Loading...
07-07-1980 Regular Meetingi July 7, 1980 The regular meeting of Mayor and Council was held pursuant to the Charter on July 7, 1980 at City Hall. The meeting was called to order by presiding officer Mayor Frank Johnson at 7:30 o'clock p.m. All Council members were present except for Jack Shinall who was on vacation. Also present was City Clerk Willouise Spivey, Finance Director Gunter Newsom, Al Cochran filling in for City Attorney Charles Camp, Police Chief Everett Little, Fire Chief Don Atkinson, Water Department Super- visor Larry Dunn, Parks and Recreation Director Bill Johnston, Civil Defense Director Jim Farley and representatives of the press. Invocation was given by Elbert Coalson, followed by the pledge to the flag. Citizens Reports: Mr. Ellenburg of Howard's Furniture represented several merchants in that area protesting the recent adoption -of the amendment to Section 6-95 of the sign ordinance, and asked that they be given the opportunity to speak. John Dickson of Dickson's Shopping Center asked that the sign ordinance be explained to them. Jim Hawkins stated the sign ordinance allowing for temporary signs was adopted prior to him coming onto Council. As of today, there are 49 signs in the City that are permitted, out of approximately 200 signs throughout the City. Our sign ordinance is very lax as compared to ordinances of some municipalities throughout this county. The portable signs were intended to be used as temporary signs, but most of the merchants are using them as permanent signs, and not permitting them. The purpose of this new ordinance was simply to clean up the City and make everybody live by the same rules. Elbert Coalson stated that in the future when ordinances are adopted which will affect the merchants of this city, it might be good to meet with them first and get their ideas. Mr. Ellenburg said he realized there were some problems with signs in the City, but he felt this ordinance was not properly advertised and a hasty decision had been made when it was adopted. Also, he felt the businessmen should have a say in this ordinance. Jim Hawkins said he would be happy to meet with the merchants, but he wished they had come forward prior to adoption of the ordinance. -Jim said he would set up a meeting with them, and would notify everyone concerned of the date and time. Sue Brissey stated since there were so many merchants here tonight, she would like to ask their cooperation in keeping their store fronts and streets clean and asked why citizens were allowed to place signs on utility poles. Also, if the ordinances aren't going to be enforced, they should be eliminated. Nick Kipreos, owner of Fat Boy Restaurant, questioned the use of political signs in the City and it was explained to him that anyone seeking political office was required to post a $500 bond with the City to guarantee the removal of the signs. Mr. Kipreos also complained of the cable reels.stored in the Southern Bell parking lot next to his business. Mayor Johnson stated he did not think we were legally in a position to require their removal, as their zoning classification allowed for outside storage. Olivia Morris represented the Smyrna Swim Team -.Parent -Association and -said Smyrna was hosting the District Swim Meet on August;lst and 2nd. She.asked Council -to approve the purchase of an ad for their program at $150.00 for full page. Elbert Coalson said.i.t had been the policy of Council,to not purchase any ads, except for the Wills and Campbell Booster Club each year, and recommended that each Council. member contribute $20.00 each to -pay for the ad, which they did. Jack Beals, a resident of Spring Drive expressed his support for approval of the ordinance concerning vicious dogs which was on the agenda tonight, due to several incidences in his neighorbood recently. He:was concerned about some of the wording in the ordinance and the City's ability to enforce it. Mayor Johnson stated the most difficult part in enforcing the.ordinance would be in defining a vicious dog, and after adoption of the ordinance it would have to be put to practical use to see if it would stand up. Mayor Johnson thanked Mr. Beals for his support. Annexation: King Springs Baptist,Church requested annexation ofproperty on King Springs Road, located in Land Lots 481,.527 and 528,,the legal=description read and made a part of the minutes of June 16, 1980. There was no opposition to the annexation. Max Bacon made a motion the property be annexed into the City, to become a part of Ward 2. John Steely seconded the motion which carried by a 6-0 vote. There were no commercial building permits. Ordinance -Amendment: Max Bacon read the following proposed amendment.to the Code of Ordinances, made a motion Chapter 4, Animals and Fowl, Article II, Dogs, Section 4-31 and it be approved: 0 (Continuaiton of July 7, 1980 Meeting) "(c) No dog of dangerous or vicious propensities or tendencies whether vaccinated against rabies or not shall be kept or harbored any time within the limits of the City and it shall be unlawful for the