HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 02/08/2010 - 02-08-10 W.S. Mins (Migrated from Optiview) (2)Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 1 of 26
This summary is provided as a convenience and service to the public, media, and staff. It is not the intent to transcribe proceedings verbatim. Any
reproduction of this summary must include this notice. Public comments are noted and heard by Council, but not quoted. This document includes limited
Mme. presentation by Council and invited speakers in summaryform. This is an official record of the Milton City Council Meeting proceedings. Oficial Meetings
are audio recorded.
The Work Session of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton was held on February 8, 2010 at 6:00
PM, Mayor Joe Lockwood presiding.
Council Members Present: Councilmember Karen Thurman, Councilmember Julie Zahner Bailey,
Councilmember Burt Hewitt, Councilmember Joe Longoria, Councilmember Alan Tart.
Councilmember Absent: Councilmember Bill Lusk was absent/excused.
Mayor Lockwood:
• Work Sessions are an informal setting to update Council on business items.
• No votes will be taken during these sessions.
• There are eight (8) items on our Agenda tonight.
• Public comment is allowed that is germane to an Agenda Item.
• If you wish to speak you are required to fill out a comment card and turn it into the City Clerk staff.
• Public comment will be allowed for a total of 10 minutes per agenda item and no more than 2 minutes per
person.
• Public comment will be heard at the beginning of each Item.
• Once the item is called, no other comment cards will be accepted.
Chris Lagerbloom:
• We're going to start with Item 2.
Interim City Clerk Gordon read Agenda Item #2.
CPAC Financial Model Conclusions and Assumptions
(Presented by George Ragsdale, CPAC Chair)
George Ragsdale, CPAC Chair:
• At a fairly critical stage in terms of where we are with respect to the Plan, we're here tonight to talk about
feedback on the financial modeling that we've done and to try to get your guidance on how to move
forward from here.
• All of the assumptions are things that you've seen and we've talked about before. We've tried to capture
them all in one place and will try to do the same thing going forward.
• On the revenue side we have based the model on actual 2008 revenues and 2009 annualized.
• The numbers in the annual report have no resemblance to what we've used in the model. One of the
assumptions we made in the model was that the property tax revenues were going to be received in the
year in which they were assessed at 100%.
• The model assumes that revenue from LOST is flat, year to year. I checked with Lynn Riley about what
the County was assuming; they haven't made any different assumption at this point and we don't know
what they're going to do with that until they see some census figures. There could be a one-time
adjustment in 2012 with respect to population.
,.w • The model assumes no change in property tax rate
• Appraised values "escalated" as follows:
• 2009 —down 10%
• 2010 —down 5%
• 2011 — no change
• 2012 — no change
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 2 of 26
• 2013 and thereafter = 3% per year
,� • With respect to the expense side:
2008 - Actual
2009 - "annualized" (confirmed by Stacey)
2010 - "line item" budget; we put this in as approved and made a one-time adjustment against that budget
of savings of $1.3MM bottom line reduction vs. 2009 for the staff transition
2011 — additional $1 million adjustment for remainder of staff transition; once those adjustments are
made they become part of the budget adjusted at 3% going forward
What we intend to do when we do our mid -year budget adjustment, is fold that $1.3MM back in on a line
item basis so that it matches more accurately what the actual budget is.
Councilmember Thurman:
• So are we saying overall we're going to save $2.3 million because of this?
George Ragsdale:
• Yes, that's the direction we were given.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• Do we want those savings to go beyond year 2. It seems that until we have that mid -year budget, we
might be under estimating the cost savings.
City Manager Chris Lagerbloom:
• I can tell you what our thought process was behind providing these numbers.
• In the 2010 line item budget, where this extra million comes in the second year is when we look at those
items that we have had to purchase with respect to the transition, they do not recur on an annual basis
resulting in additional savings.
• What we found, when we had a contract is that we were buying a new IT Dept. every year. Same thing
with vehicles; e-mail accounts. I'm comfortable with where it is at this point. We'll have the accurate
numbers when we start to get into the mid -year adjustment and 2011 fiscal budget.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• Beyond 2011, we would still have some cost savings, even in year 3 and beyond, because this is all
relative to the budget that included the full cost of CH2M Hill
George Ragsdale:
• Beyond 2011 you're still going to see the savings. The savings that you gained in the first 2 years are still
going to be captured going forward.
Councilmember Thurman:
• So your escalation for 2011 is based on whatever the reduced amount is for 2010?
George Ragsdale:
• Yes. There are no additional savings that you would see in 2012, but the savings that you've gained in
2010 and 2011 are still there. The whole $2.3 million is not necessarily strictly staff; that's the effect of
the change.
qq� • We assume debt service is constant. No new borrowing per se. There are no "extraordinary," one-time
expenditures included (e.g., no purchases of parklands) other than continuing historical spending patterns
Councilmember Thurman:
0 In addition to not buying parkland, it doesn't include any cost if we were to develop existing parkland.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 3 of 26
George Ragsdale:
Other Assumptions:
• Population Growth at 2% per year beginning in 2011.
• 3 people per housing "unit" for all types of housing.
• Capital cost inflation rate is 4% per year.
• Value of high-density residential property $210,000 per unit.
• Value of multi -family residential property $150,000 per unit.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• Can you distinguish between the high density and the multi -family based on your model based on
numbers of units?
George Ragsdale:
• Multi -family are homes that are situated on land at a ratio of 5 or more units per acre; high-density are
homes situated on land at a ratio of 3-5 homes per acre.
Other Assumptions continued):
• Development assumed to take place linearly over 20 -year period.
• All land that is currently zoned for development but not yet developed is developed as zoned.
• Future land uses not specifically sited in areas are recommended for master planning; we have identified 3
or 4 different areas.
• That portion of agricultural and undeveloped land needed to accommodate population growth is assumed
to be developed as residential land use in each Character Area; then commercial development is assumed
in appropriate areas to balance revenue/expense as follows.
• Model A — Low Density Residential build out to match population of 2% growth per year
(approx. 43,000 in 2028). We may have to adjust this number after the census; some conversion
to commercial to balance budget.
• Model B — Maximum Low Density Residential build out with no commercial.
• Model C. — Intermediate Density and High Density build out for more aggressive population
growth (45,000 in 2028).
• Model D — Maximize Commercial build out.
• Model E - ???
• Again, there are all sorts of iterations in between; trying to boil this model down to four scenarios was not
easy.
Councilmember Tart:
• When you say maximum Commercial build -out, what does that mean? Just in the areas where we
currently have Commercial zoning?
George Ragsdale:
• Those areas where as part of the discussions that we had where we had Commercial zoning and
theoretically there is land available that could be rezoned Commercial, we would maximize those areas.
An example would be in Deerfield where the zoning allows for multi -story commercial, we don't have a
lot of that right now, but when looking at the Commercial model we took advantage of the fact that it's
zoned that way.
• When we look at Model A'revenues are slightly ahead of expenses through 2015, after which expenses
+w exceed revenue; this is based on minimizing commercial growth.
• Our recommendation is to go with Model A and add the small amount of Commercial we believe we
would need in order to make the budget balance.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 4 of 26
• Graphically, in the two areas where we have Commercial, Arnold Mill and Deerfield, we would be
converting 130 acres in Arnold Mill and about 191 acres in Deerfield to Commercial; with respect to the
overall land available, clearly the two biggest areas are in Central Milton and Birmingham and there is no
commercial growth in either.
• The red bars on the graph indicate land that is not currently zoned Commercial that would be rezoned and
developed as Commercial. It does not assume that those areas already zoned Commercial are fully built
out to the maximum the zoning ordinance allows right now.
Councilmember Tart:
• So how much of the 191 acres is new Commercial?
George Ragsdale:
• All of it. There's a certain amount of acreage in Deerfield that's zoned Commercial right now. The
assumption here is, all the land that's zoned Commercial will be developed as Commercial. In addition,
in this Model we are proposing an additional 191 acres be rezoned from something other than
Commercial to Commercial. Some of it is on the future land use map, but I can't answer as to how much.
