[00:00:08] >>> WE'LL CALL TO ORDER TONIGHT'S CITY COUNCIL [1. CALL TO ORDER.] MEETING FOR AUGUST 19, 2025. WELCOME ALL OF YOU WHO ARE JOINING US LIVE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AS WELL AS THOSE LISTENING ON WANI RADIO AND LISTENING ON STREAMING SERVICES. THE ROLL CALL. >> WOULD YOU PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND REMAIN STANDING FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> PLEASE BE SEATED. DURING THE COMMITTEE OF THE [4. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS.] WHOLE, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES THAT THE CITY MANAGER PASSED ON TO US TONIGHT. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF ITEMS IN OUR AGENDA THAT HAVE BEEN POSTPONED OR WITHDRAWN THIS EVENING. AND THEN THERE WAS ONE NEW ITEM THAT WAS ADDED TO OUR AGENDA TONIGHT. AS FAR AS MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS, JUST QUICKLY I WANT TO SAY HOW EXCITED I AM PERSONALLY FOR THE PEARSON PARK OPENING ON MONDAY. THIS IS A NEW PASSIVE PARK ON SHELTON ROAD IN AUBURN, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO FINALLY GETTING THAT OPEN AND CELEBRATING. I WANT TO THANK AUBURN UNIVERSITY, AUBURN UNIVERSITY'S REAL ESTATE FOUNDATION, THE LATE ANN PEARSON AND THAT VISION FOR THE PROPERTY SHE LEFT THE CITY AND THE UNIVERSITY WOULD BE UTILIZED. AND THANK YOU FOR ALL THE COOPERATION. THAT WAS A KIND BENEFACTOR THROUGH THE PROCESS AS WELL. ALSO, OUR NEW FIELDS AT LAKE WILMORE HAVE BEEN OPEN THE LAST TWO DAYS FOR ACTIVITIES. IT IS VERY ENCOURAGING TO KNOW THAT THE CHILDREN ARE OUT THERE PLAYING AND PRACTICING, EVEN AS WE SPEAK RIGHT NOW. JUST THANKFUL FOR THOSE FOUR NEW FIELDS. I APPRECIATE THE CITY COUNCIL SUPPORTING THAT PROJECT AND THE PARKS AND REC ADVISORY TEAM RECOMMENDING THAT PROJECT AND OUR STAFF AND PARKS AND REC GETTING TO THE FINISH LINE. WE LOOK FORWARD TO A LOT OF JOY THAT WILL COME FROM THOSE FIELDS. I WANT TO THANK NEELY CALDWELL FOR INVITING ME TO THEIR ANNUAL MEETING RECENTLY, WHERE AUBURN'S NEW WOMEN'S BASKETBALL COACH WAS THE SPEAKER AND DID AN EXCELLENT TO HIS WORK HERE AT AUBURN. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY FOR THIS, I WANT TO THANK NEELY AND THE ORGANIZATION OF THE CHRISTIAN WOMEN'S JOB CORPS TO HELP FIND JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY. HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL STARTS THIS FRIDAY NIGHT AND BOTH OUR LOCAL TEAMS WILL BE PLAYING THEIR FIRST GAMES HERE ON FRIDAY NIGHT. WHAT AN EXCITING TIME OF YEAR, AS OUR YOUNG PEOPLE THAT LIVE WITH US, THAT HAVE GROWN UP WITH US, HAVE BEEN PRACTICING A LONG TIME, FOOTBALL TEAM, BAND, CHEERLEADERS, OR FLAG CORE, THERE'S A LOT OF YOUNG PEOPLE GETTING READY FOR FRIDAY NIGHT. AND I APPRECIATE THE PARENTS SUPPORTING THE ENDEAVORS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THEM. I WANT TO SAY CONGRATULATIONS TO OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TEAM, OUR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT TEAM. WE WERE RECENTLY RECOGNIZED AS A TOP TEN AREA FOR SMALL BUSINESSES FOR THE BEST BUSINESS CLIMATE IN THE UNITED STATES FROM BUSINESS FACILITIES MAGAZINE. MR. DUNN LAP, CONGRATULATIONS. I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE'VE BEEN RECOGNIZED BY THIS ORGANIZATION, BUT IT'S NICE TO REMAIN IN THEIR TOP TEN. THAT'S FROM A LOT OF HARD WORK FROM YOU AND YOUR STAFF. CONGRATULATIONS. WE WANT TO PRIDE OURSELVES AS A PLACE THAT'S GOOD TO DO BUSINESS. I KNOW OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CONFERENCE WAS LAST WEEKEND, AND CITY MANAGER, I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE COULD GET A SMALL REPORT ON THAT. I'VE ONLY HEARD WONDERFUL THINGS FROM THE PARTICIPANTS. BUT I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT WE TAKE TO INFORM THOSE IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO WANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE CITY WORKS AND IN PARTICULAR THINGS RELATIVE TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. >> THAT SMALL REPORT WOULD NEED TO COME FROM ALISON BLANKENSHIP, OUR DIRECTOR OF CITY RELATIONS, WHO IS NOT READY TO STAND UP. BUT SHE WANTS TO STAND UP, AND HERE SHE COMES UP TO THE PODIUM AS I SPEAK. >> SHE RECEIVED A SMALL HINT THIS AFTERNOON IN CITY HALL. >> IT'S A GOOD THING SHE HAD A HAND THE CITY MANAGER DID NOT. BUT OKAY. >> I DON'T KNOW IF I FULLY UNDERSTOOD THE HINT, BUT I GOT IT NOW. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. IT WAS A VERY SUCCESSFUL EVENT. WE HAD A GREAT TURNOUT. WE HAD REALLY GREAT SPEAKERS THAT REPRESENTED MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS. AND A GOOD KEYNOTE. AND WE REALLY JUST -- WE HAD A GOOD TIME AND INFORMED THE RESIDENTS AND GOT A LOT OF COMPLIMENTS FROM IT. SO, I THINK IT WAS SUCCESSFUL. >> THANK YOU FOR MAKING THE TIME TO DO THAT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP. WE APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE HAVE AN [5. AUBURN UNIVERSITY COMMUNICATIONS.] [00:05:06] ANNOUNCEMENT? OKAY. WE'LL MOVE AHEAD. AUBURN UNIVERSITY COMMUNICATIONS. >> THERE SHE IS. >> HEY. >> WELCOME BACK. >> IT'S GOOD TO BE BACK. SO, SATURDAY WAS BID DAY AND OVER 2,000 GIRLS RECEIVED BIDSBIDS SORTIES. AND THEN YESTERDAY WAS THE FIRST DAY OF CLASS. SO, IT'S GREAT TO SEE EVERYONE BACK ON CAMPUS. IT'S BEEN SUPER, SUPER BUSY. AND THEN TOP FIVE MISS HOME COMING CALLOUTS JUST HAPPENED. THEY JUST POSTED ON THE SGA WEBSITE. THOSE GIRLS WILL CAMPAIGN ON HOME COMING WEEK, AND THEY WILL ANNOUNCE WHO IS THE HOME COMING QUEEN ON SEPTEMBER 13TH AT THE HOMECOMING GAME. THEN THE A.I. STORE UNDERNEATH THE EDGE DINING, IT'S, LIKE, A NEW STORE, AND THERE'S, LIKE, NO PEOPLE WORKING THERE. IT'S LOOK A GRAB AND GO AND EVERYTHING IS CHECKOUT WITH A.I. THAT'S A NEW STORE THAT IS UP AND RUNNING, OPENED YESTERDAY. SO FAR IT'S BEEN SUCCESSFUL. I HAVE YET TO VISIT, THOUGH. AND THE SGA FALL RETREAT IS THIS SUNDAY, AND THEN MEETINGS FOR SGA WILL START NEXT WEEK. NOT TOO MUCH GOING ON. THANK YOU AND WAR EAGLE. >> THANK YOU. [6. CITIZENS’ COMMUNICATIONS ON AGENDA ITEMS.] >> WAR EAGLE. >> GLAD TO HAVE YOU BACK AND GLAD TO OUR STUDENTS BACK IN TOWN. COMMUNICATIONS AND ITEMS ON AGENDA. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT ANY ITEM ON THE AGENDA, THIS WOULD BE THE TIME TO DO THAT. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IN THE RESOLUTION CATEGORY, ITEMS 10, 2, 3, AND 4 -- 10A-2, 3, AND 4, IF YOU WAIT UNTIL THEN, THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE, COME FORWARD AND YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL. >> ROBERT WILKINS, 261 -- AUBURN, ALABAMA. ITEM 10B. IS THAT FOR LATER? >> 10B IS GOOD. >> 10B-2, PLEASE POSTPONE. I WANT TO READ THE AUBURN CITIZENS EMAIL THAT WAS ADDRESSED TO MEGAN MCGOWIN, OUR CITY MANAGER AND CARBON COPIED TO MAYOR ANDERS AND ALL THE COUNCIL. DEAR COUNCIL MEMBERS, I'M ASKING THE AUBURN CITY COUNCIL POSTPONE ITEM 10B-2 ON AUGUST 19, 2025. COUNCIL AGENDA UNTIL FIRSTFIRST COUNCIL MEETING IN SEPTEMBER. THE PURPOSE IS TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE CITIZENS RECEIVE FOR THE $300,000 AUDIT. ALSO THE FINANCE DIRECTOR OF -- INFORMED THE COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS OF AUBURN THE VARIOUS KINDS OF AUDITS THAT ARE AVAILABLE, THEIR PURPOSE, AND WHERE THE AUDITS FIT. EXPLAIN THE PROCESS OF HOW MANCHIN -- HAS CONTINUED TO RECEIVE THE PLEASURE OF PERFORMING THE AUBURN CITY AUDITS FOR DECADES. MAYBE A CHANGE IS DUE IN GETTING A BETTER PERSPECTIVE ON CITY FINANCIALS. PLEASE TAKE THE AUDIT STATEMENTSTATEMENT I HAVE ATTACHED AND SHOW TO OUR ACCOUNTANT, OUR FRIEND, TO EXPLAIN THE VALUE OF THE 2024 COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT AUDIT STATEMENT THAT IS ON PAGE 25 THROUGH 28. I APPRECIATE ALL THAT EACH OF YOU DO FOR THE CITY OF AUBURN, EXCUSE ME. ROBERT WILKINS, AUBURN CITIZEN, WARD 5. I SENT THIS EMAIL THE PAST SUNDAY EVENING. I HOPE EACH OF YOU COUNCIL MEMBERS ASKED YOUR ACCOUNTANT OR A FRIEND ACCOUNTANT THE VALUE OF THE CITY AUDIT. MY OPINION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THREE DIFFERENT CPAS I PRESENTED THE AUDIT STATEMENT TO, THEY SAID IT'S WORTHLESS. THE CITY OF AUBURN SHOULD GO THROUGH THE QUALITY STATE AUDITS THAT EACH GOVERNMENT AND THE STATE DEPARTMENTS GO THROUGH. COUNCILMAN GRISWOLD HAS STATED ON NUMEROUS TIME AUBURN IS UNIQUE AND DIFFERENT FROM OTHER CITIES. CITY OF AUBURN SHOULD TAKE THE LEADERSHIP ROLE NO OTHER ALABAMA CITY HAS TAKEN. MAYOR ANDERS, YOUR THE LEADER FOR THE BIG TEN. SHOW THE OTHER NINE CITIES THAT LEADERSHIP IS WHAT IT'S ABOUT. CONDUCT THE CITY AUDIT BY THE STATE OF ALABAMA. WE AUBURN CITIZENS BELIEVE IN A REAL AUDIT. WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN SUGAR COATED, MAKE BELIEVE FULL AUDIT. PLEASE AS A CITY MEMBER DO NOT SIT THERE IN YOUR SEATS AND TELL ME I'M WRONG. RESEARCH AND PROVE TO ME I'M WRONG WITH FACTS, NOT YOUR OPINIONS. THE RECORDS GENERATED AND MAINTAINED BY THE CITY OF AUBURN SHOULD BE AUDITED FOR FINANCIAL AND LEGAL COMPLIANCE. CAN WE HAVE A REAL AUDIT? PLEASE POSTPONE. >> ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT ANYTHING ON OUR AGENDA EXCEPT FOR THE THREE ITEMS IN RESOLUTIONS? YES, SIR? [00:10:02] >> GOOD EVENING. LET ME ASK, IS ITEM -- AGENDA ITEM 10A- 3 SOMETHING WE CAN SPEAK TO NOW? >> NO, SIR. WE WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO WAIT UNTIL THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE YOU ASKING. ANYONE ELSE? >> >> NO, SIR. YOU HAD YOUR FIVE MINUTES. >> THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING. >> YOU'LL HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THAT. [7. CITY MANAGER’S COMMUNICATIONS.] ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. CITY MANAGERS COMMUNICATIONS. >> UNDER CITY MANAGERS COMMUNICATIONS, AS YOU PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED ITEM 9A-1 IS OFF THE AGENDA, REMOVED BY STAFF FOR FURTHER REVIEW, SOMETHING 10A-1 HAS BEEN REMOVED BY THE APPLICANT. AND THEN WE'VE ADDED ITEM 11A. IT'S AN ALCOHOL BEVERAGE SPECIAL EVENTS LICENSE, SOMETHING HAVING TO DO WITH FOOTBALL SEASON, THAT WE'LL GET TO AT THE END OF THE AGENDA. I'D ALSO LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE HAVE TWO VACANCIES ON THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOARD FOR TERMS THAT BEGIN OCTOBER 10 AND OCTOBER 9, 3031. THE APPOINTMENTS WILL BE MADE AT THE SEPTEMBER 16TH MEETING. ONE VACANCY FOR A TERM THAT BEGINS OCTOBER 1, 2021 AND ENDS 2029. THE APPOINTMENT WILL BE MADE AT THE SEPTEMBER 16TH MEETING. THERE ARE TWO VACANCIES ON THE WEST PAGE VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. ONE TERM BEGINS UPON APPOINTMENT AND ENDS SEPTEMBER 2030 -- AND ONE TERM ENDS SEPTEMBER 2031. [8. CONSIDERATION OF CONSENT AGENDA.] THE APPOINTMENTS WILL BE MADE AT SEPTEMBER 16TH MEETING. ARE YOU READY FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA? >> PLEASE. >> OUR FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS IS A CONSENT AGENDA. DOES ANY COUNCIL MEMBER WISH TO REMOVE A CONSENT AGENDA AND DEAL WITH THAT ITEM INDIVIDUALLY? >> YES, MAX? >> ITEM 10C- 1, PLEASE. >> 10C-1. ANYONE ELSE? >> 8C-1. >> I'M SORRY? >> 8C-1, EXCUSE ME. I GOT AHEAD OF MYSELF. >> ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? >> 8C- 2, PLEASE. >> 8C-2. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? YES? >> 8C- 3 AND 4. [8.c.1. Auburn City Board of Education. School Resource and Canine Officer Agreement. August 1, 2025 - July 31, 2028.] >> ALL RIGHT. 8C-1. >> 8C-1 AUTHORIZES A THREE YEAR AGREEMENT WITH THE AUBURN CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION FOR SCHOOL RESOURCE AND K- 9 OFFICERS. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND. MR. COBLENTZ. >> I WANTED TO PULL THIS ITEM OFF AND HIGHLIGHT THE POSITIVES OF THE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS AND THE GREAT JOB THESE GUYS AND GALS DO SERVING OUR SCHOOLS. YOU KNOW, IT'S A VERY POSITIVE INTERACTION FOR OUR KIDS TO SEE OFFICERS IN OUR SCHOOLS AND INTERACT WITH THEM ON A DAILY BASIS. AND THE TEACHING OPPORTUNITIES THESE GENTLEMEN -- WOMEN AND GENTLEMEN HAVE WITH THESE KIDS IS GREAT. SO, I'M JUST VERY APPRECIATIVE THAT OUR COMMUNITY CAN DO THIS FOR OUR SCHOOL SYSTEM. AND OUR SCHOOL SYSTEM IS SUPPORTIVE OF US. AND JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THESE FOLKS AND THE GREAT JOB THAT THEY DO FOR OUR SCHOOLS. >> THANK YOU, MR. COBLENTZ. ANYONE ELSE? COMMENT OR THOUGHT? 100% AGREE. ALL RIGHT. HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. [8.c.2. The Mark at Auburn, LLC. Landmark Properties, Inc. Infrastructure Development Agreement. The Mark at Auburn.] >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? AND THE MOTION CARRIES. 8C-2. >> AUTHORIZES AN INFRASTRUCTURE AGREEMENT WITH THE MARKET AUBURN LLC FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS AS AUBURN LOCATED ON WRIGHT STREET AND TUMOR STREET. >> I'VE GOT TWO CONCERNS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THE FIRST, IF YOU'LL LOOK AT SECTION TWO, PARAGRAPH M -- M FOR MIKE -- IT NOTES THE CITY WILL COORDINATE WITH THE DEVELOPER TO SECURE ANY REQUIRED EASEMENTS FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS AND ASSIST IN WORKING WITH UTILITY COMPANIES, ANY NECESSARY UTILITY RELOCATIONS. WHAT CONCERNS ME IS IT SAYS LATER THAT THE CITY WILL REIMBURSE THE DEVELOPER FOR THESE IMPROVEMENTS. AND IT SAYS OVER IN SECTION 7, COMPENSATION, THAT THE CITY MAY PAY THE DEVELOPER UP TO 85,000 AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 2M, WHICH IS WHAT I JUST READ FOR YOU. THE CITY DOESN'T NEED THESE IMPROVEMENTS. THESE RESULTING IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY RESULT FOR SECURING ADDITIONAL REQUIRED EASEMENTS AND WORKING WITH UTILITY COMPANIES IS ONLY NECESSARY BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER IS DEVELOPING. SO, I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHY THE CITY SHOULD BE TASKED [00:15:01] WITH REIMBURSING THEM, AS STATED IN SECTION 7. >> IT'S VERY SIMPLE. THE DEVELOPMENT -- WHETHER THE DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS OR NOT, THE CITY IS OBLIGATED TO DO STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS HERE. WHILE THE DEVELOPER HAS THE ROAD TORN UP ON TOOMER STREET OR THE SIDEWALK AND SO ON, THEY'RE INSTALLING STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS WE WERE LONG AGO COMMITTED TO THAT WE HAVE FUNDS FROM ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT ON GLEN AVENUE TO FUND. WE'RE TAKING THOSE FUNDS, USING THEM HERE. WE'RE NOT HAVING TO MOBILIZE A SEPARATE CONTRACTOR. THIS WOULDN'T BE IN HERE IF THEY HAD SAID, NO WE'RE NOT WILLING TO PARTNER WITH YOU. SO, IT'S SIMILAR TO A CASE YOU SPOKE AT A PREVIOUS MEETING THAT WE'RE ASKING SOMEBODY TO DO SOMETHING ABOVE AND BEYOND THE SCOPE. WE DON'T HAVE A LEGAL NEXUS TO MAKE THEM DO THESE IMPROVEMENTS. BUT WE ASKED IN THE SPIRIT OF PARTNERSHIP, AND THEY COMPLIED AS LONG AS WE PAY FOR IT. SO, THE ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS HAS TO DO WITH IT'S NOT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY. ANYTHING THEY NEED FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT, THEY WILL HAVE TO ACQUIRE EASEMENTS FOR THEIR OWN ACCORD. FOR WORK WE'RE ASKING THEM TO DO FOR US, WE ARE ALSO WILLING TO HELP ACQUIRE THE EASEMENTS BECAUSE IT'S WORK THE CITY WOULD LIKE DONE. >> ALL RIGHT. >> BEFORE YOU MOVE ON THERE, WHAT WOULD COMPEL US TO DO THESE STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS? >> TRYING TO GET A CONSISTENT STREETSCAPE IN THIS AREA. I CAN HAVE OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FOLKS SPEAK TO IT. BUT WHEN A PROJECT WAS BUILT AT 250 WEST GLEN, THE THEN ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, KEVIN CAL PER INSISTED ON MONEY FOR A DEVELOPMENT FOR TOOMER STREET. THE CITY HAS YET TO PERFORM THAT PROJECT. AND THOSE FUNDS CAN ONLY BE USED FOR A STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT ON TOOMER STREET. SO, AS PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS HAVE GONE ALONG TOOMER STREET, THEY HAVE PAID FOR SECTIONS IN FRONT OF THEM. AND THIS IS FOR US TO PAY FOR A SECTION THAT IS NOT IN FRONT OF ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN REDEVELOPING. MISS ANYTHING, SCOTT? >> NO. THAT WAS GREAT. >> HOLD ON A SECOND. GREG'S GOING TO GET YOU. >> AM I GOOD NOW? OKAY. NO. THAT'S CORRECT. THIS PIECE HERE, WE WOULD END UP CONSTRUCTING WHETHER THEY'RE DOING THIS PROJECT OR NOT AT SOME POINT. IF THEY DIDN'T DO THIS PROJECT, WE WOULD BE CONSTRUCTING THE REST OF TOOMER STREET STREETSCAPE. WE'RE IMPROVING SIDEWALK ON BOTH SIDES, PROVIDING LIGHTS AND OTHER THINGS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS. WE'VE NOT DESIGNED THIS YET OR THEY HAVE NOT DESIGNED THIS YET TO FIGURE OUT ALL THE UTILITY CONFLICTS OR POTENTIAL EASEMENTS. THE WHOLE THING IS THAT IF THERE ARE ISSUES THERE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HOLD THEM HOSTAGE OVER NOT BEING ABLE TO DELIVER THAT PROJECT AND GET A CEO FOR THEIR PROJECT BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING FOR THE CITY, NOT REQUIRED FOR THEM. >> WELL, THERE'S ANOTHER STATEMENT HERE THAT SAYS, IN EXCHANGE FOR IMPACTS ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF- WAY, DEVELOPER WILL DO THESE THINGS, DEVELOP SO AND SO. I MEAN, I WOULD THINK THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF AN EXCHANGE FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS OF IMPACTS ON PUBLIC ACCESS INCONVENIENCE AND PARKING, THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE WILLING TO LEAN OVER BACKWARDS TO ACCOMMODATE US. IN MY OPINION, AUBURN IS A VERY, VERY DESIRABLE PLACE FOR DEVELOPERS. THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. THEY'RE ALL GOING TO MAKE A BUNCH OF MONEY OFF THIS STUFF. WE SEEM TO JUST MAKE IT REALLY, REALLY EASY. AND I WOULD PREFER THE DEVELOPERS HAVE THEIR FEET HELD TO THE FIRE. AND IF THERE'S ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO SAY, WOULD YOU PLEASE DO SOMETHING, NOT -- WE CAN'T MANDATE IT. BUT WOULD YOU PLEASE DO SOMETHING? WHY DON'T WE ASK THEM TO DO SOMETHING? >> THAT'S WHAT WE DO ALL DAY EVERY DAY. THE STAFF SITS IN HOURS OF MEETINGS ASKING FOR EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN GET. THE DEVELOPER HAS A RIGHT TO SAY NO. WE TRY TO BE REASONABLE IN THAT. THAT'S THE REQUEST HERE. IN TERMS OF OUR ABILITY, LEGALLY WE CAN'T COMPEL ANYBODY TO DO THINGS THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO DO. IN THE SPIRIT OF PARTNERSHIP, THEY DO. BUT WE ALSO -- THEY HAVE A DEVELOPMENT RIGHT ON THIS PROPERTY AND IT'S A BALANCE FOR US THAT WE'RE TRYING TO STRIKE. SO, THE LETTER H THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS ALSO THE IMPROVEMENTS THEY HAVE TO MAKE IN THE RIGHT-OF- WAY PER OUR REQUIREMENTS, WHICH THEY'RE MAKING. IN TERMS OF TOOMER STREET, NOT ALL OF YOU WOULD HAVE GOTTEN INFORMATION FROM ME. THEY WILL -- NOT TOOMER STREET. WRIGHT STREET, THEY WILL TAKE UP FIVE PARKING SPACES FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. SOME WILL BE OPEN NOT FOR PARKING BUT FOR PEDESTRIAN WALKING DURING FOOTBALL. THEY WILL PAY $1 AN HOUR FOR EVERY DAY THEY BLOCK THOSE SPACES. IT'S ROUGHLY $20,000 FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT BECAUSE THEY ARE TAKING AWAY METERED SPACES IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. THEY'RE GOING TO NET GAIN TWO SPACES, ADDING TWO SPACES. THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR SPACES THAT DON'T EXIST. ON TOOMER STREET WE DON'T HAVE [00:20:02] ON- STREET PARKING RIGHT NOW, SO THEY DON'T PAY FOR THAT. WE HAVE TALKED TO THE CITY ATTORNEYS AD NAUSEUM ABOUT HOW DO WE PUT A VALUE ON THE SIDEWALK BEING CLOSED. WE HAVE NOT FOUND A LEGAL MECHANISM THAT WORKS THAT PUTS A OF USE OF THAT SIDEWALK FOR A DURATION. AND WE HAVE TO HAVE A STUDY THAT DETERMINES THAT VALUE TO BE ABLE TO CHARGE IT TO THEM. AND IF WE THOUGHT WE COULD FIND THAT VALUE SOMEWHERE THAT WAS DEFENSIBLE LEGALLY, WE WOULD CERTAINLY DO THAT. >> SO, WHY ISN'T THIS DOLLAR PER DAY OR WHATEVER IT WAS YOU MENTIONED INCLUDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? >> IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY A CITY POLICY. ANY DOWNTOWN MERCHANT THAT HAS WORK GOING ON IN THEIR BUSINESS, WE CHARGE THEIR CONTRACTOR EVERY TIME THEY ASK TO BLOCK A SPACE. SO, THAT'S DEFACTO HAPPENING AND DOESN'T HAVE TO BE MEMORIALIZED, JUST LIKE EVERY REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT IS NOT IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BECAUSE IT RESIDES IN OUR DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. SO, IT'S THE SAME IDEA HERE. >> OKAY. I CERTAINLY AM NOT AWARE OF THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE EVER HEARD OF SUCH A THING. I SEE A LOT OF HEADS GOING, NO. BUT TWO AND A HALF YEARS WORTH OF INCONVENIENCE TO THE CITY IS ALLOWED UNDER THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. TWO AND A HALF YEARS. FRANKLY, I JUST -- I -- I'M FLABBERGASTED THAT WE WOULD THINK THIS IS A GOOD THING TO DO. SO, OKAY. I'M DONE. >> BUT WE COULDN'T STOP IT IF WE WANTED TO. IT'S BY RIGHT, CORRECT? >> THEY CAN BUILD THE PROJECT. YOU, THE COUNCIL, HAVE THE RIGHT TO STOP PEOPLE FROM USING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. HOWEVER, TYPICALLY PROJECTS HAVE TO USE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. AND WE CAN GO IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND TALK AT SOME POINT IN TIME ABOUT THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS THEREOF. IT'S THE SAME WITH TOWER CRANE AGREEMENTS AND OTHER THINGS. YOU CAN SAY, NO, IT CAN'T SWING OVER THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID -- AND WE HAVE A LOT OF PROFESSIONAL EXPERTS ON STAFF -- IS WE'RE TRYING TO MINIMIZE DISRUPTION TO THE AUBURN CITIZENS AND VISITORS. IN THIS CASE THEY'RE TAKING TOOMER STREET AND WRIGHT STREET AND PULLING OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WHERE WE CAN FACILITATE ACCESS TO THE PARKING DECK, OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS IN THE AREA, AND THEY'RE PULLING TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD TO OFFLOAD. OTHERWISE THEY CAN BACK ONTO THEIR SITE FROM WRIGHT STREET AND BLOCK EVERYBODY'S ABILITY TO GET ON THE STREET. >> THEY WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT? >> THEY WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT AND WE WOULD HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE AFTERMATH. THE CHOICE GIVEN TO STAFF -- IT'S NOT A THREAT FROM THE DEVELOPER. OUR CHOICE WAS WHAT IS THE LEAST EGREGIOUS THING TO THE AUBURN CITIZENS. CERTAINLY SAY IF THE COUNCIL WANTS THINGS DONE DIFFERENTLY, WE NEED TO MAKE DIFFERENT RULES AND REGULATIONS BECAUSE WE ARE IN A POSITION WHERE WE HAVE TO LET PEOPLE BUILD PROJECTS AND WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT A WAY. AND IF IT IS NO DISRUPTION TO THE RIGHT-OF- WAY, THAT'S GOING TO BE CHALLENGING FOR ANYBODY TO BUILD A PROJECT. AND YOU CAN'T JUST PUT IT ON THE URBAN CORE. IT HAS TO BE CITYWIDE, SAME RULES APPLY. >> YEAH. I APPRECIATE THAT THIS IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT. THAT'S FINE. BUT I DON'T SEE HOW AN OCCASIONAL DELIVERY OR OCCASIONAL BLOCKAGE OF THE ROAD FOR SOMEBODY TO BACK IN THERE EQUATES TO TWO AND A HALF YEARS. >> THERE IS NOTHING OCCASIONAL ABOUT A PROJECT LIKE THIS. >> AT SOME POINT THERE WOULD BE. YOU DON'T SEE PEOPLE RIDING UP AND DOWN OVER HERE EVERY SINGLE DAY TRYING TO BACK INTO THE BANK. ANYWAY, THAT'S ARGUABLE. BUT GO AHEAD. >> THE AC HOTEL GETS DELIVERIES ON THE DAILY. CITY HALL IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT. THEY'RE WORKING ON IT. IT'S CERTAINLY UP TO THE COUNCIL. STAFF'S JOB IS TO DO THE BEST WE CAN FOR THE CITIZENS OF AUBURN, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE, IN OUR OPINION. >> ALL RIGHT. >> JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON WHAT WAS JUST SAID, THIS IS ONE OF THREE THINGS THAT THIS RESOLUTION -- NO, I'M SORRY, THIS -- THE ITEM PERTAINS TO. AND THE FIRST OF THESE IS AN INFRASTRUCTURE AGREEMENT. >> YES, SIR. >> AND PART OF THAT IS THAT WE'RE ALLOWING PARKING IN FIVE PLACES AND THEY'RE PAYING FOR THAT PARKING. >> CORRECT. >> IS THERE -- ARE THERE OTHER PARTS OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE AGREEMENT THAT STAND OUT NOTABLY, OR IS THAT THE MAIN -- PARKING THE MAIN ISSUE FOR THAT PORTION? >> NO, NO. I MEAN, THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS TALKING ABOUT ALL THEIR CONSTRUCTION LOGISTICS, WHEN THEY CAN BLOCK THINGS, WHEN THEY CAN'T BASED ON FOOTBALL. IT'S VERY COMPLICATED IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE FLOW OF THE PROCESS OVER TWO AND A HALF YEARS, PLUS TOWER CRANES GETS MEMORIALIZED HERE. >> OKAY. SURE. >> I'M SORRY. >> THEY ARE CONTRIBUTING TO PAYING FOR RETIMING OF SOME OF THE SIGNALS. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT CAME OUT OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. >> IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S IN THE AGREEMENT? >> IT IS IN AGREEMENT, YES. >> IT'S IN THERE BUT ALSO BY RIGHT. NO, WE DID NOT INCLUDE THE ON- STREET PARKING PIECE [00:25:02] BECAUSE THAT HAPPENS ROUTINELY. I TOLD YOU GUYS THURSDAY THAT'S A QUESTION FOR THE STAFF THAT I'VE RECTIFIED AN IN BETWEEN. BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO THE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS REGARDLESS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BECAUSE THAT'S ALSO A DEVELOPMENT MANUAL REQUIREMENT. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS/QUESTIONS? >> GRISWOLD, ARE YOU THREW WITH -- WITH -- >> YEAH. >> THERE ARE TWO OTHER PARTS TO THIS WE'RE VOTING ON TONIGHT, THAT IS TOWER CRANE AGREEMENT. >> CORRECT. >> WOULD THAT HAVE TO DO WITH PLACEMENT AND SWING AREA? >> JUST MAINLY HAS TO DO WITH SWING AREA. IT SHOWS YOU WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE, BUT IT'S THE RADIUS IN WHICH THE CRANE WILL SWING. THE ANY PROPERTY THAT IS NOT THEIRS THAT IT SWINGS OVER, THEY'VE GOT TO GET AGREEMENT FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER. IT'S ALSO A LIABILITY. IF IT'S GOING TO SWING OVER THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, WE WANT THEM TO TAKE ALL LIABILITY FOR IT. YOU DO HAVE THE RIGHT AND WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE, TO SAY NO. HOWEVER, WE'VE APPROVED A TON OF TOWER CRANE AGREEMENTS TO DATE. >> WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE SAY NO? WHAT DOES -- >> THEN THEY CAN'T SWING OVER THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE RADIUS OF THE CRANE CANNOT SWING OVER THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> WOULD THAT CAUSE THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT TO TAKE LONGER? >> I COULDN'T SPEAK TO THAT. >> IN THEORY. >> IN THEORY BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY'RE PARKING ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF- WAY WITH THEIR DELIVERIES. SO, THEY'VE GOT TO -- THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOWER A CRANE OVER THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF- WAY TO GET TO THAT. IF YOU SAY NO TO THE TOWER CRANES SWINGING OVER THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BACK THEIR EQUIPMENT ONTO THE PROPERTY. AND I ASSURE YOU IT WILL BE LOTS OF BLOCKAGE OF ROAD. WRIGHT STREET IS VERY ACTIVE. THIS IS WE'RE ONLY ALLOWING 9:00 A.M. TO 4:00 P.M. DELIVERIES. WE HAVE A TIME RESTRICTION, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> YES. >> IS THE CITY COMFORTABLE WITH THE TOWER AGREEMENT, WITH THE CRANE AGREEMENT? >> YES. >> OKAY. THE THIRD THING IS TEMPORARY SHORING AND ANCHORING PORTION. AND THIS IS RETAINING WALLS? >> IT ANCHORS. AND I CAN LET ONE OF OUR ENGINEERS TALK ABOUT WE'VE DONE THIS WITH OTHER PROJECTS. WHICHEVER ENGINEER, ROLL THE DICE. HERE WE GO. >> SO, WHEN THEY EXCAVATE DOWN NEXT TO AN EXISTING RIGHT-OF- WAY OR EASEMENT OR ADJOINING PROPERTY, THEY PUT IN A TEMPORARY SHORING SYSTEM. SO, INSTEAD OF BUILDING A RETAINING WALL OR, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE SEEN THEM DRIVE IN THE SHEET PILES AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT VIBRATE EVERYBODY AROUND THEM. THEY ACTUALLY INSERT THESE DIFFERENT TYPES OF DEVICES. SOMETIMES THEY USE, LIKE, A SOIL NAIL AS THEY CALL IT OR SOMETHING. BUT IT ACTUALLY ANCHORS A -- BASICALLY JUST A SPRAYED ON CONCRETE WALL AND HOLDS THAT STEADY WHILE THEY BUILD THEIR BASEMENT AREA UP AROUND THOSE UNTIL THEY CAN SHORE THAT AREA UP. BUT IT'S A TEMPORARY SHORING. AND THOSE ARE CUT LOOSE FROM AS FAR AS ANY TENSION GOES WHEN THEY'RE DONE. THE DEPTHS OF THESE WILL BE BELOW ANY EXISTING UTILITIES. >> OKAY. THE TERM "SOIL NAIL. " THAT'S NOT QUITE RIGHT. >> THAT'S WHAT THEY CALL THEM. >> SOIL NAIL? >> YES. >> WHAT IS THAT? >> IT'S JUST LIKE, YOU EITHER DRILL -- YOU CAN EITHER DRILL A METAL PIECE INTO THE SOIL SO THAT IT WON'T PULL OUT, OR THEY ACTUALLY USE A TENSION -- IF YOU JUST WERE TO DRIVE A STEEL ROD DEEP INTO THE SOIL AND THE TENSION ACTUALLY HOLDS IT FROM PULLING OUT. >> AND YOU SAID SPRAY ON CONCRETE? OR SOMETHING. >> YEAH. IT'S JUST A GROUT WALL THAT YOU SPRAY ON THERE AND IT JUST -- IT SECURES IT AND HOLDS IT STEADY FOR TEMPORARY USE. >> IT WOULDN'T CUT THE TENSION -- WHEN THE PROJECT IS BUILT, THEY CUT THE TENSION. SO, YOU LEAVE A LITTLE BIT OF IT, A LITTLE PIECE OF IT IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, BUT THE REST OF IT IS -- IT'S NO LONGER NEEDED. >> ARE THERE CONCERNS ABOUT THESE TWO TECHNIQUES AND OTHER TECHNIQUES? >> NO, THEY'VE BEEN USED QUITE -- SEVERAL TIMES THROUGHOUT THE CITY. THEY'RE USED QUITE COMMONLY. >> WHEN WE FIRST STARTED SEEING THESE, WE DID A LOT OF RESEARCH WITH OTHER CITIES AND GOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE LANGUAGE. AND THE BASE AGREEMENT YOU SEE HERE IS SOMETHING DEVELOPED SEVERAL YEARS AGO BECAUSE OF THAT. AND WE LOOKED AT ATLANTA SPECIFICALLY, WHO WAS DEALING WITH IT A LOT. >> COULD THIS HAVE -- COULD THIS DEVELOPMENT TAKE PLACE WITHOUT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? IS THAT JUST -- >> DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OR CRANE AGREEMENT? >> DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. >> THE -- I MEAN, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SPEAKS SPECIFICALLY TO HOW THEY WILL HANDLE LOGISTICS AND THINGS LIKE THAT SO WE CAN HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE. I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE KEY POINTS. >> THE PURPOSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS TO PUT RESTRICT -- IS TO GIVE US A