owner to keep or harbor such dog within the limits of the City, unless such dog is confined within a building or secure enclosure. (d) The owner of any vicious animal which is not confined in a building or secure enclosure or any person who shall release either willfully or through a failure to exercise due care or control or takes such animal out of such building or secure_ enclosure in such a manner which is likely to cause injury to another person or damage to the property of another person shall be in violation of this ordinance and said animal shall be permanently confined or humanely destroyed. (e) Any dangerous or vicious dog found running at large within the City after the owner thereof has previous knowledge or notice that such dog is dangerous or vicious may be killed by any police officer or animal control worker of the City without the officer or worker having to catch or impound such dog. (f) Dogs evidencing abnormal inclination to attack or bite persons or other animals without provocation shall be conclusively presumed to be dangerous or vicious dogs. (g) Dogs which on more than one occasion exhibit vicious or destructive propen- sities or tendencies including but not limited to threatening attitude without provocation, chasing, biting, or otherwise attacking or attempting to attack any other domestic animal or human, shall be presumed to be a dangerous or vicious dog. (h) This section shall not apply to guard dogs used by licensed security service or dogs used by law enforcement agencies. (i) Upon receipt of a citation signed by two (2) or more residents of Cobb County, each complaintant residing in separate dwellings in the vicinity in which the violation and issue occurred, made under oath before a committing magistrate stating the nature and date of the act, the name of the owner of the animal, the address of the owner and a description of the animal doing such act, the Animal Control Officer shall investigate the complaint to determine whether the act complained of violated this ordinance. (j) Upon it coming to the attention of the Rabies Control Unit of the City that the owner of a vicious dog resides within the city limits of the City of Smyrna, said owner shall be notified of such classification and thereafter shall keep said animal confined within a fence or other structure with appropriate posting of warnings to prevent harm to other citizens." Jim Tolleson seconded the motion to approve the amendment. There was further discussion and questions from Mrs. Jack Beals concerning section (d) of the ordi- nance in the definition of a "secure enclosure." Attorney Al Cochran advised that if a dog was confined in a secure enclosure, even though it had killed another animal within that enclosure, the City would not have the power to remove the dog. Under Georgia law, a dog only has to bite once to be determined vicious and this ordinance is actually stronger than the Georgia law. It was Mr. Cochran's opinion that it would be unconstitutional to have an ordinance any more stringent than this one. Following further discussion, vote on the motion to approve the amendment carried by a 6-0 vote. Gene McCord presented a status report to each Council member concerning his efforts in securing State and Federal funds for the City. Mr. McCord stated that a grant application for $84,500 had been submitted through the State Crime Commission for communication equipment for the Police Department, and is finalizing at this time another grant application for funding on the Pasadena Road project, which should be culminated this week. There are other priority items that he is working on, but due to the complexities and legal requirements they will not be identified until a later date. Mr. McCord stated he was working very closely with local officials, as well as ,State and Federal officials as needed. Mayor Johnson said we would have a question and answer period later in the meeting, after everyone had read his report. Elbert Coalson made a motion the minutes of June 2, 1980 be approved as submitted. Jim Tolleson seconded the motion which carried by a 6-0 vote. Elbert Coalson made a motion the minutes of June 16, 1980 be approved as submitted. Max Bacon seconded the motion which carried by a 6-0 vote. (Continuation of July 7, 1980 Meeting) Mayor Johnson stated the City owns a small lot adjacent, to the Depot on Atlanta Road and Mr. J. C. Steinmetz, owner of the Depot had requested permission to lease this lot, to be paved and used for parking facilities. Mayor Johnson suggested our city attorney prepare a lease, with Mr. Steinmetz paying the attorney fee, and the City lease it to him at a minimal fee with a 60-day cancellation clause on the part of the City. Following discussion, it was agreed that Jerry Mills would work with Mr. Steinmetz on this request, and have a lease prepared for Council approval. Mayor's Report: "Council has met on several occasions and have not come to a conclusion on what route to take with regards to balancing the budget. Everyone is well aware that we are falling