We're going to leave it to the Master Planning effort to figure out where it goes.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• So what we're asking is, how much of the 191 acres is truly new and how much has been anticipated, just
hasn't been rezoned? I assume this can be answered at a later time.
,.�., George Ragsdale:
• Honestly I won't vouch for these graphs. I don't know whether the graphs match the data in the models.
The red line is expense and the green line is revenue. Up to about 2015 or 2016, revenue and expense are
`"'A running with each other. Revenue starts to taper off after that and expense starts to escalate.
• With respect to Model B'very similar in terms of assumptions. We maximize low density residential
with no Commercial in this case. From an expense -revenue scenario, this is the worst case. The graph
projects a wider gap between expense and revenue because there is no Commercial development in there.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• In Model B what areas were you showing the maximum residential density and does that tieback to the 3-
5 and 5 units per acre?
George Ragsdale:
• We were showing anything other than low density based on what's currently zoned. The only thing that
was converted is what you see here — the only conversions for land not currently zoned for residential was
converted to low-density residential in all cases.
• For Model C, here what we looked at was adding some medium and high-density residential more to
accommodate a more aggressive population growth. In this Model, the crossover point for expenses and
revenue is a little bit further out. This has a little bit of Commercial similar to Model A in Deerfield and
Arnold Mill to try and pick up the revenue.
• One of the concerns that we have is that this is a paper exercise. We can assume we're going to put 6 -
story buildings in Deerfield but if we don't fill them it really doesn't matter much. In the short term we
don't feel we need to be too aggressive in what we assume.
*AW • I think Model D will show you the effect of Commercial. We've taken all the areas where we have
Commercial and maximized the amount of Commercial per acre based on what the zoning allows. Again,
that may or may not be what we want. The significant driver is the amount of Commercial that is put on
that acreage.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 5 of 26
• Starting in 2012 or 2013, the expenses lag revenues. Revenues outstrip expenses all the way out through
the remainder of the model.
So, we have 4 scenarios, two of which are at opposite extremes. One all low density with no Commercial
and the other being maximum Commercial with virtually no significant change on the residential side.
We recommend Model A for a couple of reasons. It's the most consistent with what the community
wants and that's taking care of the residential growth through low density residential development. This
doesn't mean that there's not high or medium residential development. It means that the only high or
medium will be in the areas already zoned that way.
Again, this is a paper exercise. So how aggressive we want to be or how soon we want to build that in is
something we need your guidance.
Councilmember Longoria:
• Which model do you think best approximates where Milton is right now if we didn't make any changes?
My gut feel is that it's Model B.
George Ragsdale:
• If you're asking where we are literally today, I would say you're right because Model B does not have
any Commercial growth at all, but we don't believe it's the right model to consider over the next 20 -year
period.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• On Model B, does that at least allow for a build -out of that which is currently zoned?
George Ragsdale:
• Yes. In all 4 of these it allows for the build -out of what is currently zoned. What we're talking about
here is conversion or rezoning.
Councilmember Tart:
• To me, what would be more realistic would be everything that's in our current future land use plan that
could be zoned commercial, say all of that is Commercial. Then, you make some adjustments to the
model to accommodate population growth with regard to residential development.
George Ragsdale:
• We could try to do what you're saying, but to me we're building in an assumption that invalidates what
we're doing. To start with the current future land use plan as a base is not going to tell you guys what
you might be faced with. I think what is more appropriate is to start with what is currently zoned and talk
about what the future land use is going to be compared to that.
Councilmember Thurman:
• I think what we want to know is how much additional we would need to get there compared to what is
already on the future land use plan.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
,,.�,., • What, if anything, is in the model for mixed use? If we don't reflect mixed use, I'm afraid we could end
up with some redundancy.
George Ragsdale:
• Again, that's the reason from our standpoint for suggesting that that area needs to be master planned. The
amount of acreage and units that has to be in there is what the model is trying to predict.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 6 of 26
Councilmember Longoria:
• My whole point in asking this question in the first place, if we take no action, Model B is what's going to
happen.
George Ragsdale:
• Actually it's probably something less than Model B. Technically Model B still has a significant portion
of the available acreage that's not currently zoned residential being converted to residential. Model B still
has things that you're going to have to do to make that happen.
• What you're asking us to look at is the incremental change from the current land use plan as opposed to
creating our own land use plan based on what we believe is the right way for Milton to be developed.
Lynn Tully:
• I think I see where you're coming from and I appreciate the healthy discussion we're having here. I think
what you're trying to say is important and is something that we can find out. We have some good GIS
folks and good people on the team and I think we can work out at least the beginning portions of what
you're asking for and bring that back to you to look at and come to a happy medium.
George Ragsdale:
• When do you want us to come back to you? I can have it by the end of the week or early next week
assuming that staff has the data to do that. Let me talk to Lynn and Michele tomorrow and see what data
they have that we can use to do that. What's difficult is translating that future land use map into specific
uses and acreage because that's not the way the model was developed.
• The need for us is to make sure that we have alignment with you guys around what it is that we're trying
to develop the plan around going forward. We've put a bunch of assumptions up here, and we've shown
you models based on those assumptions. What we need is direction coming back saying "this is what we
want the plan to be based on."
Councilmember Longoria:
• Why don't we have more plans where revenue exceeds expenses? How can we make a decision on 3
things where we know for a fact are going to be economically not viable versus one option where it's
economically viable?
George Ragsdale:
• You can always add Commercial to take care of the budget problem if you need to. Right now that's the
only lever we've got, other than reducing expenses which is not consistent with the direction you've
given us. The direction you've given us on the expense side is escalated at 3% per year. The millage rate
and everything else is fixed. If we want to have a balanced budget all the way out through 2028 we can
build in Commercial to the extent that we get a balanced budget going out. But what's the base
assumption on residential?
Councilmember Longoria:
• Obviously commercial is the best of all worlds because they generate taxes. I'm not saying we should be
a Commercial city but obviously that maximizes revenue. We also can see some gains in revenue as we
elevate density on the residential side. If Model B is a baseline, how far do we have to turn the higher
density knob and how far do we have to turn the Commercial knob and what's the ratio between those
r.w
two to get to something that breaks even?
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 7 of 26
George Ragsdale:
• The higher density knob has very little effect on it because the expenses are going up with the population.
The most dramatic effect is to change the millage rate.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• Is part of our mission with this modeling is to make sure we deliver what our citizens want, not just in
what year can we have revenue and expenses at a break-even point? I think we have to be cautious that
we don't today start to change the entire complexion of our community because we have a financial
model that might show that we will have expenses that exceed revenue.
Councilmember Thurman:
• I don't personally want to see a plan that shows us in the red after 2015. I think that's very poor planning
if we have any sort of plan that shows us with expenses greater than revenue in 2015.
George Ragsdale:
• I agree with everything that everybody has said. To Karen's point, we don't want to put forth a plan
that's going to reflect something that can't be accomplished. We want to try to project something that
over the life of the plan is going to be fiscally achievable. The only lever we have from a planning
standpoint is to try to figure out how to build Commercial into the community in a way that still tries to
maintain the values and aesthetics that the people in the community wants.
Mayor Lockwood:
• Chris, can you try to tie this up for us? Can you guys tweak this in an efficient way so it holds them up as
little as possible?
City Manager Lagerbloom:
• I think we can.
Councilmember Tart:
• I'm still baffled about the confusion that we still seem to be having regarding the need to provide
something to us that contemplates the future land use plan being totally rezoned to what it has.
Councilmember Thurman:
• That's because they're doing a new future land use plan, so they don't want to take into account the old
one, which is not what this committee has spent their time coming up with.
Councilmember Tart:
• So following that line of assumption, going back to Model A are you saying that everything that's red on
the future land use map now won't be red anymore?
George Ragsdale:
• Going forward, we assume the current future land use map will disappear and not exist anymore. The
only constant going forward is the zoning map.
NOW* Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• Can you speak to Arnold Mill and say how you arrived at 133 acres?
George Ragsdale:
• We based that on the amount of total acreage in Arnold Mill that is currently undeveloped or zoned as
agricultural and arbitrarily decided that as we looked along Highway 9 and approximated what we
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 8 of 26
thought would be that area, that would be developed as Commercial. The future land use map is not
going to show a strip of red on both sides of Arnold Mill Road.
