2/17/2025 Meeting Preview
You’ll see below some of the agenda highlights for our second meeting in February. I’ve added information from the council agenda memos and background on items that may be of particular interest, along with some of the questions I have raised about these items. You can also watch the meeting on the city’s Facebook or YouTube pages. Our meetings are on the first and third Mondays of the month. Workshop session begins at 6:00 pm; regular session begins at 7:30 pm; executive session takes place at the conclusion of the regular session.
You can access the full agenda packets here.
We welcome your attendance at our meetings and public comment is available near the start of the meeting, before any actions are taken. You can submit an e-mail with your name, address, and comment or remark to pcomment@collegeparkga.com no later than 7:30 pm on the evening of the meeting. The City Clerk will read your name, address and comment into the official record. If you have feedback for Mayor and Council directly, you can e-mail us.
WORKSHOP SESSION
3. Presentation on the Vialytics application, which monitors and records the conditions of streets and roadways within the City of College Park. This is cosponsored by Councilwoman Tracie Arnold and Mr. Raymond Cotton and is budgeted from the Ward 3 Community Enhancements funds.
This system will allow our public works department to automate data collection for our roads and maintenance tasks. We would be able to prioritize road maintenance in an objective manner. I think this is critically important for the city. Road paving projects have typically been recommended by staff, with changes from council, typically based upon constituent feedback or the opinion of the elected official. Because we haven’t addressed the needs in a more equitable manner, some areas of our city in desperate need of maintenance have not received it. You can learn more about Vialytics here.
4. Motion to commence the first of three public hearings to allow citizens to offer their remarks and comments regarding the Council’s intent to opt out of the statewide adjusted base year ad valorem homestead exemption for the City of College Park. The hearing will be held at Jack P. Longino City Hall Council Chambers located at 3667 Main St., College Park, GA 30337 on February 17, 2025 at 6:00 PM and pursuant to the requirements of Official Code of Georgia Annotated, O.C.G.A § 48- 5-32 does hereby publish the following presentation of the notice to “opt out” of House Bill 581.
House Bill 581 did a number of things, but most importantly for our purposes, allowed voters across the state to weigh in on imposing a floating homestead exemption. It was overwhelmingly passed last November. The “float,” or the rate at which property values could increase, would be determined by the Georgia Department of Revenue each year, but would not exceed the rate of inflation. Local governments have the ability to opt out of the exemption. If College Park opts out, this would mean homesteaders would be subject to values that could rise sharply from one year to the next without some other intervention from the governing body, which would then have to be approved by the state legislature and placed on a ballot. You can read more about HB 581 here.
From a tax policy standpoint, opting in will limit the growth in the city’s homestead property tax revenue, but it will not result in a loss of funds from what we have now. Another exemption to be addressed at our meeting and discussed below would, and my thoughts are different about it. I do not believe the city should opt out of House Bill 581. Your voices are crucial to these public hearings and I hope to see many of you there.
REGULAR SESSION
8. Consent Agenda
As I’ve noted before, “[a]ccording to the Georgia Municipal Association’s Handbook for Mayors and Councilmembers, a consent agenda can be a useful tool when a governing body has a lot of business to cover. It typically includes noncontroversial items or those previously discussed and needing final approval, such as permit issuances, street closures, or bill authorizations. While a consent agenda can save time, it should never be used to bypass public participation or stifle open dialogue.”
We regularly utilized consent agendas in 2023. The items on the consent agenda were part of the workshop session for discussion and then approved in the regular meeting. Any member of the body could pull an item off of the consent agenda in the regular session for individual consideration. This process ensured each elected official understood the business at hand before a vote. This hasn’t happened with the use of consent agendas in 2024 and so far in 2025.
A. Consideration of and action on a request to Mayor & City Council, to approve Kemi Construction Co. Inc. to remove and replace the Water Main located at Hardin Circle in the amount of $285,100.00. This item is requested by Tim Lewis, Water & Sewer Superintendent. This item is located in Ward 4. This item is budgeted.
B. Consideration of and action on a request to approve Kemi Construction Company Inc., to remove and replace the Sanitary Sewer line behind 4604 Winthrop Drive in the amount of $139,100.00. This item is requested by Tim Lewis, Water & Sewer Superintendent. This item is located in Ward 4. This item is budgeted.
C. Consideration of and action on a request to approve Kemi Construction Company Inc., to remove and replace the Water Main located at 1584 Hardin Avenue, in the amount of $357,010.00. This item is requested by Tim Lewis, Water & Sewer Superintendent. This item is located in Ward 4. This item is budgeted.
D. Consideration of and action on a request to approve Jewel of The South, Inc., to remove and replace the Sanitary Sewer line behind 4616 Greenspring Road in the amount of $88,055.00. This item is requested by Tim Lewis, Water & Sewer Superintendent. This item is located in Ward 4. This item is budgeted.