short of necessary funds to meet our demands for expenses. We have watched the budgets just about as closely as we can and the figure of $576,345 is what we have worked down to, and that is after taking out the figure of $50,000 that was in error. I thought I would try to make you aware of where some of this deficit comes from. Our projected revenues for this year are $249,542 short of our revenues for fiscal year 1980. With a downturn in the economy, we are almost $17,000 short on building permits. If we have a severe or dramatic upturn in the economy this figure might not be that accurate, but we don't anticipate that the upturn in the economy will be that significant, so we are looking at being actually $16,900 short on building permits. Parks and Recreation will have a deficit of near $2,000. The franchise taxes which come from utilities are projected to be about $4,000 short of last year -- that reason being that franchise taxes are paid on gross revenues of the telephone company, Georgia Power Company and Atlanta Gas Light Company, and due to people being more aware of the cost of services and energy cost they are turning down their thermostats. Our water revenue and transfer accounts will amount to somewhere over $100,000 -- in the neighborhood of $135,000 to $140,000 short of what was transferred last year from water revenue into the general fund. Our CETA program has been cut. At the present time we have about 6 employees left on CETA and they have been terminated as of June 30th. CETA funds were terminated as of last July 30th, leaving a deficit of $101,027. Our revenue sharing, after considering the advice of the National League of Cities which indicated that revenue sharing would again be cut for all.cities and using their figures for percentages, will mean about $35,780 loss in revenue sharing. When you take'all those figures and add them together, then you are looking at a deficit amount of.revenue. Our city is not one that addresses itself in a favorable way towards the question of inflation. Inflation running at the rate of about 13% has drastically cut into the funds that the City has to spent. Gasoline is up, cost of materials is up, cost of vehicles is up., and cost of equipment is up dramatically, because of inflation.; Inflation is.certainly one of those prevailing factors that causes our dollars to not go near so far. The gasoline bill for our city is astronomical- as compared to the same gasoline cost of 2 or 3 years ago. Everything.costs more and it forces our dollars to have to stretch a lot further. Last year we bought very few capital items and there -were some that we needed. We did that last year -and year before last we ran in the black on.our budget for the first time in a couple of years and I had hoped we would have the figures tonight on our audit which is in progress now, but it will not be ready for 3 or 4 more days.We don't know exactly where we stand now, but we are hoping it would be 1% either way. We have to be very careful about staying within our expenditures by departments and we hope.that we have done that this year, but at this point we do not know. In June, 1978, we had 247 employees in the City full time. As of June 30th this year, we were down to 199 employees full time and we feel that has been a drastic measure and one of the reasons for being able to stay within our budget year before.last and hopefully, this past year. On the expenditure side, where we have a reduction in revenues, we:are actually up -about $326,000. after looking at our budget as closely as'we know how..and cutting out everything we.feel like we can and still operate as a city and provide services, and not live so •frugally that we are not in a position to continuously build a vehicular pool in Sanitation, Parks and Police. We have to make some degree of,purchases. Our salary outlay is a_ great part.of our expenditures and just to give our employees a 5% merit increase will cost $168,292. When you add the department heads to that, you are looking at something like $170,000 of $175,000. We are short on.revenues and long on expen- ditures, and the net result of that is that we are actually 6.33% short on revenues from last.year and.our expenditures are 8.29% in -.excess of last year which gives us a shortfall in our budget of $576,345. In the last couple of,weeks there has been a series of newspaper articles relating to the question of the financial status of our city, and we did have a list of things -that we might do in order to balance our budget. Some of those things included letting the county assume the responsibility of fire protection of our citizens. Our Fire budget is $900,000. Next on the -list was the question of.turning the Parks Department over to the county. Our Parks budget is $476,000. Another question on the list we prepared, which was (Continuation of July 7, 1980 Meeting) just for study,.was that we turn thelLibrary over to the county. This budget is $90,000. We looked at the possibility of a millage tax -increase. The City -hasn't gone up on taxes in