Thank you mayor. We're recording. Okay Councilor light to call this meeting of our work session to order this Tuesday June 6, 2023 at 5 o'clock Thank you. Could you lead the pledge? Sure the United States of America and to promote and encourage the hands of one nation under God and the biggest bubble with liberty and justice for all. Okay. I'm Simon. Thank you. It's time for Mayor's remarks. None at this time. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. The first item under strategic priorities is the recreation and parks makerspace at ColleCree. Contract award for phase one construction documents and director Haggard as here for presentation. Good evening, Mary and Council. In April, staff reviewed the master plan for the Colleague Creek makerspace with council. The next step was to engage a firm to complete construction documents for the first phase. Before I get to the contract recommendation, I want to be sure we're on the same page as to what is presently included in first phase with the construction estimate of $2 million. The graphic on the screen. It was included in your April work session materials and discussed at the time. But to confirm, this co-op includes the roof, some building wide infrastructure, such as fire protection, electrical panels, gas lines, and domestic water and sewer. The first two classroom work areas, and they're associated storage areas, as well as the restrooms. In addition, we heard that council wanted to design the first field robotics area as shown on the screen. So basically this extra area down here. as shown on the screen. So basically this extra area down here. This will be included in the design. And if additional construction funding is identified, we can include this in the phase one buildout. That said, we recommend entering into a contract with McMillan, Pasin, Smith, Architecture, to complete the construction drawings. And once approved the construction drawings, it takes six to nine months to complete. And with that, I'm happy to answer questions. I'll be on the go. Yeah. Chris, what did this white area do? So the white area, so I'm going to go to the next picture, which is the full buildout. And so there's right now it's an open area, but you can see on that left one up there, maybe I can get real fancy. The left area, the right side of that middle of the screen, that's the sort of field that they laid out for the robotics or other multipurpose uses, that's where that would be. And so everything below that right now would just be an open area, open area that's not built out yet. So but we are not doing any contract award for the whole thing, only the top half. Outside of securing the roof and painting the building and anything that requires the entire shell to be secured for safety purposes and that, no. We would only be building the flooring and the walls from that line up. So the ask is basically to say? The ask is to approve this architecture contract to lay out the plans for that. Only this base. Correct. I mean, why did the restrict only to that top space? Because you only have $2 million in your budget that you guys agreed that we should stick to, which would build about that much, and in that exterior, we're going to go ahead and design it so that it's sort of, well, hopefully we can get it done in Phase 1 if there's some additional funds to cover it. So, my point is, you can build out later about the design part with good finishes. We could do that. We could do more design, but that's what Councillor Greed on to last meeting was designed to 2 million. There you go. Dole. It's I recall. I'm sorry. But to think, Chris, like what we're looking at is like, I'm going back to what Bob said, can we design the whole thing but just only build this part? Yes, because we're waiting on that policy document so maybe Kimberly can answer when we can expect those like the naming rights policy document. Right. Because the way I'm looking at is like by the time we are done with the design phase and have all the drawings, maybe we will secure enough funds to do more than just this part. So is there a way we can just design the whole thing, but just only? Yes. So you want to design even more than with the contract? Is that a brought to? The primary. If that's a will account, we can go back and get the additional. So the way I'm looking at it is like, let's design, like, assuming that we're going to build the whole thing, all right. But based on the funding, when we are ready to put it out for the beach, we could cut back on how much fund we have in hand and then structure. Okay. So just to be sure you understand what you're asking, if we design for the, let's just say seven to nine million dollar full build out Your design fees gonna be more in the five to six hundred thousand dollar ballpark I would think versus the hundred and sixty one we're talking about for phase one so it's not a It's not a small change. It's a big design change. It costs that's I just want to make sure you understand the big design change. It costs. I just want to make sure you understand the magnitude of the increase cost. Would we be smart? Just, I mean, that's more than I was expecting him to say. I'm wondering if we wouldn't be better off to get in there, start seeing how it jeez, start seeing what maybe the people that are actively involved with it, see is how maybe it should proceed. No, we can do that. I wasn't expecting that big guff at Delta in there, so I think. That's why I want to make sure, because once you start putting in the second floor, which is part of the ultimate build out, the roof, all the other rooms, you put in the stairs and the first feet, once you start getting into all the elements, the cost just continues to come. The only thing I'm looking at is the crisis. We are exploring all the options for the funding. Let's assume three months into the design. We might be able to secure another couple of million dollars. Right. Well, and the good part is, we have a great partner. This architect, Ferns, is living great. They give me great answers to all the concerns you had at our last conversation. Do I think they could expand the base floor to at least get it activated? With a relatively simple change order, yes, I want to get them started. So I think this is a great starting point. This gets the shell going, this gets the base, all the mix of the building infrastructure, the fire safety, that's the whole building. And then what money we have in three months can change how they finalize the design. There's a couple more steps in the process. So if you authorize this amount, we still have an opportunity to expand it in October, September. That's what I'm looking at, too. Just give them a heads up saying yes, we authorize it now, but as things start moving, scope might you. Exactly. That would go up. That would be a complete sense. Chris, if I may add, how about just only the bottom floor? Or the bottom part? Will the deck be as big? It would be somewhere in between those estimates that I give you. But it would be an extra more expense. I can get those numbers. I just want to mention. that this is 161,000. And the other one will cost another. I haven't had that scoping conversation, but I'm just telling you that generally when you look at construction contract amount, you take a percentage and say that's the engineering or architecture cost. So if your cost of construction goes up and double, engineering may double. Now, there are some orders of magnitude and savings, but when you go from two to seven million, you're not just going to go up 10%. You're going to more than double to get to that seven million construction. So I just want to make sure we're all on the same page. Yeah. The architect is open saying that. Yeah, they're more than happy to do it. I'm good with that. Can I just ask so for the mezzanine, are we going to pay a premium to build that second floor after the first floor is already open and those classrooms on the first floor? The only premium would be that you'd have to work around people actively working there. But I don't think it's going to be, and the other part of that is, you're not going to start for another year. So the cost, everything is going to go up inflation here. But I don't think there's any great premium you're going to have to pay because you've not done it all in one time. Gotcha. Gotcha. Thank you. Everyone's already asked the questions. I was going to ask one more though. Will we end up spending more money if we wait and design phase two after we do phase one, more money in the long run, over the five or six hundred? 