Mayor Lockwood:
• I would like to move on. We could talk about this all night but I would like to get everybody some more
information. Thanks for all the hard work.
• City Clerk, sound the next Item.
Interim City Clerk Gordon read Agenda Item #1.
1. Presentation and Update from the Greater North Fulton Chamber of Commerce
(Presented by Brandon Beach, GNFCQ
Brandon Beach:
• I'm here to talk about the North Fulton CID. I represent the Chamber's President and CEO and I'm also
the President and CEO of the North Fulton CID, which is a separate entity, has its own Board of Directors
and is completely separate from the Chamber.
• We had a gathering at Ray's Killer Creek one night which you couldn't attend, so I wanted to give you a
brief overview of the CID.
• The Community Improvement District stretches from Mansell Road all the way up 400 to the Forsyth
County line to McGinnis Ferry. The yellow part is a proposed expansion south going down towards
Kimberly Clark at Holcomb Bridge.
• We're a self -taxing district for just commercial taxpayers, not residential. It's a 3 mil tax. We raise about
..w $2.5 million a year. We have about $10 million in the bank as of now.
• We've been in existence a little over 6 years. Every 6 years we have to renew it for another 6 years; it has
to be voted on by the Board and it was renewed about 2 months ago.
• The reason we came into existence was one issue — Westside Parkway. We did our master plan about a
year ago called Blueprint North Fulton. We wanted to have a parallel road on the west side like we have
on North Point Parkway from Mansell Road to Windward. We went to the late Wayne Shackleford, who
was the DOT Commissioner at the time and he told us, if you build the middle part, I'll connect the two
and I'll find the money. We floated a bond and built the middle section. Then Wayne Shackleford retired
and when we went to the new DOT Commissioner and he said we don't have any money for it. So we
created the CID to help fund this project.
• We just opened the southern end behind the ice skating rink, where Lickskillet was. It's all now 4 laned.
The other piece will be open by the Land Rover dealership by April 1st. The CID spent about $1.2
million and we leveraged it for $25 million of State and Federal funding.
• We want to finish it up to Deerfield. The problem we have now is that Prospect Park is in bankruptcy and
we don't know when that will be finished.
• For every $1 we spend, we get $12 from either State or Federal funds. We think we can jump start
projects a little quicker since we're not under the same constraints as government.
• A couple of other projects we're working on: the bridge from Encore Parkway going across; a
beautification project at Haynes Bridge Road; on Windward Parkway add a turning lane (right only into
North Point Parkway) to alleviate some congestion and a landscape project.
• DOT loves CID because we jump start projects. John Bell represents the City of Milton on our Board.
"'" We have a 10 -member Board. Six of them are property owners and each city in the county gets a
designee.
Now
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
0 How far out would you say the current projects take the CID?
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 9 of 26
,o, Brandon Beach:
• For the Windward project, you'll probably see dirt moving in March or April and we'll do the road
project at the same time. I'm working on getting the permits to get that project done more quickly.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• How does the CID go about prioritizing the next wave of projects?
Brandon Beach:
• We're trying to work with all the cities rather than Fulton County and the State DOT. On Thursday
morning at the Chamber of Commerce we will have all 5 city heads of Public Works to talk about the
comprehensive plan North Fulton is doing through ARC. We're going to talk to each city and see what
the needs are. If we can help expedite it, we will do that.
• There are 14 CID's in the metro region and they've built some pretty neat projects.
Councilmember Thurman:
• There's only a small part of Milton that is within the CID. Have you reached out to some of the other
areas adjacent to it to see if they would be interested?
Brandon Beach:
• We have not done that. We're very favorable to expanding. To expand, you have to get 75% of the
assessed value and 50 plus one owner, then you can start taxing that area. Even the people that didn't
*► sign up would get swept in. It's not an easy task to get people to agree to increase their property taxes,
but it's easier than it was 6 years ago because we have things to show for it.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• Can you indicate whether support for roundabouts is still there?
Brandon Beach:
• It's still there. I can send you a presentation. I'll e-mail it to Chris tomorrow.
• The best advice I can give you is to have projects "shovel ready" and then when money becomes
available we can funnel it to you.
Mayor Lockwood:
• I think Number 3 we have deferred. Will the City Clerk sound the next Item.
Interim City Clerk Gordon read Agenda Item #4.
4. Communications Presentation — My Milton
(Presented by Jason Wright, Communications Manager)
City Manager Chris Lagerbloom:
• I'll start by giving you the background on this. This is a concept that Jason put together which he used in
a second interview that we had with him before he was employed by the City of Milton. I think this
concept kind of hit it out of the park in terms of having something that markets the City of Milton. This
• will be very quick because Jason has somewhere else he needs to be so we can get more detail at a later
time if we need to.
Jason Wright:
• The idea behind this is to create more citizen ownership of Milton's government and community. This is
a roadmap for how we do these things. Social media is coming. It has become very clear that we need
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 10 of 26
OWN
more on our web site. There is a liaison in each department that I'm working with. On February 19th
they will turn in to me exactly what they want for their web pages. I will then meet with boards and
committees to see how that template works for them. We'll have a lot more photos and interaction blogs
to get more people coming to the web site.
• We have three core messages: Milton is a rural, equestrian -centric community focusing on small town
values; Milton cares about taxpayer dollars and is working hard to get the citizens the most for their
money; and Milton wants to know what its citizens expect from their government.
My Milton is my livelihood: it is where I work and utilize my skills to benefit the city. I will meet with
all aspects of city staff to ensure they understand the community messages and how to strengthen it in
their daily interactions with citizens; Tools: City communication workshops: Let the staff take ownership
of the Milton brand - they keep the city moving day to day. We have city communication workshops
planned as the need arises. The people that you have working for you are very hard working and really
care about what they're doing, so it's already happening.
My Milton is involved: City Volunteers: My Milton is a group of dedicated citizens giving their time
today for a better tomorrow. I will champion the value of our volunteers and committee members —
without them Milton wouldn't be where it is today. I will ensure that they feel appreciated; Tools:
Newsletters that contain content relevant to this audience — profiling members, recognizing their
achievements, highlighting committee progress and activities, reaching out to people who may be curious
about becoming more active in city programs.
• This is something that your Parks and Rec Director, Cyndee Bonacci, and I are working on. As we plan
more events, we will reach out for more volunteers. As we go forward, newsletters will contain a lot
more content that's relevant to this audience. We have greatly increased newsletter distribution since I've
been here.
• I will do a lot more leg work. I've already met with the schools and have added all of their PTA
members. When schools have big events, I will be there signing people up for the newsletter and telling
them about Milton. Same thing with Milton football games. Anything that has to do specifically with
Milton, I will be there.
• My Milton is thriving: Established Community Groups: My Milton is friends and neighbors coming
together and sharing ideas. I will communicate what's happening in the city — events, news, changes. I
will engage established community groups like HOAs, Rotary clubs, church groups, the Milton Business
Alliance and more to understand the heartbeat of the city. I will make these groups part of the city
message and active purveyors of it.
• Tools: Facebook — Milton Facebook group page allows citizens to join and create wall postings, share
events, post videos and photos. Community publications — make sure that local publications like
neighborhood newsletters, church bulletins, etc. are aware of the upcoming city events. Mobile Media —
create alert subscriptions so the on -the -go person can be kept abreast of city news and event reminders.
• As far as HOA's go, AJ Phillips is the community officer. He started last week. I have a presentation as
he meets with HOA's and PTA's to keep people a lot more informed.
001. • My Milton is what we should preserve. Agricultural community: My Milton is beautiful stretches of
land, flora and fauna. We have built our city on agrarian ideals. We want to hear from these citizens
about what makes Milton a great place to live.
• Tools: Strong presence at horse shows, polo matches and famers markets. Think a grassroots approach
to compliment our high-tech efforts.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 11 of 26
• My Milton is my hometown. Youth: My Milton is where I am learning, growing and having fun. I will
r�..r connect with Milton's youth through their sports, Boy and Girl Scout organizations and school -sponsored
events to make them and their parents proud to say they are from Milton.