quite a number of years other than the fact that the reappraisal of property -by the State did cause the county to go up.according to the appraisal. We have lived so frugally over the years, that about 6 years ago the millage was at 15 mills and today, -it is 12 mills, being cut by this administration one -quarter mill. -In Mayor,Bacon's administration there was a.millage decrease. In face.of all the businesses and occupations going up, the City has been going down in cost and have not asked for any type of adjustment. One mill of taxes would bring in about $125,000. (Max Bacon stated that -during Mayor'Bacon's administration, there was not a millage decrease. John -Steely asked how much a one mill tax increase would affect a citizen if their home was assessed at $40,000. Mayor Johnson replied that on,a $50;000 assessment, you would figure:40% of that which would -:be $20,000. A two mill increase times $20,000 would be $4Vper year increase.) Another question on that list was how many employees.could.be laid off to come to $575,000, and we were looking at laying off 30 employees: All of these things, from some that had significance to some that were just put on the list, I suppose; for reading purposes, were.just some options that -we had. �Those.items'are still under discussion and they are-options,that we have. Somewhere inbetween some, or all of those, is the question of where.we are going to"find $576,000. We can go back through the budget, line item byline item, department -by department, and we can rework the entire budget, -and I think we will. come pretty much to the same -figures. We won't find $576,000. So gentlemen, we have a question of serious magnitude in front of US. We are going to need within the next few days, as elected officials exercising the very finest example of prudence and understanding and competence between all of -us, to look at this budget in an objective -way and to look at the plight we have before us in an objective way and make the best decision that we can possibly make for -this city. All of that might paint a gloomy picture, but it's really not that gloomy. Our city is in excellent financial condition. We are not in bad financial condition -- the problem is that we have a problem balancing this budget and it is going to take some drastic measures to get it balanced. The City is in good sound financial condition, and I don't take exception to that -- I'm just saying that we have got to take some steps to balance this budget because our city lives primarily from ad valorem taxes. This is nothing in the world but a business -- a business of serving people. It is up to thisbody to be sure that we expend those funds that we'get and provide the very best service for that.money. That's our charge and our goal and I'm sure each one�of you agree with me. We just need to get our act together in the next few days because we have a serious question about how to balance this budget and no one wants to face a hard question. But we've got a hard question here and I challenge each one of you to join together and put anything else aside. Let's get this budget put together. This is just exactly as much our charge to add 2 mills to this next digest as it is to take away 2 mills when it's not needed. It's our responsibility to see what needs to be done. If we need to make drastic cuts in any way to make sure that this city will remain sound, then it is our elected charge to be sure that we look at that decision, not for any other reason than what is good.for this city and what you were elected to do. Gentlemen, I,charge you to work together on this, because we have a serious question." Committee Reports: Jim Tolleson said he appreciated Mayor Johnson's statement, and in that same vein he wanted to read a statement: "I want to say some things tonight that should have been said several months ago. I want to try to point out some things that I feel are contributing to the unsuccessful way our city affairs are being handled. First, our committees don't function the way they should. By that, I mean the committees are.set up by the city charter to oversee each department. But the city charter does not say that the chairman of the committee should run the day to day operation of the depart- ment. The situation exists today, and it's totally wrong. It.takes away the initiative from our department heads, confuses the employees under that department head and causes loss of respect, in some cases,'for the department head. It can't help but cause a department to do unwise favors for the particular council chairman, or his ward. Let's let the department -head pick what street should be recurbed or resurfaced through his committee. Let's let the department head and the finance director prepare his budget and submit it to the entire council for approval. One-man domination has got to stop. The second thing I see that must be done before this governing body can get back on the road to recovery and start moving again the way we should, is that we have to re-establish the trust in each