100. Not really. I don't think it's going to be a significant change. Okay. Well, I'm fine getting started. Yeah, I think you get started. Let us see where we're headed. And if it is a good idea, we can figure that out with our architect and come back to you and talk about it. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. If you've answered pretty much all my questions too. I did have a question though on you right up here on the basketball court, you're saying that the floor space is not going to be large enough for regulation basketball, but we can do half courts. Correct. Okay. And the bleachers set up are those collapsible bleachers that were anticipating to give us more space, more usable. I don't believe they were intended to be, but I, but I, I, I, they were permanent structures so that you could actually walk up to the second floor using the bleachers as well. Could, would it make sense to look at collapsible bleachers like to do in high schools and then have us an auxiliary way to go up to the second floor only because the floor is premium space to be used and if that's sitting there taking a lot of that maybe we could just move on. Possibly that's not part of the current design but yes if we went and expanded design that's something we could look into. Okay. I think that the best. Yeah I just think that makes sense if If, financially, if it makes sense. But I'm ready to go forward with this. And with the current design, the scope of the design where we have it today, I'm anticipating that you're planning on building flexibility within the design so we can go ahead and add the second floor. So we're not going back. We're not having to go back and redo the drawings. That's correct. There will be the correct pillars and things put in place so that you can build on top of it in the future without having to go back and tear it. Engineering and all that stuff. Correct. I'm good with it. Thank you. Chris. I fully support it, but I'm just curious what were you able to investigate the inflation reduction act on the tax credits for public sector entities for solar panels? I did not. I can take that offline. How are you going to answer that one? We have started looking into it. I have not submitted any applications at this point. Those do dead deadlines for several of the grant opportunities fall middle and later in July. But are exploring what options might make sense based on the lineup of the projects. Chances are good. We'll need a resolution of support so that would come back to council. All right. Thank you. I fully support this and the solar panels. I'd like to look at, analyze the cap rate to see when it would turn positive for the taxpayers of Johns Creek. But yeah, fully supported. Thank you for pursuing this, Chris. I'm proud. So like we're good. Systems go. Thank you Chris. Next slide. Thank you. The next item is Creekside Park, Project Update and finances. Director Haggard's going to stay with us. Yes, good evening again. At the retreat in January, Council confirmed Creekside Park is a strategic priority for 2023. Your specific goals for Creekside Park Parks progress in 2023 included completing engineering in environmental permitting, beginning the right-of-way acquisition, hosting special events in town center, and exploring if a portion of the Creek Side Park could be ready for construction more quickly. I'm pleased to confirm that Creek Side Park remains on schedule and we are on pace to hit each of these 2023 milestones set by council. However, as discussed in the memo, additional council directions needed related to funding the project's construction and whether or not council intends to phase the construction. At this point, the estimated project cost is $35.5 million. Council's allocated $10.3 million towards the project funding. You have another roughly $10 million of unprogrammed T-sploss, two funds that could be allocated to the project, still leaves about a $15 million gap. This summer you will have several opportunities to allocate additional funding including the end of year surplus and the fiscal year 24 budget. And as we approach the 60% mark with the construction documents, I need to understand whether we should be finalizing documents for a phase construction or for all the construction to be authorized in one contract. I'm happy to answer questions, but I'm interested to hear your feedback and intent for this funding the significant project. Council, so I've got a confession to make. As I was thinking about this issue, I had blown it up in my mind to be in some ways bigger than I think maybe what is before us tonight. And so, as far as where the money comes from and how quickly does it get paid for, the construction is not really what's in front of it's more about, you know, are we still 100% committed to what we've previously outlined in terms of our plan for Creekside Park? And so when you look at like that, then for me it's an obvious answer 100% yes, yes I am. And when I go ahead and commit to the full construction documents for everything we've talked about. So I just kind of want to give a little bit of context with that, Bob. Yeah, John, I would echo that I am very much keen on seeing this colleague creek park take shape. Primarily because I have a fairly comfortable feeling about colleagueeague Creek phase one where it's almost usable. The rest of the stuff will be possibly I can say a little garnishing we can at least start using it. So it makes sense that we divert crowd here too and get footfalls to this what is to this park. So I think we should go ahead with your recommendation. Okay. All right, thanks, Pa. It's all great. Chris, like, now again, like, we had a whole plan and everything, so I would definitely proceed with the engineering for the whole thing. The question is, the RFP and the procurement process is going to be February of 2024. So the construction, how much time are we looking? Just ballpark? 