. This position was in place
there and everything was based on that. Originally, in November he had conversations with the City Manager about
the need for this position and they decided to wait until now to fulfill it in order to save our taxpayers money and to
verify the need. In all due respect, the Mayor stated that some of the Council knows how much work is involved day-
to-day operations. He knows from personal experience, he is basically working full time for the City now, which he is
proud to do, but it is not the intent of our Charter or City plan, and he has very little time to run his own business. He
has at least 300 emails a day to respond to plus numerous phone calls and several meetings to attend each week so far.
He believes there are certain Councilmembers and several citizens already complaining about response time from staff
on issues that the Mayor and Council will be involved with. When this resolution was brought up by Councilmember
O’Brien, the Mayor stated that he explained this to him and asked him to talk to the staff independently in which he
did. The Mayor then asked all of the staff and Council to respond with all their comments and viewpoints on this
issue. All the responses were 100% supportive of this position with the exception of one which felt that it should not
be mandated by the Charter. Councilmember O’Brien seems to feel that he has a majority of the Council in support of
this resolution, but from my request mentioned early, he does not. If there are any Councilmembers that have not
responded to the Mayor, Council and staff on this issue but have given support to Councilmember O’Brien on this
resolution privately, then he would be very disappointed and thinks it does not show respect for our staff and Mayor’s
office and fellow Council, as well as the City of Milton.
It certainly is not in the best interest of our City to eliminate a key position in staff. When you are trying to run
efficiently and do a better job or save money, you do not start cutting your key people. He strongly feels this is not a
smart thing to do in order to try and cut costs and it would greatly impact our service and efficiency of City
government. He would like to ask staff’s opinion on this resolution.
City Manager Bovos stated that he wanted to take a few minutes and discuss some items that were previously
discussed in emails. The first thing he wanted everyone to be clear upon was the Mayor references a section in our
Charter that does not allow us to make changes based upon home rule change. As a result of that, this resolution
sponsored local legislation at the state level which requires the delegation of Fulton County to sign off. This resolution
is simply sponsoring and making a position that the City wants the position removed. He wanted to be clear on the
fact that the Council does not have the power within the existing Charter to do that. The Council does have the ability
to pass a resolution asking that it be done, but do not have the power directly to take it out. The second thing is that
when the City began from a staff perspective to formulate the organization, one of the considerations that was given to
the entire executive team was the City Manager’s commitment to be sure that they had the resources needed to be
successful. He cannot reiterate from a leadership standpoint how important that is. Expectation of service and
expectation of delivery of service without the resources that you need to do those services creates an extremely
frustrating and controversial internal environment full of turmoil simply from the fact that we are expected to do a job
and do not have the resources to be able to do it. When he spoke to several Councilmembers about this position as a
City Manager, he did ask the question and it was reiterated to him that resources would be provided as they were
needed to be sure that the City was successful. He is very appreciative of it. Frankly, staff never anticipated a private
resource for the Mayor. They never anticipated a private resource for the City Council. Not to say that position is not
justified, but from staff perspective, to integrate a staff person into the organization and have them be effective in the
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 20 of 52
core of the executive team, it would not be beneficial for that person to be serving or be responsive to people outside of
that core executive team. As they moved forward with the definition and job description for this position, it was
always contemplated that they would provide support and resources to the Council, first and foremost, and the Mayor
as well and during their free time, to staff. There are systems and functions that go along with that. For example, the
scheduling of meetings, the attendance of special events that we have offset to that position and not require staff to do.
He wanted everyone to be clear that from a staff’s perspective, if the position is eliminated and the funding associated
with it, we need to eliminate the expectation of service. There is no way that we as the executive team could deliver
the same level of service without the same number of resources. He hoped that in addition to the wording that is in the
resolution, the Council would acknowledge that is the fact. Councilmember O’Brien has provided feedback about his
position and the City Manager greatly respects the difference. It was not a negative discussion at all. Some of the
things that are important to point out are that as a core team, the City has working department directors. The directors
facilitate a great amount of work that occurs within the organization. The challenge in that type of organization is not
only to be effective as a leader, but also to be effective in managing the resources and time. He wanted to reiterate that
the staff’s job is to facilitate the Council’s needs and also facilitate the needs of the organization. In doing that, the
executive staff turns to the support staff to facilitate that success. He stated that it pained him to realize that 30, 60, 90
days into the organization we are cutting resources. He understood why but he has yet to see anyone acknowledge that
service is being cut and service in particularly to citizens who are going to call in, services to all the Council that staff
is able to offer, and services outside of things that we have not yet experienced. Today, we received an invitation to a
ribbon cutting. That ribbon cutting happens to be next week during the City Council meeting. It would be great to
send a representative from the senior team to the ribbon cutting to represent the City of Milton. There is no one sitting
here in front of the Council that can do that. Customer service, emails, telephone calls are voluminous. When we
eliminate resources and positions, we also eliminate the expectation of service.
Councilmember Thurman stated that she felt that what was before them was not necessarily eliminating the position,
but it is eliminating the position as it is outlined in our Charter. She felt very strongly that this position should not be a
part of our legal constitution, which is pretty much what the City Charter is, especially as it is currently laid out. The
position has an indefinite life. A new Mayor and Council could come in and get rid of them. She does not think it is
fair to anyone that assumes the position and it is not fair that the salary is reflected in the Charter. She does not think
that anyone else here would want their salary reflected in the Charter. She thinks that if the City does need a position,
it should be a position supporting the Mayor, City Council and any other City staff. If it is a full time position or part
time position, the salary should be set based upon the responsibilities of that position and not based on our legal
constitution. She is not saying that the City needs to get rid of an additional person, but we need to get rid of the
person reflected in the Charter.
It is her understanding that based on the City’s State Representative, this position is being removed from the Charter
and she thinks that resolution is basically saying that the City does not want to fund a position that could be removed
two weeks from now. If we decided that we needed another person to help us, then that is fine, but she does not think
we should fund a position that could be removed two weeks from now at a salary that is set by our Charter and with the
responsibilities outlined by our Charter and not by what the City Manager and City Council or Mayor feels the
responsibilities ought to be.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that Councilmember O’Brien referenced some legislative changes that
are coming and it sounds like Councilmember Thurman has had some discussions with our State Representative as to
the removal of this position. She wanted to know if there was any documentation or information that could be shared
with the rest of the Council. She stated that she has not been privy to this information.
Councilmember O’Brien stated as he had indicated that he wrote a very lengthy explanation of the rationale behind
this and the other three resolutions he is offering. A conversation was held with the Mayor where he commented that
he was under the understanding that this position in fact was to be removed from the Charter and responding to that,
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 21 of 52
that was really the inception of the concern that the Council perhaps would have a vulnerability as a City if we hired
someone only to then been in the awkward position of having to ask them to leave.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated to Councilmember O’Brien that his communication was to the Mayor.
Councilmember Thurman stated that to clarify Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams question, when she and the
Mayor met with Representative Jones a few weeks ago, Representative Jones did mention that that was one of the
changes to the Charter that she planned on bringing forth during the session.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams asked did Representative Jones comment on why she was going to make these
changes based on the fact that she wrote the Charter.
Councilmember Thurman stated that when the Charter was written this was something that was added at the last
minute. At that time it was a suggestion by a former Mayor. We were just trying to get any bill passed because the
Legislators were having some problems getting some things passed. It was added at the time even prior to the election
when they were sitting down looking at the bill and looking over the Charter as it was written. This was something
that came up as a point that they were not sure of whether it needed to be looked at further. After further discussions
over the summer and fall, it was determined that this was a position that really probably should not be a part of our
legal constitution, but it should be position that if determined necessary, it should have a lot more flexibility than is
given in the Charter itself.
Mayor Lockwood stated that he wanted to make something clear to everyone. He stated that he thought everyone was
talking about two different issues. One is the Charter. At this point, we do not have any control over the Charter. If
Representative Jones wants to try to introduce legislation then that is fine, but that is a different issue. Right now it is
in the Charter.
The second issue is about Councilmember O’Brien’s thoughts that it eliminates the position and saves money. It is a
staff person that we need and whether it is in the Charter or not, and whether we hire them with the Charter and later
the Charter goes away, that just means the next time it is not stated in the Charter. It does not mean we need to fire
that person. He thinks it is crazy to think about running a City and a part time Mayor and not have anybody there.
With everything going on, in which he anticipates getting worse, he is imposing on staff as is to get issues taken care
of. As far as being stated in the Charter, the salary is a small salary for what that person should do. He did not think
that was a limiting factor at all. Every other Mayor that he has been dealing with has assistants; some of them have
two assistants. There has been reference to this as being a luxury to the Mayor. It is not a luxury for the Mayor. He
stated that the limited staff does not have time to check the daily emails that he receives. Someone is needed that can
implement all these things and ideas that Council has in order to make our City grow and profit the way they want it to.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that respectfully she was just trying to get to a point of understanding
where this came from. It seemed to her that it came out of nowhere. She had not heard any previous discussion and
we have been through steering committees, a Governor’s Commission, election of the officials, runoff of the officials,
and all of a sudden it comes up and it is a sense of urgency. She felt that it was because Representative Jones was in
session now. With that said, she agreed completely that this position should be supported and believed it is a position
that is necessary to support not only the part time Mayor but the part time Council and staff. She would not support
the removal of this position or the recommendation of the removal of this type of a position.
Councilmember Thurman stated that what is before the Council is a removal of this particular position. It does not
mean there is not another position that is not an Executive Aide to the Mayor included in our Charter but it could be a
similar position. It just will not be a position in our Charter with this title with these responsibilities and set salary.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 22 of 52
Mayor Lockwood asked if we hired someone in that position and later the legislation takes it out of the Charter, is
there any reason why the person would not stay if it is a necessary position.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she is confused about how we are going through this process of
discussion. Since our procedures are Robert’s Rules, we should have some formality with how people are
acknowledged and then how we are addressed. She thought that the Council did need to have process in the meetings
and she asked that direction come from staff that as the Council goes through this discussion, that we have appropriate
acknowledgement of those who are going to speak for the record so that we can go through this in an orderly and
respectful way. She would very much appreciate that tonight.
City Manager Bovos stated that the easiest way to do that is to ask for a show of hands of who would like to make
comments, make a list of those hands, and call on them.
City Attorney Scott stated that the Chair should recognize everyone who would like to speak.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that what he is hearing throughout the discussion is that the City does not have the
authority to change the Charter. With that being understood, do we want to eliminate the formally stated position from
a funding standpoint of Executive Assistant to the Mayor. He thinks that is what is before the Council. The next
thing to discuss is there a need for a separate position. Not necessarily an Executive Aide to the Mayor, but someone
who provides staff support. Something that he has not seen is a detailed scope of responsibilities for this person.
Maybe it should not be called Executive Assistant. If it is to offload from staff so that the Council is not impacting
upon staff in a negative way, then let it be written so that the position reflects what it is that this person is to do. That
is where he has heard a lot of discussion going back and forth and from a formal standpoint, if the Council looked at
other Cities, do they truly have a position where it is an Executive Assistant directly associated with the Mayor. He
stated that he knows Mayor Lockwood has talked to other Mayors and they have Executive Assistants. He would like
to see the Council define what the responsibilities are, the duties of this person, and then custom tailor the position and
salary based upon what the needs are for Council, Mayor and staff.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he is in no way suggesting that the City attempt to change the Charter itself. All
he wanted to do was give consensus that if in fact it has been suggested by those who have more contact with
Representative Jones that it is intended legislatively to remove the position. That we have consensus that it would be
unwise to fill the position and perhaps identify that as a savings in the budget. He recognized that this was an
uncomfortable topic. If it was his choice, he would love to have the Mayor to have an assistant or have more staff. He
would be very sensitive to concerns for service delivery. One of the first things he brought up to City Manager Bovos
was that very topic. With respect to the Mayor, he implied that he had 100% affirmative support for the position.
Councilmember O’Brien felt that it was fair to say that there have been some email issues this week so he is unaware
that there was considerable affirmative support for the position. He was under the impression that there was some
favorable consideration for this and in no way is he implying that this is a luxury. City Manager Bovos is in a position
where he operates in a very autonomous way with a great deal of responsibility and a great deal of authority.
