by Jason Wright / Appen Newspapers
January 19, 2009 MILTON - A discussion concerning Fulton's response to Milton's intergovernmental agreement (IGA) and sewer map passed in September 2008 turned into a verbal smackdown Jan. 12 when council members disagreed yet again whether the map and new provisions constituted "sewer extension."
City Attorney Ken Jarrard and City Manager Mort Smedley had met Jan. 12 with Fulton County Interim County Attorney Larry Ramsey to discuss discrepancies between Fulton's original 2006 sewer agreement and Milton's new one.
Fulton said it wants two things: Milton must recognize existing lines in the ground that would not affect service, which Jarrard said would be no problem. Also seven lots that Milton had not included in its map must be lumped in with the serviceable area.
Jarrard said he's tried to get Fulton to agree to Milton's map, which he said will cover 95 percent of the service area, and that they can negotiate when it comes to those seven lots. If not, everything reverts back to Fulton's original 2006 IGA, rendering Milton's work moot.He said Fulton authorities have taken it into consideration. Ramsey could not be reached for a comment.
Then Mayor Joe Lockwood opened a can of worms by saying the seven lots probably would not be considered an "extension of service" because they were included in Fulton's map in the first place.
Councilwoman Julie Zahner Bailey took exception to that position and said anything new would be sewer extension. She then said the map passed in September was sewer extension, and hypothesized the whole thing might have something to do with county water and sewer usage being down.
"I don't think we would need to be the tool to increase revenue," she said.Lockwood, Karen Thurman, Burt Hewitt and Bill Lusk outvoted Zahner Bailey, Tina D'Aversa and Alan Tart to pass the map. At the heart of the issue were those two little words – sewer extension.Lockwood said that some members "firmly believe [the September map] was not sewer extension." Karen Thurman agreed and asked Community Development Director Alice Wakefield if she thought the map was sewer extension.Wakefield said no.
Zahner Bailey countered by asking Jarrard if the seven new lots were.He said yes, under the "working definition used at the time."
After an uneasy silence and several more jabs back and forth, it was decided to let negotiations take their course and see what happens.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
25 comments:
The sad truth is Councilmember Bailey will kill herself on the sewer issue to make something out of it that it is not, and she will probably end up being buried in a septic tank?
I just don't understand why she continues to insist that this would be the City of Milton "extending sewer service" when it was FULTON COUNTY that actually placed these 7 parcels on THEIR map...before the CITY OF MILTON even existed...
Why does she think that the City of Milton has any right to make changes to what a previous governing body allowed?
I'm sure many wish there would be more "uneasy silence" out of Bailey.
She has a wire crossed in her brain.
Let's just ignore the city attorney 'coz he may be right and we don't like what he has to say.
I think in this ecomomy we all realized we need more commercial tax money like Alpharetta, but to accomplish that we have to get rid of Jules.
The economy will recover as it historically has. Let's not use our current economic situation as an excuse to irreversibly over-develop Milton.
Hey "Coz" You should ask the city attorney what he has to say about your wife? You might be supprised!
Doesn't matter what the attorney thinks personally about anyone. What matters is that he's doing his job and the council majority seems to be ignoring his expertise.
Actually council is following his recommendations. A certain council member can continue to try to put him on the spot, but this too will pass.
The attorney's opinion on the sewer extension is on public record and available to everyone. As are the words of the mayor and other council members who continue to say and do otherwise.
To say that the attorney is being "put on the spot" to state his professional opinion is ridiculous. The man is doing his job. So is Councilwoman Bailey who asked him to speak on record. It's obvious you just don't like what they have to say.
This entire fiasco is nothing more than bureaucratic BS. If Fulton County did, in fact, place the 7 on map, sewer it and move on.
I would expect the response to be "let's call a meeting to see if we should call a meeting", and go from there.
This city would be an over developed, crowded sprawling mess, if it weren’t for Julie Bailey. Thanks Julie.
What do you mean would be, it is already.
Interestingly if you ask many die hard Julie fans, they have seen her true colors when they need her help.
They've still elected her twice. That speaks volumes about her service to the community. Thank you, Julie.
Yea, look at her competition and who supported her. A dog could have won that one.
If you only knew the real JZB?
Imagine if you differed on your opinion of something with you. Guess what will happen?
I'd put my big girl panties on and move on.
And she would stab you in the back real quick "big girl"!
Wonder if Joe's or Burt's knife is available.
Burt will only make his knife available if Joe tells him to.
He does not have a thought, opinion or vote of his own that isn't in line with what Joe wants.
Amen to above. Get a backbone Burt and start living up to your campaign promises. You look like a worm up there.
Actually if you listen closely, when Burt does speak it is with very good common sense and is usually supported by the majority. Unlike others that run their mouth so much just to hear themselves "for the record", that no one listens.
Talk about someone not having a backbone, just listen to Tart and try to figure out how long it took for Julie to craft his pre-written speech?
Post a Comment