Check the new time for the regular second monthly meeting of the Peachtree City Council: 9:30 a.m.
The council plans on having earlier gavel times for the second monthly gathering for April 18, May 16 and June 20. The idea is to make a council meeting more convenient to more residents who for work or other reasons have not been able to attend the usual evening meetings.
Below is the council agenda for April 18:
WHAT HAPPENED AT APRIL 4 MEETING
Call to Order
The Mayor and Council of Peachtree City met in regular session on Thursday, April 4, 2024. Mayor Kim Learnard called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Council members attending: Laura Johnson, Suzanne Brown, Clinton Holland, and Frank Destadio.
Pledge of Allegiance and Moment of Silence
Announcements, Awards, Special Recognition
Johnson said she might have to leave the meeting early to catch a flight.
Public Comment
Keith Larson told Council that heavy trucks on neighborhood streets were a concern to many residents and proposed they revise the City ordinance that prohibited heavy trucks on certain streets to include Holly Grove Road, Robinson Road, portions of MacDuff and Senoia Road, as well as Crosstown Road. Larson said the pending construction at the SR 74/54 intersection hastened the need for this revision as truck drivers would be looking for alternate routes to avoid that area. Tom Crofton related how he took up pickleball after he developed knee problems. He then said he had a major heart attack three years ago and died in the ambulance. Now he cherished every day and felt he was on borrowed time, so he was asking Council to get more pickleball courts built in the City soon. The recent recreation survey showed pickleball as a major interest for citizens, and $700,000 of Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) had been allocated for pickleball.
Agenda Changes
Johnson moved to move New Agenda item E, 04-24-05, Ordinance 1218–City Council Meeting Procedures and Rules, above New Agenda item A and reorder the new agenda items. Destadio seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Minutes
Johnson moved to approve the March 21, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes, the March 21, 2024, Executive Session Minutes, the March 28, 2024 Special Called Meeting Minutes, and the March 28, 2024 Executive Session Minutes. Destadio seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
A. March 21, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes
APPROVED 5-0
B. March 21, 2024 Executive Session Minutes
APPROVED 5-0
C. March 28, 2024 Special Called Meeting Minutes
APPROVED 5-0
D. March 28, 2024 Executive Session Minutes
APPROVED 5-0
Consent Agenda
Holland moved to approve Consent Agenda items A, B, and C. Johnson seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
A. PD Hardware/Software Annual Renewal and Brand Name Approval
APPROVED 5-0
B. Surplus and disposal of decommissioned vehicles/equipment
APPROVED 5-0
C. Start time change for the second City Council meetings scheduled in April, May, and June
APPROVED 5-0
Old Agenda Items
None
New Agenda Items
A. 04-24-05 Ordinance # 1218 City Council Meeting Procedures and Rules
The Mayor noted that this amendment referred to placing an item on the agenda and not deciding on an issue. She turned the floor over to Johnson, who she said had done a tremendous amount of legwork.
Johnson moved to approve New Agenda item A. with the following amendment: (c) Agenda item request. City staff with approval from the City Manager may request to have an item placed on the agenda, by filing such request in writing with the City Clerk prior to noon on the Thursday preceding the council meeting. The Mayor or any Council member may introduce an item in accordance with Sec. 2-36 (i), under Council and Staff Topics. Consensus must be reached in a public meeting, by the Mayor and Council, to determine if further investigation and research into the matter is warranted prior to bringing the item back for an official action at a subsequent meeting. Such items may not be placed or discussed on the agenda if Council has already decided the issue within 180 days. Destadio seconded.
Johnson said she had put a lot of thought into this. The proposal would require the support of three Council members or two Council members and the Mayor to put an item on the agenda. It had been mentioned that this proposal could be perceived as a quorum reaching a consensus behind closed doors. There were other scenarios discussed, she related, including two Council members and the City Manager or two Council members, the Mayor, and the City Manager, but none seemed like good procedure because the City Manager was not an elected official and should not have veto power over what could be put on an agenda.