Essentially, the style of government as he understood it and believed to be true, City Manager Bovos has the
fundamental day to day operating authority within the City. In that light, it was apparently deemed by our State
Representative who the Council owes this opportunity to be here to begin with. As he understood it, there is no similar
size city that has an Executive Aide position and of this type. He finds this an uncomfortable topic, but believes it is a
legitimate area of discussion. For instance, he was told that in Sandy Springs, a much larger city with a slightly
different form of government where the Mayor has more day to day responsibilities, she does not have an assistant. If
anyone else is familiar with examples where sole positions such as this would operate, then we need to identify it.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 23 of 52
Mayor Lockwood stated that the discussion first began when he asked everyone to respond back, be it negative or
positive. Out of everyone that responded through the system, they were all affirmative positive responses. One said
they did not feel comfortable with it being in the Charter.
City Manager Bovos stated that from a perspective of cities of similar size, no studies have been done, but he can tell
the Council that the neighboring cities do have a position similar to this. He felt that it was important to reiterate that
this resolution de-funds a position within the organization. We are taking appropriations out of the budget. What is
frustrating to hear from the Council is that they hired an executive team, he included, and that the staff is coming to the
Council saying that they have a need for a resource and he is hearing things such as we need to define what that person
does. What staff is here to tell you is that there is a plethora of things that person can do on a daily basis including
taking work off of all the people who are sitting before the Council so that they are not at the office 10 to 12 hours a
day. There have been no complaints from staff.
There are two functions occurring here. There is removing this from the Charter and there is de-funding this position.
The staff has no control about the Charter itself. Council can pass a resolution with respect to the Charter, but if you
are interested in making sure the organization is successful from an administrative standpoint, it would seem that the
City would not defund the position. We would reallocate the funds to a staff level position that reports to the City
Manager and allows the City Manager to develop a program in which that position would serve the City Council to do
some of the same functions that the Executive Aide would do. He has not heard that discussion yet tonight. The City
of Roswell has an Executive Aide; their City Council has two positions. The City of Alpharetta has a strong City
Clerk. Now granted that you are going to say that we have a City Clerk, the difference in that their City Clerk does not
prepare agendas, does not do contracts, and does not facilitate that process. She is there as the Clerk to the Mayor. We
have defined our organization much more traditionally and through traditional means than some of these organizations
have. In comparing, the Council needs to be sure they understand functions and levels of responsibilities.
Mayor Lockwood stated that all due respect to everyone sitting there, no one sitting on the Council knows what goes
on during the day or half as much as staff does. Each Councilmember can take how busy they are and multiple it by
seven and that is the Mayor’s day because everyone wants to talk or meet with the Mayor. No disrespect, but he sees it
as a position that has to be there and he sees the staff totally going crazy everyday. It is a slap in the face to them when
the Council is sitting here saying that we promised them this on the front end and now we are saying we want to save
some money and cut some of the help.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that was the last way he wanted to characterize it. He saw this as an exploratory
process and he would welcome a business case or whatever support the Council needs. The Mayor has a strong
personality and clearly is the face of the community. He understands the demand on his time, but many of us expected
it to be busy and ran on that basis. He certainly would not accept nor seek administrative assistance. The other thing
is perhaps we ought to make sure we are not getting too much into the minutia; that we are just the policy guidance and
we are staying out of the way of staff. He has intentionally avoided bothering the staff and have not asked for a staff
representative to accompany him or have not dropped down any projects of his own. He has tried to just participate in
the process and respond to the rhythm that City Manager Bovos has set along with the other professionals here in front
of the Council.
Mayor Lockwood stated that a good point was made about getting too involved with the minutia. That is part of the
reason why we need a position like this. We as a City Council can look at the big picture, but not get into the day to
day micromanagement.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that in light of what staff is saying, he was suggesting a better term instead of saying
Executive Assistant to the Mayor. What is described is maybe redefine the position and title to reflect exactly what it
is we need including responsibilities, and what salary would be competitive to attract the right person for that position.
That is not saying lets de-fund it, it is saying lets eliminate this position if our position does not fit the description nor
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 24 of 52
the salary. We do not have the flexibility if we do not follow the guidelines. We need to come up with something that
is truly needed. I apologize if this didn’t come across clearly.
Mayor Lockwood stated that those kinds of discussions have gone on back and forth in the emails. It did not matter
what the title was because there is work there that needs to be done. He asked Councilmember O’Brien if his
resolution was to save money and take money out of the budget and not redefine the job description.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that it arose out of the understanding that the position was to be removed.
Mayor Lockwood stated that the position was to be removed out of the Charter, not the actual physical position.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that it does not eliminate in his mind the possibility that the staff may at this time or
in the future need additional support. But again, as Councilmember Mohrig is trying to convey the role is completely
different than written.
City Treasurer Wolfe stated she wanted to offer her perspective from a working director view. She stated that the
City Manager has put together a team of directors who like to be working directors. The collective goal is to be
responsive and to stay ahead of operational needs by leading projects and ensuring operational success. The
perspective of a staff person or the elimination of a staff person at the level of an Executive Aide or whatever the title
may be, or wherever it may be funded in the Charter or as a budget appropriation, that position will allow us to be
more responsive to the Council because it takes the staff out of the minutia of scheduling. That position is more of the
support and clerical type items that we have to do out of necessity become the priority and staff is not able to facilitate
the Council as policymakers and help do research on projects and items such as that. Keep in mind that a support
person like this will allow operational success of the organization simply because it will allow us, the folks that City
Manager Bovos has hired, to help the Council in their role as policymakers and not play that support role ourselves.
Mayor Lockwood stated that it concerns him and makes it more important that items like this are in the Charter when
we have a capable staff that is reliable and experienced. The Mayor and Council try to pull things away from them
against what their recommendations are. It seems more important to have it in the Charter so someone cannot just say
we going to save money and pull this away from you.
City Treasurer Wolfe reiterated that the staff goal is to be responsive and to ensure the success of this organization.
Support staff is critical to that success.
Councilmember Lusk stated that he felt the Mayor’s remarks were directed at him because he did not respond to the
Mayor. He saw no overwhelming case that came from the Mayor to support the argument that is being heard tonight.
For the first point, there has been a lot of work put upon the Mayor. He understands the efforts required in starting up
a business and running a business. When he ran for office, he knew that this was not going to be a sleigh ride. The
second point, City Manager Bovos expressed it very well as City Treasurer Wolfe did too and that is there is a need
there. He does not know what has prevented the establishment of an Administrative Assistant for the operations. The
third point is the way he reads the description for the Mayor’s Aide; it appears that it is for the exclusive use of the
Mayor. He does not see where the staff would have the option of using the Mayor’s Aide to do their work. He does
not doubt that the Mayor needs it, but he is not sure if an exclusive position is in the best interest of the City or the
efficient use of the staff. He would like to see a job description crafted more specifically for staff as an Administrative
Assistant and some guidelines for salary and experience. He knows what it takes to run an operation.
Mayor Lockwood stated that it would be different if they were coming in now saying that they wanted to add a
position, but we are saying that we are going to take a position away. All along through discussions, staff and himself
felt the description of this position is not just exclusive for the Mayor. It would be for the Mayor, Council, staff, and a
liaison to the community.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 25 of 52
Friendly Amendment: Councilmember Thurman stated that she would like to make a change to the proposed
Resolution as follows:
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE EXECUTIVE AIDE TO THE MAYOR
OF MILTON POSITION BE LEGISLATIVELY REMOVED FROM OUR
CHARTER
WHEREAS, The position of Executive Aide to the Mayor is a concept that was
introduced in our Charter with little precedent in charter’s of other local governments,
and
WHEREAS, It is anticipated that legislative action will remove the Mayor’s
Executive Aide position from our Charter, and
WHEREAS, It is unfair and inappropriate on several levels to invite an individual to
accept employment with the Staff, only to face elimination of the position weeks or
months later, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THIS COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MILTON, GEORGIA, AND IT IS RESOLVED BY THE AUTHORITY OF SAID
CITY COUNCIL.
By passage of this resolution, the City of Milton Mayor and City Council authorize
the Mayor, City Manager, and City Clerk to immediately effectuate a halt in
interviewing, hiring or funding the position of Executive Aide to the Mayor as the
position is currently outlined in our charter.
The City of Milton hereby calls upon the General Assembly of the State of Georgia to
pass local legislation removing the position of Executive Aide from the Charter of the
City of Milton.
She stated that she took the resolution as it was written and removed the dollar amounts. What she was trying to do
was separate the two issues before the Council, which is should the position be a part of the Charter and is this a
position that needs to be funded. What she has done is tried to make this a resolution that basically says this is a
position we would like to have legislatively removed from our Charter. She has not addressed at all the issue of
whether or not this position is a needed position, with maybe a different job description than what is in the Charter,
that does need to be funded in order to support the Mayor, City Council, and City Staff.
Mayor Lockwood asked for clarification. He stated that right now it is in the Charter. The position is out there and
there is a spot we need for that person. He wanted to know if we were to hire that position whether it was called
Executive Aide or come up with a new job description, and a few months from now, legislatively, the position from
our Charter is removed, will that affect the person or will the person just be a City employee.
City Attorney Scott stated that there would be nothing to stop the staff from shifting a person in that position from
this Charter mandated position to an ordinary staff position.
City Manager Bovos stated that we have a friendly amendment on the floor and it needs to be accepted or denied by
the person making the motion.
Friendly Amendment Accepted: Councilmember O’Brien accepted the friendly amendment.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 26 of 52
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that as she listened to the discussion, the first point she wanted to make was
that it is exactly for the reason that she asked that process be followed as a new government. She pointed out that the
breadth of discussion, the breadth of questions, and the number of items that need full evaluation, is exactly why her
comments earlier at the beginning of the meeting were as they were. She believed there was a process approved on
November 21, 2006 that needed to be followed. The Council does need to have full review by all members of staff and
Council, whether it is this issue or another one. She wanted to emphasize that this discussion punctuates exactly why
she made comments earlier and why she did not approve for the additions of these items to the agenda. It is because of
the depth of discussion we are hearing now that highlight how critical the process is to good government. With a
policy change of this nature, it deserves more than a first read as the Council sits before the citizens and the citizens do
not have the benefit of this. She said this because this is precedent setting in terms of how we handle ourselves as a
new government.
Secondly, as it relates specifically to this resolution, one of the questions that she has and she has not heard an answer
to this yet, is what basis we have to believe that legislatively a Charter change either one, will be recommended, or
two, approved. She does not have any data other than what she would refer to as hearsay based on comments, and she
is not challenging that. She is just saying that as an individual who sits on the Council with a new resolution before
her, while she may have understood conceptually the intent of Councilmember O’Brien, this is her first reading of an
actual document. She takes resolutions just as seriously as ordinances. She believes that the responsibility they have
as Councilmembers and Mayor to the citizens that elected them is that they have to do their due diligence. That means
they need adequate time and, as we just went through an entire agenda and got this document, she does not personally
perceive that as adequate time.
With regard to the State legislature, her question to City Manager Bovos is did the State legislature approve very
recently a Charter that included the position of Executive Aide.
City Manager Bovos stated that House Bill 1470 includes the Executive Aide. That is correct.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that is part of the Charter that was adopted. She asked was the Charter
subsequently voted and approved by 3,879 some odd voters on July 18.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she is again trying to establish the process under which everyone is here
today. As a Councilmember mentioned earlier, we are here as a result of our representative. She would like to state
that she is here because the citizens elected her to be here and that is why she sits before everyone tonight asking the
questions and stating that she believes due process is necessary. She would take exception to the statement that
everyone is here because of an individual. She personally believes strongly that she is here because of the 3,594
people that got out and voted and put her to be here to ask these questions. She takes extreme exception with the
earlier statement of Councilmember O’Brien that statement.
With regards to the staff recommendation, she would like the City Manager to state his recommendation. She wanted
to know if his recommendation was that this position is necessitated by workload and by the organizational structure
that he helped to put in place.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked if this salary for this position was already budgeted for as approved by the
Council.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 27 of 52
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked in terms of the salary level for a position of this nature, is it reasonable to
assume that we have a job description for that position.
City Manager Bovos stated that the City does.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she heard a question raised earlier about a job description. She surely
would expect that as an organization, that our personnel policies require a job description. She wanted to make sure
that indeed we did have a job description and it was her understanding that we did have one.