other, and I suggest we start tonight just like you said. But first, we have to take care of a few old problems. We are being told about our bad financial condition, somewhere in the neighborhood of a $600,000 deficit for the FY80-81 budget, and I frankly don't believe it. Here's why I don't, or. why I don't know what to believe. We met at 5:00 p.m. on June 12th to discuss the budget for the first time as a (Continuation of July 7, 1980 Meeting) complete council. We were given a list of several options to consider as to possible ways of balancing the new budget. Some of the options were quite drastic, as everyone now knows -- turning over the Fire Department, Library and Parks to the county, laying off 40 or 50 people, or even having a large tax increase. Options to be considered as drastic action. Mayor, you said when we left that meeting something like "due to the sensitivity of some of the options that we should keep it in that room -- not to discuss them -out of that room." What you were saying, and I agree, is that it would do nothing but get everybody, citizens and employees alike, upset -- that we were to consider the options. One week later the story appeared in the Marietta Journal. An irresponsible councilman for whatever reason, gave the story to the paper in detail. What purpose did it serve? It served to embarrass the citizens of this city, the employees of the City, and the city council. But Mr. Councilman, you did even more than that. You destroyed any confidence we had in each other, and the confidence the employees or citizens of this city had in us. I am embarrassed for you, and the entire city. Because of what you have done and because of no confidence in the budget figures presented to me, I will not consider adoption of a budget until I see the audit figures now underway by Pate & Associates. Mr. Mayor, I also want to request that you do everything in your power to identify which councilman betrayed the trust and loyalty of this council and once he is identified he must be censured by no less than. removal from all committee assignments. Mr. Mayor, it's no threat, but if you won't do it, the majority of this council will." Max Bacon stated the Employees Benefit Committee for several months had been inter- viewing several companies that have proposed a deferred compensation program to the City. After several weeks of interviewing firms, the committee has decided tonight to authorize the Hartford Variable and Equity Company to implement a system into the City. Hartford has 350 other similar type municipalities that they deal with and tonight Mr..Chuck LaBarbera, a. field representative for•Hartford, is here to answer any questions we might have. Mr. LaBarbera explained that deferred compensation is-a.fringe benefit which can be.offered to employees, at no cost to the City. It is a voluntary°program that enables employees to set aside.a portion of their salary using before -tax dollars to go to work for them. Legislation which made this possible was passed in:November,, 1978, and allowsindividuals working for municipalities to set aside up to one-fourth°of their salary, not to.exceed $7500 yearly. This contract will include elected officials, as well as city employees. Individuals participating in -the plan would receive a.quarterly statement directly from the Hartford and the•City would receive a quarterly report as to the perfor- mance in the accounts, for their total investment package. Max Bacon made a motion that Hartford Variable.-and•Equity. Company be -authorized to implement a..deferred. compensation program in the City. John Steely.seconded the motion. Max said there were approximately 10 or 12 companies screened for this program, and the committee felt than Hartford offered the best program.- After -further discussion, vote on the motion carried bya'6-0 vote. Max Bacon said he would also l ike'to comment on the budget problem, and thatthe newspaper had never contacted him for a statement. His statement was as follows: "The meeting we did have on the budget was very informal and lasted less than 45 minutes, and some things were discussed that did not appear in the newspaper article. The things that'we did discuss were quite drastic, and it wasthe first time I had seen the alternatives,. I was floored, to say the least. Being a new council member, I find it hard to believe the City is in -this bad a financial shape. In the latter part of November, -I discussed it at great lengths with .a.member of,.the Finance Committee and at this time this person assured.me•that the City was in tremendous financial shape - couldn't be better.. However, now I'am faced with over a $500,000 deficit. Some'of .the figures that have been brought to us I find.hard o believe, and I'm not calling anybody.a liar, I don't want you to misunderstand me.. For someone to sit in that room and.tell me the City is..in good financial shape and, nine months later we -are in -the hole .this bad is hard for me to believe. The thing that upsets me equally is that this meeting was supposed to be.in!confidence due to the sensitive nature of it. Turning over the Fire Department, Parks or.Library is not something you do overnight. This would have taken several weeks to.complete, if we had decided to take'this route. Nowwe have somewhat of a chaotic situation here where employees don't know how long they will be employed, a -Fire Department that does not know if they are going to the county tomorrow, citizens that don't know from one day -to the.next if they -are going to,have a,5 mill tax increase or not. The information that was given to the .paper was fairly accurate, it was everything that we discussed in there. But it's just beyond me why the person that gave them the information would give it to them.