After much research and thought, she said she had come up with a procedure that should be feasible, but first she wanted to state what she saw as problems with the current system. When a Council member placed an item on the agenda, it lacked transparency as it did not include a memo from staff giving an explanation, thus causing confusion for citizens. Council members got emails from citizens saying they were trying to do something was the opposite of the item’s purpose. Items could be hastily added to the agenda and become items to vote on the very next week, creating a time- and labor-intensive process as Council sought to understand the item’s need, purpose, repercussions, and how they stood on the item.
Johnson commented that much work was created for an item that was possibly only supported by one Council member. Council members had also spent taxpayer dollars by bypassing staff and going straight to the City Attorney to get his approval for an item that might have just the one person’s backing. Johnson remarked that Peachtree City’s citizens cared and paid attention, saying she valued transparency as many of them did and felt this proposal gave them transparency on a silver platter and provided solutions to the issues she had mentioned.
She proposed that items be added to an agenda by a majority of Council during Council/Staff Topics at an open meeting. This would not be an official action, only consensus on a future actionable item. It would allow the public to see who was putting forth an item and who supported it. It allowed Council to openly discuss the need for an item in front of citizens without the pressure of a required vote. Staff would have time then to work on the items and bring them back at a later date for Council’s vote. With this process, each item would include a memo giving clarity to every item in the agenda packet. With the help of staff, they would see quality items that had a higher likelihood of having Council support before going to legal, thereby saving taxpayer money.
Individual Council members were not allowed to direct staff, Johnson pointed out; it took three of them. This proposal would give Council the opportunity to tell staff what they wanted them to focus on and held the elected Council members accountable to citizens. Johnson also noted that if a citizen had a concern, they could come to a Council member and have it discussed during Council/Staff Topics at the next meeting. She said someone could have come to her that day and had their issue discussed at this meeting. Any Council member could bring up any topic to discuss in that portion of a meeting. She asked for Council’s support in this proposal, saying she believed it to be more transparent and unifying. It allowed for better communication in front of residents and saved time for Council and staff and money for the taxpayers.
Johnson summed it up as a win for Council, staff, and citizens.
Destadio noted they had discussed who could put items on a City Council agenda for at least two years. Last year they agreed on a version that said all a citizen had to do to get an item on the agenda was get the support on one Council member. It had worked fine for the last year or so, he added. They still received criticism for not allowing enough time for the citizens, Destadio commented, so they reviewed the options, and Council members like Johnson had offered suggestions on how they could do this faster and more openly. Johnson’s proposal had been vetted by several members already, he stated. Other Fayette municipalities had similar ordinances and all called for some combination of endorsement by City Council members, City Manager, or Mayor in order to get an item on the agenda.
Destadio said he appreciated Johnson’s approach because it was open and easy to get something on the agenda.
Brown, however, called it an insult to Council members and an attempt to prevent them from addressing theirs or their constituents’ grievances with Council. She said she found it odd that the Mayor brought this to the agenda immediately after she (Brown) placed the TDK resolution on the agenda for March 3 meeting. She said she withdrew it at the request of the Mayor and Holland. Was the timing of this change planned to block her from bringing the TDK resolution to the agenda? Brown asked.
Brown recalled that as a citizen she placed an item on the City Council agenda regarding disenfranchisement of voters in the Rising Starr precinct after the special election. Almost immediately after that, a proposal was made to change the procedure for citizens to place an item on the agenda. It required a citizen to speak during Public Comments and ask to have an item added to a future agenda if the Mayor and a Council member agreed to add it.
She remarked that changing the procedure would have a direct impact on a Council member sponsoring a citizen item. Two Council members would be needed in addition to the one making the proposal. Brown said tonight’s proposal was the Mayor’s attempt to take away free speech from Council and citizens, both of whom had a right to redress grievances to full Council. She said Learnard was asking Council to vote to take away their own rights. This was a veiled attack on her abilities to function on behalf of her constituents, Brown claimed, adding she viewed it as an attempt to silence her and every member of the Council to bring issues to the agenda, especially if the Mayor did not like them or support their ideas.