In terms of the salary associated with this position, not the term of the position, but with the work of this job, she asked
the City Manager was that salary position something that he believed is appropriate based on the expectations and the
qualifications of the individual that would be fulfilling these responsibilities.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked would it be fair to say that the salary range is in concert with the personnel
policies of both the CH2M Hill and the personnel policies that we adopted as a Council.
City Manager Bovos stated that it is certainly in concert with our personnel policy. We do not necessarily oversee the
salary pay grades or the pay of CH2M Hill employees. He would not be able to prepare a comment about where this
position falls in respect to positions assigned to the City on the CH2M Hill contract.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that it is her understanding that the personnel policy parallels some of the
personnel policies from CH2M Hill since we have a private/public partnership. In terms of the ninety days that was
referenced, she heard mentioned by the Mayor as well as by the City Manager, that there was the opportunity based on
Charter to have hired this position initially, but there has been an intentional wait and see to period to validate whether
or not the experience as a new city validates the necessity for this position. Understanding what she thinks she heard,
she asked the City Manager to clarify that within this approximate ninety day period. She asked has his experience
been that the workload necessitates the continuation of this position within the organizational chart.
City Manager Bovos stated that is correct.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked if the City Manager had any reason to believe that his experience thus far
would somehow change into a lesser or did he expect the workload to increase.
City Manager Bovos stated that he would expect a different type of workload to occur. The City has been working
obviously on deployment at this time and becoming operational. That will change into the work plan and performance
measurement driven work in the future. He does not feel it will lessen, but it will change.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that as for an example, she stated that right now, the Council has the luxury of
not having any zoning hearings. Based on her prior experience, she suspects that when the City begins to have those
sorts of items added to the agenda, the work that proceeds will obviously add a significant workload as would be true
for ordinances and a variety of things that Community Development hopes to prioritize as we go through a retreat and
work session. The purpose of the question is to evaluate the importance of this position based on workload. She is
less concerned with the term of the position. She believes it was more form over substance when the Council talked
about whether or not it should be in or out of the Charter. What she was hearing was that the professional staff was
hired to help manage the City. They indicate this position is a necessity. She is still unclear about the legislative
driver behind potentially changing the Charter. She has no evidence of that. She would question why at this early
stage we would want to start making Charter changes to our document because perhaps if the City were to have time to
review the Charter in its totality, with more experience and time, we might find other things within our Charter that we
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 28 of 52
might suggest. She is concerned about making a piece-meal change to the Charter that was so recently adopted when
we do not yet have a lot of experience as to whether or not certain of these items necessitate change. She is not clear
about the driver behind the resolution before the Council this evening knowing that staff believes the position is
necessary.
Mayor Lockwood stated that he does not agree with the resolution and also with the amendment mainly because it is
in the Charter. We are discussing the Charter and the Charter is not really up to us to change. If it gets changed, it gets
changed. Staff has said that we need the position and he says we need the position. If the position had been hired from
day one, the Council probably would not be having this discussion. It was done in the spirit to try and save the City
money and drag it out as long as possible. Now it is becoming an issue. When he sees that the staff feels strongly that
it is needed, the Mayor sees that it is strongly needed, part of the Council realizes that it is needed, he would be in
favor of not approving this resolution. It is always something that can be looked at later. If down the road they change
the Charter, the Council can look at the position and adjust it. The bottom line is the staff agrees the help is needed,
the Mayor agrees the help is needed, as do part of the Council, and it is in the Charter.
Councilmember Thurman stated that all the resolution does is ask the legislation to remove it from the Charter,
which is her understanding that they are going to do this anyway, and for the City not to fund the position as an
Executive Aide to the Mayor as it is currently outlined in the Charter. All the questions that Councilmember Zahner
Bailey asked really had nothing to do with the resolution that is before the Council because the resolution that is before
the Council is about a specific position in the Charter. It does not address whether or not this position is needed, and it
does not address what salary this person should have. All the resolution does is say that the City is requesting that it be
removed from our Charter and that it not be funded as it is currently reflected in our Charter since that position appears
to be going away. That still gives the City Manager the ability to fund the position if he feels that it is necessary to hire
someone. This resolution does not get rid of that, it does not say that we do not need the position, and it does not say
this is a personal assistant. All the resolution basically says is that the City is asking the legislature to remove the
position and that we are not going to fund it as it is currently reflected.
Mayor Lockwood stated that he does not recommend a piece-meal approach to Charter to changes. He does not see it
as the City’s place to start asking for the Charter to be changed. After we have been running for a year or two and we
see through everything, then maybe the City can do a comprehensive look at it and have some suggestions.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that if the fact is that our State Representative has indeed decided to
remove this position from the Charter, then why are we addressing this issue. She wanted to know why we needed a
resolution, other than making a statement as a Council to support this. Of course, there seems to be a divided support
for and against this resolution. Her opinion is to support the Mayor and that the resolution not be approved. If the State
Representative seeks to take or remove this from our Charter, then we address it at that time. It in no way impacts the
ability to hire an Executive Assistant, an Assistant, an Admin, a jack of all trades, etc. Everyone knows we need
something. She supports that the Council not approve the resolution and that the Council move forward and allow our
State Representative to be reactive however she intends to and then the City would react to her action.
Mayor Lockwood stated that it also shows that the staff is being supported as well as the Mayor, Council, and City.
Councilmember Thurman stated that the resolution is ask the Council not to go forward hiring someone in the
position as it is outlined in the Charter if we know the position is getting ready to be removed from the Charter. It is
not fair to a person that will be hired if that position is actually being removed from the Charter and that is what this
resolution does. It says that we are not going to hire someone whose position as stated in the Charter is going to be
removed from the Charter itself. If you want to hire someone outside the Charter, that is a whole different ballgame.
Mayor Lockwood stated that he did not know if the person would know the difference.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 29 of 52
City Manager Bovos stated that there are positions in the Charter that have been hired through the Charter and they do
not necessarily do only what is in the Charter. You have a Director of Operations who is the City Treasurer and also
oversees IT and HR. You have a City Clerk who also oversees the Municipal Court. We have to get some liberties
within the Charter because we are not a huge organization. We took liberties with this position early on. The job
description initially did not have it reporting directly to the Mayor despite the fact that the Charter says that. The job
description had it reporting to the Mayor and the City Manager so that we could effectuate the overall success of the
administrative support. He stated that the City has positions further down on both sides of him that are not in the
Charter at all and who are extremely important to the organization.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that Councilmember Thurman very effectively summed up the intent. He thought it
was very unwise to hire someone. As many out there would probably say that government jobs are forever, when we
hire someone, it goes from a piece of paper to someone we know and like. The point of the resolution is to avoid the
mere awkwardness of having the position go away with someone on the payroll. He supports the Mayor personally
and in his organizational position and certainly the staff. If the staff needs someone, he stands ready to figure out a
way to get that for the staff. As he understood it, there are about 34 non public safety positions that are in the plan.
City Manager Bovos stated that there are 34 positions under the CH2M Hill contract.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he again wanted to reiterate that Councilmember Thurman was very effective in
summing up. He would hope that if the Council would agree that this position as written is likely to go away, let us
not grandfather it. If the consensus is contrary to that, then he would support that as well. He felt that it was in the
best interest of the community. To revisit Councilmember Zahner Bailey’s comment, he fully recognized her fans and
many in the community respect her experience and he is one of them. He was acknowledging the fact that as a
community we have the opportunity to have local government because of Representative Jones and a few others who
create momentum for us to have our own entity here in Milton.
Mayor Lockwood stated that it has been demonstrated by the people that are informed that it is a position that needs
to be there. If the Charter is changed in the near future, then seamlessly this position will be taken care of with the
City.
Councilmember Thurman stated that according to the Charter, the Mayor is the only person who can remove an
Executive Aide from their position. The position of Treasurer in the Charter had about four sentences to describe their
position and duties. The Executive Aide has a page to describe their position and duties. So, this is not just like any
other position. This one has very clear responsibilities and duties laid out along with the salary laid out. She stated no
one else’s salary is laid out in the Charter.
It is her understanding that Representative Jan Jones is going to ask that this position be removed from the Charter.
She thinks the resolution basically states that the Council supports her removing it from the Charter and that we will
not fund the position as it is reflected in our Charter. You can still fund another position if it is needed.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she is unclear as to why a legislator would make a change to the Charter
that was authored by that same legislator just a few months ago. Whether the changing of the Charter occurs or not,
she personally does not believe that the City needs to be about the business of modifying the Charter this early into the
formation of our new City. Obviously, a few months ago that same legislator just commented about, not just
individually but as a body, was involved in approving the Charter with those specific items. She thought that their job
as professionals and the responsibilities the Council has is not to get so mired in the detail of a definition in a Charter
that defines Executive Aide. The Council is professional enough as a body and individually to be able to assess that if
the City was to hire anyone for this position or another position, and if they were to prove to be non performers, the
City better not continue to have them on staff. We expect all personnel, regardless of their title, to perform to high
standards. The citizens have an expectation of performance. There is no job that is guaranteed. She hoped everyone
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 30 of 52
agreed that no position is forever and she personally does not believe that just because someone is hired that gives a
guarantee. Performance is the only guarantee to a position assuming there is a workload that deems the position
necessary. Sometimes you can have great performers, but the position is no longer necessary. The responsibility as
Mayor, Council, and staff is to continually evaluate the organizational chart. If we find that all 34 positions with
CH2M Hill are not necessary, she would expect CH2M Hill to reduce that number or come to the City and talk about
it. She has a great expectation that we will be fluid in our evaluation of performance, budgets and of reasonable and
professional approaches as to how we hire staff. Currently, she is more concerned that this may be more form over
substance. Whether the Charter is changed by someone else or not is not the issue. The issue is do we have
professionals that say we need this position. The answer is yes. The other question that she has for the Council as a
body is do they believe professionally that they can evaluate there are positions already noted in the Charter. Those
positions by nature of course take on deeper and wider activity. She thanked staff for not expecting their day to day
operations to be tied to the definition of a Charter. The same would be true in regards to the position that is being
discussed. Procedurally, she has issues with beginning to ask for Charter changes when she does not believe that is
going to drive functionality and performance based on this new government.
Councilmember Lusk asked if the Charter carried the full force of effective law.
City Attorney Scott stated that the Charter itself does.
Councilmember Lusk asked if a job description would fall under lawful language.
City Attorney Scott stated that it would have to.
Councilmember Lusk asked City Manager Bovos if the job description that is already made up for this position
coincided with the job description in the Charter or is it more expansive or less than what is in the Charter.
City Manager Bovos stated that the staff utilized Charter language in multiple positions as the minimum base for a
job description and thereby then expanded it based upon the organizational needs. The job description for the position
in question entails what is listed in the Charter, but is also expanded to include the needs of the organization.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that the language of the job description does incorporate that Executive Aide,
but it is broader and does indeed incorporate more activity than just what the language of Executive Aide in the
Charter would indicate.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that is similar to two positions that have been hired that are lawful positions
that were based on a job description that allowed the City Treasurer and City Clerk to do more than the bare minimum.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that lawfully a job description is never intended to be at the minimum, but it is
meant to be more expansive as this would be. The job description is broader than the Charter, therefore, it addresses
the need that the staff has described and it is not limited to only providing a singular source of duty as would be the
concerns that had been voiced by some Councilmembers.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that the point he tried to make a long time ago was in reality, his experience in
business is that you have a title for a position that ties to a job description. What he heard from staff is that it seems to
be a different description. It may include some of those items, but it sounded like it was a different position than what
he would consider Executive Aide to the Mayor. It seems to be a debate what the Charter says and what we really
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 31 of 52
need. His suggestion is to take a look at what this position is from a salary, instead of it being dictated by the Charter.
It does not have to fall under the Charter if we need the staff support and it includes the support for the Mayor and
Council. Write the position and title that way, have it fall under that position title, and then commence with salary to
that. Then you are not even tied into whether or not it goes away or stays. You look at the role and responsibilities,
who are they going to support, write the position and title, then you make sure you are paying the person right, whether
it is the same or more. That is what you do in business and he assumed that is what would be done here.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that is a different point from what they are being asked to approve. The
Council is being asked to approve that the State Representative go into legislature and remove something from the
Charter that she wrote. The citizenry has not even been asked one word yet other than do they want a city and who
would they like to run it. She did not think that the Council should be approving something when apparently there are
some Councilmembers that know it is about to be removed so why bother asking for it to be removed.