- I.believe it's now time for.the Mayor to take some type of necessary action to find out who released this information to the papers. It appears to me that we have a leak. I think the Mayor needs to take (Continuation of July 7, 1980 Meeting) some type of strong action to correct this if he wants any type of trust among the council. As for alternatives for balancing the budget, I will not vote to turn over our Fire Department to the county and until we get a complete audit from Page & Associates, I will not vote on any type budget measures at all." Mayor Johnson stated:he did not think we,would consider voting on the budget, until -we receive our audit. Jerry Mills made a motion that the City operate under the -old budget, until the new budget can be approved. John Steely seconded the motion. Mayor -Johnson said he would like to have a clear understanding that we make absolutely no expenditures other than -day-to-day operations until after adoption of the new budget. Elbert Coalsori asked if the employee's raises would be retroactive to July lst:after the budget•was adopted:, Jerry Mills explained the 5% included in the budget was not for cost -of -living, but was the standard 5% merit increase employees receive on their anniversary date:• ,Vote on the motion carried by a 6-0•vote. • Jim.Hawkins­thanked Mayor Johnson for.his remarks and information:to the people as;to our financial situation and -made the following.statement:: "There have been a lot of rumors around the City as to what happened to,the City. Back in August we were told the City was in the best financial condition we had been in in many years. Based on the information given me at that time, I was told that we would have a slight windfall in our taxes and could afford a one - quarter mill rollback. That was a motion -by the Mayor and -Finance -Committee, and I voted for that millage reduction. Now it is hard for me to conceive how this has happened -- the $600,000 deficit -- in such a short time. I have been serving on the Finance Committee since January, 1980, and in all those hearings I have sat in on, practically none of the suggestions that were given to us at this meeting in June were ever brought up. Particularly, I am talking about turning the Fire Department, Parks and Recreation and the Library over to the county. We had some very informal discussions on possible tax increases or employee layoffs. These were the only solutions discussed by the Finance Committee and they were simply discussions. I think the worst thing that has happened in this whole thing is that in an informal meeting we are presented with a list of so-called suggestions and we are told by the -Mayor that they are merely suggestions, which they were, and felt like it would be beneficial for everybody to go home and study them and get our ideas together as to what we should do and we would set up,a meeting in the future. I couldn't have agreed more with him; I -thought that's what .we should have done. Im the next couple of days as I was pondering over these different options I picked up my local newspaper and read the whole story on the front.page. I'm a little bit lost in confidence as to what we're supposed to be doing on the Finance Committee. I'm supposed to be a member of that committee and I'm not informed of these things -- that the council was "leaning towards giving our Fire Department to the county." I never seriously•considered that,as an option and I don't believe the council would consider it as an option. In fact, we discussed it for maybe 15 minutes. A move that drastic takes probably months of prepara- tion. •-There were many other suggestions :that were left out of the article. I 7j certainly at this time,,would not support turning the -Fire Department over for: several reasons. Number one, it would not save the taxpayers any money because at the present time we are getting a discount on county millage for having our own Fire Department. If we turn our Fire Department over to the county, they simply increase the amount of millage on county taxes, so regardless of what pocket it comes out of, it still costs you the same amount of money. I might add that by law, the county can charge from 3 to 5 mills for fire protection, so legally, they could charge us more for fire protection than what we are paying now. But, in the vein of suggestions, I