18 to 24 months. So probably we are looking at like a Q3 or Q4 of 2025. Yeah, ballpark, by the end a 25, I will be my target. So by the time we're going to have plenty of opportunities like the couple of budgets and a couple of start places. So I'm positive we will find funding flows from these opportunities. So I would proceed with the project. All right, thanks. Thanks. No, I'm 100% committed. Thank you. Thanks, ma'am. Love the, love Creekside, love what it can do for the city. Question I had with the T-Splot funding. If, I think we should do it in Phase 23 and 24, so we can better visualize and see what's coming in the door T-splots funding. Based on historical information, are you anticipating, because we're in a deficit right now, we're looking for money to finish this project, do you anticipate T-splots funding actually exceeding our projections like we did last year. Yes sir. You do? Yeah, because the end of the day, we only, when we came to eat a program from the beginning, we allocated 85% of what we anticipated received. So if we receive between 85 and 100, we're over the, what we thought we'd receive. And we're target, we're on target to be over 85%. Do you believe that we can accomplish all the funding for this project in two years, 23 and 24, or to based on other projects or unforeseen uses of T-splots? Do we possibly have to go three years out to finish this? So you're asking me to predict your financial budget? Okay, so I can't do it. But from a T-splot perspective, I don't see any weird hiccups coming that would kill you. But I also have a bid all the projects. We've had some discussions about estimates and we know we have an inflation bucket. I'm not tapping into that inflation bucket in this conversation. So that is what I'm going to use first to try to cover any of those over budgets. So I can't give you a definitive answer, but I can tell you, I think we have a reasonable path forward. Okay. If you don't mind, I'll just leave you. Please. So we're looking at a $15 million dollar delta. 25. But that's. So 10. I think that 10 million from this plot. 10 from T's plus two. But we haven't made that authoritative. Correct. That's true. But assuming that because we had spoken as a council earlier about that. So in the upcoming 24 budget to do the amphitheater, the actual ban shell and the surrounding seating on the what I call the interior between the lake and city hall. That is something that I will be proposing that we fully fund. So that will close about a $5 million gap. So then you're looking at 10 and there may be some For lack of better term change in the suffocations that might get us closer to eight Okay, and so then it starts sounding much more You know within site right we're closing the thing. Yeah, we're closing the gap so Yeah, I say we Say focus on our main thing. Oh, it's it's a priority for council this into in 23 here I I want to go forward with it. I'm just asking the questions. I know T-splots, what we anticipate the revenues coming in, they were greater last year than we anticipated. So hopefully things are going that direction also. So we have additional funds to play with. But the other thing you have to keep in mind, and I don't have the detail break out of these expenses, but we can only spend the T-sposs dollars on the trail. We can't spend it on the amphitheater, the terracing, some of those different things. So there's a max of what we could put that money towards. There's your breakdown. The separation of the amphitheater versus the two. Okay, I got to catch it. Thank you. But the favor of it. Yep. I mean, with the T-SPLOS-2 funds, that's 40% that delta, right? So is it going to cost that much to build out the trail? I just, I don't know. That's a question. The trail is significant expense in the project between the boardwalk element, because we up on piers through that whole south South wetland area that's relatively expensive and them to trail all the way around the pond counts for T-Spaus 2 because pedestrian trail It's more open and then you've also got a landscape bucket So we've kept a little bit of that and the T-Spaus 2 as well already so and the T-spaus 2 as well already. So. We're also looking at the lighted. You said there's one of the intervention there was a little destination conference. Correct. That is not currently in the plans. It concretes up to about $200 a yard. It's crazy expensive right now. And sorry, one last question. You had mentioned about the horizontal control and proposed grading. I'm not sure what horizontal control is referring to. Horizontal control would mean the survey. We'd be trying to serve the survey of the property. I guess I need to breathe the exact statement. It's okay, it's okay. It's okay. Take it offline. That's fine. I'm all, I'm all for it. Okay. Thank you. Chris? Yeah, so I'm for it, but yeah, it's a big price tag. So I do think we need to be mindful on how we plan for that and develop a plan of how to get there over the next three years. So I support it, but I think we should definitely start planning on where those dollars are going to come from. Yep, for sure. Okay, well it sounds like you've got your go ahead. Thank you. Are any of these items going to be coming back to us for the next meeting? Like do we need to contract with the argument? Okay, so consent agenda, everybody? And the one before the maker space? That one's going to be the creepsci park will not come back. It was just a direction issue. Okay. So the maker space. Okay, the maker space is a contract. Okay. They were all in good with consent for that. Okay. All right. Thank you. All right. Next. The next item is the recreation and parks call you Creek Park field striping recommendation from the recreation and parks advisory committee. Assistant. Assistant City Manager Greer, here for presentation. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Tonight I'm reporting back from the Recreation and Parks Advisory Committee regarding field markings at Colle Creek Park. As you know, we've constructed two synthetic turf fields and to ensure they are most flexible in their use. They have been permanently marked with the outer sid lines, the end lines and the center lines, as well as permanent tick marks that can be used to line the fields for football, soccer and lacrosse. We have the same outer lines and tick marks at the city's other rectangular fields. When Newtown Rec has a lacrosse game at Newtown Park, they line the field for lacrosse. When they have youth soccer, they tend to divide the large field into two using that center line. And then they have two smaller fields running in parallel. The current approach from a city staff perspective is that it provides the highest level of flexibility and promote shared use rather than promoting one group over another. The Recreation of Parks Advisory Committee met last month and discussed field striping for a Colleague Creek Park. After reviewing three options that are represented in the memo in your agenda packet, they suggested that you should consider taking a different approach for one of these synthetic turf fields at Colleague Creek Park. To promote and improve the usability of the field for football, they suggested that you should add permanent field striping for football, they suggested that you should add permanent field striping for football. As with all recommendations from advisory committees, the decision is one that rests with council for final determination. Should you wish to pursue adding permanent striping to one of the synthetic turf fields, we will need to identify the $75,000 to fund the expenditure and then schedule the installation. Because we don't want to avoid the warranty on our newly installed field, we need to have the same company make the modification. So that'll have to be scheduled. The earliest they can fit us in is probably October. And I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that between now and then you've asked staff to release an RFP to find a recreational partner. Similar to how we use Newtown Record, Newtown, OC Park Athletic Association at OC. So that organization will in the future help you decide how you're running and managing new sports at Colley Creek Park. So you may want to factor that in. But with that, I bring you a recommendation from RPAC and I seek your direction as to where to go from here. Well. One of the things which I'm mindful of is giving rather government, choosing winners and losers. In this case, if you go to Stripe, only the football feel. I believe we may not be perceived as being favoring one sport over the other. However, there is