Councilmember Thurman asked the City Attorney a question. She stated that according to the Charter the Executive
Aide is appointed by the Mayor for an indefinite term and can only be removed from office by the Mayor. If the
position is funded and the position is removed from the Charter what would happen.
City Attorney Scott stated that if the legislature tells the City that they have to do something, then the City has to
because the City is a creature of the legislature.
Councilmember Thurman stated that all it is doing is removing the language. It is not changing the terms of this
position.
City Attorney Scott stated that if the legislature removes the position as a Charter mandated position, we can continue
the position.
Councilmember Thurman asked if that person could still only be removed by the Mayor since that was the position
they were hired for or could they be removed by the City.
City Attorney Scott stated that at that point in order for only the Mayor to remove that position, there would have to
be an ordinance passed.
Councilmember Thurman stated that if a person was hired for the position and at the time they were hired it could
only be removed by the Mayor.
Mayor Lockwood asked if the position would be hired from the City of Milton. The Charter is a guideline, but if the
Charter goes away that person is being hired based on their employment contract and job description.
City Attorney Scott stated that at that point, the person would revert into being a City employee.
City Manager Bovos stated that he would concur with that and the personnel policies adopted would cover that.
Mayor Lockwood stated that he is not in favor of approving the resolution.
Friendly Amendment to the Motion: Councilmember Thurman moved to amend the motion and substitute the
Resolution stated above, A Resolution Requesting the Executive Aide to the Mayor of Milton Position Be
Legislatively Removed from Our Charter. Councilmember Lusk seconded the amendment to the motion. The motion
passed 4-3, with Mayor Lockwood, Councilmember Zahner Bailey, and Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams voting in
opposition.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 32 of 52
Resolution to Voluntarily Mandate, as City Policy, no Provision for Medical/Dental or Other Supplemental
Benefits or Salary for any Part-time Employee or Elected Official, Without Unanimous Approval of Entire City
Council and Mayor.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that this resolution was drafted in response to some concerns in the community and
to reflect our fundamental position that we understand that as elected officials and, as it would pertain to temporary
employees absent any extraordinary circumstances, nor do they expect or seek or accept any supplemental benefits
beyond what was put in the Charter and what all of the Council knew and ran on. He read the resolution as follows:
RESOLUTION TO VOLUNTARILY MANDATE, AS CITY POLICY,
NO PROVISION FOR MEDICAL/DENTAL OR OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL
BENEFITS OR SALARY FOR ANY PART-TIME EMPLOYEE OR ELECTED OFFICIAL, WITHOUT
UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR
(Expense reimbursement excepted, on as needed basis only)
WHEREAS, the nature of compensation for public office in Milton was clearly delineated before
incorporation; and
WHEREAS, part-time employees in corporate America rarely enjoy additional benefits, thus it would be
tremendously unfair & inappropriate to seek, or be perceived to have sough, such perquisites; and
WHEREAS, the confidence of the residents is already being tested, due to actions and discussion in the public
realm; and
WHEREAS, the only exceptions would be to reimburse Milton for participation in group plans, if desired &
available, at full cost, or to enjoy any innovative delivery method of previously advertised benefits, such as
placement of salary in a tax-deferred investment account rather than a taxable salary disbursement; and
WHEREAS, such flexibility should only be available upon mutual consent, with absolutely no cost to the
taxpayers; and
WHEREAS, any departure from such a policy would be a breach of the trust and expectations of the 86%
voting in favor of the formation of the City of Milton, as well as those electing officeholders individually; and
WHEREAS, we must reassure the taxpayers and demonstrate our resolve to hold the line on taxes and
expenditures, especially as we initially embark on our journey of governance in Milton; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVE BY THIS COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA,
AND IT IS RESOLVED BY THE AUTHORITY OF SAID CITY COUNCIL.
By passage of this resolution, the City of Milton Mayor and City Council authorize the Mayor, City Manager,
and City Clerk to adopt an operating policy, consistent with our ability within our Charter and any other
applicable policy, that incorporates these concerns and responds completely with the expectations of the
majority of taxpayers; specifically, that Milton government will be lean, cost effective and mindful of the very
limited resources available and the trust with which they are extended to us for our careful use.
Motion and Second: Councilmember O’Brien moved to approve the Resolution to Voluntarily Mandate, as City
Policy, no Provision for Medical/Dental or Other Supplemental Benefits or Salary for any Part-time Employee or
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 33 of 52
Elected Official, Without Unanimous Approval of Entire City Council and Mayor. Councilmember Lusk seconded
the motion.
Discussion on the Motion: Mayor Lockwood stated that the Charter does have provisions for providing benefits for
Council and Mayor. Our Council and Mayor elected not to include these in the budget, fund them, or provide for
them. We adopted the personnel policy and budget. Basically, we have already decided not to include these benefits
to Mayor and Council on record. The concern he has is that the City should not tie the hands of future
councilmembers that may have different circumstances. This may limit the ability to have qualified citizens to serve
our City instead of only a certain segment that may have more resources than others. He has asked for staff
recommendations and thoughts on what other cities and governments have in this case.
City Manager Bovos stated that the organizations with strong Mayors and strong Councils who are heavily engaged
with the operations of the organization are often sometimes covered by benefits. The organizations with strong City
Managers and part time Council often do not. Our Charter allows the Council to set policy. The personnel policy has
been adopted by ordinance and the benefits are excluded for elected officials in the personnel policy. In order to
change the personnel policy, an ordinance would have to be passed. In addition to that, the resolution is in direct
conflict with the personnel policy. People who work 35 hours or less and are regularly scheduled part time employees
do enjoy some minor benefits of the organization such as paid holidays and time off. In addition a budget was adopted
by an ordinance and the budget did not appropriate benefits for elected officials. So at this point in time, there are two
ordinances in place that provide for the intent of the resolution. A resolution in and of itself will not supersede an
ordinance, but the ordinance itself carries law.
Councilmember Thurman stated that her understanding is that this resolution would only be binding to the current
Council.
City Attorney Scott stated that his interpretation of a resolution is that it is only binding on the current Council and so
it would be in effect only for the rest of this year.
Councilmember Thurman stated that realistically this resolution does not change anything the Council has already
done. It just reiterates to the public our intent not to provide these benefits. There was some misunderstanding at the
Council meeting in which the budget was approved and this would be looked at again once the full Council was on
board. All this does is say we have the full Council on board and we support not including these benefits. It really
does not change anything that is being done other than reiterating that fact.
City Attorney Scott stated that was a fair interpretation.
City Manager Bovos stated that he was a little concerned about the statement of time of a resolution. Unless the
resolution or ordinance specifies a time that it expires, they do not necessarily expire, meaning the staff does not come
before the Council every year to adopt a new zoning ordinance.
City Attorney Scott stated that is the difference between an ordinance and a resolution.
City Manager Bovos stated that was not correct. A resolution establishing a position of the City does not expire or a
proclamation proclaiming someone does not expire as a result of the failure to include that language in the
proclamation or resolution. They are ongoing unless they specify in the body of the resolution or proclamation there is
an expiration date.
City Attorney Scott stated that for an example, we needed to accomplish the transfer of the properties from Fulton
County by the end of 2006 because the viewpoint was the resolution that Commissioner Pitts had sponsored and the
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 34 of 52
Fulton County Commission had passed would not be binding on a future commission. His viewpoint is that a
resolution would not be binding on future councils.
City Manager Bovos stated that in that instance the Fulton County Commission had the ability to call for
reconsideration. Therefore, his understanding of that specific item is that we were concerned with the new
commissioners making a motion for reconsideration and changing the original resolution.
Mayor Lockwood stated that the City is making a bigger statement by having the ability to provide the benefits and
having not providing them. He is not looking at this for his own personal needs or anybody else on the Council. Later
on down the line, there may be a case where the only people that are able to serve on Council are people that are
independently wealthy or retired and we may lose out on some good people that normally the benefits would be the
difference between them being able to serve the community. That is his biggest point on that issue.
City Manager Bovos stated that it has never been the goal to require an elected official to serve and pay for their
service. We want to make sure the City is represented by the best elected officials it can attract. As organizations go
through a bell curve, there are times at which this becomes very effective. Removing it from the Charter or binding a
future Council is something that will be discouraged from a staff perspective. We will never like to see any action that
is taken by this Council that binds future Councils. That goes for any financial policy, debt issuance or administration
just on the fact the Council have a tendency to turn over and staff has a tendency to staff in place, especially the
executive team. When specific issues are looked at, they need to be looked at on the global and long term versus the
short term. Where we are today with an ordinance and personnel policy, this resolution has no effect on those. If we
really want to change something with respect to the Charter or those particular ordinances, those items need to be
called back forward.
Councilmember Lusk stated that a resolution is subject to repeal. In that regard, he would see the resolution as
somewhat innocuous since it is already covered in the Charter. He can read into the resolution since he was not on
board at the time certain things happened, but his was out campaigning. He thought this served as more of a PR move
than anything else, sending a message to City residents out there that this is the path that we intend to take and we are
just setting the record straight.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he would not characterize this as PR. He would characterize this as a
fundamental philosophical perspective that he thought many of Councilmembers would share. He has the utmost
consideration for those in difficult circumstances. He does not want to picture benefits for part-time public service and
he wanted to send a clear message with this resolution that the Council clearly understand that the overwhelmingly
majority of citizens in Milton do not anticipate nor do they desire to extend benefits other than a relatively modest
salary for this effort.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that what the City Manager articulated with clarification of the HR policy, the
Council has already stated for this term, this budget and, that they are not going to extend benefits. This Council voted
that way and that is the way they intend. They saw some mis-categorization the way it was played out in the press. He
thinks that is where a lot of static from citizens came from and it left a sour taste with them. That is not where the
Council was trying to go. It is in the Charter, but the Council made a statement to not take publicly paid benefits as a
Council. It sounds like Councilmember O’Brien is trying to clarify that is the intent of this Council to our citizens that
is the direction we are trying to head. He stated that what he heard from the City Manager was that if the Council
passes this resolution, the Council will be in conflict as written because we have already put it in the budget and
adopted it in the HR policy.
City Manager Bovos stated that it is not necessarily in conflict. It is just that you are not overriding an ordinance that
is in place and certainly the HR policy is an ordinance that has been approved, distinguishes part-time employees and
distinguishes the benefits associated with part-time employees. This resolution has no effect on that.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 35 of 52
Councilmember Mohrig asked if there were any recommendations on rewording so it is not in conflict or does not
appear we are trying to supersede policy.
City Manager Bovos stated that if the goal is to reiterate a position of the Council and to discuss a position that the
Council has made through a public relations standpoint, then that can be effectively done without passing this
resolution. It is engaging staff to make that point and to certainly educate and do press releases with respect to what
the Council has already done.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she wanted to thank Councilmember Mohrig for his statements because
they are right on target. We as a Council have already made a decision. We have approved a budget and that budget
clearly does not include benefits. We have a personnel policy that clearly does not include benefits. Because we are a
lean organization with limited staff, she would be concerned if we started to initiate movement towards resolutions to
simply state our intentions. Not because they do not have good intent, but if we have already taken action where the
resolution is simply a restatement of that which we have already done. There is a concern that it starts to drain the staff
and that it sets the stage to say we take action and we somehow have to restate that action. She stated that when the
discussion first came up it was appropriately done during the second reading of the budget with the goal of being
transparent. If we had not had that discussion, the members of the public would not have known if that was included
or not. There was a question about how reimbursed expenses are handled. If there is no public discussion, the Council
cannot possibly address that for the public. The discussion was intended to be a transparent discussion to give people a
better understanding of our budgeting process. We need to continue to do a better job with the press making sure they
have the facts. This evening it gives the Council a great opportunity, not necessarily with the approval of the
resolution, to have a healthy discussion and hopefully the press will take away this evening that indeed the Council
already has two ordinances that clearly made that statement. If they missed that point, this evening is a great
opportunity to reiterate that point.