Brown called the idea that there were too many frivolous items on the agenda and that it cost too much a “sham.” Few items were placed by Council members on the agenda and those that were were to execute the business of the city and the best interests of the citizens. She said she, as an elected official, had the right to bring items to Council’s attention by placing them on the agenda for discussion and a vote. Brown said a Council that had no voice was not a Council. A Council member who wanted to place an item on the agenda must gain the support of two other members and that required too many conversations behind closed doors. She said it ran the risk of three Council members saying they did not support an item, then, in total darkness outside the view of citizens, Council members could conduct the equivalent of a vote by a majority of members to block an issue.
She declared that changing the ordinance would violate the open meetings law by requiring a majority of Council to discuss the item prior to it being shown to the public. Brown concluded by saying she did not support this proposal at all. She thanked Johnson for her work on a compromise, but she could not support that, either.
Learnard asked City Attorney Ted Meeker if he had reviewed this verbiage and did it pass muster? Meeker said the change to having the discussion in public alleviated his major concern with the original proposal.
Holland reflected that Peachtree City was a special place where citizens had the opportunity to redress their grievances. He agreed that Johnson did a great job in trying to find a compromise. However, he felt this was a solution looking for a problem. They went through a lot of discussion last year to come up with what they had today, and that solution had worked for a year, Holland remarked. He said he could not support this.
Learnard called Johnson’s work “masterful” and said she appreciated her talking through this with staff. She asked Interim City Manager Justin Strickland if he had any concerns, and he said staff would follow whatever Council decided.
The Mayor then said she and Brown met in her office on March 26, and she ran this by her then. Brown submitted the TDK resolution on March 27 as an agenda item for the April 4 agenda. The Mayor said she talked with each Council member about this item before putting it on an agenda. Brown noted that she did not agree with it then. Learnard again stated that Brown placed the TDK resolution of the agenda the next day.
Learnard said this was a huge step in the right direction and would maximize Council and staff time. It would ensure that Council could hear the agenda items, have discussions, and vote in public. They could hear from the public during Public Comments, in workshops. She remarked that they all read every email they received, answered phone calls, had coffee meetings; they were there to listen to their constituents. Learnard said she disagreed that citizens felt they were not being heard. She thought this was a step in the right direction and asked if anyone had any final comments.
Johnson stated that she would not have put this forward if she felt it was putting things behind closed doors. The original item might have seemed so, but the amended version prevented that. She again mentioned that Council could bring any topic to the dais and could bring it to Council/Staff Topics the day of the meeting. It did not limit them as Council members because they could bring up as many items as they wanted to discuss in Council/Staff Topics. Her goal in this, she continued, was to have a better relationship with other Council members.
She said if she brought something up in Council/Staff Topics, she would have first gone to every one of the other Council members and have a clear plan when she presented it. The public would not find out about something when it appeared on an agenda; it would be on the agenda because Council had reached a consensus at an earlier meeting. All citizens would have the ability to talk to Council during the period between the decision to put the item on an agenda and the actual meeting where it would be decided. The first discussion would just be to ask staff to spend time on it.
Johnson told the other Council members she understood their points, but this was a true effort to bring clarity and to be transparent.
Destadio reminded them that at the retreat in January, Council gave staff a list of about 40 projects that the public had asked for, from pickleball courts to dredging the lake. They were working on those, and results had been seen. Anyone who said there needed to be a plan could find it on the City website. They were talking about transparency, and Council wanted to be transparent. However, he continued, they had to think of the repercussions of putting an item on the agenda. Destadio used Brown’s pet project of allowing backyard hens as an example. Before adopting an ordinance for that, staff would have to review a lot of factors, so they needed to consider the cost in time and money, as well as scheduling. Those were the kind of things they were trying to cut costs on.