• Tools: Twitter — Local youth and parents can follow Milton tweets after a campaign to have them join us
at local events. I can make sure local media cover our youth.
• Non-involved citizens: My Milton is simply where I live or am looking to move. Milton is a positive
community, a great place to raise a family, establish a dream farm or just relax.
• Tools: Local broadcast media — television and radio features about Milton reach far more people than
local print media ever could. It will involve people not currently engaged in their community by reaching
them where they are sure to look. I can't take credit for the firefighters being on TV. The police will
hopefully be on TV tomorrow. I've called every media outlet I can think of to get them to our "Tip a
Cop" event tomorrow. Same thing for the polar plunge.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• When people go to put their credit cards in to make payment, there are still a lot of databases that don't
have Milton, still have Alpharetta. I would recommend that you contact all the databases through which
people's credit applications or other things have to go. People can't transact services with us because
Master Card and Visa won't accept Milton, Georgia 30004.
Councilmember Thurman:
• Facebook will not allow us to have Milton as our home town yet.
amm
Mayor Lockwood:
,,,, • Jason, I just want to say what a great job you're doing. Chris and I are getting tons of positive feedback
on communications going out. What you've done so far is making an impact.
Jason Wright:
• I have to say it's very easy working with staff to get stuff. As soon as I send out an e-mail asking for
anything, I get a response. One thing I'm going to start getting into is departmental updates at staff
meetings.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• The postal service is also one of those where there's still some people on Arnold Mill that believe that
they can't mail to Milton, Georgia. I think we need a proactive communication with the postal service.
Inserts in utility bills may be an inexpensive way to reach people that are not available electronically.
Councilmember Longoria:
• Lexis Nexis in Alpharetta controls whether you can put that on credit applications. They're just now to
the point where Milton is seen as an acceptable city for the 30004 zip code.
Jason Wright:
• For the next Council meeting, everyone wear suits and look good because we're going to take a picture.
Mayor Lockwood:
•*W• 0 Will the City Clerk sound the next Item.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 12 of 26
a" Interim City Clerk Gordon read Agenda Item #5.
5. Discussion and Demonstration of Advanced Life Support programs in the Milton Fire
Department
(Presented by Robert Edgar, Fire Chief)
Chief Edgar:
• The firefighters have worked very hard preparing for the ALS transition from BLS Life support, which
should occur within the next 30-60 days, starting with Engine 42.
• To define what that means, Basic Life Support focuses on rapid evaluation of a patient's condition,
maintain the airway, breathing and circulation, control bleeding, prevent shock and prevent further injury
or disability.
• Advanced Life Support is emergency medical treatment beyond Basic Life Support that provides for
advanced airway management, defibrillation, establish IV's and provide drug therapy.
• To quote a few things from the American Heart Association, effective bystander CPR is provided
immediately after cardiac arrest and can double a victim's chance of survival. CPR helps maintain vital
blood flow to the heart and brain and increases the amount of time that an electric shock from a
defibrillator can be effective. Approximately 95% of sudden cardiac arrest victims die before reaching
the hospital. Death from sudden cardiac arrest is not inevitable. If more people knew CPR, more lives
could be saved. Brain death starts to occur 4-6 minutes after someone experiences cardiac arrest if no
CPR or defibrillation occurs during that time. If bystander CPR is not provided, a sudden cardiac arrest
victim's chances of survival fall 7-10% every minute.
• I'm going to allow the firefighters too take over at this point [simulation of cardiac arrest victim and EMS
response].
• It doesn't always go that quick but we wanted to have the demonstration for you and didn't want to take
up too much time, but it's clear that ALS will certainly benefit the patient and it's our goal to provide that
service.
Councilmember Longoria:
• The method of putting in an IV when it's difficult to find a vein in the patient, I heard him do the drill
method directly into the bone, do you guys do that automatically?
Chief Edgar:
• That's our second choice. The first choice is obviously an IV line. It's less invasive on the patient. We
can put a needle into the bone and still administer drug therapy as well as IV fluids.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• Did you say within 60-90 days that will be available starting with Engine 42? When do you anticipate
that will be in our other stations as well?
Chief Edgar:
• That's correct. The struggle we're dealing with today is not having enough certified paramedics. We
have several folks that have stepped up and have started going to school, which is almost a 2 -year
program. As we progress and have more paramedics on the street, then we'll certainly add this to the
some other engine companies. The reason we chose 42 is because of the call volume in this particular area.
The EMS call volume is much higher in the 42 zone.
an" • Councilmember Lusk came by station 42 and saw the guys out there working and said this would be a
great presentation in front of the Council, so that's what prompted this.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 13 of 26
Mayor Lockwood:
• Does anyone have any question as to what they're capable of once they move to ALS versus what they're
doing today? Does everyone understand the difference between BLS and ALS?
Chief Edgar:
• What we can do today is, all the units carry AED's (automatic external defibrillator), which can only
administer shock in two rhythms, V -Fib and V -Tach. What we can do with a defibrillator is we can
actually look at heart rhythms and tell if somebody is having a heart attack, then actually administer
medications prior to sending them to the hospital. Early intervention will decrease the loss of heart
muscle and that's the goal. Time kills heart muscle, so if we can administer those drugs early and get
them to the right hospital on time, then we save heart muscle and the patient has proven to walk out of the
hospital with almost no loss.
Councilmember Tart:
• I have a quick technical question. I was under the impression that if someone has cardiac arrest and they
fall out right in front of you, you do total CPR with no artificial respirations. I notice that they were doing
artificial respirations. Did I hear that wrong?
Chief Edgar:
• That's for bystander CPR. What they were finding was that folks were very intimidated about breathing
for somebody. So what they said was, just do the compressions; that there is enough oxygenated blood in
the system for the first few minutes of CPR that would maintain the brain so it doesn't start to die off
without oxygenated blood. That's the reason for that.
• 2005 was the last update from the American Heart Association. What they're talking about now with the
new update is that there will be no attempts at ventilation at all. Just do CPR and once ALS intervention
gets there, they can insert an airway.
• Another thing that's going on today is a lot of beta testing with hypothermia treatment. Someone goes
into cardiac arrest; they get a pulse back and start to reduce the core temperature of the body which then
reduces the blood flow, brain damage and heart muscle damage. They insert an IV where the fluids have
been refrigerated at about 35 degrees. The other side of that is you have to get to a hospital that has that
type of machine. Basically it's an IV machine that continues to monitor the core temperature because you
don't want to drop it or bring it back up too fast.
Mayor Lockwood:
• We have gotten great feedback on our first responders. The comments I get are that our fire department
arrives faster than the ambulance, so it's great that we have this capability to save lives.
Chief Edgar:
• That's one of the frustrating things for firefighters right now. They can get to the scene quickly but can
only go so far.
Councilmember Tart:
• Is there anything we can be doing from a budget perspective to provide more of these apparatus on the
engines?
.pm,
City Manager Lagerbloom:
• It's not a budget problem; it's the problem of not having enough paramedics if you want every piece of
equipment to be ALS all the time. Twelve would get you one on each truck each day in a three-day cycle.
How many paramedics do we have at this time?
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 14 of 26
Chief Edgar:
• One is getting ready to take his state test, so we'll have 10 by next month.
Councilmember Thurman:
• Is that training paid for our firefighters?
Chief Edgar:
• Yes, through tuition reimbursement.
Mayor Lockwood:
• We'll take a 2 minute break and then proceed.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
• Mayor, can we handle Item 7 before Item 6? We do have the Public Works Director from the City of
Roswell here tonight, and I don't want to keep him any longer than necessary.
Mayor Lockwood:
• Will the City Clerk Sound the next Item.
Interim City Clerk Gordon read Agenda Item #1.
*OM 1. Discussion of a Potential Shared -Use Agreement with the City of Roswell for the
Roswell Recycle Center.
rr.v (Presented by Carter Lucas, Public Works Director)
Carter Lucas, Public Works Director
• Before I get started I want to recognize Stuart Moring, who is the Public Works Director from the City of
Roswell.