She would yield to the recommendation of staff which as she understands is that the Council does not need to be in the
business of putting resolutions in place that simply are a restatement of actions that have already been taken. She is
concerned that if that is set into motion that we might be restating actions often. Resources as a staff are limited
already which was evidenced by the earlier resolution. She absolutely respects the intent of making a statement for
this community and Councilmember O’Brien’s intent to want to set the record straight for the public. She does not
believe a resolution is needed, however, to make that statement. She stated that she is not familiar with the reference
that was made to “innovative delivery method of previously advertised benefits, such as placement of salary in a tax-
deferred investment account.” She does not remember it being a specific item outlined in the Charter. Her concern is
that if through this resolution suddenly a new benefit is being introduced that has not been discussed, that in itself
might create some perceived conflict. She is concerned about the pursuit of different benefits that may not have been
clearly delineated or advertised. She is not familiar with the tax deferred approach or salaries of Council or Mayor as
an item that was never discussed. She does not want to walk down a path of benefits that were indeed not part of the
Charter directly that may present some other conflicts that the Council does not anticipate. This is a first read for her
of this proposed resolution. but within that section she has some questions.
City Manager Bovos stated that based on personnel policy elected officials are not eligible to participate in deferred
compensation. There is one caveat to that and that is the IRS replacement plan that is being initiated through the
Section 218 code. Based upon personnel policy, which again was adopted by ordinance, the Council is not eligible to
participate in deferred compensation.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that the language of the proposed resolution starts to be in conflict based on
what the City Manager just stated. Her suggestion is to state that two ordinances are clearly in place and they do
represent law as stated by City Attorney. Those ordinances are stronger legal methodologies for ensuring the public
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 36 of 52
that the Council is not participating in benefits. If the Council were to do that without the resolution, we are being
more efficient in how we manage our staff and activities.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that all he sought to do was reassure the citizens. As far as other delivery methods,
the only reason he went that way was because if some innovative opportunity that arose was cost neutral at any time in
the future, that would be welcomed. He did indeed want to eliminate any confusion since some exists with the
discussion of increasing expense reimbursement. If you open a discussion about increased benefits that were not
published as part of the expectation during the election process, then it sends a message to the voters and citizens. It is
a reminder to the people that the Council does not see this as a full time job with full time benefits. It seems to him
through listening to comments that this resolution could survive without ill effects.
City Manager Bovos stated that the passage of the resolution will not affect what is already in place. When it is
talked about part time benefits for part time employees, passing the resolution is not changing what is already in place
and what is already in place is a direct conflict of this resolution. He stated that because in the resolution it stated that
any part time employee or elected official will not receive a provision for medical/dental or other supplemental
benefits or salary.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he did not consider Christmas as a day off, a supplemental benefit. He stated
that he would be glad to amend it for it to reflect just elected officials if that will simply things and allow the Council
to move on. He stated that someone could offer a friendly amendment to remove the passage about part time
employees.
City Attorney Scott stated that this is titled as a Resolution to Voluntarily Mandate, as City Policy, no Provision for
Medical/Dental or Other Supplemental Benefits or Salary. He thought that the entire title is problematic because what
the Council resolves at the end is not what the titling of the resolution says to do.
Councilmember Thurman asked could the resolution be tabled for one week so that the exact wording could be
worked on.
Call the Question made by Councilmember Zahner Bailey. She also stated that the City Attorney said that the
language is in conflict.
Councilmember Thurman stated that if a question is called and not everyone has spoken then they are allowed the
opportunity to speak.
City Manager Bovos stated that his understanding is that when a question is called a vote has to occur.
City Attorney Scott stated that calling the question is a motion to cut off the debate and there certainly is the ability to
vote whether to cut off the debate.
Mayor Lockwood asked if this is voted and not passed could Councilmember O’Brien reword it and bring it back up.
City Attorney Scott stated that he certainly could do that.
Councilmember O’Brien asked could he withdraw the resolution.
City Attorney Scott stated that he can withdraw the motion.
Motion to Withdraw and Acceptance: Councilmember O’Brien moved to withdraw the motion to approve the
Resolution to Voluntarily Mandate, as City Policy, no Provision for Medical/Dental or Other Supplemental Benefits or
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 37 of 52
Salary for any Part-time Employee or Elected Official, Without Unanimous Approval of Entire City Council and
Mayor. The withdrawal was accepted by Mayor Lockwood.
Resolution Establishing protocols leading to Development of Policies, Procedures and operational Philosophies
Which Meet or Exceed the Georgia Municipal Association Guidelines for the “Cities of Ethics” Program,
Leading to Milton’s Designation as a City of Ethics.
Resolution No. 07-01-05
Councilmember O’Brien read the resolution as follows:
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROTOCOLS LEADING TO DEVELOPMENT OF POLICIES,
PROCEDURES AND OPERATIONAL PHILOSOPHIES WHICH MEET OR EXCEED THE GEORGIA
MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION GUIDELINES FOR THE “CITIES OF ETHICS” PROGRAM, LEADING TO
MILTON’S DESIGNATION AS A CITY OF ETHICS
WHEREAS, the basic tenets are as follows: Serve Others, Not Ourselves; Use Resources With Efficiency
and Economy; Treat all People Fairly; Use the Power of Our Position For the Well Being of Our
Constituents; Create an Environment of Honesty, Openness and Integrity, and
WHEREAS, such an effort will be a visible indication of our intentions to be ethical, effective and ultimately,
stewards of utmost responsibility for the tremendous trust placed in us by the residents of Milton; and
WHEREAS, successful implementation resulting in designation as a City (or Town) of Ethics will be the first
of many tangible overtures to set the bar ever higher as we serve the public, reinforcing their confidence in our
efforts; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THIS COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA,
AND IT IS RESOLVED BY THE AUTHORITY OF SAID CITY COUNCIL.
By passage of this resolution, the City of Milton mayor and City Council authorize the Mayor, City Manager,
City Attorney and City Clerk to expeditiously pursue any and all steps necessary to accomplish the letter, spirit
and intent of the goals of this program, ever mindful of the tremendous trust and responsibility placed upon the
government of Milton by present and future generations, thereby setting the standard for future administration
in the years to come.
He stated that the GMA has a program that has certain requirements. Of all the cities in Georgia, approximately 170
are considered “Cities of Ethics.” He was hoping the City would seek the highest standard as possible and become
certified later on this spring.
Motion and Second: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve the Resolution Establishing protocols leading to
Development of Policies, Procedures and operational Philosophies Which Meet or Exceed the Georgia Municipal
Association Guidelines for the “Cities of Ethics” Program, Leading to Milton’s Designation as a City of Ethics.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams seconded the motion.
Discussion on the Motion: Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that while she has not agreed with the
procedures that are being followed this evening, as a new Council, they are still learning and will get better at this. She
believed that the City of Milton is a city of ethics and the entire Council has to lead and follow what Councilmember
O’Brien has read. She positions herself that way and looks forward to having the City endorsed.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 38 of 52
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that the City of Ethics designation is tremendous. She supports that Council
pursuing the GMA designation. She stated that the Council and Mayor will improve and be more efficient and provide
services better if we establish effective and efficient processes from the start. This afternoon she tried to pull up some
information about the process on the GMA procedure because she was not familiar with what would be required to
become a city of ethics. She recognized that phrases stated in the proposed resolution is from the recommended
language of the GMA. The document she explored talked about the need to have a signed resolution and to have
consistency with an adopted ethics ordinance of the City ensuring that the resolution identifies or has had a review
process relative to the ordinance. We have adopted an ethics ordinance. She wanted to state that we already believe
ourselves to be a Council and Mayor of ethics. This is simply an additional step to get that certification. Her question
has to do with concern over making sure that we have a full staff review and a legal review, not to preclude it from
occurring but to make sure as the Council goes down this path we have adopted a resolution which corresponds to the
certification requirements. Knowing that the resolution has not yet had an opportunity to be reviewed by staff in
concert with the ordinance that has already been adopted, she would ask that Council be cautious. She would like to
be a certified city sooner and not later. If there are some reviews that need to occur to ensure that the resolution will
allow the eventual package that goes to GMA to be approved and allow for certification, she wants to make sure that it
goes through all necessary reviews to make sure it can be effectuated. She asked the City Manager to comment on the
process.
City Manager Bovos stated that staff has not undergone that review process. There are members on the team that
have worked for cities that are certified. However, with the introduction of this resolution, we have not taken the
opportunity to review the program guidelines and requirements to ensure that this resolution accomplishes the city
certification. Many of the basic tenets that are outlined in the resolution are values. The staff has purposely not come
forward and asked the Council to define values until after the retreat. That is one of the major objectives of the retreat.
By adopting this resolution, we are also adopting values of the organization. This is something that would have been
brought to the Mayor and Council in a six to eight month time period once deployment had been accomplished. The
staff supports this, but it was not on the radar from a 90 day perspective.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that this could be a rather extensive process. She wanted to know if we could
consider moving this to a Council report so that staff would be engaged rather than adopt the resolution as currently
written only from the perspective that it would allow staff to review the process by which we could have a sense of
probability of securing that certification and that would allow us to go through those necessary and normal steps just
noted.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he was alluding to with the words “to pursue any and all steps necessary to
accomplish….” He is seeking to initiate that process whether it takes two years, two months or one week. He is just
inviting to resolve to begin to pursue the steps necessary. He described the basic tenets of the city of ethics program,
but that does not necessarily mean that is our core value. He is not suggesting that at all; just merely sharing that is the
underlying concept of the city of ethics program from GMA. At risk of trying to pursue policy and establish the City’s
philosophical approach to leading and serving in this community, he wanted to express to the customers and
constituents that we hold them in the highest respect and how we conduct ourselves will be treated the same way.
Councilmember Lusk stated that as a registered professional engineer in the State of Georgia, he conforms to the
ethics of that license. As a registered license general contractor in the State of Georgia, he conforms to the ethics of
that license. It goes without saying that he would conform with all the ethics laid out by GMA guidelines. He is not
sure where this is going. It sounds like it is being sent to a committee and the committee is part of the staff and to
members of the Council to formulate this. He thinks that is where the Council needs to head this. Understanding the
City Manager, he stated that the Council needed to consider these values at the retreat and fine tune and polish this
resolution before executing it.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 39 of 52
City Manager Bovos stated that would be staff’s recommendation. We are 90 days old and have not had a retreat,
have not had a chartering session, have not had a discussion on values and mission statement or anything like that.
Certainly, the staff is supportive of this program because some of the staff has come out of organizations that have
adopted these programs. They are extremely beneficial. He does concur that the resolution does authorize the Mayor,
City Manager and City Clerk to expeditiously pursue any and all steps necessary to accomplish the letter, spirit and
intent of the goals of this program. This resolution, from the staff’s perspective, serves as directive to them to begin to
implement the program.
Councilmember Lusk asked the City Manager did he support it as it was written.
City Manager Bovos stated that since there is the word “expeditiously” in the resolution, his preference would be to
allow staff to work on deployment of operations and services, to have discussions with Council about core values and
mission statements, and to see if those values and statements can come back into alignment or be in alignment with
this program and then move forward with the implementation of the program. He has no problem with doing it, but
the word expeditiously is part of his concern.
Councilmember Thurman asked if the word expeditiously was taken out would the City Manager feel more
comfortable.
City Manager Bovos stated that he supported the program. The Council already has a comprehensive ethics policy
that covers a huge amount of our operation.
Councilmember Thurman stated that she understands that the one word in there does have time constraints. If that
one word was removed then all it would basically state was our intent to pursue this and the pursuit could allow the
Council at the retreat to discuss how they want to go about pursuing this.
City Manager Bovos stated that he would feel more comfortable with this.
Friendly Amendment to the Motion: Councilmember O’Brien made a Friendly Amendment to remove the word
“expeditiously” from the last paragraph. The Friendly Amendment was accepted by Councilmember Thurman.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she supports the city of ethics program. She asked that at the risk of
having resolutions every time we want to direct staff, is there no way to approach this without having a resolution per
say, but to have it as a discussion during Mayor and Council reports. She stated that individually and collectively the
Council supported values. Typically, the process would be to have the retreat and have the process begin not with the
resolution because the resolution is what has to go to GMA, but instead staff begins to go down the path, which they
have already identified as an item for the retreat, and then the resolution would result from that and the Council
ultimately would sign a resolution put forth by staff and then it would goes to GMA. We could amend this resolution
to say that we do intend to pursue this, but to do it not as a resolution but as a procedure within reports directing staff
to go down that path in preparation for a retreat and then to meet those certification requirements that may or may not
be fully outlined in this resolution. She is just trying to procedurally understand what is the best approach to make sure
we capture intent and also set forward a good process as we proceed.