also the case that our young footballers are leaving our city and going to other schools and other leagues, which is a matter of concern to me. If this means that we are signalling to them that we don't want to lose you, I would rather go ahead and say let's try it permanently because every sport needs encouragement. For a long time this football field was kind of a neglected sport and That's why we did see a lot of when we see this course between John Screeke High School and some of the school It is it's it's not something we can be proud of. And that's primarily because we're losing young folks, good folks to other cities, while they're growing up. So I would like to see this permanently striped, at least one field for the purpose of playing football. for the purpose of playing football. Thank you. Thank you. Don't. Q. Well, a couple of questions. Like, we will have the partnership with the organizations in about probably six months, right? Likely? Yeah. So in general, like, the expense is $75,000. Like, how would that be handled in different other parks like the new town? Sure. If we were making a capital improvement in one of our existing parks that already had a recreational partner associated with it, if it was a project that they were supportive and suggested to us, then each of our partners contributes either $25,000 or I think it's 5% of their gross revenues, it's a percentage in our facility use such agreement, so they might contribute funds towards that improvement. So instead of being a city-only cost, it may be a shared cost, or it may be an improvement that they seek to do within the parks just with our blessing. So what you're saying is like if you wait to have the partnership, there's a possibility that the cost might be picked up by the. Yes. So at our current arrangement at New Town Park, New Town Rock handles all of the striping of the fields. But the way I'm leaning towards is like, let's assume we stripe it. And down the road, once we get to that point of partnership with the organization, we might see a need of another sport more than the football. At that point, how do we backtrack? So if you wanted to add more permanent striping let's say soccer or lacrosse the estimate we got from the field company was it's $75,000 for football it's a little bit more labor intensive $40,000 for soccer or $40,000 for lacrosse so you could if the recreational partner said, hey, football is great. It would be great if we had one with permanent lacrosse lines too. You could add that to the other field. You could add it to the same field where you have football. And you can have multiple, they tend to use different colors to denote the different sports. So you would, it would be unlikely to remove the football striping once you edit. That's fair I'm getting to, but we would definitely want to support that sport, but what are the options do we have, like rather than permanent, because we want to keep the options open? Yes, so the memo outlines another option that we talked through with RPEC was Bay-Sell robots that you program with satellite coordinates to do the striping for you. It's paint, it has to be redone after a certain period, but it is not permanent and that it can be washed off, rained off. There was a lively discussion with ARPAC about whether or not the paint or how the paint sometimes transferred on the clothing and skin, but that is true for anyone who has been on painted and striped fields. No, several of you other play sports played or have children that do so. The way I'm looking at it is rather tying it down for specific sport, not knowing the demand in the park, and that from the residents, I would rather want to keep the options open. Yeah, this is certainly something you could revisit later. You could plan as a future capital project or you could plan to set aside funds to revisit the topic once you have registration numbers or a recreational partner on board. If- It's fair I'm heading. Okay. If I may. I mean, we heard from so many, even when during campaigning the last time, heard from so many people that we're moving out of John's Creek and that's what I don't want to happen because there's nowhere for them to play currently for football. So I think it's different. Newtown part, they easily, I mean, it takes less to strike those fields. So like I was out there today, they're striped for soccer. So the soccer has a home at Newtown, at least at Newtown, if not at ShakeRag 2. So I'm definitely for option 2 because in the long run it's going to be cheaper than, you know, buying the robot and doing it per year when as it washes out. So I'm in favor of option 2. And I wouldn't encourage others to. I would definitely want to support that thing, but again, if we can come up with a temporary solution, which is pretty much like the permanent one, but down the road when we have that partnership with the organizations, probably at that point we can come back and say maybe like that particular field is not for the football, but maybe another one. I want to keep the options open when we have the partner, because they might be the ones who might come back and say, hey, do these things. XYZ. They might pick up the cost rather than us incurring $75,000 today. But still, provide them the option of striping temporary and just have them keep the football games going on. Okay, so you're in favor of the option three? Okay. Okay. Okay, so I think everyone here knows my opinion how I feel about this. I am heavily involved with the Northview football team. So I whole hardly support the keeping warranty with the dollars we spent. I think it was initially a mistake and oversight as far as not having at least one field in all of John's Creek dedicated to football. And let me just say that again, all of John's Creek, one field dedicated to football. When there's multiple lacrosse, multiple soccer, multiple crickets, baseball, there's not one field dedicated to football. I think that's a shame as far as not having that for the residents and the people that play football that are into the sport. I know for fact that there are many families that have moved out of Johns Creek specifically because the football program is non-existent in Johns Creek and it hasn't been promoted, hasn't been supported. permanently stripe a field. I think there will be a lot of people that are pretty disappointed in Colleague Creek because they're looking at Colleague Creek and saying hey this is something where we'll finally get a football field. And so by doing this with the permanent stripe being will maintain the warranty. Second, I think the robotic side of it while that is a nice fallback plan, the total cost of ownership is a lot more expensive because it's not only the GPS coordinates that are licensing, it's the supplies of paint that you got to keep buying and it doesn't last forever and it takes about two hours to stripe a football field. So that cost of an effort every time this partner wants to use or let someone play football, it's a lot of effort, heavy lifting to get the field prepared for football. As some of the people in our pack have said, who are very familiar with soccer and multi-striped fields, kids get used to it. They learn by the different colors, whether this is football, this is lacrosse, this is soccer, those lacrosse and soccer, those stripes, those paints are a lot simpler than football. I mean, there's a lot of stripes and hash marks and moving parts in football that the kids, you know, they're, they get used to seeing all that and the colors are different. So it wasn't an issue to the people at our pack who are very familiar with this. And secondly, as we put out an RFP to a partner, just like we're talking about having