Every time somebody complained about not having enough pickleball courts, Destadio continued, they should consider that somebody else put something on the agenda that bumped it down. They needed a system to regulate putting things on the agenda that took time away from staff and cost the city more money.
They already had the right to bring any issue up during Council/Staff topics, Brown noted, as well as the right to request it been added to the agenda. This required them to get someone else to agree just to put it on the agenda. They were elected with the right to put something on the agenda, and to vote for this was an egregious takeaway of freedom of speech for Council members, she commented. She should have the right to put any issue on the agenda. It did not happen enough to bankrupt the city, Brown told Destadio.
Holland said they should consider the citizens; previously, a citizen could come to one of them, and they could put something on the agenda. Now there would be a number of hoops to go through. He said it was a restriction on their First Amendment rights of free speech and redress.
The current ordinance, adopted last year, Destadio noted, did just what this said. If you got one more person to agree, it could go on the agenda. This was not taking away anyone’s rights; it was what was currently there, he remarked.
The Mayor said she was glad she and Brown could clear up the misunderstanding about the dates of their conversation and Brown’s request to add something to the agenda.
There was a motion on the table, and she called for the vote. The motion carried 3-2, with Learnard, Destadio, and Johnson voting in favor, and Brown and Holland voting against.
B. 04-24-01 Meade Field Softball Lighting Bid
City Engineer Dave Borkowski requested Council approve a bid to replace the lights on the lower pinwheel at Meade Field. Currently, there were halogen lights there. Borkowski said they hired an architect to do the design work, then put the project out to bid. Three bids were received, from PSG, Georgia Power, and West Georgia Lighting, with PSG the lowest at $340,912. Borkowski said these lights could be maintained from ground level and were LEDs, which lasted much longer than halogen lights. They vetted the bids with the architect and electrical engineer. Funding would come from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). Holland moved to approve New Agenda item 04-24-01, Meade Field softball lighting bid to PSG in the amount of $340,912. Destadio seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
C. 04-24-02 SR 54 and Lake Peachtree Bridge Project Change Order
Borkowski said they were familiar with the project to widen the path bridge over Lake Peachtree on SR 54. Construction had begun, and Kiewit, the contractor, applied to receive a permit for lane closures from the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT). GDOT objected to the number of days traffic needed to be restricted to one lane through the construction area to accommodate the cranes. They looked at options including driving the piles at night, but that was not possible due to the proximity of residential areas. Moving the construction out into the lake would be two or three times more expensive. The alternative they came up with was to take out a portion of the existing grass median and build two lanes through the worksite.
The change order from Kiewit for the required additional work came to $281,596.29, and Borkowski said he requested Council approve this. He noted there was a lot of work involved in this. The money was available in the 2017 SPLOST. Holland moved to approve New Agenda item 04-24-02, SR 54 and Lake Peachtree Bridge Project Change Order, in the amount of $281,596.29. Destadio seconded. Holland confirmed with Borkowski that GDOT was in no way going to allow SR 54 to be shut down to one lane for 18 days, and Borkowski said that was correct. Motion carried unanimously.
D. 04-24-03 Resolution of Support for FEMA SAFER Grant
Assistant Fire Chief Wil Harbin said he was asking for Council’s support of their application for the Federal Emergency Management Agency Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Management Response (FEMA SAFER) grant, which would provide funds to hire nine firefighters to staff the new Station 85 that was approved in the 2023 SPLOST. This grant would provide 36 months of salary. Support from Council would look good on the application, he remarked, because it showed a commitment from the City to keep these firefighters on after the 36 months. Holland moved to approve New Agenda item 04-24-03 Resolution of Support for FEMA SAFER Grant. Johnson seconded.
Brown asked Harbin to explain to the public what these firefighters would be doing. He said Station 85 would be opening in the next few years, and they did not have staffing to run the new fire engine. By hiring them soon, Brown noted, they would be trained and ready to go when the new station opened.