City Manager Bovos stated that the challenge from staff’s perspective with the resolution is that it incorporates an
action item that needs to be accomplished within a time period. An action item that engages the whole organization
needs to be approved in the work plan. As part of the retreat, the Council will be asked to set the priorities for the
upcoming year. Staff will set their goals and priorities for the upcoming year as well. There will be no way to
accomplish all of those so collectively, as a policymaker, the Council will prioritize that for the staff. The
implementation of a program such as this, would be preferred to be seen on the work plan for that year or three year
period so the staff knows when they have available resources based upon the priority of staff implementations of the
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 40 of 52
priorities of the City Council that we will get to that particular program and have implementation. The challenge with
this type of resolution is you have a police department to deploy, a fire department to deploy, a community
development department to implement, software systems that has yet to be written account payable checks for, and we
have yet to pay employees. So when you are passing a resolution before any employee has ever been paid to
expeditiously implement a program, it just feels inverse. His preference is to go forward with a work plan everyone
agrees with. It can be amended at anytime if there is something that is missed in the retreat.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that is why she asked the question of whether the word expeditiously being
removed would cure the concerns, but she heard that it would not cure it from a planning and prioritization standpoint.
She asked would he prefer the option to be a non resolution based directive, but instead an acknowledgement from the
Council and Mayor that they of course want to pursue this but because of the staff limitations we would want to
consider it relative to the other priorities of deployment of the items just mentioned.
City Manager Bovos stated that he could assure the Council that is what would happen at the retreat whether this
resolution is passed or not passed, but this will be one of the items of discussion about the upcoming work plan. At
that point, the Council will prioritize as a body where they see this program fitting into the work plan. From the staff’s
perspective, it will be carried forward whether it is passed or not passed to the Council’s input on how quickly it is to
be done.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that from a process standpoint, we have an opportunity to not have a resolution
for everything that we intend to do as a Council. Her concern is that as a Council, with limited staff and limited time,
we not put ourselves in the position to feel that we must now put forth resolutions for everything we think has high
value as a statement of intent.
Councilmember Thurman stated that this will be taken care when the work plan is in place.
Call the Question: Councilmember Thurman called the question.
Vote: There was no further Council discussion. The motion passed unanimously.
Resolution to Change the Name of City of Milton to “Town of Milton”.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he spent several months going door to door and talking to people with some
saying that they did not really see Milton as a city. A city is concrete, tall buildings, and other things that go with that.
He happened to grow up in a town that incorporated in 1670 in New England. He often commented that he would
characterize Milton as a town. He stated that he believed firmly that the quality of life and property value for the
residents of Milton will depend on us to some degree being able to brand what we have here. His nominee for the bike
path committee, Mr. Chatham stated that real estate relocation shows this area is in the top five for executive relocation
and estate moving. He really felt they were referring to Milton, not Alpharetta. He believed that we should pursue
aggressively a branding project where we reach out to the media, the weather channel, mapquest, and the traffic
reporters. He wants to hear reference to Milton and see Milton on the map. The true character of this area is more
accurately reflected as a town rather than a city. In Georgia, the terms are legally interchangeable. There are 109
towns in Georgia and 395 cities. He has fairly consistent advice from GMA and others that say there are no
impediments to this process. We could effect the change at this point for a very modest amount of money, but probably
only tonight. He read the resolution as follows:
A RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT A CHANGE OF THE NAME OF
CITY OF MILTON TO “TOWN OF MILTON”
WHEREAS, the term “Town” is evocative of a warm, connected community; and
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 41 of 52
WHEREAS, the term “city” suggests concrete, tall buildings, lack of contact with neighbors and other, often
negative implications; and
WHEREAS, the term “City” is a misnomer for the impression provided most residents or visitors to Milton;
and
WHEREAS, the terms “City” and “Town” are legally interchangeable in Georgia; and
WHEREAS, there are 395 Cities in Georgia, but only 109 Towns; and
WHEREAS, it would be cost neutral to initiate a name change at once, however each day of delay creates
exponential complications and cost; and
WHEREAS, items such as office consumables, forms, documents and routinely replaced work products
would be used until exhausted, then replaced with “Town of Milton” items; and
WHEREAS, the total actual costs at this juncture to effect such a change, which will have a positive effect in
perpetuity, is estimated to be less than three thousand dollars; and
WHEREAS, the process of “branding” Milton, will assist in an effort which likely will dramatically enhance
property value, livability and enflame desire to be a part of the Milton experience; and
WHEREAS, such a change will set us apart from the majority of cities, in name certainly, but also on the path
to a unique destination, which will be out legacy for Milton; and
WHEREAS, we have a great opportunity to establish a unique note in the name of our Town; one reflective of
the warm, beautiful equestrian flavor of the area and suitable for the rich traditions of the natives & founders,
which now grace the streets and historic cemeteries of our home; and
WHEREAS, we can be at once the largest, best, most desirable Town in the State of Georgia, while also
capitalizing on our golden opportunity to be the model town in the Southeastern United States.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THIS COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA,
AND IT IS RESOLVED BY THE AUTHORITY OF SAID CITY COUNCIL.
By passage of this resolution, the City of Milton Mayor and City Council authorize the Mayor, City Manager,
City Attorney and City Clerk to expeditiously pursue all administrative, operation and legal requirements to
effect such change, while especially mindful of the desire to utilize any asset or consumable possible during a
transition period, minimize disruption and preserve the ability to capitalize most effectively upon the
opportunity presented by this unique choice. Particular vigilance will be afforded any concerns pertaining to
maintenance of continuity and validity of Milton ordinances & policies, in the simplest manner possible, to
mitigate staff inconvenience and smoothly effect the changeover.
The City of Milton hereby calls upon the General Assembly of the State of Georgia to pass local legislation
facilitating the changeover described herein, while accommodating such change in the Charter of Milton.
Motion and Second: Councilmember O’Brien moved to approve the Resolution to Change the Name of City of
Milton to “Town of Milton”. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion.
Discussion on the Motion: Mayor Lockwood asked how long does it formally take to get the name changed.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 42 of 52
Councilmember O’Brien stated his understanding is from the guidance he has received is that the terms are legally
interchangeable so we would be free to characterize ourselves anyway we would want. He stated that he is very
mindful that a change of this nature would probably only take place at this beginning juncture of our existence. Before
the City goes too far down the path of procuring items for community, especially public service police cars, fire
engines, badges, uniforms, he felt at the moment the City had a modestly investment thus far. Perhaps the City
Attorney and Public Safety Director could comment on the relative timing and how we would affect this if it is
approved.
City Attorney Scott stated that his only comments would be limited to the actual ordinances and documents that the
Council has effectuated already. From a legal perspective, because Georgia statutes make it clear that city, town, and
municipal corporations are all interchangeable. We would not have to start all over again and begin the process. It
could be relatively simple. He felt it would require a Charter change, a change the Council cannot make on their own.
The Charter does say the City of Milton. If this is something that the Council wants to do and there is support in the
community, it would be better to do it now than later.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams asked how many people would Councilmember O’Brien surveyed of the
approximately 4,000 people that voted on the City of Milton.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he firmly believed that people did not vote in referendum for Milton, city, or
town. They voted conceptually to be free from the failed representation connection they were experiencing with
government. They voted to have the people that they select up here on the Council. As Councilmember Zahner Bailey
pointed out, she was vigorously supported and in other cases, no one was strong enough to challenge them. He
believed that the people want a concept, but he also believed that they do not want the Council to go to them and
establish a referendum or engage a poll every time the Council acts on their behalf. He believed from a marketing
standpoint and as we see ourselves unique, he thought this would be a fairly simply but interesting tactic to take. He
believed that people expected the Council to act and be innovative. His goal while running was to be respectful of the
traditions in the past. He does not see Milton as we know it and want it to be as being consistent with a city. Many on
the Council grew up where townships were very common. It is something that the Council can exploit as they go
forward and just a small piece in a bigger process of branding this community and increasing its name recognition.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that her firm belief is that the Council has not surveyed the citizens and
residents at all. Certainly, there are some items that the Council needs to act on that they expect. When it comes to
making such a tremendous change after all the work and tireless effort that went into having the City of Milton
approved, she really believed that the citizenry needed to be engaged and not just go on the comments of a few people.
She has heard an equal number of people talking about not liking the name of Milton at all. If you have 100 people or
the Council says they prefer town, but there is an enormous groundswell support for something different, maybe it
should just be Milton, Georgia like most cities are. The City of or The Town of does not have to come into play at all.
She would ask the Council not to react so early and hastily to have a resolution that is brought forth that is so
magnanimous because she felt this was a very major change to our City after all everyone went through. She did agree
that people voted for local government and control. We would have over our city, but she did also believe that people
were starting to identify with it. More due diligence is necessary. She urged the Council to engage the citizenry
immediately.
City Manager Bovos stated that from a legal perspective the resolution tonight sponsors local legislation to change the
name from the City of Milton to the Town of Milton. His challenge with that is the official name change would not
occur until the local legislation is finished, which will not be today. As a result, he would have to direct staff with
moving forward with obtaining and procuring equipment under the name The City of Milton since that is the official
name until a point in time occurs that the legal name changes. In the event that takes a day, week, or month, the costs
as the resolution states dramatically increase. He disagreed with the minimal figure that is in the resolution. As of
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 43 of 52
today, one is talking about new federal ID numbers, state ID numbers, and a whole plethora of issues behind that scene
that would occur right now. It may not be a direct expense, but certainly staff time. He asked the City Attorney’s
opinion about whether the City was aware the State Representative would be willing to sponsor this change, and if she
would, how long does the City anticipate something like this to occur.
City Attorney Scott stated that he has discussed this with State Representative Jones and she indicated that there was
an intent with the original bill to do this in the first place, but it was done in some haste. As far as how long it would
take, the legislature will be session in March. Local legislation takes less than time than a local act such as the City
Charter bills that were passed last year. There really is no telling. It all depends on when it comes up in the priorities
compared to everything else they are doing. As far as the tax ID numbers go, he felt that they would not have to be
changed because the City would not be becoming another entity. If this happens, it is just a matter of changing the
name; it is not changing the entity. A corporation does not get a new tax ID when they change their name or a person
does not get a new social security number when they change their name.
City Manager Bovos stated that studies would have to occur on every single thing that has occurred to date and that
involved staff time and costs. From staff’s perspective, the procurement of equipment will not be delayed. He could
not tell the Council that he was going to delay ordering police cars, fire trucks, and any other equipment that is to be
ordered because of a pending change in the name of the City. In the event he does that, the City will begin to incur
$670,000 worth of unbudgeted expense as a result of delay in public safety deployment. The organization cannot
afford to do that. He wanted to be clear that Council understood that it could not happen from an economical liability
and the service standpoint of this organization. In the event this resolution is passed, and is sponsored in local
legislation in the time period to change that, we will incur expense to change what the City has already done.
City Treasurer Wolfe spoke about the federal and state ID numbers. She stated that she approached this subject
today with the payroll provider and they have some real concerns in remitting state and federal holdings under the
current federal ID number which would tie back to an IRS issue number under the City of Milton and we would be
remitting state and federal holding under the Town of Milton. They did not give a definitive answer, but they do have
the concerns about having a different ID number on record and the federal and state name we remit the withholdings to
the State of Georgia and the Federal government.
Councilmember Thurman stated that as a CPA she did some research on that. A name as such does not and will not
allow you to get a new federal ID number because it is the same organization unless one is getting a new Charter.
Councilmember Lusk stated that he went through a change of name 16 years ago of his company and the same
federal ID number was kept.
Councilmember Thurman stated that it appears the largest expenditure would be the public safety equipment.