the city potentially reimbursed with some of the goal posts that that could be the cost of entry where they would have to pay for some of that as the partner, potentially some of this could be funded back to us. And I think we talked about that here in work session where we went ahead and said, okay, the partner, they normally buy the field goals, but because we funded those field goals on a front end, we talked about potentially a partner reimbursing the city for some of those. And we can look at that also potentially with some of the football side. So to me, and I know I'm going long-winded here and I apologize for that, but I think there's a lot of people passionate about this and I can't see a reason why we would go any other direction but to have one football field dedicated one field dedicated football so that's my opinion so quick clarification are you saying dedicated football no other painting no no no thank you thank you no okay no the football field can be used for soccer lacrosrosse. We can strike that also. Okay. So you're having at least one field striped to accommodate a full-foot ball. Okay. Yes. Yes. Okay. So all right. Well, I'm in agreement then. Okay. Because I definitely want to leverage the multi-use capability. Yes. However, I think where I'm stuck is the pain. So who holds that bag? So like if we would do permanent striping for football, yeah, so we would do that. And then, but then I'm just using a name placeholder. A colleague create recreation goes online December. They started getting processing participants for different programming pieces and they realized, oh, we got a paint soccer and lacrosse lines or whatever. How are we accommodating those differences? Like, are we putting lacrosse and soccer on? I say if we do football, we have to do it all. Does that make sense? If you wanted to do it all, adding lacrosse striping permanently is $40,000. And soccer is $40,000. So it would be $75, 75 for football plus 40 for soccer plus 40 for the cross and you need to pick which field you want them on. Where you can do all three on one. But just a point here, to strike a soccer field and a lacrosse field is a significant factor easier than football. I mean, the lines are pretty good. No, no, no. Yeah, I don't care about process, I care about dollars. So like, I'm saying, where will that 80K? Will we make calle Creek recreation? We probably need to put a plan in place rather than picking one sport at a time is what I'm saying. And I think we would wait to stripe it in winter of this year when Colleague Creek programming goes online and they know exactly which sports to stripe first, but that's just my thoughts. At least soccer and lacrosse can use Newtown Park now in Shake Rag. That's the difference. So if- Do we know how many families are playing football? I know we've talked about families moving out. Do we have any data on the number of kids that will be participating in K-5 football? If you have something to do, if the question should be other than on? If there was nothing available, will anybody come forward? That's, I mean, the other we were asking is there was never a field. The data from the Strategic Parks Plan, which is not as supportive of tackle football as some of the other sports. So that's what I'm concerned that we stri the field. We get 30 kids to play, right? And not enough to really leverage the football element. So that's my concern that we go fully stripe it. But if you're fully confident that we're gonna get 150, 108 kids or whatever the best data I have. I think it's really fun. Find me. Go ahead and then Bob. The best data I have is from your recreation and parks plan, which speaks to the trends that we have seen nationally, regionally, locally. To get more enrollment data, I would certainly want to reach out to some of our partners on our pack and Councilman D. Biasi, who has specific information from the Northview few team but the enrollment counts we have seen and heard locally are not particularly promising. Well I mean if we go only by the information that was in the survey from the parks plan then we ought to eliminate all the cricket fields. I mean come on. That cricket fields are like almost last and as far as the desire for cricket fields to John's Creek. But I hear what you're saying and I'm also saying from a standpoint that the program because the city hasn't supported the program in so many years, it has been slowly dwindling because there's nowhere to play. I mean, would our children want to hop offense? Seriously, do we want to hop offense and jump in and play football? Because there's nowhere to practice, nowhere to play. So the antidotic evidence is the fact that there's dwindling support, not because there's desires not there, there's nowhere to play. And Kento, in a way, it's kind of a negative self-fulfilling prophecy. Exactly. That's fine. I'm just saying in terms of paying and prioritizing the field space, shouldn't we let the enrollment data guide that decision making? So giving emotions and anecdotes out of it and not even having the national trend, determining Colley Creek recreation saying, hey, we got 250 kids that are signed up to play soccer, but we only got 40 for football, then we've made a miscalculation. But I'm not saying, but I will say this, that for some reason we've got football having to meet a threshold higher than any other sport. Thank you. And so we've got support that we've given to all these other to meet a threshold higher than any other sport. Thank you. And so we've got support that we've given to all these other sports. And I think that we want to try and make to the best of our ability, John Scrieka-Hum, for as many of these these sports as we can. I did have a question just to kind of throw something else in the mix. So the last memo regarding Colleague Creek, the maintenance contract, is that we had set aside like 700,650 somewhere in there. And it talked about transition from construction site to a recreational amenity. And to part of that was triscapes and the maintenance and all that. But so there's somebody left, but I don't know if that's been You know may all have got other plans or is that money that we can tap into for this to make this feel ready for if it is a priority of council We'll come back with some funding options for you. Yes, okay, but I There are some areas of colleague Creek that we are not building out as part of phase one that need to be bushogged So I need some money to prepare an essay park There are some areas of college that we are not building out as part of phase one that need to be bush-oct. So I need some money to prepare it as a park. But certainly, if it is, and it sounds like we're nearing consensus, if it is the consensus, we'll come back with some funding options as I shared it. It's a while before it could be scheduled to be implemented. As you have all agreed, we need to keep with the same company so we don't warden. And so my final question. You've not finished it. Oh, well, no. So I'm not disagreeing with the painted football, but I lines. I'm disagreeing on going at a whimsical approach. I think we need to be planful and start organizing this with college creek recreation on who's going to pay for it in how. So that's the point I want to make is that we can paint every field football. I don't care if that's the demand for it. I think we need to be more planful and not just doing football here, the right field across seven months from now and closing these different, we get them all done at the same time to bring the fields offline just for that limited time if we have the capability. Does that make sense? the painting of the fields, if you will, or the striping of the fields. If, when