merely took it as a suggestion. I think this points out one thing that we need to work on and that is, that if we are going to solve these financial problems, and I think we can, then we as a body are going to have to start drawing on the resources of all seven councilmen. We cannot, any longer, afford to have one or possibly two councilmen dictate to the rest of this body what will and will not be done. I dont' mean to be grandstanding,•and I certainly am not going to call any names. But I think we need to take a long, serious look at restructuring some of our committees to equal out the responsibilities of all councilmen. Another thing that we are going to have to insist on is that this council is going to have to get monthly budget statements to tell where we stand financially. We have not received these on a regular basis for 22 years, and it is very difficult for a councilman to come up here every day and find out.what the financial situation of the City is. My recommendation, Mr. Mayor, is that we all start working as a team, that we all start informing the entire council of the financial situation, and that you as Mayor take a strong look at restructuring some of the committees where certain councilmen are given far more authority than other councilmen." (Continuation of July 7, 1980 Meeting) Elbert Coalson said,he had called the reporter from the Marietta Journal to see who the source of information concerning the budget was. Elbert said he knew she wouldn't tell him -- it was her job not to -- and he appreciated that. Elbert said he had been to City Hall and couldn't find the source. But one day it would pop up, and there would be one of the employees looking for a job if he had any- thing to do with it. Mr. Coalson said it was high time the council was reunited and try to work this budget out for the City. We are not doing the citizens of this town justice. There is no way we can work up a budget, divided as we are. His suggestion was that we bury the past and get down to work and try to get a budget for this city. John Steely said he, too,. took offense to the article written in the paper and -knew it was no fault of the reporters;:jthey-�were only doing-wfiati-itheys�wer,e=-.paidr:to do, to write stories regardless of how they get them. John said he agreed with everybody, that unity is the only thing to bring this group back on its feet. He, too, would like to find where the article came from, but that's. neither here nor there, he would like to see the council joined together and become one body again. John thanked Bill Johnston and his staff for the good job they did on the July 4th celebration. Announcements: Jonquil Breakfast on July 16th at 8:00 a.m. at Fair's Restaurant and the next council meeting on July 21st. Meeting adjourned at 9:24 p.m. July 21, 1980 The regular meeting of Mayor and Council was held July 21, 1980 at Smyrna City Hall. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 o'clock p.m. by presiding officer Mayor Frank Johnson. All Council members were present. Also present was City Clerk Willouise Spivey, City Attorney Charles E. Camp, Finance Director Gunter Newsom, Police Chief R..E. Little, Fire Chief Don Atkinson, Parks:and Recreation Director Bill Johnston, Assistant Public Works Director Vic Broyles, Building Inspector Dan Steely, Civil Defense Director Jim Farley and representatives of the press. Invocation was given by Elbert Coalson, followed by the pledge to the flag. Citizens Reports: Leon Hood reported that ex -Councilman Clarence Canada was in the hospital and asked that.he and his family be remembered in everyone's prayers. Variance Request: Jeff Stevenson, Manager of Arbor Lake Apartments asked that his request for a variance from the sign ordinance be tabled and presented at a later meeting. John Steely made a motion the request be tabled. Jack Shinall seconded the motion which carried by a 7-0 vote. Variance Request: Jack Boone requested a variance from the setback requirement of 40' to 30' for the construction of a building on Bourne Street which would be used for a combination office/warehouse. Mr. Boone stated this construction would not be out of line with the other buildings on the street. Mr. Hiram Singleton, chairman of the building committee at Welcome All Baptist Church said the church, as the adjoining property owner, had no objections to the variance. Bourne Drive was formerly called Russell Avenue and was deeded to Jack Boone and Welcome All Baptist Church some time ago and the paved area being used by the church for parking is actually property belonging to Mr. Boone, which he has been letting them use. Elbert Coalson made a motion the variance be granted. Jack Shinall seconded the motion which carried by a 7-0 vote. Residential Business License: Ms. Lillian Pruitt, 2750 Ivanhoe Lane, requested a residential business license to operate an interior decorating service. There was no opposition to the request. John Steely made a motion the license be granted. Jim Tolleson seconded the motion which carried by a 7-0 vote.