4/6/2026 Meeting Preview
We have a new city manager! Over the weekend, Michael Hicks was selected for the role after serving in an interim capacity since November 2025. I congratulate Mr. Hicks and I look forward to him leading with integrity, openness, and a clear sense of accountability to the people we serve. I anticipate a collaborative work environment where our decisions are made in the light and always in the best interest of College Park residents.
You’ll see below some of the agenda highlights for our first meeting in April. I’ve added information from the council agenda memos and background on items that may be of particular interest, along with my thoughts on those issues. You can watch our meetings on the city’s Facebook and YouTube pages. Our meetings are typically on the first and third Mondays of the month. Workshop Session begins at 6:00 pm; Regular Session begins at 7:30 pm; Executive Session, if necessary, takes place at the conclusion of the Regular Session.
You can access the full agenda packets here.
We welcome your attendance at our meetings, and public comment is available near the start of the meeting, before any actions are taken. You can speak at the meeting by signing up for public comment here, starting at 4:00 pm on the day of the meeting, or by signing up in person at City Hall starting at 4:00 pm. If you have feedback for Mayor and Council directly, you can email us.
In my preview of the November 17, 2025 meeting, I raised my concerns about the adoption of a new public comment policy that eliminated the ability for comments to be emailed and read into the record. This change was placed on the agenda the day before the meeting, leaving little opportunity for the public to weigh in on a significant shift in how we engage with our stakeholders. I continue to disagree with this decision. I cannot support initiatives that make it more difficult for people to have their voices heard.
A note on Community Enhancement Funds:
In FY 2025–26, each member of the governing body has been allocated $900,000 in community enhancement funds—$500,000 designated for capital projects and $400,000 for non-capital expenditures.
Unlike the formal budgeting process undertaken by staff, where every dollar is tied to a specific line item, my colleagues and I did not go through that level of detail when these enhancement funds were allocated. As a result, some of the items being funded through these accounts are appearing for the first time on the consent agenda without any prior public discussion.
To ensure you have a real opportunity to weigh in on how these public funds are used (especially given the recent changes to the public comment policy), I believe any community enhancement expenditure not specifically identified in the adopted budget should appear in the Regular Business section of the agenda, not the Consent Agenda.
As this fiscal year continues, I will provide updates detailing how your community enhancement dollars are being spent. You deserve to know where and how your tax dollars are being invested.
To see the latest spending information, visit How the Math is Mathing: An Ongoing Series.
WORKSHOP SESSION
1. ONMA Presentation Acknowledging Grant Winners of Old National Merchants Beautification Grant with Councilwoman Arnold and The City of College Park.
The Old National Corridor Beautification Initiative has produced real, visible results along a corridor in our city that deserves attention.
The information in the packet includes a thorough photo summary of completed work. However, there is no breakdown of how the $50,000 was administered (i.e., which businesses received awards, in what amounts, and through what selection process). I’m looking forward to learning more at the workshop session.
2. Presentation on the Fire & Rescue Public Safety Feasibility Study. Presented by Amber Batchelor with Batchelor & Bradley Insights Group LLC.
As College Park grows, our public safety infrastructure has to keep pace. The city previously issued a formal RFP for this exact study, received responses, and made no award, citing budget and timeline constraints. There is no information in the workshop packet as to what the RFP responses actually proposed and what made them unworkable. Staff is now proposing to award the contract to Batchelor & Bradley Insights Group, a firm already engaged by the city for executive retreat facilitation, for $30,000.
I support getting this study done and single-source procurement policies exist for legitimate reasons. It is also important to examine in detail when we deviate from our standard procedures.
3. Presentation of Traffic study for Rugby and Main Street in conjunction with GDOT. Presented by John Duke. This item is sponsored by Councilwoman Dr. Jamelle McKenzie.
The data in the traffic study, collected across multiple observation sessions from December 2025 through March 2026, shows that current traffic volumes do not support a four-lane configuration on that stretch of Main Street.
The proposal before Council is to request that GDOT re-stripe Main Street to a uniform three-lane configuration from Princeton Avenue to the East Point city limits, with the reclaimed space designated for pedestrian use. This is described in the presentation as Step 1 of a longer-term vision for the corridor.
REGULAR SESSION
8. Public Hearings
C. Public Hearing (First Reading) of an Ordinance to Amend Section 4-7(I) of the City Charter Relating to the Contracting and Purchasing Authority of the City Manager.
This is the first public hearing on a proposed charter amendment that would change how the City Manager's contracting and purchasing authority works. Currently, the City Charter sets a hard limit of $10,000. The City Manager cannot make purchases or enter contracts above that amount without Council approval.
This ordinance would remove that fixed dollar amount from the Charter entirely. Instead, the threshold would be set by ordinance, resolution, or the city's purchasing policy. The stated rationale is administrative flexibility, avoiding the need for a full charter amendment every time economic conditions change.
That flexibility cuts both ways. A charter amendment requires a formal, deliberate process with public notice and multiple readings. Moving the threshold to an ordinance means a future Council could raise it with far less process. If you have thoughts on the change, please join us for the public hearing and share your views.
9. Consent Agenda
As I’ve noted before, “[a]ccording to the Georgia Municipal Association’s Handbook for Mayors and Councilmembers, a consent agenda can be a useful tool when a governing body has a lot of business to cover. It typically includes noncontroversial items or those previously discussed and needing final approval, such as permit issuances, street closures, or bill authorizations. While a consent agenda can save time, it should never be used to bypass public participation or stifle open dialogue.”
There are a number of items in the Consent Agenda that warrant additional review.