Holland thanked Harbin for applying for this grant. He noted that it would total about $2.5 to $3 million over the course of three years. Harbin said that was correct; they would hire firefighters and firefighter/EMTs/paramedics, and the average wage and benefits would come to about $100,000 for each position. Holland noted that would be $900,000 a year taxpayers did not have to pay. Council voted unanimously to approve the motion.
E. 04-24-04 Resolution in Opposition of TDK Extension
Brown said she wanted it known that no one on Council or staff had suggested extending TDK Boulevard. However, she continued, the issue of extending TDK Boulevard across Line Creek and into Coweta County had been a hot topic for more than 20 years. Brown recalled that in her campaign, she promised to resist urbanization, and nothing was more urban than mass traffic running through peaceful streets. Page 11 of 68
Prior administrations had looked at the connection as being favorable for both counties, she remarked, but that was when the southeast portion of Coweta was mostly agricultural. Council members learned nearly 20 years ago that nearly one million square feet of commercial development and about 3,950 homes were proposed in that area and abandoned the plan to extend TDK.
By 2007, Mayor Harold Logsdon had removed the TDK expansion from the transportation plan. While many of the vehicles arriving in Peachtree City via a TDK extension would turn north on SR 74, others would continue on through Braelinn Village via Crosstown Drive and out of Peachtree City on Ebenezer Road. The volume of traffic would be devastating to the City’s repaving budget, and the commercial operations would impact many of Peachtree City’s small businesses and the loss of sales tax would impact the budget, possibly requiring an increase in property taxes, Brown continued.
As recently as March 21, 2019, the Peachtree City Council unanimously approved a resolution against the TDK Boulevard extension. Brown said the decisions of one Council did not bind the actions of another Council, and they needed to sign another resolution. She noted that the Mayor and Holland were working on organizing a study committee for the SR 54 corridor consisting of representatives from Fayette and Coweta counties, Fayetteville, Sharpsburg, and Peachtree City. Brown said the SR 54 road easement was wide enough to add another traffic lane in each direction from the 54/74 intersection west into Coweta County to Fischer Road.
She added that it would help if Coweta improved Fischer Road from SR 54 to Interstate 85. This traffic study with representatives from five governments would have more clout that one from a single area, but Brown cautioned that it could also allow Coweta to press for an extension of TDK Boulevard. That was why she wanted this Council to pass a resolution. She wanted the other governments to know that extending TDK was not an option. She said anyone on the Council who wanted the TDK option to remain was not working for what was best for Peachtree City. Brown also stated there were many indicators that Coweta developers had not given up hope for a TDK extension so they could build massive developments along the border with Peachtree City. If signing this resolution meant Coweta County would refuse to work with them, so be it, Brown remarked.
Brown moved to approve the resolution as written. Holland seconded. Destadio said he wanted to set the record straight. He believed they should sign Brown’s resolution, but this was a dead issue. Peachtree City owned all the land on the other side of Lake McIntosh, so the could not extend TDK without taking the land or Peachtree City giving in. He said Brown could sound the alarm all she wanted, but nothing was going to happen. None of them wanted or were willing to let it happen.
Holland had no comments.
Johnson agreed that none of them wanted it open.
Learnard remarked that as the Georgia General Assembly ended, retiring legislators had been asked what advice they would give to their successors. One said that he had noticed that new people coming in wanted everything done quickly, while another noted that building relationships took time, and you could not get anyone on your side without those relationships. Another advised newcomers to listen to people who had been there for years; they knew what they were talking about. The fact that this resolution found its way to City Council was an insult to a community partner that they had just begun to work with, Learnard said.