DEGREE OF CONTROL OVER HOW THIS -- THIS [00:30:04] IS DEVELOPED. >> CORRECT. >> AND THINGS NOT CAPTURED OTHERWISE. WE DON'T HAVE IN ANY OF OUR MANUALS CONSTRUCTION HOURS RELATED TO FOOTBALL. BUT WE DO IN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS BECAUSE WE WANT TO RESTRICT DELIVERIES AND OTHER ACTIONS ON SITE ON FOOTBALL FRIDAYS AND SATURDAYS SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT'S SO DISRUPTIVE TO WHAT'S GOING ON. THERE ARE THINGS MEMORIALIZED ININ HERE THAT WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO REALLY MEMORIALIZE OTHERWISE. BUT THEORETICALLY ONE COULD TAKE PLACE. BUT TO SCOTT'S POINT, THERE'S EVEN A NEW SECTION IN HERE ABOUT WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO ISSUE CITATIONS AND DO OTHER THINGS. WE'RE HAVING MARKET ISSUES WITH CONTRACTORS BLOCKING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WHEN THEY HAVE NO PERMISSION TO DO SO. JUST PUTTING CONES OUT IN THE ROAD AND DOING WHAT THEY FEEL LIKE DOING. AND WE HAVE BEEN SHUTTING CONSTRUCTION SITES DOWN LATELY AND THE POLICE HAVE BEEN SHOWING UP TO TELL THEM THAT THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO BLOCK THE RIGHT-OF-WAY RIGHT NOW. WE'RE TRYING TO RECTIFY THOSE THINGS BEFORE WE GET A REGULATORY ITEM IN THESE AGREEMENTS. AND IT'S CATCH- ALL TO SEE SOME OF THE NUANCES OF A PROJECT. >> WHAT IS THE HISTORICAL DURATION OF CITY DISRUPTION, ROAD DISRUPTION, WHATNOT, WITH SOME OF THESE OTHER LARGE- SCALE PROJECTS, LIKE THE ONE ON MAGNOLIA OR THE ONE DOWN ON GLENN, WAY DOWN ON GLENN, OR THE AC HOTEL? >> TWO TO TWO AND A HALF YEARS TYPICALLY. >> YEAH, I THINK THIS SCHEDULE IS VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH ANY OF THOSE LARGER SCALE PROJECTS. >> TWO AND A HALF YEARS? >> YES. 18 MONTHS TO TWO YEARS. YES. >> 18 MONTHS TO TWO YEAR SS A LONG WAY FROM TWO AND A HALF YEARS. BUT OKAY. YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION. >> DEPENDS ON THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT. THIS IS A MASSIVE PROJECT. >> IT IS A UNIQUE PROJECT, THOUGH, BECAUSE AS OPPOSED TO TAKING UP THE LENGTH OF IT ALONG ONE ENTIRE STREET, IT'S BETWEEN TWO STREETS. SO, I THINK FROM A DISRUPTION POINT, IT'S NOT LIKE WE'VE SEEN WITH SOME ON GLENN. IT'S TAKEN A LOT LONGER BIT OF SIDEWALK, SCAFFOLDING REQUIRED. I MEAN, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, IN MY OPINION, IS FOR SAFETY REASONS AS MUCH AS ANYTHING. I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT ISSUES COUNCILMAN GRISWOLD YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT YOU WOULD LIKE US TO CHANGE AS A COUNCIL WITH REGARD TO THIS AGREEMENT. FOR US TO NOT PAY THEM 85,000? OR -- I'M -- I DIDN'T HEAR AN ASK WITH YOUR COMMENTS. >> I DIDN'T OFFER TO ASK. >> OKAY. >> OFFERING INPUT AND STATING WHAT MY CONCERNS ARE, THAT WE'RE PAYING FOR THINGS THAT ARE NECESSARY BECAUSE OF THE PROJECT AND NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING WE WOULD DO REGARDLESS. WRIGHT STREET, THE STREETSCAPE, THERE'S NOTHING SPECTACULAR ABOUT THE STREETSCAPE. SO, IF WE HAVE TO ACQUIRE A RIGHT-OF- WAY OR RELOCATE UTILITIES AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BEAR THE COST. THAT'S MY COMMENT. >> ALL RIGHT. >> I CAN SPEAK TO HISTORICALLYHISTORICALLY PROJECTS LIKE THIS, THE PARKING -- WE TRY TO WORK TO GAIN ANY PUBLIC PARKING AS PART OF WORKING WITH THESE DEVELOPMENTS. THIS IS A FAIRLY LARGELARGE BEING BUILT. AND OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD OPEN UP ADDITIONAL PARKING OPPORTUNITY FOR US POSSIBLY AS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT. CAN YOU SPEAK -- >> WE DID YEARS AGO WITH SOME OF THE EARLIER PROJECTS. WE FOUND THEM TO BE COST-PROHIBITIVE IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY WANTED TO CHARGE US PER SPACE TO BUY INTO THE PROJECT FOR LONG TERM LEASES. WE HAVEN'T EXPLORED THAT IN A WHILE, PART OF THAT BECAUSE OF THE $16 MILLION WE SPENT ON THE WRIGHT STREET PARKING DECK. WE ARE CHALLENGING THE URBAN CORE BY FINITE AMOUNT OF RETAIL SPACE IN WHICH PEOPLE CAN VISIT. AND SO RIGHT NOW, FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, WE FEEL THAT WE'VE GOT ADEQUATE PARKING. THE OTHER CHALLENGE IS WE CAN'T PARTNER WITH SOMEBODY FOR PARKING THAT IS REQUIRED FOR THEIR USE. SO, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BUILD ADDITIONAL PARKING. AND THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, THE COUNCIL WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED, ACTUALLY ASKED FOR A VARIANCE TO DO LESS PARKING AND WAS DENIED BY THE BZA AND THEN CAME FORWARD AND MET THE PARKING REQUIREMENT. AND SO WE HAVEN'T PURSUED LATELY. I'M NOT -- WE ARE NOT CURRENTLY SEEKING, AS A STAFF, ADDITIONAL PARKING BECAUSE WE FEEL THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE PUBLIC PARKING. PROBABLY OUR NEXT PARKING DELIVERY WILL BE THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE GAY STREET [00:35:02] PARKING DECK. THE ORIGINAL MUNICIPAL PARKING DECK IS GETTING TO THE END OF ITS LIFE SPAN AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT AT SOME POINT IN TIME, PROBABLY WITHIN THE NEXT TEN YEARS, DAN. IS THAT ABOUT RIGHT? TEN YEARS OR LESS? >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. >> COULD A PUD ORDINANCE BE USED IN CONGRUENCE WITH THIS TO NEGOTIATE PARKING AS PART OF THIS -- >> ARE PUDS ALLOWED IN THE URBAN CORE? I CAN'T REMEMBER. >> YEAH. SO, PUDS ARE ALLOWED IN THE URBAN CORE. I'M STRUGGLING THINKING ABOUT THE INCENTIVE OF PUBLIC PARKING. I GUESS IT WOULD BE A TRADE- OFF OF WHATEVER PARKING WAS REQUIRED, IT WOULD ALMOST BE LIKE GIVING THEM A BREAK ON PARKING. IF THEY WERE TO ALLOW A PERCENTAGE TO BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC JUST BECAUSE OFTEN TIMES, I WOULDN'T SAY THEY PUSH BACK ON THAT. BUT THEY WOULD JUST PUSH BACK ENTIRELY ON HAVING TO BUILD A NUMBER OF PARKING. I GUESS IF WE WERE GOING TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE ON- STREET PARKING, WHICH IS THE ONLY ASK THAT I'VE BEEN APPROACHED WITH IS FOR ON- STREET PUBLIC PARKING, NOT NECESSARILY STRUCTURED PUBLIC PARKING. >> YEAH. A PUD THEORETICALLY, YOU COULD. IT DOESN'T -- IN THE URBAN CORE ALSO YOU HAVE SETBACKS AND SO ON FOR A PROJECT OF THIS SIZE THAT ARE -- WE'RE ALMOST ZERO LOT LINE JUST DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY'RE DOING. SO, THERE'S NOT A HUGE ADVANTAGE TO A PUD IN THIS CASE. AND I DON'T KNOW -- IT WOULD BE HARD FOR THE STAFF TO GET BEHIND PROVIDING SOME PUBLIC PARKING OF WHICH SOMEBODY'S GOING TO CHARGE FOR AND DO WHATEVER. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE OWNERSHIP OF THE CITY OR WHAT HAVE YOU. BUT STRUCTURED SPACES, I DON'T KNOW IF KEVIN HOWARD KNOWS RIGHT NOW. THEY USED TO RUN 15 TO $30,000 A SPACE OR MORE AND THEY'RE PROBABLY WAY HIGHER THAN THAT NOW. >> PROBABLY 45. >> 45 OR 50 GRAND A SPACE EASILY. SO, YEAH. IT'S -- YEAH. IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN ALWAYS EXPLORE. AND IF SOMEBODY APPROACHED US WITH THE RIGHT PARTNERSHIP, WE CAN CERTAINLY BRING IT FORWARD TO THE COUNCIL. AT THIS STAGE, ALL OF THEIR PARKING IS REQUIRED PARKING. >> IF THEY DETERMINED AFTER BEING FULLY BUILT AND USED THAT THEY ARE NOT FILLING UP THEIR PARKING BECAUSE RESIDENTS ARE NOT UTILIZING IT, COULD THEY -- >> THEORETICALLY, AND ON THE PUBLIC RECORD I'M GOING TO BE CLEAR. NOBODY SHOULD BE LEASING OUT THEIR REQUIRED PARKING. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> WHILE INDEED IT DOES GO ON, THE CITY CANNOT CONDONE THAT BECAUSE IT'S REQUIRED FOR THE USE ON THEIR PROPERTY. OUR ORDINANCE DOESN'T SPEAK TO THAT, AND IT'S CHALLENGING FOR IT TO DO SO. BUT, YES. >> IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS THAT WE SEE HAVE -- WE DON'T GET TO SEE THEM IN THEIR BEGINNING FORM. WE SEE THEM AFTER A PERIOD OF PROTRACTED NEGOTIATION WITH THE DEVELOPER. SO, IT'S -- >> YOU OFTEN SEE THEM SIX TO 12 MONTHS INTO THE PROJECT TYPICALLY FOR US. FROM FIRST CONVERSATIONS TO HERE IS IN THAT TIME FRAME BECAUSE WE'RE PAST THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM PROCESS, TYPICALLY, OR DEEP ENOUGH INTO IT WE CAN -- WE CAN FORMULATE ONE. >> SO, THERE ARE LIKELY THINGS -- THERE ARE THINGS THAT STAFF HAS PROBABLY REQUEST AND ASKED FOR AND THE DEVELOPER HAS DECIDED NOT TO PLAY BALL WITH US THERE, AND WE'VE TRIED TO NEGOTIATE OTHER ITEMS INTO THE AGREEMENT THAT WE WOULD FIND OR THAT THE STAFF BELIEVES -- >> WE CERTAINLY NEGOTIATE WHAT WE CAN, BUT I ALSO -- YOU KNOW, I WANT TO BE CAREFUL. WE DON'T LOOK AT IT, LET'S GETGET WE CAN GET EITHER. OUR GOAL HERE IS FOLKS ARE INVESTING MONEY. CITY IS NOT RECRUITING THIS STYLE OF PROJECT, IT COMES. THEY ARE INVESTING A LOT OF MONEY. AND COMMON ANSWER AROUND THE TABLE IS YOUR PROPERTY TAXES ARE GOING TO INCREASE. AND, AGAIN, WE'RE NOT RECRUITING THESE PROJECTS. THAT IS PART OF IT. THERE IS TRUTH TO THAT, THAT PROPERTY TAXES DO INCREASE BECAUSE OF THESE. SO, WE ARE ALLOWED TO ASK FOR WHATEVER WE WISH. AND WE PUSH PEOPLE'S BUTTONS AS FAR AS WE CAN, AND I GET COMPLAINTS FROM SOME OF YOU ABOUT THE BUTTONS WE PUSH WHEN ASKING FOR THINGS. WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT. WE DO IN OUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION WHEN THINGS ARE NECESSARY. IN TERMS OF ASKING FOR MORE THAN WHAT IS NECESSARY, THAT WOULD BE AN UNUSUAL ASK FROM THE STAFF. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION. WE'VE GOT A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. [8.c.3. LCD Aquisitions, LLC. Authorize deposit agreement for third-party plan review for The Mark at Auburn.] >> AYE. >> ANY PPOSED? >> NEE. >> ONE NAY. >> DEPOSIT AGREEMENT WITH LCD ACQUISITIONS LLC FOR THIRD PARTY PLAN REVIEW FOR AUBURN. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. MR. MOREMAN? >> THANK YOU. I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THIS ITEM, THE ITEM BEFORE, AND THE ITEM AFTER ALL PERTAIN TO THE SAME PROJECT. [00:40:02] AND IN THE BROAD OVERVIEW, THIS IS PART OF THE CITY'S DESIRE TO, I GUESS ENCOURAGE STUDENTS TO LIVE WEST OF COLLEGE STREET. IS THAT OKAY TO SAY OR FAIR TO SAY? >> WELL, I THINK THE CITY MANAGER JUST MADE IT CLEAR THAT WE'VE NOT RECRUITED ANY OF THESE COMPANIES TO COME FOR THESE PROJECTS -- >> THAT'S CORRECT. THE CITY IS NOT RECRUITING. THAT'S BEEN A QUESTION AMONG OUR CITIZENS IS ARE YOU RECRUITING THESE PROJECTS. THE ANSWER IS NO. OUR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, THEY'RE NOT OUT THERE RECRUITING. HOWEVER, FROM AN EXECUTIVE PERSPECTIVE, THE GOAL WAS YEARS AGO IF WE WERE GOING TO HAVE DENSER DEVELOPMENT, IT WAS TO BE IN THIS URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD WEST, WHICH THIS -- SORRY, YEAH, URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD-WEST. THIS CORRELATES WITH THE URBAN CORE AND THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD-WEST. IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH. THE GOAL WAS TO ALLOW THE DENSITY HERE WHERE STUDENTS WERE CLOSEST TO THE CAMPUS TO THAT MAGNOLIA SIDE OF CAMPUS AND BE WALKABLE. AND WHERE TYPICALLY AVERAGE CITIZENS DON'T SPEND A LOT OF TIME OTHER THAN VISITS RESTAURANTS IN THE AREA AND PASSING THROUGH. TRYING TO LOWER VEHICLE TRIPS TO THE AREA, SONNY, AND TRYING TO GET A LOT MORE PEDESTRIANS. AND FROM THE FRUSTRATIONS WE GET ABOUT THE MAGNOLIA CROSSWALK AT CHIK-FIL-A, THERE'S A LOT OF PEDESTRIANS THERE. THAT PART IS WORKING. AND OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR IS VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THE WALKABILITY OF THE AREA IN TERMS OF WE ARE SEEING -- THAT WAS A GOOD QUESTION I HAD FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS RECENTLY. ARE WE SEEING PEOPLE WALK IN THIS AREA? WE ARE. THE HOPE WAS TO GET SOME PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR CARS BY PARKING HERE AND DOING THAT. AND THAT'S WORKING. BUT I THINK IT REMAINS TO BE DETERMINED HOW PEOPLE GENERALLY FEEL ABOUT THE ZONING THAT ALLOWS IT. >> AND THIS PARTICULAR ITEM IS A THIRD PARTY PLAN REVIEW. >> YES, SIR. >> IS THAT A COMMON PRACTICE TO BRING IN THIRD PARTY REVIEWERS? >> SO, WITH THESE LARGE PROJECTS -- AND WE TALKED ABOUT ONE AT A PREVIOUS MEETING. THE REASON THAT WE'RE DOING THIS IS WE HAVE OTHER PEOPLE BUILDING OTHER THINGS IN AUBURN. WE HAVE A LEMTED STAFF THAT REVIEWS BUILDING PLANS. AND WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS NOT BRING TO A SCREECHING HALT THE REVIEW OF ALL OTHER PLANS IN THE CITY, WHY WE REVIEW SUCH A LARGE BUILDING. SO, ONE THING THAT WE'VE REALLY STEPPED UP OUR GAME ON IS ASKED FOR THIRD PARTY REVIEW. THE END USER GETS REVIEW RELATIVELY FAST. IT MEETS ALL THE SAME CRITERIA, AND IT KEEPS OUR STAFF MOVING ON EVERYBODY ELSE'S PROJECTS, SWIMMING POOLS, GARAGE ADDITIONS, AND OTHER COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. THE BEAUTY OF THIS IS THE DEVELOPER PAYS 100% OF THAT COST. IT ACTUALLY USED TO BE THAT THERE WAS A SPLIT. THERE'S NO LONGER A SPLIT. THEY'RE FULLY FUNDING. >> WHAT'S THE ANTICIPATED COST? >> $78,000. >> 78. YOU DONE? >> I THINK SO. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS/QUESTIONS? >> WHICH ONE'S WHICH? WHICH ONE ARE WE ON? >> 8C-3. >> OKAY. THE TOWER CRANE WAS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. >> I HAVE A BELATED QUESTION ON THE TOWER -- I KNOW WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING, BUT THE TOWER/CRANE AGREEMENT, GLENN WAS NOT SHOWING ON THE MAP. DOES IT GO ALL THE WAY TO GLENN? >> NO, NO, NO. >> NO? OKAY. >> NOPE. THIS IS BETWEEN WEST AND WRIGHT PROJECT AND ANOTHER PROJECT CLOSER TO MCDONALD'S. >> OKAY. THANKS. >> OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT W. . [8.c.4. HR Green, Inc. - Task Order IS 02 for building plan reviews for The Mark at Auburn.] WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> 8C-4 AUTHORIZES TASK ORDER WITH HR GREEN INCORPORATED FOR BUILDING PLAN REVIEWS FOR THE MARKET AUBURN. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. MR. MOREMAN? >> THANK YOU. THE LAST ONE ACTUALLY WAS A DEPOSIT AND WE COVERED THAT FROM A DEPOSIT STANDPOINT OR JUST A THIRD PARTY PLAN REVIEW. THIS ITEM DIFFERS FROM THAT IN THAT IT'S A BUILDING PLAN AGREEMENT. >> THIS IS AN ACTUAL CONTRACT WITH THE COMPANY THAT'S GOING TO REVIEW THE PLANS. IT'S A TASK ORDER, YOU APPROVED OVERALL US DOING BUSINESS WITH THIS COMPANY. THIS IS THE SECOND SET OF PLANS THEY'RE REVIEWING FOR US. THE PREVIOUS ITEM IS A DEPOSIT AGREEMENT FROM THE DEVELOPER SO THAT THE FUNDS ARE ON HAND. WE WANT TO BE SURE THE CITIZENS OF AUBURN UNDERSTAND THEY'RE NOT PAYING FOR THIS PLAN REVIEW. THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE DEPOSIT AGREEMENT. >> THANKS, WELL SAID. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? AND THE MOTION CARRIES. [00:45:03] DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA? >> SO MOVED. >> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED. >> AND THE CONSENT AGENDA IS [9.a.2. Sandhill Acres Redivision Lot 1 Annexation. Approximately 14.7 acres. Property located south of 4474 Sand Hill Road.] APPROVED. ORDINANCES. >> ITEM 9A-1 IS NO LONGER ON THE AGENDA. 9A-2 IS A REQUEST FROM DONALD LANKFORD TO ANNEX 14.7 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF 4474 SAND HILL ROAD. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST BY VOTE OF 7-1 AT ITS AUGUST 14TH MEETING. UNANIMOUS CONSENT IS NECESSARY. >> I'LL INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE AND ASK FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT. >> SECOND. >> ANYONE HAVE A PROBLEM MOVING FORWARD WITH A VOTE ON THIS THIS EVENING? SEEING AND HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? >> MR. MAYOR, I'LL JUST SAY, I -- THIS IS KIND OF A UNIQUE CASE AND DOESN'T REALLY HAVE ACCESS TO SAND HILL ROAD. REASON WHY OF WHY THIS PROPERTY IS BEING ANNEXED. SO, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF SUPPORTING THIS ANNEXATION TONIGHT. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. ROLL CALL. >> DAWSON. >> NO, MA'AM. >> GRISWOLD. >> NO, MA'AM. >> ]. >> NO, MA'AM. >> PARSON. >> NO. >> TAYLOR. >> NO. >> WITTEN. >> NO. >> ADAMS. >> NO. >> COBLENTZ. >> [10.a.2. Cafe Racer. Extension of conditional use approval for a road service use (fast food w/ drive thru). Property located at 220 Opelika Road.] NO, MA'AM. >> ANDERS. >> NO. >> ITEM 10A-1 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT. 10A- 2 -- WHICH WAS A FAST FOOD WITH DRIVE THROUGH FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS CAFE RACER, LOCATED AT 220 OPELIKA ROAD IN THE CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT URBAN ZONING DISTRICT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THIS REQUEST. A PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND. THIS TIME I'LL OPEN FOR PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS CITY COUNCIL ABOUT THIS, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. AND YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL. SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL? ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. [10.a.3. The Corner Market Plus. Commercial and entertainment use (package store). Property located at 844 Martin Luther King Drive.] >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? AND THE MOTION CARRIES. >>> ITEM 10A-3 IS A REQUEST BY RNC ENTERPRISES-510- FOOT PACKAGE STORY -- LOCATED AT 844 MARTIN LUTHER KING DRIVE. THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST WITH ONE RECUSAL AT ITS AUGUST 14TH MEETING. A PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. I'LL OPEN TO PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT THIS, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL. YES, SIR? >> GOOD EVENING, AGAIN. >> GOOD EVENING. >> MY NAME IS STEVEN FAULK. I SERVE AS PASTOR OF AUBURN ZION CHURCH, 576 MARTIN LUTHER KING DRIVE HERE IN THE GREAT CITY OF AUBURN, ALABAMA. COME BEFORE YOU AGAIN TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR AWESOME LEADERSHIP FOR THE CITY OF AUBURN AS WELL AS TO ASK YOUR CONSIDERATION NOT CONSIDERATION APPROVE THE PACKAGE STORE ON MARTIN LUTHER KING DRIVE. AS WE'VE BEEN BEFORE YOU BEFORE TO REQUEST THAT PACKAGE AND LIQUOR STORES NOT BE WITHIN THE PROXIMITY OF THE CHURCH FOR VARIOUS REASONS AS WELL AS FOR THIS COMMUNITY. THERE ARE ALREADY TWO LIQUOR STORES IN CLOSE PROXIMITY OF THE CHURCH. THIS, IF APPROVED, BECOMES THE THIRD LIQUOR STORE. IT IS WITHIN 500 FEET OF ONE CHURCH AND APPROXIMATELY 15 -- WELL, 1,000 FEET OF AUBURN ZION P CAN CHURCH. SEVERAL OF OUR LEADERS FROM THE CHURCH ARE HERE TONIGHT, AS WE, AGAIN, OPPOSE ANY LIQUOR STORE BY ANYBODY. THERE ARE TWO ALREADY, WHICH ONE WAS THERE BEFORE I BECAME PASTOR. AND THE OTHER WAS APPROVED AFTERWARDS WITHOUT US HAVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO IT. SO, WE ARE HERE TO ASK THAT YOU WOULD DENY THIS APPROVAL. A LETTER HAS BEEN SENT TO [00:50:06] YOU OUTLINING SOME OF OUR REASONS AND OPPOSITIONS TO THIS LIQUOR STORE. AND WE JUST SIMPLY ASK THAT IF WE COULD LOOK FOR OTHER THINGS TO BRING TO OUR COMMUNITY BESIDES A LIQUOR STORE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, PASTORPASTOR FAULK. WHO WILL BE NEXT? ANYONE? OKAY. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY DISCUSSION OR COMMENT FROM THE÷÷ COUNCIL? >> JUST A POINT OF ORDER, I GUESS. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE BEER OR WINE, WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TONIGHT. A PACKAGE STORE DOES NOT -- >> THEORETICALLY A PACKAGE STORE CAN SELL THAT, BUT THIS IS ABOUT LIQUOR. I BELIEVE THAT THE CORNER MARKET ALREADY HAS THE ABILITY TO SELL BEER AND WINE. >> RIGHT. >> AND A LICENSE WOULD HAVE BEEN ISSUED BY THE COUNCIL, BUT THAT WOULDN'T HAVE REQUIRED A CONDITIONAL USE. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL OPPOSED, PLEASE SAY, NAY. [10.a.4. Grand Junction Event Space. Commercial and entertainment use (event space as a component of a mixed-use development). Property located at 1027 East Glenn Avenue. Postponed from July 22, 2025.] >> NAY. >> ALL RIGHT. MOTION FAILS. >> ALL RIGHT. ITEM 10A- 4'S REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR COMMERCIAL EVENT SPACE AS A COMPONENT OF MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TO BE LOCATED AT 1207 EAST AVENUE -- THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST AND INCLUDED A CONDITION THAT ANY EVENT THAT REQUIRES OVERFLOW PARKING REQUIRES A CONTRACT TO BE PRESENTED TO STAFF. THEY DID THIS AT THEIR JULY 10TH MEETING AFTER A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM WITTEN AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN ADAMS AT THE LAST MEETING, OUR JULY 22ND CITY COUNCIL MEETING, COUNCILMAN ADAMS MOVED TO POTENTIAL STPONE THIS ITEM TO AUGUST 19TH. A PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED. >> BEFORE WE GO TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR THE COUNCIL TO ASK QUESTIONS? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> OKAY. DOES THE COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A BACK STORY AS TO HOW WE GOT HERE AND THE REASON THAT THIS WAS PULLED OFF. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD REQUESTED THAT WE ADD A PARKING CONDITION OR A REQUIREMENT THAT WE PUT A PARKING AGREEMENT IN PLACE BEFORE. DO IS TAKE THE TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT LANGUAGE WAS CORRECT. WE FELT COMFORTABLE WITH IT. WHEN IT'S PUT IN THE ACTUAL CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL. SO, WE WORKED WITH STAFF. WE ALSO WORKED WITH THE DEVELOPER TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD WHAT THE OBLIGATIONS WERE. AND WE HAVE PUT -- WE PUT SOMETHING IN PLAY THAT I AM COMFORTABLE WITH. I DO HAVE SOME -- I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. >> SURE. >> I'VE GOT A COUPLE MORE COMMENTS. ONE OF THE REASONS WHY A PARKING AGREEMENT WAS PUT IN PLACE WAS THE DEVELOPMENT HAS, I BELIEVE, 197 SPACES. THIS DEVELOPMENT HAS TOWN HOMES. THERE'S GOING TO BE A RESTAURANT THERE. THERE'S GOING TO BE AN OFFICE BUILDING THERE. 40 SPACES WERE SET ASIDE FOR THE OFFICE BUILDING. EIGHT SPACES WERE SET ASIDE FOR THE EVENT SPACE. THAT IS PER OUR ZONING ORDINANCE. I THINK IT'S ONE SPACE FOR EVERY 400 SQUARE FEET. >> CORRECT BECAUSE THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOESN'T SPEAK DIRECT I WILL TO EVENT CENTER PARKING. IT'S CONSIDERED AN ALL OTHER USE UNDER COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT USE. SO, IT FALLS UNDER A CATCHALL CATEGORY. AND HOTELS DO HAVE A REQUIREMENT, BUT IT'S ONE PER 500 SQUARE FEET OF EVENT SPACE. SO, YEAH. >> THE EVENT SPACE CAPACITY IS 400 PEOPLE. THAT IS MAXIMUM CAPACITY OF THE EVENT SPACE. SO, WHAT WE SAW -- WHAT PLANNING COMMISSION SAW WAS THAT THERE COULD BE A PARKING ISSUE. THE SOLUTION TO THAT WAS TO DEVELOP A PARKING PLAN AND TO ENSURE THAT THE DEVELOPER MAKE SURE THAT WE ACTUALLY -- THAT THEY HAVE SOMEWHERE TO PARK VEHICLES WHEN WE HAVE AN EVENT. THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE WITH THE PARKING AGREEMENT. >> CORRECT. AND OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR WROTE IN THE RESOLUTION FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL, HE WROTE YOU JUST A NICE STATEMENT. IF YOU GUYS WERE INCLINED TO APPROVE THIS, IT SAYS WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT MUST ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN A SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT TO ACCOMMODATE MAX CAPACITY EVENTS THAT EXCEED ON PARKING. THAT'S WHAT YOU INTENDED? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> IS NOW THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? [00:55:02] >> YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING WHENEVER YOU WANT. BUT WE CAN GET ALL THIS OUT THERE NOW. >> CAN WE ASK QUESTIONS BEFORE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? >> SURE. ABSOLUTELY. >> COULD I ASK QUESTIONS OF THE DEVELOPER? >> THAT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL. I DON'T SEE WHY NOT. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO START THERE? >> I WOULD LIKE TO START THERE. IF YOU WOULD, FOR THE RECORD, TELL US WHO YOU ARE AND WHERE YOU LIVE. >> GOOD EVENING, BRIAN STONE WITH BC STONE HOMES. OFFICE ADDRESS IS -- >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. STONE. WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO GIVE A DESCRIPTION OF HOW YOU INTEND THIS SPACE TO BE USED AND THE TYPE OF EVENTS THAT YOU SEE GOING HERE? >> SURE. YEAH. IT'S JUST TO CLEAR A COUPLE THINGS UP ON THAT. 4,300 SQUARE FEET OF TOTAL SPACE. THERE'S ONLY ABOUT 3,000 SQUARE FEET OF ACTUAL EVENT SPACE. AND ACCORDING TO OUR ARCHITECTS -- AND WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF DESIGN. BUT OUR OCCUPANCY WILL ACTUALLY ONLY BE 230 TO 250. SO, THE 400 IS NOT GOING TO BE WHAT WE'RE DOING. TO PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE, THE OCCUPANCY OF THIS ROOM IS 170. SO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EVENTS THAT WOULD HOLD 60 TO 80 MORE PEOPLE THAN THIS ROOM. SO, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT LARGE EVENTS. EXAMPLES, WE REALLY WANT TO TARGET CORPORATE EVENTS. THERE'S REALLY NOT AN ENVIRONMENT FOR THAT. COMMON EXAMPLE IS CHRISTMAS PARTIES. BUT ALSO CORPORATE TRAINING. THEY'RE JUST HAVING A HUB WITH GOOD AUDIO WHERE PEOPLE CAN COME AND CORPORATIONS CAN HAVE TRAINING EVENTS. SMALL WEDDING RECEPTIONS, GRADUATION PARTIES, CIVIC FUNCTIONS, CHARITY EVENTS. THOSE WOULD BE EXAMPLES OF WHAT WE WOULD ENVISION OUR CLIENTELE BEING. I THINK OUR CUTOFF TIME FOR EVENTS -- BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WAS A CONCERN EARLIER. I MEAN, WE'RE OKAY, 11:00, 11:30 P.M. BEING THE MAX. WE DON'T ENVISION THIS STAYING OPEN LATE. I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE ANYTHING WE WOULD BE -- WE DON'T ENVISION THIS BEING A PARTY ATMOSPHERE-TYPE PLACE ANYWAY. AND AGAIN WE'RE IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH THE OFFSITE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. IN THE EVENT WE EXCEED -- I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO SPEAK TO THAT. I MEAN, YOU HAVE A 15,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, 10,500 SQUARE FEET OF THAT IS OFFICE SPACE. MOST OF THESE EVENTS ARE GOING TO BE AT NIGHTTIME WHEN THE OFFICE SPACE IS CLOSED. SO, YOU DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A BUILT- IN BUFFER FROM A PARKING PERSPECTIVE, EVEN BEFORE YOU GET TO OFFSITE PARKING. THOSE 40 SPACES, THERE MIGHT BE ONE OR TWO PEOPLE THERE IN THE EVENING, BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING THESE THINGS DON'T COINCIDE WHEN IT COMES TO PARKING. WE WILL DEFINITELY HAVE A SIGNAGE PLAN ON SITE AS IT RELATES TO OUR PARKING REGARDING RULES ABOUT -- ONE CONCERN YOU AND I SPOKE ABOUT IS CHERRY STREET, PEOPLE TRYING TO PARK ON CHERRY STREET. IT WILL BE CLEAR WITH OUR RENTAL AGREEMENTS, SIGNAGE IN THE BUILDING AND ALONG THE SITE THAT NOT ONLY CAN THEY NOT PARK ON CHERRY STREET BUT THEY CAN'T PARK IN THE TOWN HOME PART OF THE COMMUNITY AS WELL. WE'LL HAVE SPACES RESERVED FOR THE RESTAURANT AS WELL WITH SIGNAGE DELINEATING ALL THAT. WE PLAN TO BE PRETTY SERIOUS ABOUT THAT. >> YOU PLAN TO MANAGE THAT PARKING AND ENFORCE THOSE? >> I MEAN, OUR OFFICE IS GOING TO BE UPSTAIRS. I DON'T WANT PEOPLE BANGING ON THE DOOR MAD AT ME BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET IN THEIR PARKING SPOTS. ME BEING THERE AS WELL, I DON'T WANT TO PARK AND WALK FROM OFFSITE AS WELL. I THINK YOU HAVE BUILT- IN BUFFER THERE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. STONE? >> BEFORE YOU GO, I'M A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE NOW. THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> SURE. >> IS THERE A NEED, DO YOU THINK, FOR OFFSITE, LIKE OFF THE PROPERTY PARKING? >> I THINK THERE WILL BE. ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S EVER A DAYTIME EVENT, I THINK THAT WILL BE THE PROBLEM MORE THAN ANYTHING WHEN EVERYBODY'S THERE. AND I DO THINK, I MEAN, IF YOU'RE BEING REALISTIC, 250 PEOPLE, IF PEOPLE COME IN GROUPS OF TWO AND THREE, THINGS LIKE THIS, THAT COULD BE A LOT OF CARS IF IT WAS MAXED OUT. I WOULD THINK WE WOULD WANT TO HAVE A VALET SERVICE OR A WALKABLE PARKING LOT AGREEMENT WITH A NEARBY PROPERTY OWNER OR ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. >> OKAY. WE'RE STILL EXPLORING -- YOU'RE STILL EXPLORING THAT OPTION I GUESS. >> WE ARE. >> OKAY. >> WE HAVE -- WE'VE TALKED TO A FEW DIFFERENT FOLKS ABOUT IT. WE DIDN'T WANT TO GO TOO FAR WITH ANYBODY UNTIL WE GOT APPROVAL -- CART AHEAD OF THE HORSE. >> THANK YOU, MR. STONE. >> THANKS. >> I'VE EXPRESSED TO MR. STONE THE IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING THAT NO PARKING ON CHERRY STREET, AND I FEEL LIKE HE'S ALSO COMMITTED TO MAKING SURE THAT THAT -- THAT THAT'S THE CASE AS WELL. BEFORE WE OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AS WELL. >> PLEASE. >> IS THAT GOOD? HOW WOULD THE CITY ENFORCE THIS IF MR. STONE WAS UNABLE TO DO IT? >> SO, HOW WOULD THE CITY ENFORCE IF -- >> NON-COMPLIANCE. >> -- IF THERE'S NON-COMPLIANCE. FIRST OF ALL, IT'S COMPLAINT [01:00:03] DRIVEN. IF WE START TO HEARING FROM THE ADJACENT RESIDENTS, WE'RE GOING TO BEGIN TO LOOK INTO IT. I CHECKED WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY THIS AFTERNOON ABOUT VIOLATIONS OF ZONING ORDINANCE. SHOULD YOU ADD THIS CONDITION -- AND I NEED TO REMIND YOU, EVEN THOUGH IT'S IN THIS RESOLUTION, YOU NEED TO MODIFY THE CONDITION IF YOU PLAN TO PROCEED. SOMEBODY NEEDS TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE -- YOU ALREADY MOVED FOR APPROVAL BUT YOU MOVED FOR APPROVAL WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S EDITION, NOT THIS ONE IN THE LATEST RESOLUTION. JUST TO CLARIFY THE LANGUAGE THERE. AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE WOULD HAVE TO CITE THEM FOR VIOLATING THE ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH THEN GOES TO MUNICIPAL COURT. >> WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO OPEN THE EVENT CENTER IF THEY DID NOT HAVE A PARKING AGREEMENT IN PLACE? >> DEPENDS ON THE CONDITION, JUSTICE. >> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. IT DEPENDS ON THE CONDITION. >> IF YOU ADD A CONDITION AND THEY DON'T PRODUCE THAT, JUSTICE WON'T PRODUCE A CERTIFICATE THAT ALLOWS THEM TO OCCUPY AS AN EVENT CENTER, AND THEY CAN'T GET A BUSINESS LICENSE EITHER. >> SO, A CONDITION THAT THE -- MUST ESTABLISH TO MAINTAIN THE SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT TO ACCOMMODATE ANY MAX CAPACITY EVENTS THAT EXCEEDS ON- SITE PARKING IS SUFFICIENT TO DO THAT? >> YEAH, AND IT'S ALSO GIVING THE PLANNING DIRECTOR LEEWAY TO BE REASONABLE ABOUT THAT. >> YEAH. THAT'S -- THAT IS CORRECT. SO, THE IDEA AROUND THIS ISN'T THAT IT WOULD BE ON A CASE-BY- CASE BASIS, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET ONE FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL EVENT. IT WOULD REALLY JUST BE THAT FOR THEM TO GET THE INITIAL BUSINESSBUSINESS LICENSE JUST KIND OF OPERATE THERE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO PRESENT THAT THERE IS AN ACTIVE AGREEMENT WITH ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER SOMEWHERE ESTABLISHING, A, WE HAVE THIS MANY PARKING SPACES IN RESERVE AT THIS LOCATION, HERE'S OUR PLAN, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. SO, ONCE THEY PRESENTED THAT TO STAFF, THEN THAT WOULD BE A PROCESS FOR THEM GETTING APPROVAL FOR THIS EVENT SPACE AND OPENING IT UP AND GETTING A BUSINESS LINE -- A ZONING CERTIFICATE. >> AND IF THAT AGREEMENT EVER EXPIRE SND. >> IT WOULD HAVE TO BE RENEWED. WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING WITH AN EXISTING ONE NOW. SO, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE DO KEEP TABS ON WHENEVER THERE ARE UPGRADES TO THE SITE OR ANY MODIFICATION OF PARKING ON SITE. THOSE ARE THINGS WE DO ASK ARE MODIFIED, THEN PRESENTED TO STAFF. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES KELLEY? >> DID I HEAR THERE WILL OR NOT NOT OCCASION BY OCCASION REQUESTS. >> WOULD NOT BE. >> IT WOULD NOT BE. >> WE'RE LOOKING FOR A UNILATERAL AGREEMENT WHERE THEY MAINTAIN AT ALL TIMES THAT THEY HAVE OFFCYTOPARKING. WHERE THEY USE IT FOR VALET OR NOT. IT'S FINE WITH US IF IT'S VALET. WE'RE JUST LOOKING IF THEY HAVE SOMEWHERE TO PUT THE CARS THAT ARE NOT CHERRY STREET, AND GLENN AVENUE IS NOT -- NOR THE SIDEWALK. >> IS THE WORDING IN THE AGREEMENT IN FRONT OF US -- TO BE A CONTINGENCY- TYPE APPROVAL? >> YEAH, THE ONE THAT'S IN YOUR RESOLUTION, JUSTICE -- THE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION SAYS SOMETHING SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT FROM THE REQUEST, YOU'VE ADJUSTED FROM CITY COUNCIL TO SAY WHAT IT NEEDS TO SAY THAT'S ADEQUATE. SO, I WOULD JUST SUGGEST EVEN THOUGH THERE'S BEEN A MOTION AND A SECOND, IF YOU'RE INCLINED TO PROCEED WITH THIS CONDITION THAT SOMEBODY JUST MOVED TO AMEND, TO ADD THE CONDITION AS WRITTEN IN PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO YOU GUYS. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. AND YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. >> ROBERT WILKINS, 261 -- DRIVE. I ORIGINALLY DIDN'T LIKE THIS CHERRY STREET THING THE FIRST TIME WHEN Y'ALL VOTED FOR IT. I THINK TWO OF YOU DIDN'T VOTE FOR IT. THE REST OF YOU DID. MY CONCERN IS I GO DOWN CHERRY STREET, THERE ARE FOUR DUPLEXES, SO EIGHT FAMILIES, AND THEN YOU TURN RIGHT ON BURCH CIRCLE, WHICH GOES ALL THE WAY AROUND -- I'VE DONE DELIVERIES FOR ALL THOSE AREAS. AND I'M THINKING THIS HUGE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE THERE AND IT'S RIGHT UP AGAINST THOSE PEOPLE. I WOULD HATE TO HAVE OWNED ON A HOME ON BURCH STREET AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME BECAUSE I BELIEVE THERE IS A LOT MORE NOISE AND A LOT MORE DIFFICULTIES FROM THAT. ALL THAT'S BEEN DONE WITH THE 2030 PLAN IS TO BASICALLY -- AND I USE TERMS AND I DON'T MEAN IT TOTALLY, BUT I DO -- IT'S LIKE BULLDOZING IT DOWN ALL THE WAY TO -- YOU KNOW, ALL THE STREETS -- ALL THOSE AREAS TO HAVE BUSINESSES. BUT ALL THOSE HOMES THAT ARE ON THAT OTHER SIDE ARE NOT GOING TO -- YOU KNOW, EVENTUALLY THEY'LL JUST SELL THEIR HOMES AND THEY WILL RENT THEIR HOMES. AND THEN WHEN THAT DOESN'T WORK, AND THAT'S -- AND I BELIEVE IN DEVELOPERS. I KNOW A LOT OF TIME TS I TALK ABOUT DEVELOPMENTS. I BELIEVE IN IT. [01:05:01] I JUST DON'T BELIEVE IN THE WAY IT'S DONE SOMETIMES. I CAN GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON FARMVILLE. THERE WAS A LOT MORE SPACE THERE. IT WAS A LOT MORE OPEN. AND Y'ALL VOTED IT DOWN UNANIMOUSLY BECAUSE SO MANY PEOPLE SHOWED UP. NOBODY HARDLY SHOWED UP FOR THE CHERRY STREET, SO IT'S FINE TO DO THAT. I JUST HOPE THAT -- AND I KNOW IT'S TOO LATE TO DO NOTHING THERE, BUT I JUST BELIEVE THAT IT WAS THE WRONG THING TO HAVE DONE ON CHERRY STREET BECAUSE YOU'RE DESTROYING OUR COMMUNITY. I TALKED A LOT ABOUT SHORT- TERM RENTALS. SHORT- TERM RENTALS, WE NEVER DID ANYTHING AS BAD AS ONE DEVELOPMENT COULD DO OVER TIME. AND I THINK IT'S JUST HORRIBLE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S DONE THIS WAY. BUT, HEY, I'M JUST TOTALLY AGAINST IT, NOT FOR IT, BUT AGAINST. >> ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. EXCUSE ME. >> I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY. THERE IS NO -- THERE'S NO BUSINESS THAT IS DJOINING THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. >> NOT THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. THAT'S WHERE THE TOWN HOMES ARE. >> THOSE ARE TOWN HOMES? >> YOU DO HAVE ONE KIND OF WHERE THE DRIVEWAY COMES OUT ON CHERRY STREET, YOU HAVE AN ADJACENT RESIDENCE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. SO, THE RESTAURANT, KIND OF, GOES INTO THE BACK OF IT. I GUESS THAT'S ON THE WEST SIDE OF IT. BUT THAT'S -- I GUESS THAT'S A RECTANGLE. AND I GUESS THE WESTERN SIDE OF THAT RECTANGLE IS KIND OF WHERE THE OFFICE AND THE RESTAURANTS ARE. >> YOU HAVE A DRAWING IN YOUR PACKET. THE RED OUTLINED BUILDING IS WHERE THE EVENT CENTER IS GOING TO GO ALONG GLEN AVENUE AND THE RESTAURANT PARCEL IS CLOSER TO CHERRY STREET, BUT AT THE FRONT. >> I DO HAVE ONE MORE COMMENT. MR. WILKINS SEEMED TO BE DISCOURAGED THAT NO ONE CAME TO SPEAK AGAINST THE CHERRY STREET DEVELOPMENT WHEN IT FIRST CAME UP. I SPOKE TO MULTIPLE RESIDENTS IN THIS AREA, ALL OF WHICH WERE EXTREMELY EXCITED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING AT THE TIME AA BREWERY A RESTAURANT THAT WAS WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF THEIR HOMES. I SHOWED THE DEVELOPMENT PICTURES AND LAYOUTS TO MULTIPLE PEOPLE. I RECEIVED NOTHING BUT POSITIVE FEEDBACK ON THAT. I WAS LOOKING -- LOOKING -- FOR NEGATIVE COMMENTS. I WAS LOOKING FOR PEOPLE THAT HAD AN ISSUE WITH IT SO THAT WE COULD TRY AND ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. THERE WERE NONE. NO ONE ADDRESSED ME AT THE TIME. I BELIEVE THAT -- I BELIEVE THAT ONE REASON, MR. WILKINS, THAT NO ONE -- THAT NO ONE CAME AND SPOKE AT THE TIME WAS BECAUSE THE MAJORITY OF AUBURN CITIZENS DID NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT. I'LL BE SUPPORTING IT. >> ANYONE ELSE HAVE COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, THOUGHTS? >> QUESTION. SO, BUILDINGS 33 4 -- I'M SORRY, 2 AND 3 IN THE BACK OF THE PARK, WILL BE TOWN HOMES, THE ONES THAT BACK UP TO THE EXISTING HOMES ON BURCH CIRCLE? >> YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. >> ALL RIGHT. NOW -- NOW HERE COMES -- >> YOU WANT TO MOVE TO AMEND THE CONDITION? >> I MOVE TO AMEND THE CONDITION TO REFLECT THE CONDITION APPROVAL THAT IS IN THE -- THAT'S IN OUR PACKET. IS THAT SUFFICIENT? >> SECOND. >> IT'S SUFFICIENT. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR OF VOTING FOR THE AMENDMENT, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NOW WE NEED TO APPROVE THE -- >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. >> THE WHOLE THING. >> WHOLE THING. ALL RIGHT. GOT THAT? A MOTION AND A SECOND? >> YOU GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. YOU JUST NEED TO -- >> VOTE. >> -- VOTE. >> JUST NEED TO VOTE. >> MM-HMM. >> ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. [10.b.1. Kadre Engineering, LLC. North Donahue Drive Widening Project (Sougahatchee Creek to Farmville Road). $762,640. ] >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. APPROVED. >> ALL RIGHT. WE WILL MOVE TO CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS. ITEM 10B-1 AUTHORIZES A DESIGN AGREEMENT WITH CADRE ENGINEERING LLC FOR THE NORTH DONAHUE WIDENING PROJECT, INCLUDING THE INTERSECTION OF FARMVILLE ROAD AND NORTH DONAHUE DRIVE IN THE AMOUNT OF $772,640. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. [10.b.2. Machen McChesney. Independent Audit for Fiscal Year 2025 and Fiscal Year 2026. $300,000.] >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. >> ITEM 10B-2 AUTHORIZES A TWO- YEAR CONTRACT WITH MATCH AND -- FOR INDEPENDENT AUDIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 IN THE AMOUNT OF $142,000, IN FISCAL YEAR 2026 IN THE AMOUNT OF $158,000 FOR A TWO-YEAR TOTAL OF $300,000. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? YES? [01:10:01] >> I DO HAVE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT THIS ONE. MR. WILKINS HAD ASKED US WHAT THE VALUE OF THIS AGREEMENT IS. HE ALSO SEEMED TO IMPLY THAT THE LOCAL ACCOUNTING FIRM THAT WE USE DOESN'T REALLY PROVIDE WHAT HE WOULD CONSIDER A THOROUGH AUDIT. COULD WE HAVE STAFF SPEAK TO THAT? >> WE'D LOVE TO. I WILL TELL YOU JUST A FEW QUICK THINGS WE ALWAYS IN A STANDARD PRACTICE FOR GOVERNMENTS LIKE US TO USE INDEPENDENT AUDITING AGENCIES. WE DO NOT CONTRACT WITH THE STATE. I'M SURE THEY DO A FINE JOB, BUT THEY'RE ALSO WAY BACKED UP WITH THINGS. AND BEING BACKED UP CAUSES THEM TO NOT BE ABLE TO DELIVER AUDITS IN A TIMELY FASHION. IF WE DON'T DELIVER AN AUDIT IN A TIMELY FASHION, WE CAN'T ISSUE ANY DEBT. WE ARE GROWING LEAPS AND BOUNDS, AND IT WOULD BE VERY PROBLEMATIC FOR US IF WE CANNOT BORROW FUNDS TO DEAL WITH INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS NEEDED. SO, I'M GOING TO HAVE -- UNFORTUNATELY ALISONEDGE IS UNDER THE WEATHER THIS AFTERNOON. A LOT OF YOU HAVE SEEN HEIDI LOWERY, ONE OF OUR FINANCIAL GURUS, DOES AN EXCELLENT JOB. HER OFFICIAL TITLE IS ACCOUNTING AND OFFICIAL REPORTING MANAGER. BUT I LIKE TO CALL HER ASSISTANCE FINANCE DIRECTOR. HEIDI IS EXTREMELY KNOWLEDGEABLE. WHAT I WOULD LIKE HER TO GO THROUGH IS THERE'S SOME BANTER ABOUT A FOUR-PAGE OPINION LETTER THAT YOU GOT. BUT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE 500 HOURS THAT MATCH AND -- SPENDS ON OUR AUDIT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. AND HEIDI IS NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU 500 HOURS WORTH OF EXPLANATION, BUT SHE IS GOING TO TELL YOU ALL THE THINGS THEY DO THAT GO INTO THE AUDIT. HEIDI? >> YES, SO, I LOOKED AND OUR AVERAGE IS ABOUT 550 HOURS. I MEAN YEAR TO YEAR, THAT