B. Consideration of and action on a request to approve the replacement of playground equipment at Zupp Park by Kaboom at no cost to the City. The removal is a budgeted item GL#100 1100 54 7183 Ward 3 Community Enhancement Capital at the cost of no more than $50,000. This item is sponsored by Councilwoman Tracie Arnold.
KaBOOM! is a nationally recognized nonprofit that has done excellent work in communities across the country, and I am glad we are partnering with them again for a playground at Zupp Park.
Given the addition of the example contract in the packet, however, I do want to share some context about the most recent KaBOOM! build in our city, which took place at Embarcadero Club Apartments on Sullivan Road last spring. The city paid $8,500 directly to KaBOOM! as a community partner contribution for the purchase of equipment and city crews performed the site preparation work at the private apartment complex. The progress of the team was noted in the City Manager’s Report during that time.
Through subsequent Open Records Requests, it is clear that not only did city workers come onto private property to do work, but it appears our previous City Manager and one of my colleagues were aware it was happening.
I am not opposed to any part of our community getting a playground. But Embarcadero Club Apartments is a gated community, meaning the public at-large does not have access to the equipment. When tax dollars and city employees are used to improve private property, the public that funded that work has to be able to benefit from it.
C. Consideration of and action on a request to replace the GICC Kitchen Exhaust Fan (at the cost of $23,425.00). This is necessary to ensure compliance of fire and safety codes. This is also necessary to ensure uninterrupted service to clients and to maintain uninterrupted operations. This item is requested by Executive Director Yanous Barner. This is a budgeted item. Fund: Other Equipment Replace G/L #555-4970-54-7640. FY: 2025--2026. This will service Ward 2.
I do not know whether this work has already been completed. The language in the packet would suggest it has not been, but the City Manager signed off on the work on March 30.
The vendor's proposal is dated March 10, 2026. The proposal states in red text that pricing is valid for only 15 days, meaning it expired around March 25. The internal memo requesting Council approval is dated April 2, nearly a month after the quote was issued.
Our Purchasing Policies and Procedures Manual is clear on a few things. Any purchase over $10,000 requires a formal competitive solicitation, publicly advertised for a minimum of two weeks. There is no competitive process documented in the packet.
If this was an emergency, our policy requires a specific emergency purchase memo, Finance Director approval, and City Manager authorization, with Council ratification at the next meeting. None of that documentation appears in the packet, either. The policy also states that "failure to anticipate normal needs does not constitute an emergency." A quote obtained nearly a month before Council action does not suggest an emergency.
I have reached out to the City Manager with my questions about this item and will share additional information with you as I receive it.
UPDATE (8:45 am, 4/6/2026): Per Yanous Barner, Executive Director of the GICC, he and the City Manager have decided to take this item off of the agenda and put it out to bid.
J. Consideration of and action on a request to amend the existing piggyback agreement with Pinnacle Maintenance, LLC, increasing the contract amount by $201,000. This amendment will allow for the continued provision of essential landscape services in Ward 2.This item is being requested by Joe Carn, Mayor Pro-Tem. This is a budgeted item funded by the Tourist Product Development (TPD) account. GL Account# 275- 4975-52-6300 FY 2026
This is a request to increase an existing landscaping contract with Pinnacle Maintenance, LLC by $201,000 for work at the GICC campus. The funding source listed is the Tourist Product Development (TPD) account.
TPD funds come from the hotel-motel excise tax collected on hotel stays. Under Georgia law, specifically O.C.G.A. § 48-13-50.2(6), TPD funds must be spent on the "creation or expansion of physical attractions which are available and open to the public and which improve destination appeal to visitors, support visitors' experience, and are used by visitors." The statute also specifies that qualifying expenditures may include both capital costs and operating expenses.
The GICC is a convention and meeting facility, which is explicitly listed as a qualifying attraction under the statute. That means operating expenses associated with maintaining it, potentially including landscaping, could be an allowable use of TPD funds. I have reached out to the City Manager with questions about this item, as the agenda packet does not show it was reviewed by the City Attorney's office. I will share additional information with you as I receive it.
10. Regular Business
D. Consideration of a Resolution Expanding the Redevelopment Area of the City. This item is sponsored by Mayor Pro Tem Joe Carn.
Late last year, the Council approved the creation of a Redevelopment Plan that would allow the members of the Redevelopment Authority to have a wide range of powers that could put it in conflict with our Business and Industrial Development Authority. As part of the requirement for the plan, a map of the area that was to be considered as part of the Redevelopment Area was included.
This resolution would expand the Redevelopment Area to include Bill Evans Field, Badgett Stadium and the practice field to the west of the track at the stadium, along with four additional city-owned parcels to the immediate north of those properties, which would include the Hawks basketball court, the playground and the parking area at the southwest corner of College St. and John Calvin Ave. It would also include land owned by the College Park Housing Authority where the Longino and Lindsay senior buildings are located.
It would also add a seven acre parcel that is currently zoned as a park to the Six West Redevelopment Area. Given that it is on the west side of Herschel Road with no other portions of Six West on that side of the street, it is a somewhat unconventional addition to the Redevelopment Area.
The final expansions would come to the Old National Corridor area, adding 2260 Godby Rd., 2370 Godby Rd. and 2163 Godby Rd. The last two parcels were identified as the future location of a park on Godby Rd., and the Council authorized resolutions to acquire the land.
The addition of these parcels seems very deliberate. I hope we’ll hear more about the thought process behind their inclusion in the Redevelopment Area at the meeting.
Proposed Redevelopment Expansion Area (Marked with XX)