She read from an email from a former Council member who asked why there was a need for another TDK resolution? Peachtree City had made all of the stakeholders aware of their opposition for decades. The excessive 54/74 traffic was a regional project that would require a teamwork to solve, the email continued, and concluded by saying this resolution was unnecessary and would alienate the decisionmakers they needed to work with. As Destadio had pointed out, Peachtree City owned the tract of land that stood between Peachtree City and Coweta County, Learnard said; they secured that tract when she was on City Council. The Mayor said she would vote for the resolution, but it would prove to be a very costly resolution and Peachtree City could do better. The motion carried unanimously.
Public Hearings
None
Council/Staff Topics
A. Redwine Road Tunnel Project
Strickland said the County had contacted them about the Redwine tunnel project, a County project which had been going on for about three years now. It was nearing the point of bidding out the construction to drop the tunnel into Redwine. Redwine Road would have to be closed for at least four weeks, so the project was originally set for this summer while school was out. However, they would not be able to meet that deadline. They could bid it out and do the work in the fall while school was in session or wait until school was out again next summer. Although Peachtree City had no real say in the decision, the County was seeking their opinion.
Learnard asked about a detour, and Strickland said there was no specific detour designated now, but he believed the detour would be Robinson Road to Holly Grove, then back to SR 74. The detour would go into Peachtree City, which was why the County had asked for their input.
Brown said she believed the traffic count on Redwine was 9,000 or 11,000 cars per day and reflected on that traffic being rerouted for four weeks. That was going to happen no matter when it was done, Strickland noted, and Brown said she would assume that traffic during summer was less. What would be the negative impact of delaying it to summer 2025? Brown asked. Strickland said the faster you bid something out, the cheaper it was; prices were rising. Also, he noted that the County had been working on this for years, so he was sure they wanted to get it done. He noted they were getting feedback from the Board of Education as well.
Destadio said you had always rather do construction projects in the summer, rather than fall. He thought costs would be less, and there would be less impact on students and parents if they went with summer.
Holland supported next summer, and he said there had been discussions of the viability of the project at Fayette County Transportation Committee meetings he had attended. He thought a delay would give them a chance to look for alternatives. Johnson said she supported next summer because of the school. Brown agreed, as did Learnard. Strickland said he would let the County know they supported summer 2025.
B. Recreation Committee
Holland noted he just voted “no” on an item regarding putting items on the agenda, but now he would be the first to use the method proposed by Johnson. He reported that a number of citizens wanted to be involved in a recreation committee and opine on the recreation master plan being created by outside consultants. He asked Council to look at creating such a committee and get citizen input in addition to the input from stakeholders that had already been collected.
Learnard replied that it was her understanding that they planned to create a committee after the master plan had been released. They would discuss as a Council what all the next steps would be, including budgetary considerations, pickleball, staffing, facilities; the citizen recreation committee would be part of those discussions. Holland said he thought it would be better to have citizens involved in the process as opposed to opining on something that had already been decided.
Brown agreed, saying getting more people involved before the final plan was adopted was not a bad thing. Destadio said he had no problem with keeping citizens informed but was skeptical about the practicality of getting too many people involved in the creation of the plan. They should not just open things up and get all this input and get things confused.
Council had just heard a presentation on this, Johnson observed, and they had asked Cyndee Bonacci of CPL about a committee. Bonacci said that was why they did the citizen survey and talked with stakeholders. Johnson noted that the City had invested a lot into having a company come in and do this recreation master plan, and she wanted to talk to Bonacci before creating a committee to see when it would be appropriate, so they were not throwing a wrench in things and were working with this company that they had paid so many tax dollars to hire.
There were untold staff hours in dealing with any kind of committee, the Mayor commented. She did not think they were ready to have this conversation until they understood what the staff time would be and when that time might be available. She thought they needed to get a handle on that before making a decision.
Holland said he did not disagree with that, but he was trying to make a distinction between stakeholders and citizens. The stakeholders were in charge of an organization, be it pickleball or a sports league; others, such as casual runners, did not have an organization behind them. He wanted to involve average people.