• This presentation is twofold: (1) just to give you some information as to what's being discussed with the
City of Roswell regarding the potential joint use of the Recycle Center there and (2) to get any feedback
that you might have as we move forward with these discussions on the use of that facility.
• We've been approached by the City of Roswell to participate as a partner in the Recycle Center there.
This partnership would allow Milton residents full access and utilization of the facility.
• It would have a program that involves the Milton schools, just as it does the Roswell schools. We've
been discussing that particular component with Milton Grows Green. We'll try to coordinate with them
so we don't jeopardize those programs or overlap with anything that's being worked on with the Milton
Grows Green process.
• This also involves annual reporting on Milton residents and tonnage received, which goes toward our
solid waste management reporting that we do at the end of the year. This has also been a component of
our short-term work program under the solid waste management program, or at least a discussion of a
shared -use with Roswell, not necessarily actually executing an agreement.
• The way it currently set up is based on approximate operating expenses of $400,000 per year.
• The current agreement proposed by Roswell would be a prorated share based on population. Under
current proposal, which is the starting point for our initial discussion, Milton's share would be
now approximately $50,000 of the overall operating expenses. Coincidentally, that is about what we have
budgeted for this year for this activity.
Now • We've talked with Milton Grows Green to see where they're headed with a recycle program in Milton
and how this would impact, either positively or negatively, with what they're doing.
• Roswell was kind enough to do a six-week survey from August 9, 2009 to September 20, 2009 of users of
the facility from various communities. Milton had about 5% of the total users over that six-week span.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 15 of 26
• One of the concerns that Milton Grows Green has is the inequity between our total users versus our pro-
rated share of the cost. Maybe this is short-term. Maybe users will grow as word gets out.
• One of the things we initially talked about with the City of Roswell is the use of a membership fee at the
Recycle Center. It's been discussed in the neighborhood of $50-$75 as a potential fee. Roswell is
working on that right now. As a partner, City of Milton residents would not be subject to that fee. They
would be allowed to use the facility as if they were a Roswell resident. Without the partnership, anyone
using the facility would be subject to the fee.
• We'll be dealing at a staff level with Roswell moving forward on this.
Councilmember Thurman:
• When were they looking at implementing the fee?
Stuart Moring, Roswell Public Works Director:
• March or April to make the decision, but September, but more likely January, to implement the fee.
Councilmember Thurman:
• Do you have an agreement with Alpharetta? Do they use your facility?
Stuart Moring:
• We do not have an agreement with them; they use our facility because it's convenient. We've had
discussions with Alpharetta over the past 5 or 6 years and that was part of the reason for discussion as to
whether to implement a per trip or membership fee, or possibly both. Feedback from the North Fulton
wpm Mayor's Association is that if there isn't a fee, what is the incentive for a community to participate?
• There are currently a few fees for items such as refrigerators and things that contain Freon. There are a
slow hand full of things that non-residents have to pay for that residents do not have to pay and members under
this scenario would not have to pay
• Our Council is interested in hearing what you are thinking; what basis is most likely to get you to
participate. I'm here to listen to what your thoughts would be.
Councilmember Longoria:
• Carter, is the intent here to take the budget that we have set aside for this kind of thing and provide part of
that to the City of Roswell for the use of their facility commensurate with the survey that they did? How
did we get to the $50,000?
Carter Lucas:
• That was the initial starting point and was based on population, not on use. The survey was done to find
out how much Milton residents actually used the facility and was the per capita approach the best way to
go or should we look at another alternative and build up to that per capita?
Councilmember Tart:
• We're going to have to get the word out, and it seems like an enormous amount to pay initially given the
numbers that are using the facility right now. To build up to that would seem more equitable.
Carter Lucas:
• Mayor Wood characterized this as the model agreement that he wanted to have with Milton and then
**� move forward with the other communities in North Fulton.
Mayor Lockwood:
• The $50,000 represents about 12% of the total cost of running the facility. We assume this will allow us
to advertise this as a partnership and maybe have some signage there that indicates it's a partnership with
other cities so our citizens will feel like it's part of their community.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 16 of 26
• What I want to see is what is our citizen's benefit of the partnership versus paying a fee. I don't know
,,,•,,, that you can come up with that right now, but that's what I'm thinking. Once it's promoted, maybe
people will recycle more if they don't have to pay a fee when they get there.
Councilmember Thurman:
• Have we gotten any input from the Milton Grows Green Committee as to what their thoughts are to this
arrangement? Are they working on an alternative for this? I wouldn't want to do anything that's contrary
to what they're working on.
Carter Lucas:
• I think the alternative right now is in the programs with the schools. They may have something working
instead of the program the Roswell Recycle Center will provide to the schools. I think their push this
year is to get our solid waste handlers to bulk up their recycling capabilities and try to take some of that
load off. Their concern was that if we did that and recycling became more proactive and available at the
home, it might not increase numbers at any of the recycle centers.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• One of my questions is that we go back to our hauling legal requirements. I think we should be requiring
our haulers to collect recyclables. Right now we don't do it, we don't monitor it and we've talked about it
since the inception of the City. I know we're working towards it.
Carter Lucas:
mom • We're doing it. As recent as last week we issued a couple of citations in hauling cases. It is ongoing.
We're not working towards it, we're working on it.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• I think we should see what happens to the numbers when our own haulers are required, in accordance
with the ordinance we put in place 3 years ago, to do what they're supposed to do. Obviously from a
green city perspective it's in everybody's best interest to recycle and reduce what goes to the landfills.
• 1 understand that there is potentially going to be another recycling facility on our borders even closer than
Roswell. Are we going to have conversations with them as an option? I think we owe it to our citizens to
check that out because it would be closer.
Mayor Lockwood:
• My question is, is that recycle facility meant for that particular waste hauler or the public?
Carter Lucas:
• It's both. It's a transfer facility and has a drop-off component to it and as far as we understand, it would
be open to anyone.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• Since this is new information, I think we need to get more details about that facility. Our hope was that it
would not be approved as a transfer facility for waste but just potential for recyclables. To the Mayor's
point, we need to better understand what options it presents for our citizens, what would be the cost, if
any to our citizens. On distance alone it's closer for our citizens.
"I•.
Carter Lucas:
• I think the difference between the drop-off facility and what Roswell offers is in terms of materials that
they take. The drop-off looks to be just the standard glass, paper, cardboard, whereas Roswell accepts
almost anything that can be recycled.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 17 of 26
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
,,, • Another question would be, in years past in a different economy, recyclables in some cases generated
revenue. When that revenue stream picks back up, how would we share in that? Is it contemplated as
part of this contract?
Stuart Moring:
• Absolutely. There hasn't been discussion with our Mayor and Council about that, but it would certainly
be my expectation. At one time our revenue was close to $200,000. This past year, probably more in the
range of $125,000 or so. As a membership thing, I would not expect to share profits, but we would
certainly contemplate a profit sharing with partners.
Mayor Lockwood:
• Carter, does that give you any kind of feedback or direction?
Carter Lucas:
• I think so. I think you have some of the same concerns that we as staff have had that based on the number
of users we currently have at the facility, we might look toward a more equitable starting point and build
up to a full-time partnership.
Mayor Lockwood:
• I know this would be tough for Roswell bearing the brunt of it, but is there a way to base it on an
accounting of use?
R.
Carter Lucas:
• Part of the problem in the accounting was, how do you know. There's not a full-time person at the gate
checking to see who's using the facility. I think under the membership scenario, there would be a gate
and people would have a card to get in.
Mayor Lockwood:
• What I take from this discussion is that there definitely is interest, but there are a lot of unanswered
questions based on the needs of our citizens. Maybe you guys could fine tune it a little bit.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
• The one thing I want to be clear about is whose court the ball is in. We're working on a proposal from
another local government and it's similar to this situation. I almost think we need to hear what Roswell's
Council is willing to offer as a proposal. We could sit here all day and make recommendations, but if
their Council is not going to go for it .... I almost think the ball is in Roswell's court at this point to let us
hear what our options are.