we send out the RFP, if the cost of entry, the cost of becoming this organization within John's Creek, okay, there's a potential expense to them that they, you know, X amount over X amount of years. Yeah, sorry, the grimace is a, I to make sure that when we find our recreational partner, we don't necessarily eliminate any partners based on preset cost determinations, especially since we don't. We have a very predictable partnership cost and value that we've used for our facility usage agreements at Newtown and OC that we've previously explored for ShakeRag. $75,000 is a lot of money for a nonprofit organization that may or may not exist already. So happy to look into it and explore it, but I don't want anyone to walk away with the assumption of, oh, this will be payback this year, no problem. It may be a very long period. It may be. Right, maybe $50 a usage or $10 a year. Right, right. So just, just a way. Over time. But I guess what I'm saying is that if there's a fixed cost for them to rent the field, this is the organization, right? So the way, once we select a partner, they kind of get right a first refusal. It's not exclusive use, but they get more use of the field. So new town rack gets use of our fields at Newtown Park and then when they don't need them for practice and play, we make them publicly available for rent and use. But first right refusal is there's a cost to that. There is, yes, there. So that is why we have the facility usage agreement. But the cost we're, the benefit we get is, is not making money off of the organization. It's that I don't have a gigantic recreation and parks team because I rely on these partners to handle the staffing and the running and the planning of the practices and the games and the trophy awards at the end of the season. So if you look at our recreation and parks approach, it's very different than a Roswell or an Al Fareda who has all of those people, like they run their rec leagues directly. They don't have partner nonprofits or private organizations. OC Park Athletic Association, a new ten record set up differently, once in a nonprofit, once not. But, yeah, there's just a lot more to that. No, I know. Okay, but. I'm way down in the weeds. I apologize. Let's go back up. Big picture. No, I understand. I understand. Just from standpoint, if there is some kind of cost, whether it's financially or intrinsic that you're asking, they're picking up some of the work that we would normally do in house, but they're doing, then I think we'd have to weigh it all out. I think I know where you're going. Okay, we're on the same page. That's a good question. So regarding the robot and the painting. How, you know, I realized that you're basically painting on plastic. Is that fair to say? Sure. Individual strands of synthetic material. Yes. So is this something that lasts a month, a quarter, a year? I am not the expert on that area, filling in for a friend who's on vacation. Gotcha. Weeks. Why would it be weeks? I mean, I hate to say it. I'm a little bit of a home craftsman myself. And so, I mean, it doesn't last forever, but I'm just saying, I mean, it's not like it just washes away immediately. It's a huge range. It's about 30 days. Yeah, 30 days. Yeah, 30 days. Okay. So does it mean we can use it robot for another? So you pay by the template? So. All right, so another... And I really meant to ask this off line, but so good old-fashioned Like the way you would typically do it on a regular grass field, which I guess is lime Is it lime that they put down? Or some kind of white powder? The chalk paint? Chalk is the most frequently called the string, tap the line, and then you use the little can of sand. So that can't be done on artificial turf? I think it falls right off. Okay. It does not work as well with the synthetic material. So these really are, these are our options. So I have to say that, when everything in considering the conversation that we have had as a council, with the youth football community over the last two or three years, I think that we would be really maybe, for like a better term baiting and switching or just not really following through when I think what we have communicated that our intentions are. And so for that reason, I've got two side with the permanent. And I agree, we can go permanent, but should we not look at lining everything up and figure out a plan of how that's gonna be paid for? Can I ask what I would argue with the next step? Like do we wanna consider additional? I don't know. like do we want to consider additional painting now so lacrosse or soccer? Could we start figuring out when the best timeline? Because I don't necessarily think October would be the best, but because I would say like middle of dead winter when it's not going to be utilized as much. But I would just advise to wait since they do already have, not OC, I'm sorry, but Newtown Park takes care of soccer and lacrosse and then Shake Rack also. So they have two homes to choose from. There may not be a big of a demand in colleague's career. Yeah, I mean, that's a very good point. The stitching is complicated. So we stitch. Now they literally have to stitch the permanent lines in, and that's why the war teeth are very critical. Because you've got the same manufacturer, same installer doing both. You don't want it to come apart. So once we have it, it's permanent. No, no. But I mean, if they do something wrong, you don't want two vendors fighting over what the problem is. That's why you want the warranty. That's why you want to do a quick leave so the warranty is in place. So, you know, between my comment about painting on plastic and sewing or the lines dissolve incredibly interesting, but we do have a consensus. I can definitely want to go for the permanent, but to Chris' point, I would hope to see like 100-place kits using that one. So, can I add something to that here? See, I grew up playing cricket. In this place, there are three batting cages. Six. Six. Look at it. That is absolutely... Somebody is honoring the resources. One particular game. We never asked how many kids will be playing before we allocated all that resources. That's what I might say. Look at the robotic thing which we are doing right now. By allocating so much money, we are encouraging people in this city to engage more in robotic design and so we are encouraging people by our gesture. Not so much as saying, if you are there, I'm going to give it to you. But again, we have programming data from major space though. I am not disordering with it, so I feel like I have to clarify. No, no, no, sir. I'm sporting the permit lines. I'm just saying I'd like us to be planful on who picks up the tab, because I think, again, like if we would do it in one fail sweep, we're looking at like, if we would do it for lacrosse soccer and one football field, we're looking at around 250K, 235. And so to your point, if I may use Larry as a representation of this, I think that we're on the same page, right? So we're in agreement that as funds come in, hopefully, over time, now I think that we're going to, it's going to take some time to rebuild the football community in John's Creek. But those funds can be designated towards coming back towards the investments that we've made. as an ancillary to this discussion, may there be a follow up at a subsequent meeting as to any other plan for lines for other sports or how they are going to be recouped in the future. The structure of the program at the back end. Yes, I agree. But I think we're all on the same page. The origin agreement is just process and timing. the back end. Yes. I agree. But I think we're all on the same page. I think we're all on the same page. The origin agreement is just process and