City Clerk Yasmin Julio pointed out that there were stakeholder meetings, but, also, approximately 2,000 residents filled out the recreation survey. Opinions were not collected only from stakeholders. She said presentation of the plan was not approval of anything; this plan would just present what citizens and stakeholders said they wanted to see. Strickland said he, too, was going to mention the survey the company did and heard back from 2,000 average residents. Holland said he had seen that data, but those were structured questions. He wanted an open forum.
Learnard said her opinion was to let the process play out; staff was on it, and the plan should be ready by this summer. They would be making budget considerations, staffing considerations, and facilities considerations. At that time, they could form any committee they felt they needed to carry it out and prioritize projects. She was not prepared to encumber staff at this time. Destadio said he agreed and recalled the citizen committee on the multi-use paths, saying it did not get everything done. He wanted citizen input, but at the right time.
C. Landscaping at City Hall
Learnard thanked staff for the landscaping in front of City Hall. She said the public buildings and grounds crew had done a great job. She mentioned that the exterior and interior of the building had also gotten some improvements.
D. New meeting times for April, May and June
Learnard noted that the next Council meeting would be at 9:30 a.m. on April 18. In May and June, the second meetings of the month would also be held at 9:30 a.m.
E. Heavy vehicles ordinance
Brown, going back to citizen Larson’s comments, said she felt a discussion was needed on updating the ordinance regarding truck traffic limitations. It would be exacerbated by the displaced left turn construction this summer with too many trucks attempting to use MacDuff as an alternate route. Redwine Road might have designations, but Robinson and Holly Grove did not, so the tunnel projects might shift trucks to them. She thanked Larson for his research.
F. Wreaths Across America
Johnson said she was excited to see so much brought up during Council/Staff topics. She then mentioned the Wreaths Across America exhibit at Drake Field, saying it was impressive. She thanked Holland for helping bring it to the City. Destadio said the Knights of Columbus placed wreaths at the Newnan Cemetery, and Brown said they did it in Fayetteville, too. At Drake Field, they collected enough money to provide 61 wreaths.
G. Memorial Day Service
There would be a Memorial Day service at City Hall at 9 a.m., Holland said. Strickland was coordinating it, and it might include a flyover.
==========================
Destadio said he wanted to speak as the elder statesman. Except for the Mayor, he had been on Council the longest and was on the Planning Commission for 11 years and chairman for seven of those. He said he had lived in Peachtree City 24 years and had a lifetime of leadership roles. He believed he was qualified to speak out.
Destadio commented that he read the newspaper but did not recognize the city depicted in it. He wondered where columnist Steve Brown, who he described as a friend, got the ideas for his topics. Brown referred often to how Council members felt and thought, but how did he know what each Council member thought? Who told him? Whoever was telling him did not know what he was thinking.
He went on to say that the City Manager worked for all Council members, not just one, as had been alleged. The opinions stated were often wrong and look bad for the city. Destadio remarked that he was friends with the editor, but said he took anything anybody wanted to send him and put it in the newspaper, resulting in a lot of people regurgitating things they knew nothing about. Why could they not stop and be the old Peachtree City they used to be?
Destadio said Holland had submitted a comment to the editor regarding City Manager Robert Curnow. It said, and Destadio echoed it, that they had gotten to know Curnow and found him to be a trustworthy person. They did not believe it was anything other than family obligations that led him to resign, and Destadio said Curnow had assured him that was the case. Council and staff needed to work together. These articles that were bad for everyone needed to stop. They were full of innuendo and blown out of proportion, Destadio stated. Who would want to come and live and work in Peachtree City after reading these articles? They needed to stop this and work together, he concluded.
H. April 16th GDOT Town Hall
Julio announced there would be a town hall on April 16 when GDOT officials would discuss and answer questions about the displaced left turn and other roadwork.
Executive Session
NONE
Adjourn
There being no further business, Holland moved to adjourn at 7:50 p.m. Destadio seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