Carter Lucas:
• I can offer this. We have a proposal from the Roswell City Council and we have some feedback from our
City Council. Stu and Janet and I could work together to come to some sort of mutually agreeable
proposal and then present that back to both Councils. I think even under the present proposal there was a
provision for annual review to see where we are in the program.
mom Stuart Moring:
• How I see this evolving is that we will continue working on the membership program and flesh out the
am details of generating enough money to pay for the cost of adding the monitoring, etc. The possibilities
range from $245 per trip and/or $50-$75 on an annual basis.
• When we have something solid from our Mayor and Council, that will give you something to build on.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 18 of 26
go--"
• At a staff level, from the discussions my staff has had with Carter I think they're excited about the
.. possibility of "Keep Roswell Beautiful" working with "Milton Grows Green." I know from the
standpoint of various grants, the State and Federal government like to see communities that are working
together.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• Regardless of where this financial blended approach takes us, please take back to your folks how much
we appreciate their efforts. Regardless of where this goes, we need to continue to work together as a
region.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
• Can I give you a couple of different options? We have 2 more Items on the Agenda. The next one I
estimate would take 15-20 minutes or so. But what I want you to make a decision on is the last one,
which is the Nation Citizen Survey Benchmarking Report. We've rehearsed this presentation with
discussion and it's about 1 '/2 - 2 hours.
• We have 2 options. We can start about 9:00 p.m. and I'd estimate we'd be done about 10:30 p.m.
depending upon how much discussion we have. The other option is to handle it during the published staff
report at the Council meeting we have next Wednesday, which is a relatively short agenda. We're
prepared to go forward tonight if you want to. It's completely up to you.
Councilmember Longoria:
• If it's that important and since Councilmember Lusk is not here, maybe we should wait until everybody is
•we" here so that way we don't have to try to fill him in and get him up to speed.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
• It's a good presentation and one I think you'll all enjoy. Let's take a quick break and come back and
decide what we want to do.
• During the break we decided to move the Item that relates to traffic calming to a published staff report at
the meeting that will occur next Wednesday so we can jump into the big Agenda Item right now, the
Citizen Survey.
7. National Citizen Survey Benchmarking Report
(Matt Marietta, Assistant to the City Manager)
City Manager Lagerbloom:
• I'll lay the stage for this and Matt and I will probably tag team this presentation. One of the things we
talked about awhile ago is that we wanted to embark on some version of a performance measurement
system for the City of Milton. We had some workshops where we were exploring the performance
measure systems, performance management that exists through ICMA.
• The first step in becoming a part of the performance measures environment in our organization was to do
a baseline survey of the citizens of Milton. We embarked on the survey in August of 2009. It was a kind
of "in the can" survey that we were able to attach some policy questions to. We have results back from
that survey and that's what we want to share tonight.
• Keep in mind that this is a statistically valid survey. There were 1,200 households in Milton surveyed
based on a random number table. We had a 32% response rate, which is great for a survey. This survey
is 95% reliable.
• What you'll see in the result is how we're ranked and how we're benchmarked against other cities that
take part in this process. As we move through this, there are some categories that are "less" or "more"
and we'll explain what that means when we get to it.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 19 of 26
• We are below the benchmark in the ease of travel through Milton. We're below the benchmark in
rw recreation and parks opportunities, which we know. We're ahead of the benchmark in our public safety
services. Both police and fire scored tremendously in the survey.
• I'll let Matt start the presentation and then we can have an informal discussion.
Matt Marietta, Assistant to the City Manager:
• The document you have in front of you and on your screen is the Benchmark Report. I also added the
policy questions that we developed and a couple of tables at the beginning that establishes where Milton
falls in relation to other cities.
• Several of the issues that came up are key interests to the citizens of Milton, such as items that we've
discussed tonight regarding recycling and economic development.
• Before we proceed into this survey I want to give you some caveats. One, the numbers that you're seeing
in this report are not percentages; you're looking at ranks. The Milton rating is not a percentage so when
you look at those numbers on these tables, don't try to attach any percentage value. As a gauge of where
we stand versus other cities similar to us, the benchmark report is probably the best and easiest way to do
a presentation.
• The other issue is on the first page we're starting with, when I say "key drivers" they are not necessarily
things citizens want to see more of. They're things the citizens want to be engaged about.
• The main purpose of doing the survey was to gauge the expectations of the citizens of Milton while we're
still in the process of establishing our government. This is especially true in light of the transition where
we're now responsible for all of our own operations. However, since Milton is still in its youth, the
citizens want us to be more responsive than what they felt they were getting from the County before. To
do that, we needed to see what their expectations were.
• The survey is statistically valid and is based on a random sample of Milton residents. This was citywide.
w�. We initially tried to break it down into character areas (Birmingham, Crabapple, Hwy. 9). The problem is
the population is so heavily weighted on the Hwy. 9 side that after they pulled the random numbers across
the city, they were only getting 1 or 2 responses from the other areas. There weren't enough responses to
make a valid judgment statistically speaking.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• So, based on that, the 1,200 households in the survey are heavier in some areas than others?
Matt Marietta:
• It's completely random and represented citywide.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
• We tried to do these areas but at the end of the day, not only was there an extra fee but when we got the
results from ICMA they said they could only break it down one way — right in the middle of Milton,
splitting it west versus east. Milton is not a west versus east city, so that wasn't a good breakdown. So
the way they could keep it statistically valid was that they set a random number table just to deliver it as
the City of Milton and not geographic areas.
Councilmember Longoria:
• What I would believe is if it was a random sampling, then it profiles the density of Milton. So we have to
be careful when we use the term "statistically valid" results. These results are statistically valid, but they
*� follow population density as opposed to focusing on unique areas of Milton.
am Matt Marietta:
• Because they're looking as this report benchmarked against other cities, and the whole program is based
on that, they're looking at the citizens' expectations of the city's performance for the whole population of
the city.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 20 of 26
• As Uhris said, the results of the survey fell where everybody expected. Economic development seen as a
rrr. key driver doesn't necessarily mean more growth; that's something that the citizens are interested in,
which we have seen by the citizens coming in and speaking at our Council meetings. They're engaged in
economic development.
• Regarding the colors on the graph, if it's green it's above the benchmark (better than the other cities
surveyed); if it's yellow it's similar to the benchmark; and if it's pink it's below the benchmark.
• As we discussed tonight, recycling and garbage collection are not only subjects that are interesting to our
citizens, but they see us as being worse than the average city in those areas. That's something we
recognize and have had that discussion tonight to try to deal with it.
• The other issue that's below the benchmark is city parks and library, which are active agenda items in
front of staff and the Council, and street lighting which goes back to the rural nature of our roadways.
• This graph is not a summary of the entire survey, but merely shows that portion that are the main
concerns to the Milton citizens.
• Interestingly, economic development is identified by NCS as a key driver while it seems to be
counterbalanced by environmental issues. You can see that the citizens are also interested in
environmental sustainability, so there is a balance between these two issues. Everybody likes public
safety, which we'll get into later, but the police and fire department are very popular.
• Because we participated in the NRC survey instead of conducting our own local survey or contracted with
a local firm as we have done on other projects, we were also able to compare our results against cities
participating nationwide. The cities are listed in the back of the document. You will see that the largest
number of cities come from the south. The benchmark is based on the cities that participated in the study.
• The main point to be taken from this survey is that Milton citizen's rate the city as a good place to live.
Our score is 72, which is above the benchmark. 92% rated Milton as a good or excellent place to live;
89% would recommend Milton to somebody else. The only one in that category that came in similar to
rw,r the benchmark is whether people would remain in Milton for the next 5 years. I think that has more to do
with the transient nature of the population in Atlanta than Milton specifically. They may lose their job,
transfer, etc.
• We move on to transportation, which is basically where you would expect it to be based on our roadways.
Ease of car travel is below the benchmark. My guess would be if we want to be above the benchmark in
some of these categories we'd have to put in big boulevards throughout the City. At some point you will
have interests that are mutually exclusive that work against each other.
• Another issue is the availability of paths and walking trails and ease of bicycle travel. We are below the
benchmark, but again we are actively working on that. That's an area the City realizes is an issue and
we're correcting it.
• Traffic flow issues are a big concern because 84% of our citizens commute to work, so a high portion of
our population is driving on our roadways.