Public Safety Director Chris Lagerbloom stated that through the procedural things that have been accomplished at
this point, the City of Milton’s police department has been created through Georgia Peace Officer Standards and
Training counsel. That is the recognizing body that recognizes Milton’s ability to enforce the law when deployed on
May 1. All the officers that come to the Milton Police Department will have a certification that attaches to that
organization. Not to say that cannot be changed but that would be redoing work that has already been done at this
point. In securing an agency number, sometimes it called an ORI, will important as the City gets closer to deployment
because it is not only a number that will allow the City to assess the State Crime Information Center but also the
National Crime Information Center. We are about five weeks into the request for that number. We are awaiting the
approval from the FBI on the ORI. He asked that question and preliminarily got an answer that it is possible. The
word from the GBI is that it is possible to change it to a town without having to go back to the very beginning. He has
not gotten an absolute certain answer that is going to be accepted in Washington. The process takes six to twelve
weeks. As far as procuring items, he broke the order of them down by deadline. The most critical deadline is the
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 44 of 52
police and fire badges. The design was finished today and approved. He has until the end of this meeting to call the
badge company and make that decision. That order has to be in tomorrow. That gives an April 26 delivery date, four
days prior to deployment. Fire trucks are the next deadline. There is a deadline until the end this month to decide if
city or town will be on the front of the trucks and on the front side doors. If we went with city and later changed it to
town, we would incur the cost of repainting the panels. There is time to spare with the police graphic because the cars
have to be on the ground before the graphic package is started on. That is something that could be changed in 60 days.
Outside of that, the City is in a design phase for the artwork of the police and fire patches. That will also be specific to
the City of or Town of Milton.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that the concern of the Public Safety Director is to be mindful there is tremendous
support and hopes for a County of Milton as well. Whichever path is taken, one would like to have city or town so that
we can differentiate from a potential County of Milton as well.
Public Safety Lagerbloom stated that he would ere on the side of caution of just not putting Milton Police on the side
of the car because if we do end up with a Milton County and they decided to have a police department, then we do not
have a brand as the city or town of Milton.
City Manager Bovos stated that depending on the determination is with the ORI number; they are used on citations
and have to be printed by State law on the citations in order for the City to actually issue a ticket. Fulton County did
not agree to allow the City of Milton to take any fine revenue that was issued off of Fulton County tickets. That meant
the City Clerk and Municipal Court Clerk had a requirement to have our court operational as quickly as possible in
order for us to recapture revenue that was rightly the City of Milton. In the event that we have to reapply for the ORI
numbers that are already in process and that takes six to twelve weeks, approximately $100,000 a month in revenue
will be forfeited as a result of not having an ORI number. Fulton County still maintains that revenue.
Councilmember Thurman asked if that loss would occur only if we had to start over.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct.
Councilmember Thurman stated that is a very big key in all of this. She wanted to know how does the Council go
about getting a definitive answer to the question.
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that he wished he had a 100% definitive answer for the Council. He got a
very promising answer from the GBI today who indicated that it would not be a problem at the State level. That the
City would go forward with the continuation of the ORI delivery. If we needed a name change, we would request and
be able to make that change. That is a process that only attaches to half of what is being sought after because the City
is looking for a GCIC /NCIC assess. They can speak to half of it but not all of it. If we do choose to do this change,
the process at the State level will be relatively easy. At this point we are just in the holding pattern.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey referring back to an earlier resolution about using resources with efficiency and
economy. It concerns her that there are a lot of questions about a name change that may or may not give us the
answers that represent due diligence. It does not mean there is not intent to go through due diligence. She understood
that a decision needed to be made ASAP if a name change was to occur. A name change is a large policy decision.
Because of where we are in the deployment process, the range of costs associated with this proposed resolution is an
issue for her. It is an unknown. She reiterated the potential loss of revenue of $100,000 per month, as noted by Public
Safety Director Lagerbloom, is not a simple issue. She also wanted know what are the risks involved with this and
whether we could assign a dollar range of costs. Earlier tonight, IGAs were approved for police and fire. If not
deployed by May 1, the $349,000 could go upwards 4%. If the deployment of services is delayed, separate from
equipment and other costs, there is the risk of increased costs to be paid to Fulton County. She asked for a cost
estimate on the difference of having the services through Fulton County on a monthly basis versus being able to
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 45 of 52
provide them ourselves. She stated that this is why she is concerned about having items of this magnitude being
brought before the Council tonight without ample review, analysis or due diligence. She believes Milton is more rural
and therefore, understood the conceptual premise. Most people think of cities as more urban than what Milton
represents. There are parts that are not rural. The Deerfield area is more city than town as an example. She stated
that the risk tonight deals with the cost perspective, the lack of citizen input regarding the name itself as well as the
costs tied to a name change.
City Manager Bovos stated that it will be between $120,000 to $150,000 per month.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that would be an additional cost to the City because we would have the risk of
continuing with the contract with Fulton County versus providing for those services through our own deployment
process.
City Manager Bovos stated that was correct and the total would be $129,000.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked Public Safety Director Lagerbloom to talk about the line items for public
safety.
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that it would be a straight guess as to what it would cost to repaint the
front doors. The total cost of a fire truck is $400,600. He does not know the percentage cost for painting. The police
car graphics are the least worried about because it is not a permanent fixture on the car.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked if the ORI process was delayed then the deployment would be secondarily
delayed.
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that it would delay the deployment with any ability to conduct business.
They could not take any enforcement actions.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that the citizens would not want a police department that cannot enforce the
law. She did not want to say to citizens that we have no risk of delayed deployment or that we are willing to accept a
delay and yet not be able to enforce the law.
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that was correct. He would not recommend putting a police force on the
street that cannot enforce the law.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that the deployment of public safety was a critical issue with the citizens. She
asked was it fair to say that the risk of deployment on a monthly basis would have a cost associated with it if delayed
because of the ORI.
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that it would.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked Public Safety Director Lagerbloom to talk about badges.
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that badges would cost $8,000 to redo them. They have to be ordered as
soon as this meeting closes. If ordered by the opening of business tomorrow, there is guaranteed delivery on April 26.
Councilmember O’Brien stated there is no cost if the change is known tonight.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that they have no way of knowing if the legislature would pass something that
has not been put before them. The whole body based on State law would have to approve the name change.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 46 of 52
City Attorney Scott stated there is nothing that can be done here tonight to assure one way or the other how it will go.
He was trying to get a hold of Representative Jones tonight to pose the question to her.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that their responsibility this evening is to act on what they know. The reality is
there is a risk that cannot be quantified. From a timeline perspective, it is unfortunate that this discussion did not
happen way ahead of this evening. She is concerned about the risk the Council takes on with no formal public input.
We just said we are not willing to take on the potential of hundreds of thousands of dollars of additional cost per
month. She is not prepared to pursue a name change with these unknowns. She stated that City Manager Bovos
mentioned specifically that if a resolution was passed to effectuate a name change, it would require a prioritization of
staff time. Staff time does not come at no cost. She asked for an estimate in time and cost of staff to help implement
this if approved, and if approved, what is the cost of making the changes from a communication standpoint, legal and
various staff areas.
City Manager Bovos stated that knowing some of the delegation that would have to sign off on local legislation, the
Mayor would be investing some time to convince that delegation this is something that the City wanted. From their
perspective, they would want to feel more comfortable that the Council and constituent base are okay in expending
whatever dollars have to be expended before they signed off on the legislation. It may take 40 hours of the Mayor’s
time. Also, we just do not know what has to be changed from a staff perspective. Does every piece of paper have to
be changed, blanket ordinance to be done to changed agreement, contract, etc. The initial expense will be in research.
One Hundred hours of a person’s time could be easily the initial cost to start this research to determine what has to be
done.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that specific research items that are needed would have to be identified and
based on those research items, what additional activity is needed would be identified. My point is that his is not a
simple conversion. Are there other costs that have not been identified?
Mayor Lockwood stated that Councilmember Zahner Bailey’s point is well taken and there will be a cost associated
with this name change. Whether $300,000 or more. He stated that he does not have a problem with the Town of
Milton. Public perception must also be looked at. The citizens may wonder if the Council is committed or not. 100%
of the residents that have contacted him are totally against changing the name. Half of the population lives in more of
an urban area of Milton.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that the rural portrayal of Milton is not realistic because we have people who live in
all types of different housing. A lot of citizens live in subdivisions and not on horse farms.
Councilmember Thurman stated that it appears that the one decision that is cost wise and has to be made tonight is
the badges. She wanted to know if it was possible to put on the badges Milton, Georgia.
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that he could do that but his concern is what he spoke of earlier about
there being a formation of the County of Milton.
Councilmember Thurman asked how often are badges replaced.
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that you do not replace them ever. You add to them and when someone
retires it goes into a shadow box and it lives on for years.
Councilmember Thurman stated that the next time badges are ordered, city or town could be placed on them to
distinguish if the County is successful at that time.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 47 of 52
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that at the end of the day the badge is just a symbol the officer puts on his
shirt that displays he has the ability and we recognize them to do the job. It is price of pride that he is interested in
public safety having the same.
Councilmember Thurman stated that she liked the idea of being a town and everyone she has spoken to likes the
idea, but she is not willing to spend $3,000 of the taxpayer’s money to become a town.
Mayor Lockwood reiterated the point of how would they know what the citizens would want.
Councilmember Thurman stated that she is in favor of this if it is $3,000 and against it if it was $300,000.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey wanted to clarify that the City does not know what the costs are and she is not willing
to risk $8,000 on an unknown.
Councilmember Thurman stated that we are not risking $8,000. You can put Milton, Georgia on it and it does not
have to be changed regardless.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she understood from Public Safety Director Lagerbloom that it was his
recommendation to have either the City or Town of Milton so there would be a consistent conveyance across the Board
of who we are. We want to brand ourselves as a Milton community and that is wise. She is not sure the reward for
this risk has been enumerated. She is not comfortable voting for something that has not fully been reviewed or
developed with the associated costs fully identified.
Councilmember Thurman stated that he could order badges with Milton, Georgia on them for now. The Council
could make a decision within a week once they have the information on cost, and what the public wants to do.
Mayor Lockwood stated that there is a cost associated with this no matter what. Also, he stated the question of what
do the people want.
Councilmember Thurman stated that they are only recommending the change and if the State legislature decides that
they want to make the change, and then we would have the additional cost. It is her understanding that is something
that may be done.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that the feedback he got back that he was acting on was the desire to boldly
differentiate ourselves. He recognized the challenge and the review has been very fair. He would be hesitant to ask
for an $8,000 badge replacement. The estimates he heard when he first floated the idea was $75,000 then it dropped to
$35,000 and then somewhere below $10,000. He felt this has merit. As Councilmember Thurman suggested, there
perhaps is a middle ground. He asked could the Council seek an interim solution that would push it off to allow
sufficient time to ascertain if the risk is significant or if it could be accomplished and warmly received.
City Manager Bovos stated that Councilmember O’Brien could make a motion to defer. There currently is a motion
on the floor to approve. He stated that staff would need to know what is it that the Council would need in order to
make their decision. He has heard costs, legislative issues, and survey of citizenry.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that it is his understanding there is a very clear plan and clear expectation of passage
legislatively for a town. He stated that Councilmember Thurman suggested that we wait a week to thoroughly review
his. He asked was there a way to modify the resolution to afford that opportunity to further assess the risk. He asked
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom what his desire would be if there was a fairly significant chance that we would be a
town in treating the badges or would he like to have one or the other.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 48 of 52
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that his preference is one or the other. The badges do not mean anything
less with the word Milton on it. If there wasn’t the push of establishing a county on the horizon then there would not
be the risk of us being similar to an agency. He would like to differentiate the city from what may come in the future.
He will call Symbol Arts as soon as he leaves the meeting and let them know which way to proceed.
Councilmember Thurman stated to just put the horse logo on the badge.
Public Safety Director Lagerbloom stated that the logo is already on the badge.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey asked about the cost of signs that were put out.
City Manager Bovos stated that it was approximately $2,500.
Public Comment:
Jenny Koury, 215 Canterbury Lane, Milton, spoke on this topic. She asked could the signs stay since they are
supposedly the word town and city are interchangeable. She expressed concern that we had not identified the cost of
replacing signs.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that the whole point is to brand. If we are to brand as the town of Milton, then
the old signs cannot be left up.
Councilmember Thurman stated that changes were being made to the Charter up to the last minute based on
recommendations from Sandy Springs.