timing. Yeah. So I think the key difference is that all the other sports we put the infrastructure in place and they started playing later. In the football folks have been asking and asking and asking too. I think they're just hanging on by their on by their By the tip of their fingers. Going with that notion probably once we strive it probably we might get more Encouragement from the team so I'm hopeful I can tell you this year there are 70 players at Northview and a their first time players That just from one school freshmanmen, that freshman and sophomore, that first couple years, they had the most recruits ever. And that's because there was a concerted effort to basically go out and bring people into the sport. But these people, these kids, never played before. Right. So that's why the scores are 50 to zero sometimes, because they never been exposed when they were younger to the sport. right. So there, and that's why the scores are 50 to zero sometimes because they never been exposed when they were younger to the sport. And how good would the Atlanta Braves be if they didn't have a foreign team? And I mean, aside from the winning and the losing, the other thing you have to consider is that, you know, I've heard this multiple times from different, you know, coaches and families that if you don't get that child involved in one of these activities early on, you're probably never going to get them involved. And so, you know, football is one avenue, but personally, I think that we want to do as a city everything we can to have some way of getting our youth involved in things that are outside, physical activity besides just being on their screen did in a virtual world. If you're making an investment on the infrastructure, like Bob mentioned the cricket, that's pretty much used, like if you walk in there, it's being used. So if you strive this football field and we see kids using it, that's exactly what we want. Like it's the maximum usage of the the dollars we are spending over practice times. That's the goal. Not literally but yeah but so so I think there's definitely yes consensus to go with tripping the field and so I think that we also have consensus for the sowing option, not the painted option. And so I think we've beat this horse again. So are we good to move on? Yes, but do you have everything that you need, Kimberly? I do. This is anticipated to be under $100,000. So if I come back, it may be later for a budget amendment to show you where the funding came from. But we will work to get this scheduled installed and sometime between now and then have a budget amendment to follow through the money. There will be follow-up conversations on many of the aspects you touched on, recreational partners, etc. But for now, yes, I have the direction I need. Thank you. Yeah, I knew. Just one. Us, the prepare and partner with colleague, re-creation, whatever that is as soon as possible. Yeah, so it was just an experience. And so I think we did talk at some point back when we were talking about the new parks director and how we've got a lot of moving parks going in the parks area, but so that we were going to try to get things stood up just as quickly as we could in terms of maybe advertising or reaching out of the community and so forth. So to his point, I think we're already kind of on fire. We are, just we gave you three options. One of us released the RFP immediately and you just wanted direction on how to strike the field. I did. I did. Just we are not actually actively pursuing the recreational partner. You said to wait till Collie Creek opened and then get that process started end of the summer early fall. So it is. Gotcha. Yes. Working on it. You're right. You did talk about it. thank you. Now I will just say, and this is my memory, which could be incorrect, but on that point, I thought that when we talked about this, that we had talked about running concurrently, as we're moving towards opening the part, we would also look at the possibility of reaching out and trying to find folks that may want to be involved in the conversation before that. Yes. Yes, and our backpack friends have done a great job of helping us find partners to talk to you. Thank you. All right, I never thought I'd get to say this again, but next item. Thank you. The next item is the annual vehicle replacement request for funding through the vehicle replacement fund for Frisco year 24. We have Director Campbell for presentation. Thank you Mr. Mayor. I'm going to use the passcode. There we go. Okay, so the city maintains a authorized pool of vehicles for an effective and efficient operations with public safety and the general administrative departments. The vehicle replacement of cruel fund provides the mechanism where funds are set aside for the planned replacement of existing vehicles. The proposed budget for 2024, which you'll see in a few weeks, will request about a million dollars for planned replacement of 16 vehicles as detailed in your agenda report. Given the long lead time for procurement and then the continued supply chain issues, Woodstaff is requesting is to administratively have the consensus of the council to begin the process administratively so that once the budget is adopted and ready for implementation on October 1st, that we're ready to go ahead and place this order, that we're not waiting until October 1st to begin the process. So that is the request before you tonight. If we can get consensus to start this process for the FY 24 vehicle replacements. And again, you'll see the budget on July 11th, it'll be detailed to you in a work session. Yeah, off for it, Bob. But isn't this a departure from normal budgetary allocations in approval? No, actually last year we asked for the same sort of administrative process to begin just a little bit earlier prior to adoption. But again, it's given the long lead time. So we, there are certain windows really for a lot of the vehicles with public safety that if we wait until October 1st, we're going to miss that one-dove opportunity to kind of place our order and get in line in the queue. Okay. I think I would authorize. Okay. No? Thank you, Ronnie. Being proactive and working with the lead times and bringing this up, so definitely support that. Thank you. Thank you. Director Kim, just a quick question here. Just because last year I do recall this talking about this same issue. Can you give me sort of an idea of what the best practices are with, say, the police vehicles, as far as how many miles they have or is it a five-year program? Is it, do we have a Hobbes meter that we can measure how many hours the motor's running? Just some kind of idea of what we're trading in. Sure, I'll tell you what, so there's not a meter on the cars for hours. So, buffer placement is five years, 100,000 miles on a patrol car. Administrative car is about seven to eight years, 150,000 on those. Fires equivalent to the same on just the trucks and vehicles minus the engines and the rescue trucks right there on a whole different replacement. Yeah. Obviously accidents so forth can speed that process up but we typically lose half a dozen vehicles a year to accidents. Right. So, and as you know by talk before, we're buying them at a state contract price, which is substantially lower than market price. So when we have a vehicle involved in an accident, the total on that vehicle getting places much lower than typically if it was a personal price. That's a different surprise. So, but you weigh those factors in. But the answer to your question, Roth, it's about five years, so in, but the answer question is rough. It's about five years, so 100,000 miles on a patrol vehicle. So, so that that falls in line with some averages that I've