CAN VARY DEPENDS ON WHAT KIND OF STATEMENTS WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED, WHAT NEW FUNDS WE HAVE. SO, IT'S JUST -- IT DEPENDS. BUT THE AVERAGE IS 550. WE HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE LIST THAT WE GET AND WE PREPARE OVER 100 ITEMS THAT THEY GO THROUGH. THEY ARE WITH US FROM MID-NOVEMBER TO THE END OF MARCH THROUGH OUR AUDIT REPORT. THEY GO THROUGH EVERY SINGLE ACCOUNT. THEY LOOK AT ANY ACCOUNT VARIANCES. THEY DO OUR NOTES TO OUR ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT. THEY LOOK AT INTERNAL CONTROL. THEY REVIEW FOR FRAUD DETECTION AND PREVENTION. DO WE HAVE PROCEDURES IN PLACE TO KEEP US FROM HAVING FRAUD UPON US? WE ARE ENSURING COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS, GENERALLY ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING STANDARDS, GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS, COMPLIANCE SUPPLEMENTS, AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY STANDARDS THAT COME UP. SO, IT'S A LENGTHY LIST AND A LOT OF HOURS PUT INTO OUR AUDIT. >> WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT THOROUGH? >> I BELIEVE SO, YES. I BELIEVE IT'S THOROUGH. JUST ASK OUR ACCOUNTING STAFF WHEN YEAR- END GETS HERE. >> REMIND ME HOW MANY FUNDS WE HAVE WITH THE CITY THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE AUDITED BY THE FIRM? >> I THINK THAT ALISON SAID THE OTHER DAY WE HAVE, LIKE, 30 FUNDS. SO, YES. IT'S A LOT. >> IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THE CITY COUNCIL INDEPENDENTLY EACH RECEIVE A LETTER FROM MANCHIN REQUIRING US TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE AUDIT AS WELL AS AN OPPORTUNITY IF WE FEEL THAT SOMETHING IS NOT BEING HANDLED IN AN APPROPRIATE MANNER, THAT THAT IS OUR TIME TO DIRECTLY SPEAK TO MANCHIN AND INDICATE THAT. >> YES. THAT IS CORRECT. AND THOSE LETTERS ALSO GO OUT TO VARIOUS OUTSIDE, LIKE, THIRD PARTIES THAT WE DO BUSINESS WITH. OUR STAFF IS ALSO ASKED THOSE QUESTIONS. >> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. THIS IS FOR TWO AUDITS. >> THIS IS FOR TWO AUDITS. AND THAT'S WHY I SAID THE $142,000 IS FOR THE FISCAL '25 AUDIT. WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE OUT THE FISCAL YEAR AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER. AND THEN THIS WOULD BE FOR THE FISCAL '26 AUDIT AT $158,000. MANCHIN HAS BEEN WITH US A VERY LONG TIME. OUR ACCOUNTING IS COMPLICATED. THEY ALSO DO PEER REVIEWS. THEY HAVE A LOT OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS. AND THERE IS NOTHING ABOUT THE AUDIT THAT IS SIMPLE BUT IS ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED. EVERY BANK AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTION RELIES ON THIS FOR LENDING TO US AND IS EXPECTED AND IS EXPECTED TIMELY. AND WE ALSO EXPECT IN THE LARGE FINANCIAL REPORT WE ISSUE THE AUBURN CITIZENS, YOU GUYS GET MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORTS BUT THE AUBURN CITIZENS HAVE FULL ACCESS TO FULL AUDITED FINANCIALS THAT MEET VERY STANDARD ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES. AND THIS IS WIDELY ACCEPTED COAST TO COAST. NORTH TO SOUTH AND EAST TO WEST. THIS IS VERY NORMAL FOR CITIES TO DO THIS. THIS IS AN INDEPENDENT AUDIT. MATCH AND MA CHEZNY IS AN OUTSTANDING LOCAL FIRM AND WE [01:15:03] DO BUSINESS WITH THE MOST LOCAL FIRMS WHO ALSO SPONSOR BASEBALL AND SOFTBALL TEAMS, GIVE BACK TO THE COMMUNITY, FOLKS LIVE HERE AND WORK HERE, AND WE CHOOSE TO DO BUSINESS WITH AUBURN FIRMS WHEN WE CAN. >> OUR FINANCE TEAM THAT WE CHARGE WITH WORKING HAND IN GLOVE WITH OUR AUDITOR HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED TIME AND TIME AND TIME AGAIN, YEAR AND YEAR AND YEAR -- >> 39 CONSECUTIVE TIMES, RIGHT, AT LEAST? >> -- FOR THEIR EXCELLENT WORK. >> CORRECT. AND IN ORDER TO MEET THE TIME FRAMES TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR EXCELLENT WORK, WE MUST USE AN INDEPENDENT FIRM. THE STATE DOES A GOOD JOB, BUT THEY HAVE A BACKLOG OF EPIC PROPORTIONS. AND IT IS HARD FOR THEM TO GET TO EVERYBODY'S AUDIT IN A TIMELY MANNER. >> WE'VE MAINTAINED A DOUBLE A PLUS BOND RATING FOR HOW LONG? >> GEEZ, I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER OF YEARS. IT'S BEEN A VERY LONG TIME. AND THE CHALLENGE IS ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THEY ASK FOR IS OUR FINANCIALS THAT COME OUT OF THIS AUDIT. >> SO, RATING AGENCIES LIKE THE S & P AND MOODIES, THEY WOULD SEE THESE COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND OUR FINANCES, AND THEIR OPINION IS THAT THEY ARE -- THAT THEY'RE OF HIGH QUALITY? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> RIGHT. >> YES, YES. >> RIGHT. AND WE DON'T GET THE RATING AGENCIES THAT WE GET AND LOWER INTEREST RATES IF WE DON'T HAVE SUCH AN AUDIT. OR WE CAN'T GET RATED AT ALL, AS SOME PEOPLE HAVE RUN INTO. IF YOU DON'T GET YOUR AUDIT DONE, YOU DON'T GET RATINGS. >> AN AUDIT BY NATURE IS INDEPENDENCE, RIGHT? BY APPEARANCE AND BY FACT, YOU WANT AN INDEPENDENT, THERE'S NO CONTROL GIVEN TO MANCHIN AND -- DURING THE CONTROL AND AUDIT PROCESS. THEY'RE MONITORING OUR CONTROLS. >> CORRECT. >> TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE -- HAVE THE PROPER INTERNAL CONTROLS IN PLACE TO CERTIFY THAT WE, YOU KNOW, ARE IN GOOD FINANCIAL CONDITION. IS THAT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT? >> CORRECT. >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT, YES. >> THE OTHER THING IS YOU NOTICE THEY TELL YOU UNAUDITED FINANCIALS. IF YOU NOTICE OUR YEAR- END BALANCES CHANGE FROM THE TIME WE CLOSE THE BOOKS UNTIL WE ACTUALLY GET THE AUDITED FINANCIALS. BECAUSE OF THEIR AUDIT WORK, SOME THINGS DO GET CHANGED. IT'S NOT BAD. IT'S WHERE THINGS WERE ACCOUNTED FOR, THEY MAY GET MOVED BY THE NATURE OF THEIR AUDIT, WHICH FOLLOWS A VERY STRICT STANDARD THAT THEY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH. >> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? YES, SIR? >> SO, IS IT SAFE TO SAY THAT MR. WILKINS' RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE THE STATE CONDUCT THESE AUDITS WOULD LIKELY DELAY OUR OVERALL AUDITS AND ALSO PUT AT RISK OUR BOND RATING? IS IT SAFE TO SAY THAT? >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. [10.b.3. Whatley Construction, LLC. Lake Wilmore Park - Pool Dehumidifying System Installation. $970,900.] >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED. AND THE MOTION CARRIES. >> ALL RIGHT, ITEM 10B-3 AUTHORIZES A CONTRACT WITH WATT LEE CONSTRUCTION LLC -- POOL DEHUMIDIFYING SYSTEM. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. [11. OTHER BUSINESS.] >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? AND THE MOTION CARRIES. >> WE HAVE ONE ITEM OF OTHER BUSINESS. ITEM 11A IS A REQUEST FROM FRIENDSHIP FOODS DOING BUSINESS FOR COUNTRY'S BARBECUE FOR AA ALCOHOL FOR 350 DUNCAN DRIVE FOR EVENTS ON SEPTEMBER 6TH AND 13TH OF 2025. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND. COMMENTS/QUESTIONS? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? AND THE [12. CITIZENS' OPEN FORUM.] MOTION CARRIES. >> MAYOR, THOSE ARE ALL THE ITEMS OF BUSINESS WE FOR YOU THIS EVENING. >> AT THIS TIME, WE WILL OPEN CITIZENS OPEN FORUM. PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL. >> THREE TIMES. I CAN'T BELIEVE IT. AUBURN -- GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 261 DENISON DRIVE, AUBURN, ALABAMA, ROBERT WILKINS. AUBURN, THE CITY THAT WE ALL LOVE -- LAST MONTH MY WIFE AND I MARKED TEN YEARS IN AUBURN. SHE GREW UP IN AUBURN. MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN WONDERFUL EXCEPT FOR THE DISCRIMINATORY ORDINANCE THAT WAS PASSED ON MARCH 16, 2021 BY THE STR-5. THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS EXCELLENT. EVEN THOUGH I'VE RECEIVED TWO TICKETS IN MY TEN YEARS. UNFORTUNATELY, BOTH WERE DESERVED. I ONCE HAD AN SUV BATTERY DEAD AND HAD AN OFFICER OFF DUTY VOLUNTEER TO JUMP MY VEHICLE WHILE HE WAS WITH HIS FAMILY IN DOWNTOWN AUBURN ON A SUNDAY. THE PARAMEDICS FROM THE [01:20:02] FIRE DEPARTMENT HAVE RESPONDED TO TWO DIFFERENT 911 CALLS AT MY HOME CONCERNING MY WIFE. WHAT CARING AND PROFESSIONAL INDIVIDUALS THEY ARE. I'VE EVEN DELIVERED UBER EATS TO A FEW OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL WITH SUCH A KIND ATTITUDE. I WANT TO THANK THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER, CITY STAFF, AND ALL THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. THEY'VE TAKEN MY CALLS, MET WITH ME, RESPONDED TO MY EMAILS -- EXCEPT FOR THE MAYOR DOESN'T WANT TO DO THAT. I HAD AN ISSUE WITH MY SEWER AND THE SEWER DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL WERE UNDERSTANDING, CAME QUICKLY, AND WORKED ON THE ISSUE WHILE PUTTING BACK MY YARD. I JOINED LAKE WILMORE RECREATIONAL CENTER ABOUT A MONTH AGO AND COULD NOT BE ASKED FOR BETTER FRONT DESK PERSONNEL OR LIFE GUARD AT THE POOL. EVEN THE MAINTENANCE STAFF ARE SO POLITE. I HAVE ATTENDED THREE BUDGET WORKSHOPS, WITH THE FOURTH BUDGET WORKSHOP BEING THURSDAY FROM 3:00 TO 5:00. EVERYONE SHOULD ATTEND. I FELT LEFT OUT WITHOUT HAVING A FULL HOUSE OF AUBURN CITIZENS SOAKING UP THE KNOWLEDGE. THE BUDGETED WORKSHOP HAS BEEN EXCELLENT. OUR CITY MANAGER, MEGAN, AND THE DEPARTMENT HEADS HAVE DONE SUPERB ON PRESENTATION OF THE CITY OF AUBURN ON THE PRESENT AND FUTURE PLANS. I HAVE LEARNED WE HAVE 669 FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES, THREE REGULAR PART- TIME EMPLOYEES, AND 341 -- I ASSUME IT'S, LIKE, SEASONAL PART-TIME. THERE'S AT LEAST 63 STAFF MEMBERS REPORTED WHAT I REFERRED TO AS THE E-100, EMPLOYEES THAT MAKE OVER 100,000 PER YEAR. BUT AUBURN SHOULD NOT FEEL ALONE. THE LARGEST CITY IN ALABAMAALABAMA -- I CAN'T TALK -- HUNTSVILLE WITH OVER 2,700 FULL- TIME EMPLOYEES HAVE 243 EMPLOYEES IN THE E- 100 GROUP. WE CITIZENS PAY FOR THESE EXTREME CITIZENS OF EMPLOYEES, AND OUR CITIES, COUNTIES, STATES, AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS, COST OF LIVING RAISE, AND MANY OTHER RAISES. I WILL GIVE MY VERSION OF THE BUDGET WORKSHOP AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. IT WAS INTERESTING. >> WHO WILL BE NEXT? CLOSE CITIZENS OPEN FORUM. ANYONE ELSE? HAVE ANYTHING? IS THERE A MOVE * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.