Each of these items (A-D) is being funded from the Municipal Option Sales Tax (MOST). We have spent most of our MOST funds thus far immediate or emergency projects. We haven’t done long-range planning. It is imperative we do an assessment so we can tackle some larger water/sewer infrastructure projects. This funding is an opportunity to modernize our systems and plan for the next 100 years.
E. Consideration of and action on a request to approve the purchase and installation of an LED monument sign at the entrance of Phillips Park to replace the current wooden sign. This item is requested by Councilman Roderick Gay. This is a budgeted item. This item is located in Ward 4.
The agenda memo does not list which department this is for, but the city manager indicated it was for the water and sewer department. The city manager also said this sign was placed out for bid, but there is no information in the packet to that effect. I have asked to see that information. I have questions about the type of information that will be displayed on the sign and any policies and procedures regarding usage of the LED display. The city manager has indicated the water and sewer department will be responsible for the sign messaging. The city manager has indicated the money for this purchase will come from 505-4400-31-3600, which is the MOST fund. I asked three separate times via e-mail to be certain this was the source. We are restricted by law from using MOST funds for anything other than water and sewer projects. I cannot fathom how a LED monument sign would qualify.
F. Consideration of and action on a request to approve the quote and state contract for the purchase of a 2024 Transit 150 Cargo Van. This is a budgeted item and is sponsored on behalf of Councilman Joe Carn.
The city manager indicated this $56,480 purchase is on behalf of Recreation and Cultural Arts. However, we just approved the purchase of a vehicle for the department at our first meeting in January. The department director listed in the agenda memo is Councilmember Carn; the e-mail address used for the quote is not a city-based e-mail. There is no indication why this vehicle is needed. The agenda transmission indicates this is a budgeted item. However, $70,000 was allocated to the purchase of vehicles in the department and we already committed to spending $67,335 in January.
G. Consideration of and action on a request to purchase and install 3 speed breakers on Janice Drive. Item sponsored by Councilman Roderick Gay. This is a budgeted item.
There is no supporting documentation with this agenda item. There is no price listed for the speed breakers. According to the agenda memo, the police department and the highway and streets department have both reviewed the proposal.
J. Consideration of an action to utilize Vialytics application to monitor and record the condition of the streets and roadways within the City of College Park and is budgeted from the Ward 3 Community Enhancements funds.
See above.
9. Regular Business
A. Consideration of and action on a request to select a sponsorship for the Medical Angels of Mercy. This is not a budgeted item. This request is from the City Manager's office.
A presentation about this event was made at our January 21, 2025 meeting.
D. Consideration of and action on a request to approve a pole attachment agreement with Verizon Wireless for small cell installations. This item is requested by Hugh Richardson, Director of Power.
This project aims to enhance cellular coverage in the city by allowing Verizon to attach small cell infrastructure to city-owned poles at specific locations:
1825 Harvard Avenue
2034 Cambridge Avenue
Princeton Drive at Freeman Court
3507 College Street
1855 W. Mercer Avenue
2097 W. Rugby Avenue
Main Street & Hawthorne Avenue
3465 Main Street
1685 Walker Avenue
This will result in nominal revenue to the city in the form of rental fees for the pole space and use of electricity from the devices.
E. Consideration and action on a request to approve an invoice from Robert Half Staffing in the amount of $15,000 for the direct hire of, LaDonna Ferguson, Executive Assistant to Mayor and City Council. This is not a budgeted item. This item is requested by Rose Stewart, Director of Human Resources and Risk Management.
Ms. Ferguson has been hired as the Chief of Staff to Mayor and Council.
F. Consideration of and action on a request to enter Financial Services Agreement with Piper Sandler on a monthly contract of $250 an hour. This item is from the City Manager's office. This is not a budgeted item.
Ed Wall has been the city’s financial advisor for over three decades. I have found him to be incredibly knowledgeable of the city’s financial history which was especially valuable during the COVID-19 pandemic. He offered sound advice that allowed us to refinance debt in the face of a severe revenue downturn. While the agenda transmission indicates this is not a budgeted item, $50,000 was allocated for financial services consulting under account 100 1300 52 5510 in the executive department. Staff has not made a recommendation on this matter. In my opinion, not renewing Mr. Wall’s contract at this juncture would be detrimental to our overall ability to maintain appropriate financial oversight.
G. Consideration of and action on a request to codify the street naming of HBCU within the Six West community. This item is sponsored by Councilwoman Tracie Arnold.
There was no supporting documentation attached to the agenda memo. The map below was provided in a separate e-mail earlier today. When we addressed this issue last year, there was discussion of incorporating community input into this decision. I still think that is an essential step before we implement any changes.
Proposed new Six West street names
H. Consideration of and action on a request on Resolution 2025-XX Consolidating City Zip Codes.
Councilmember Arnold has put forth this initiative to have the entire city in the 30337 zip code. We have residents who currently reside in the 30349 zip code. Moving the entire city into 30337 would take action on the federal level, starting with a letter from the city requesting the change to the postmaster general.