Jenny Koury stated that one thing that concerns her is the repeated words we were in a rush to get this done. It does
not look good. She understood the Council may have wanted to get through a window in which it could be done, but
to set them up in one way and to keep coming back wanting to change them was not good. When you change the
whole name of a whole city that makes a difference. It is not like just adding one more employee or changing the title
of that person’s position. She got the feeling that it was not thought out all the way through. We were proud to be the
City of Alpharetta before any of this was done. All of a sudden when we become Milton, we are not proud to be a city
anymore. If didn’t make sense to her. She stated that we are not in Mayberry anymore. We are modern now. Town
does not carry what everyone thinks it might.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that she did not want Ms. Koury to go away thinking the City was rushed.
Some of the comments were to the Charter developed prior to due diligence and through the due diligence process
none of these really focused on. So, they must not have been important as they are today. A city has not been created
in Georgia for years. The last one is Peachtree City which was created around 1960.
Carol Lane, 14890 East Bluff Road, Milton, spoke on this topic. She stated that she is concerned about tonight. She
has sat in Fulton County Commissioners meetings and City of Alpharetta meetings. Tonight, these were just
procedures, but what happens when the City gets into the critical issues. There is something to be said for procedure.
Most Council does that so that everyone does not have the last word. There has got to be a process in doing this even
though the Council is new. From her perspective of watching this, it is pretty incredible. She would love to have this
on video. She suggested that the Council tape the meetings because if they did, and watched them back, it would help
the Council. The Council represents the people and the people did vote for the Council.
She is also concerned about who runs the city, whether the Council runs the City or the State legislature. If
Representative Jones is running the City, then she needs to be here to make these proposals. They did write the
Charter and present it to the citizens. The citizens then voted on that. The elected officials were voted on and they
need to take charge. The Council is in charge of the City and she is very concerned that a Charter that was written and
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 49 of 52
approved is all of sudden being changed. If the name of the Milton is going to be changed, then all the costs must be
looked at fully. She was involved with the City of Milton after the elections and she never heard anyone saying the
Town of Milton. She stated that you are not in New England, you are in Georgia. She stated that the Council needs to
think about tonight and how they move forward.
Call the Question: Councilmember Zahner Bailey called the question.
Councilmember Thurman stated that the question could be called with a 2/3 majority vote.
City Attorney Scott stated that it seems like the Council is saying they want more time to consider this. His
suggestion is that a motion be made to lay it on the table.
Motion and Second: Councilmember O’Brien moved to table the resolution. Councilmember Thurman seconded the
motion.
Discussion on the Motion: City Manager Bovos asked was there a date on the table or was this indefinite.
City Attorney Scott stated that when you table it, it can be brought back up anytime.
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he wanted to respond to the staff’s needs so he asked for it to be tabled for one
week.
Friendly Amendment to Motion: Councilmember Thurman made a Friendly Amendment to table the Resolution to
Change the Name of City of Milton to “Town of Milton” for one week. Councilmember O’Brien accepted the
Friendly Amendment.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that Public Safety Director Lagerbloom needed to order badges this evening
and his preference is have either city or town on them. Given that we are currently the City of Milton, are we going
ahead and ordering the badges as planned?
Councilmember O’Brien stated that he would accept the decision of the Public Safety Director and City Manager
while we table for a week.
City Manager Bovos stated that as a point of order, there is no discussion on the table.
City Attorney Scott stated that the only motion valid right now is the motion to lay it on the table indefinitely.
Motion to Withdraw and Acceptance: Councilmember O’Brien moved to withdraw the resolution to table the
Resolution to Change the Name of City of Milton to “Town of Milton” for one week. Mayor Lockwood accepted the
withdrawal.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember O’Brien moved to table the Resolution to Change the Name of City of Milton to
“Town of Milton” indefinitely. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. There was no Council discussion.
The motion passed unanimously.
Discussion of Changing Meeting Time of City Council.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that he knew next week the Council would be discussing Chapter 2 Administration
and he asked for an amendment to be prepared to amend Council meeting times from 5:30 PM to 7:00 PM. He would
like a time convenient for the public and constituents. It was at 5:30 PM because the Council was meeting in a school.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 50 of 52
City Manager Bovos stated that the first reading has already been completed for the update to the Rules and
Procedures regarding the addition of work sessions. As a result of adding work sessions, that will be brought for a
second reading next week. During the approval of that particular update to the existing ordinance, a motion can be
made to change the time. The only thing he would say is that the Council has been here for five and a half hours
tonight and in the event that it starts two hours later and there is a zoning agenda, he wants everyone prepared that the
meeting may last until 2 or 3 in the morning. He has also heard that the start time of 5:30 PM is not feasible at times.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that he is constantly getting comments from citizens that have to come from
downtown and often they are stuck in traffic, especially people coming from work and traveling on 400. Because of
traffic and the time of the meetings, they can’t make it to the meetings to participate. The challenges to get here to
become part of meetings is too difficult. Therefore changing the time is important for this accommodation.
Discussion in Reduction of Franchise Fees.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that he would like to request staff to look into reducing or eliminating franchise fees
due to current budget and report the data back to Council in a subsequent meeting or two weeks.
Councilmember Thurman stated that the intent with this was to see which of the fees if any could be eliminated.
Comments had been received on garbage fees. A smaller fee could be gotten rid of if possible.
Councilmember Mohrig stated that the intent is to take a look and see if, given the City’s current situation, there are
any funds available to help reduce the fee impact on the customers.
City Manager Bovos stated that it could be done, but services needed to be reduced as well.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to instruct the Staff to look at reducing or eliminating franchise
fees and to bring back information on this to the February 1st meeting. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion.
There was no Council discussion. The motion passed unanimously.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that she and Councilmember Thurman met with Jim Nevin who is the
trustee for minor children that own George Baker Complex. He has been spoken with about annexing into the City of
Milton. He presented a letter today that stated his preference to be annexed into the City of Milton with the caveat that
his is not the lone property along Cox Road that is annexed into Milton. It means a lot to the City because it is a soccer
complex and currently leased by the YMCA.
Councilmember Thurman stated that it was an interesting process to work on and will be an interesting one when
Mayor Lockwood talks to Mayor Wood.
Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams stated that Mayor Lockwood will present the letter to Mayor Wood. The
Council wanted to do what the citizens of that area wanted. This gentleman has spoken on behalf of this property and
we will fulfill his wishes as best as we can.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey thanked both Councilmembers for making that happen and thanked Councilmember
D’Aversa-Williams for the leadership she brought to the YMCA and helping to effectuate that. She also wanted to
thank Rick Hirsekorn. On New Year’s Eve, there was some citizenry input that came to the City with regards to public
works and some road hazards. It’s an excellent opportunity to highlight the public/private partnership because
typically if we were not the organization we are, we would not have been able to respond on a Sunday that was New
Year’s Eve. There were a number of people to go out in the rain on that day and Rick went into the office to
collectively make sure the public was safe.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 51 of 52
In regards to the Adopt a Road Program, she spoke with Karen Zarin, as well as citizens that are a part of that program
through Fulton County. Greg Wilson is helping to effect a transition from Fulton County to the City of Milton. We
would like to do that with no cost expended, but it will be a challenge. We will continue to work to be responsive to
inquiries regarding the Adopt a road program.
Councilmember Thurman stated that a lot of issues before the Council tonight involved legislative issues to the
Charter. A few of the Councilmembers were invited to attend a meeting tomorrow with the legislators. These issues
will be clarified with the legislative team and to make sure what Representative Jones intent is. Charter changes are
not made by Council but by legislators. She stated that the Council runs the City and not legislature, but we do work
with the legislature to make sure everyone is on the same page.
STAFF REPORTS
City Manager Bovos reminded everyone about February 1 and February 2. Currently, there are two days scheduled
for the retreat. February 1 is from 9 AM to 2 PM and February 2 from 9:30 AM to 4:00 PM. It will be conducted at
the Hilton Garden Inn on Windward Parkway. A memo will be sent out in respect to the expectations of those two
days. He also needed to get with Councilmembers Zahner Bailey, Lusk and Mohrig on the Chamber of Commerce
event happening on Saturday evening. The mail today included passes and confirmations for the Mayor’s Day event.
Several members of staff today met with representatives of the Fulton County including Commissioner Riley to
discuss the elevated water tank that will be constructed at Pritchard Mountain. This is a budgeted capital project
within Fulton County and is necessary and required because of the higher elevation in that area. They are working
close with the area to develop a citizen’s participation program so that the design of the water tank itself can be agreed
upon. The January 18th packet will be distributed tonight.
Community Development Manager Tom Wilson stated that the City’s Charter provided for the Council to establish
commissions and boards necessary to fulfill investigative quasi legislative or quasi judicial needs. The zoning
ordinance established the need for a Planning Commission, a Design and Review Board, and a Board of Zoning
Appeals. The City code established the need for an Alcohol License Review Board, Board of Ethics and Construction
Board of Adjustments. The table included in the agenda packet outlines the boards of commission, the authority, the
frequency of meetings, the number of members and qualifications. It also includes the terms and types of actions that
can be taken by that board of commission. The Council needs to consider nominations to populate the Boards and
Commissions. The Planning Commission and Design Review Board both meet in March; therefore he is proposing
that nominations be made at the February 1 meeting and the appointments made at the February 15. A training session
is planned for the Planning Commission, Design Review Board and Board of Zoning Appeals in early March. Each
board has meetings scheduled in March and the date of the training depends on the availability of the members of the
boards. He went over an example of one of the boards.
City Manager Bovos stated that members needed to reside in the district of the Councilmember that nominates them
and their term be concurrent with the Councilmember term. Some recommendations will be brought forth when the
boards are approved.
Community Development Manager Tom Wilson stated that at the last Council meeting, an extensive review was
done of the sign ordinance. The Council did not get through the whole document. 10 more pages needed to be
reviewed and would be brought back before the Council for that purpose. A meeting will be set up some time in
February for the Councilmembers to attend to provide input on the documents.
City Attorney Scott stated that he sent an email to everyone stating that he determined five locations within the city
including the newly annexed area on Arnold Mill Road where the county’s litigation is impacting. He is working the
County office to figure out a solution.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 5:30 PM
Page 52 of 52
City Treasurer Carol Wolfe stated that as the City has started transferring utility accounts for streetlights from Fulton
County to the City of Milton. It has come to the staff’s attention that Fulton County pays the streetlight expenses for
what appears to be every street in the City of Milton, over 1700 of them. She has a list from Suwannee. In her
experience it usually is not a municipal expense to pay streetlights in subdivisions. For comparison, last year
Alpharetta paid close to $80,000 for street lighting. The City of Milton’s estimate is $222,000 for street lighting
expense. She just wanted to bring this to the attention of the Council and with their consent, staff wanted to prepare a
recommended policy on street lighting. Recommendations would be provided on how the Council could move
forward and what the options are for continuing to pay for street lighting and the transition of streetlight expenses.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that there has been concern in the past whether either Suwannee or some of the
other entities would go out and put up a new streetlight without the direction of the government. She asked that as part
of the policy, that the staff look at the expense of how we transition that and also that we do not enact a movement
towards lighting all streets.
Councilmember Mohrig asked did the City bare the cost for lights out or what would be the procedure.
City Treasurer Wolfe stated that she did not know the differentiated cost between the types of streetlights. The
maintenance of the bulbs is the responsibility of the utility company. In some cases, there is a utility lease where the
utility company owns he pole, bulb and maintenance. It becomes an enforcement issue of holding the utility company
responsible for maintaining the bulbs.
Councilmember Thurman asked has this been paid for previously out of the Fulton County General Fund or Special
Service District Fund.
City Treasurer Wolfe stated that she did not know the answer to that question.
Councilmember Thurman stated that with all the numbers Fulton County gave the City of Milton, she never saw a
cost for utilities for street lights.
Mayor Lockwood asked was there anywhere to confirm with Fulton County is they should still be paying for these.
City Treasurer Wolfe stated that Fulton County has put the utility companies on notice that they are not responsible
for the lights.
Councilmember O’Brien stated then we have an answer. We also have public safety input on the discussion of
lighting, especially for considering darkening.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she is not suggesting darkening the streets. What has happened in the past
was that lights were going up without necessarily a need being identified.
Councilmember O’Brien commented that is a good point.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to adjourn the meeting at 11:21 PM. Councilmember Mohrig
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Date Approved: April 12, 2007
__________________________________ __________________ _____________ __
Jeanette R. Marchiafava, City Clerk Joe Lockwood, Mayor