• Issues not related to rural character (such as street repair and maintenance, street lighting, light timing,
sidewalk maintenance, amount of public parking) are rated similar to the benchmark.
• In housing we're rated above the benchmark in availability of affordable quality housing and variety of
housing options. I think this is interesting given how expensive some of our houses are. I think this
statistic really comes to life when you look at the scenario of experiencing stress if housing costs exceed
30% or more of income. Fewer Milton City residents responding are having housing cost stress. What
this means is that 78% of our residents are spending less than 30% of their income on housing. If you're
in an area where everybody is upside down on their mortgage and going bankrupt, then they will say that
there is not affordable housing. That speaks well of the fiscal responsibility of our population.
• The next category is development. The quality of new development and overall appearance of the City is
above the benchmark.
rr.n • We had some conversation about the next category (population growth seen as too fast) in staff meetings.
When you see the designations of "less" and "more" don't take this as the same method of applying the
benchmark as "above" or "below." What this is saying is that more of our citizens than the average city
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 21 of 26
involved in this survey sees our population growth as too fast. So what you can take from this is that the
+rw. citizens are interested in slower population growth.
• On the next one, fewer of our citizens believe that run-down buildings are an issue. They are also happy
with the level of code enforcement that we do regarding such things as weeds, abandoned buildings,
residents keeping their grass cut, no junk cars in the yard, etc.
• Land use is rated at the benchmark of 44% saying that our policies are excellent or good.
• Economic development, shopping opportunities, access to jobs and business quality in Milton are also
seen as above the benchmark.
Councilmember Hewitt:
• On these where there are choices for answers, was it an a, b or c?
Matt Marietta:
• That's why it's not a percentage. On most of them, the responses were excellent, good, fair and poor.
Councilmember Hewitt:
• I'm just curious how they factored in the "don't knows" versus the "goods."
Matt Marietta:
• I think this was mostly based on answers, that the "don't knows" were not considered.
• In keeping with population growth expectations, the citizens are less likely to see job growth and retail
expansion as a problem. In other words, the citizens are not expecting us to create a whole bunch of jobs
or retail space. These facts point to the fact that our citizens are more conservative than those in the rest
of the study group.
• • The next category is safety and the City fared well in this category. This is looking at not only our police
and fire department, but also whether they're feeling safe walking through a park at night. These are two
separate issues but are inter -related.
• 11 % reported that a family member had been the victim of a crime, which is similar to the benchmark, but
our citizens are more likely to report the crimes to the police department. This says something about the
citizens as well as the level of trust with the police department.
• 83% of respondents rate the police services as good or excellent. 95% see the fire department as good or
excellent. Emergency preparedness was rated below the benchmark.
• As we're going through this and look at the issues where we were rated below the benchmark, most of the
items we're already trying to correct and emergency management is one of them. Jason came in tonight
and talked about all the public outreach he's doing. There's been a huge increase in public outreach and
press releases since Jason came to work for the City. One thing we can do to address a lot of these issues
is to be more forthcoming with information to the public. Using our new communication outlet as a
source of outreach would be a very important way to alleviate a lot of below benchmark issues that we're
seeing in the survey. Maybe we could create a CERT team to get the public involved in volunteering for
such things as directing traffic, putting up tents, providing water, etc. in the event of some sort of a natural
disaster.
• The next issue is the environment. All aspects of this were rated above the benchmark.
• Of utility services, only solid waste related matters were related below the benchmark. Again, this is
something we're actively dealing with right now. We're aggressively reaching out to the trash haulers to
make sure they're aware of what the regulations are and we're beginning to enforce that a little more.
• Next we come to recreational opportunities, which I'm sure you can guess is below the benchmark. We
have more people than the benchmark that say they actually participate in a recreational program but we
rr�wr have less people that say they visit a City park. Our City parks are rated below the benchmark. 61% of
the citizens think they're either fair or poor. We are also rated below in opportunities to attend cultural
activities and opportunities to participate in spiritual activities. There's a trend for people to want to
participate in community activities.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 22 of 26
WPM
• As I mentioned when we were looking at our key drivers page, the library category is below the
#Am.. benchmark. That's pretty much because we don't have one. Like parks and solid waste, this is an issue
we're trying to correct.
• In health and wellness, we're pretty much above the benchmark in all areas.
• The next slide deals with community quality and inclusiveness benchmarks. We're similar in our sense
of community and acceptance of people of diverse backgrounds. Amazingly we're high in Milton being a
place to raise kids and availability of affordable quality child care. I actually pulled demographic on zip
code 30004 from the 2000 census and we have half the residents over the age of 65. We have a little bit
of a youth skew in our population. In keeping with that, our services to seniors are below the benchmark
while our services to youth are similar to the benchmark. I can't make sense out of where that statistic
comes from because other than the one park, we don't have much in the way of services in that direction.
• Moving on to the next block, civic engagement opportunities. Again we're seeing opportunities to
participate in community matters as similar, but opportunities to volunteer as below. For participation in
civic engagements, we have more people attending public meetings and less watching public meetings on
cable TV. Because we don't have a cable channel, we changed our question to watching on the internet
and we still have fewer people watching. Again that goes back to our web site design and ease of finding
things. We also have less people that participated in a club or civic group.
• Similar to the benchmark is volunteering for a group or activity, helping a friend or neighbor, registering
to vote and voting in the last election.
• Next is communications. Milton has a high number of citizens who either visit the web site or read the
newsletter. This is a great opportunity for us to get the word out that we're listening to our citizens and
trying to engage those issues that they're concerned about.
• They like our cable television service, but public information services is rated below the benchmark. I'm
not sure how that sorts with our above benchmark rating for our web site and newsletter. I need to dig
Now into that a little bit more.
• Social engagement opportunities, again we're below the benchmark. At least our citizens are average in
neighborliness because we're similar in the benchmark on the level of contact our respondents have with
their neighbors.
• The next set of slides deal with public trust benchmarks. Milton citizens rate value of services for taxes
paid as below the benchmark. They rate the overall direction of Milton as similar, the job Milton does at
welcoming citizen involvement and listening to citizens as below, and the overall image of reputation as
above the benchmark.
• When you look to the next page, this chart compares the City of Milton with the federal, state and county
governments. You'll see a trend of what citizens' concepts are of the different levels of government.
When you look at services provided by the City of Milton specifically, we're similar to the benchmark. It
would be nice to be above the benchmark, and that's what we're working on. The services provided by
the federal, state and county governments are below the benchmark. When you look at the numbers,
Milton's quality of services was rated as excellent by 15% of those who responded, while only 3% said
either the federal, state or county governments have excellent quality of services.
• Then, as to whether you've had contact with a City employee in the last 12 months, I guess to an extent
we have a fairly independent population and we have a relatively small City staff compared to the size of
our population. So statistically that they'd come in contact with a City staff member is fairly low. I don't
know if the fact that our citizens aren't coming into contact with City employees is telling us much.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
... • One thing it tells us, which we talked about in our staff meeting the other day, is that if you benchmark us
against other cities the largest contact you have with city employees is through parks and recreation areas
Now and we are trying to move in that direction.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 23 of 26
4wwa
Now Matt Marietta:
• The final block on your document is the perception of City employees. Our knowledge, responsiveness
and overall impression are similar to the benchmark while courteousness of employees is above.
• Finally, I mentioned that I added in some policy questions. These were left off the benchmark report
because they strictly address Milton issues.
• The first policy question that we asked was which, if any, of the following types of growth would you
support in Milton? The first option is controlled growth and 46% rated that. Limited growth got 36%;
minimal limitations on growth got 10%; and 8% responded no growth. When we were crafting these
questions, we were trying to write them in a way that they didn't automatically elicit specific responses so
they weren't loaded terms.
• Policy Question 2 — if commercial growth were to occur in Milton in the coming years, where do you
think more commercial or office space should be located? Hwy. 9 corridor was the highest with 33%,
31 % wanted a combination of the above. Part of this was an attempt to shoehorn a specific policy
question into the parameters available to us based on the question format. It was a very difficult question
to craft within the space that we had. All of the above means the Hwy. 9 corridor, Crabapple Crossroads,
140 and the Birmingham area.