This will allow residents another method to definitively determine if they live in the city. There are quite a few people who have 30349 zip codes who think they live in College Park, but actually do not reside within the city limits. It would also give us an opportunity to obtain better statistical data about the city.
I. Consideration of and action on a request regarding the Senior Homestead Exemption.
This has been a topic of discussion for several years. In 2023, voters agreed to exempt seniors and disabled residents who met certain income requirements from city property taxes. That exemption took effect in 2024. As we consider a full senior and disabled homestead exemption, I have concerns about its fiscal impact, fairness, and long-term consequences, especially given that we implemented an exemption just one year ago. I want to be clear that I fully support providing property tax relief to seniors and disabled residents in need. However, I do not support a broad, full exemption that would grant tax breaks to those who do not need them, potentially shifting the tax burden onto other residents.
I don’t want to see affluent seniors getting a tax break they don’t need, while lower-income seniors—who truly struggle with housing costs—get the same benefit. A blanket exemption could unfairly shift the tax burden onto younger homeowners and renters, who are already facing increasing housing costs and may have more acute financial constraints than some of our well-off seniors. It would make sense to explore an expanded income caps or tiered exemptions to ensure that relief is going to those who genuinely need it.
Right now, 81 seniors are participating in the exemption program, which has abated $215,000 in tax revenue. If we remove the income requirement, staff estimates suggest that cost will rise to $328,000 next year. In five years, the senior and disabled exemption could cost the city over $500,000 annually according to staff calculations. It may not sound like a lot of money, but having been in office during the COVID pandemic and having to make very hard decisions about keeping the city financially solvent, this loss of revenue may have a greater impact down the line in the event of an economic downturn.
I’m also concerned about how this exemption could reshape our community over time. Seniors may move to College Park just to take advantage of it, increasing costs without contributing to our tax base. We know our city is an attractive location for those who wish to have access to the world. This could skew our city’s age diversity, making it harder to maintain a balance between working families and retirees. At the very least, we should consider a length of residency requirement (perhaps 3-5 years) to deter such actions. We need to think carefully about this policy and whether it is sustainable over the long-term.
J. Consideration of and action on a request to approve a Resolution 2025-XX to not change any of the City Charter. Item sponsored by the Legislators.
You may remember on January 16, 2024, the city council voted to terminate our previous city manager. That termination was eventually rescinded and he resigned, but in the City of Sandy Springs, such a situation would not occur. In their charter, there is a process by which a city manager can be terminated. It cannot occur on a whim.
In East Point, the charter expressly prohibits the interference of elected officials in the day-to-day affairs of the city, including the hiring or firing of subordinates to the city manager. This prohibition on interference includes giving orders to any staff members who are subordinates of the city manager.
In Milton, charter reviews are done as needed by the governing body. The city was created in 2007 and has had three substantive updates to their charter since.
In Alpharetta, Chattahoochee Hills, East Point, Hapeville, Johns Creek, Milton, Roswell, Sandy Springs, South Fulton and Union City, the mayor has veto power. All of these mayors serve in council-manager forms of government, i.e., they are “weak” mayors.
I’ve discussed before that I believe our charter needs updating. The last major revisions occurred in 1968, when the federal minimum wage was $1.60 and the average price of gas was 34 cents per gallon. Times have changed, but our charter has not kept up.
As I’ve talked with people in the community, there is some confusion about our form of government. There are three major types of local government in Georgia; you can read more about them here.
Let me be clear: I have not seen any proposed changes to our charter from our state delegation. We were recently contacted by one of our state senators asking for our input into any charter changes, and I will share my thoughts with her. I have expressed concerns with some of the members of our state delegation that our charter does not currently provide protections for our staff and it fails to clearly articulate the roles of the governing body. Because our charter is quite vague, it is exposing weaknesses in our systems that should be addressed, some of which I’ve discussed above.
The proposed resolution our council will address states opposition to any changes to the charter. In making this broad statement, the council is saying it is fine with some of the glaring issues we have encountered as we’ve tried to do the work of this community.
I also think this resolution is bordering on fearmongering. The clauses that start with “[w]hereas, based upon information and belief…” do not cite any source, but allege charter amendments that would scramble wards and disenfranchise senior citizens - without any actual facts to back those assertions up. I have no idea what citizen boards are allegedly on the verge of elimination with a proposed charter change. I do not know of any charter amendments filed by any members of our state delegation in the legislature; parts of this proposed resolution seem to be based on speculation and conjecture.
The resolution also discusses potential changes to public comment. Those could easily be implemented by the governing body via ordinance or resolution. We could determine that anyone coming to speak would not be able to make slanderous comments, as is the case in South Fulton. We could establish rules of decorum like Sandy Springs. Yet we have not.
Additionally, the resolution is factually inaccurate in its description of how charters can be changed. In addition to the methods noted (the governing body and the state legislature), citizens can also change a charter via referendum.