been reading as far as across different cities. It's 100 to 120,000 miles. Five years, typical, depending upon geographically how it's spread out. So this is, this is perfect. Sure. And there's some cars, as you know, being that that tend to run better for longer. So some of those staying the fleet for a little bit longer. Yeah. And sometimes you get a car that was built on Monday or something. It just been problems ever since. Sometimes those have replaced the sure shirts are paid. So on average. So so these vehicles when we dispose of them, so there's probably some kind of residual value. We're putting it on GovBid and we're selling and when we sell, let's say the proceeds, we get a couple thousand dollars for them. Are they going, is that, are those dollars going into the vehicle a cruel fund to go ahead to subsidize the next purchases. No, we're bringing those dollars back into the general fund and the thought is because the contributions into the vehicle replacement fund come from the general fund. They do, okay, so you're not directly, okay, that's fine. I'm on favor. All right, Chris. Good, thank you. Thank you. Man, I'm totally not. You got seven zero, so is this for, do we need to do anything? No, just consensus and willis to straight. Okay, yes. Thank you. And are you going to present the next one as well? Yes, okay, great. So the next item relates to setting the millage rate for 2023. Just recall for the Council establishment of the city's millage rate occurs in a series of steps. The first one is advertising the rate. Second might be reviewing the tax digest information in a work session. We then have conducting of public hearings and then ultimately we adopt a military and submit the appropriate paperwork to the county for implementation. We provided you with a very detailed report that provides the background on the purpose as well as the history of the city's millage rate. We've also provided you context on the current millage rate and how that compares to other cities within Fulton County and the historical rate for John's Creek. The purpose of tonight's work session is not to discuss the millage rate to be adopted for 2023, but rather what we're asking for is consensus on the rate to move forward with advertisement. As detailed in the final paragraphs of the memo, the advertised rate sets the ceiling of the rate that can be adopted but not the floor. And given that we only have one meeting in June, we thought to bring it to this meeting now, to allow us to position ourselves for the public hearings as we're detailed in the meeting and the agenda report that you received. The request again from staff is to advertise a steady millage rate of 3.986, which is our current millage rate per 1,000 of net assessed value for FY 2023 and then move forward in the process. Just as an FYI, the county mentioned to me that they're targeting getting the tax digest information to us on June 15th. So certainly if we get it on June 15th, that's going to be earlier than we've received it in past years. But there should be sufficient time for us to plan for the July workshop, a work session to share information from the tax digest and then move further in the. Millage rate setting process for 2023. Awesome. All right. Thank you, Ronnie. Ronnie, it would have been easier sell on me if you'd read it in the right in the headline saying this is the ceiling of the millage rate rather than the discussion on that. I'm for it. Thank you. Bill. I'm good for advertising at 3.986. I'm good also. Thank you. Bill. I'm good for it. What do I think at 3.986? I'm good also. Thank you. Thank you. I'm good for it, but like always, I've got a simple question. So last year, we're compressing the time that we're, the budget, we're going to work with the budget, because we wanted to give you more runway to better anticipate and see forecasting. Are you seeing things turn out the way you are planning as far as revenues coming in and expenses? Because remember a lot, we wanted to avoid it that 11 million at the back end. Correct. So as we are doing the final touches on the FY24 budget, yes, that's causing us to analyze revenues for this current year. Some are performing better than others. We are going to be presenting that information to you July 11th when we go over the budget for 2024. We'll also have a discussion on where we think we're going to end fiscal year 2023. The thought is also to then have a more focused discussion on FY 2023. Once the millage rate is set and adopted for 2023, because it has a cascading effect on both the current year budget as well as the future FY 24 budget. By putting this memo together, that tells me you've got confidence in that, based on either property values or business sales tax, that the revenues are tracking pretty well, because we're setting a ceiling here. Well, we would recommend setting a ceiling regardless of how the revenues are performing. It gives, again, obviously, the ceiling is the maximum. We can always adopt something lower than that. Right. So to link those two together, from my perspective, is not exactly what's driving this. The memo reflects kind of just the process and the timing of the process. The pulling up for the digest. And the data will follow. Yes. I'm all good. Thank you. So I'm all good. Thank you. So I'm good, but correct me here, Director Campbell, if I'm wrong, but we do have to mention like, so we'll come back, we'll get the digest, you'll have to put in a rollback rate, and so we'll have to advertise like 3.986 is a potential 12% increase over the rollback rate, right? In that advertisement. Correct. The way that it's worded in the advertisement in certainly Ron can help me with this. I believe it is captioned as a revenue increase and not a rate increase. So anytime you are adopting something other than the rollback rate that is referenced as a revenue increase, not a rate increase because the rate increase would be moving from your current rate to some other higher amount. Now I'm fine with it, but I was curious, so not necessarily for today, but I guess this question for Director Campbell and City Manager, Densmore. I'm curious of how utilization of the tax stabilization fund would be carried out. And that could be as easy as like we would take top line revenue from the milled rate, and that would be our final milled rate. Like we would adopt whatever milled rate we would would, and whatever delta between whatever amount of stabilization funds we utilize. So I'm curious how would we implement that process because I don't think we've utilized it since passing the surplus policy. So I'm just curious how we would execute. And then for my cohort here, I'm thinking we probably should consider some type of guidelines about rees. Not that any political body would do this, but I worry, like you could get lots of money in the stabilization fund right before an election and it's like, we'll save it and show we gave the biggest tax decrease or something like that. So I want to consider some guidelines in terms of executing that process. But that's down the road. But so would that be possible if we just get an email of how you all would see that functioning? Sure, I think we could give some thoughts on that. Okay. Yeah, perfect. Okay. I'm good as well. And so we're good. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And so we are done with our schedule business and we do have need for executive session. Mayor, I move that we adjourn to executive session where we plan to discuss lane legal and or personnel matters. Good, sir. All right, that was a second. All right. Discussion on the motion? They're saying none. All those in favor? And we are adjourned to go to executive session.