• Policy Question 3 — if residential growth were to occur in Milton in the coming years, where do you think
the highest residential growth should be located? Again, we have the same issue and "none of the above"
was a fairly high response in keeping with our desire for less development.
• The last one is, how important is it for Milton to have a dedicated city center with a town hall and
facilities that will create a unique Milton character? 34% said very important, 37% said somewhat
Now" important, 14% said somewhat unimportant and 16% didn't care.
• 1 believe the conversations we had regarding these policy questions were with statisticians and were not
that in-depth. What we tried to do was craft questions based on what our concerns are. I think the one
thing you can take away from these, especially the first 3 because they have so much play, we didn't see
one area that ran away with the question. Ultimately this is not a community development document; it's
a benchmarking document on how we tailor our government services to meet the desires of our citizens.
• It's nice to get validation for the direction we're headed and know what areas we need to work on.
Councilmember Tart:
• Where it says "less" for retail and jobs growth as seen as too slow, can you put that into a statement for
me? Does that mean that the citizens feel that retail growth in this city is slower than other cities that
were surveyed?
Matt Marietta:
• Fewer of our citizens see retail and jobs growth as too slow.
Councilmember Tart:
• Are we going to do this on an annual basis?
City Manager Lagerbloom:
• At this point we're going to take this as our first step into a performance measure system. We'll let that
be our guide as to how frequently we do this. My guess is this won't be an annual survey, maybe on a 2
or 3 year cycle. This is just our first step in delivering some performance measures. I'd like to sum this
"MIR up by reading the Executive Summary.
• This report provides the opinions of a representative sample of our residents about community, quality of
wro life, service delivery, civic participation and unique issues of local interest. This offers staff, elected
officials and other stakeholders an opportunity to identify challenges, to plan for and evaluate
improvements and sustain services and amenities for long-term success. Most residents experience a
good quality of life in the City of Milton and believe the City is a good place to live. The overall quality
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 24 of 26
of life in the City of Milton was rated as "excellent" or "good" by 88% of respondents, while 8 in 10
fam,„ reported that they plan on staying in Milton for the next 5 years. A variety of characteristics of the
community was evaluated by those participating in the study. Among the characteristics receiving the
most favorable ratings were the cleanliness of Milton, overall appearance and the quality of the overall
natural environment in Milton. Among the characteristics receiving the least positive ratings were
accessibility of paths and walking trails, ease of bicycle travel and ease of walking in Milton. Ratings of
community characteristics were compared to the benchmark database. Of the 30 characteristics for which
comparisons were available, 15 were above the benchmark comparison, 5 were similar to the benchmark
and 10 were below. Residents in the City of Milton were specifically engaged, while 35% had attended a
meeting of local elected public officials or other local public meeting in the previous 12 months. 93%
had provided help to a friend or neighbor. About 4 in 10 had volunteered their time to some group or
activity in the City of Milton, which was similar to the benchmark. In general, survey respondents
demonstrated trust in local government. A majority rated the overall direction being taken by the City of
Milton as good or excellent. This was similar to the benchmark. Those residents who had interacted with
an employee of the City of Milton in the previous 12 months gave high marks to those employees. Most
rated their overall impression of employees as "excellent" or "good." On average, residents gave
favorable ratings to many local government services. City services were able to be compared to the
benchmark database. Of the 33 services for which comparisons were available, 14 were above the
benchmark, 10 were similar to the benchmark and 9 were below. A key driver analysis was conducted by
the City of Milton which examined the relationships between ratings for each service and ratings of the
City of Milton service overall. Those key driver services that correlated most strongly with residents'
perceptions about overall City service quality have been identified. By targeting improvements in key
services, the City of Milton can focus on the services that have the greatest likelihood of influencing
residents' opinion about overall service quality. Services found to be influential in ratings of overall
service quality from the key driver analysis were economic development and recycling.
• That kind of sums it up in a paragraph format.
Councilmember Tart:
• In looking ahead, I would recommend rather than assume that we're doing everything to address some of
the "below" standards, that we look at those again and look at what we currently have in motion and try to
figure out if we are addressing those issues. Some things we may be doing but just not communicating.
City Attorney Ken Jarrard:
• I just want to mention that tomorrow is the Ethics board hearing. I'm not sure what will occur tomorrow
and whether it will go forward or not. I want to make that very clear although I believe there is a
reasonable chance that it will be continued until March 2nd. One of the bases by which one of the parties
is requesting a continuance is because of the membership of the Board, specifically the fact that right now
there are 3 vacancies. Based on my discussion with the Chairman today, the Board of Ethics is willing to
postpone this. There is no requirement to, but he's willing to go down that path because of that request.
He understands, and I have advised him, they have every right to go forward with a reduced membership.
If you've got a quorum, you can go forward, even if there are 3 vacancies. To the extent the City wants to
fill those 3 vacancies in time for this hearing, you'll need to do it at the next meeting. If you want to add
that as an Agenda Item, you can tell the Clerk now to add it. If you don't want to do it, that's fine too, but
it will go forward on March 2nd.
Mayor Lockwood:
• Let me ask your legal opinion. Obviously there is a quorum, but I think it's a little awkward since there is
an active case going on to bring somebody new in.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 25 of 26
City Attorney Ken Jarrard:
• It's fine for a couple of reasons. Yes it would be a little bit of a shock to come in and have an issue of
that gravity put in front of you. That's why the 17th would be nice so that individual, whoever it may be,
can get in, can have an assembled copy of the record put in front of them and they can begin to read it
before the actual hearing. Again, I'm forecasting this will be postponed tomorrow. One of the parties
made the argument that it's only fair that there be a full 7-member composition of the Board. I
understand the concern. Legally we don't have to have the full 7 members.
Mayor Lockwood:
• The only reason I ask is it seems political that a certain person could be put in.
City Attorney Ken Jarrard:
• There is a risk of that, but that risk is there any way with a Board that is appointed by you.
Councilmember Thurman:
• I still believe that we should not have a citizen's Ethics Committee hearing cases against an elected
official. I believe that puts our citizens in a very bad position. I don't know what our options are or what
other jurisdictions do, but I don't feel it's fair to anybody to have the citizens hear a case. Appointing a
new person and having them come in knowing that this before them puts them in a very awkward
position.
aim Councilmember Tart:
• By nature of it being an elected official, it automatically moves to political when it shouldn't be. I
„,N,,, wonder if there are other jurisdictions that use some sort of ....
City Attorney Ken Jarrard:
• We talked about some sort of panel of mediators or attorneys from outside the county coming in. For
whatever reason that was not embraced. I don't think it was you; I think it was the Ethics Board
themselves. This was simply an announcement and my only thought was for you to think about it.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• Based on the fact that the meeting is a week from this Wednesday, do we need to add it as an Agenda
Item just in case?
City Attorney Ken Jarrard:
• I recommend it be added as an Agenda Item and if no one wants to do anything, skip over it. But
somebody will have to preside over this hearing that we've got and if it's the 4 members, that will be
okay.
Councilmember Thurman:
• If the hearing is with the 4 members, how is the decision made? 3 of the 4?
City Attorney Ken Jarrard:
• Yes.
Councilmember Thurman:
#OW 0 After this is over, I would like us to revisit.
Work Session of the Milton City Council
Monday, February 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Page 26 of 26
aw Councilmember Longoria:
• This is completely unrelated to the hearing tomorrow or next week, but as a city of ethics, which we at
some point in time voted to be that, aren't there guidelines given as to what the responsibilities of the
Ethics Board of a city of ethics are and how they conduct their business?
Councilmember Thurman:
• Johns Creek does not have a citizen's panel to hear their cases and they are a city of ethics.
Councilmember Zahner Bailey:
• I have a thought that goes back to Item 1. In looking at the financial model, as we talked about different
options for revenue, it seems that one option we haven't discussed is financing options. The model didn't
talk about that. That's another way to start bringing revenue and expenses in line. This is just something
for us to think about.
After no further discussion, the Work Session adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Date Approved: March 15, 2010
MKOM
raw
Sudie AM Gordon, Interim City Clerk
r);/� .,
Joe Loavv ayor