The Covington City Council met for a work session Monday night to discuss topics from financial support for Newton County Tomorrow (NCT) to cemetery maintenance. [See “Roseberry makes case for NCT at Covington work session.”]

In response to complaints received and pressure from the parking problems downtown on the Covington Square, the Covington City Council reviewed its sign ordinance at Monday’s work session.

“During the original primaries, there were lots of signs [in the back] of trucks parked around the square. The question was raised -- can we do anything about it?” City Manager Leigh Anne Knight said.

She told council members the city’ sign ordinance was last “tweaked” in 2014, but that ordinance was written in 2008.

Randy Vinson, Planning and Zoning Director, read from the ordinance, saying that signs create visual clutter so they should be limited in size and color. They need to be placed in safe locations with proper and safe illumination.

“That’s what we can regulate,” Vinson said. “Size, location, materials ... It does not have anything to do with what the signs say.”

Vehicular signs, Knight said, were permitted by the ordinance, but the cars or trucks with the signs could only be placed in close proximity.

Assistant City Attorney Frank Turner warned the council that there were issues to be aware of, including First Amendment rights.

Recently, trucks carrying signs for particular candidates parked on the square, which has a 24-hour parking limit. However, the trucks were moved daily, so there was no violation of the rules. Mayor Ronnie Johnston said the problem would be solved if parking was limited to two hours on the Square.

However, that brought up concerns about the impact of short-term parking on businesses, tourism and Main Street programs. After hearing from the city lawyers and staff, the council did not pursue the subject.

Cemetery maintenance

According to Scott Gaither, Zoning Enforcement, graduate student Ashley Share, specializing in historical cemeteries and cemetery preservation, worked with Covington on a project surveying Westview and Southview cemeteries this spring.

Gaither said Share’s report said there was a lack of maintenance on the monuments and headstones at the two cemeteries. “Historically, the families of those who died were supposed to maintain them,” he said. “Some do. Others may not live locally. As part of [this study], she put together a great recommendation on how to preserve them, because it is our history.”

Maintenance can be as simple as straightening the headstones or monuments, Gaither said, removing trees or replacing the curbs that outline the graves. The biggest issue, however, is the lack of maintenance records and records of burial location that have been lost.

“In talking with Ashley said that’s a common problem,” Gaither said.

The city used ground penetrating radar to determine where graves were, but that did not map who was buried where, he said.

“It seems to me it’s in our best interest to map our cemeteries,” said Johnston, “mapping out the entire thing, knowing what we have out there, what [plots] are available.

“I’m shocked we don’t have it,” he said.

Gaither said that the staff was gathering information, as well as what legal issues might exist. The council instructed Gaither to get prices on what it would cost to map the cemetery.

Vegetation on vacation lots

Thinking they were limited by the wording of the ordinance granting the city the right to cut and clear overgrown property. Knight said she finally looked up the definition of premise, assuming it meant a structure. However, she told the council, the definition includes land, so she contacted the city attorneys.

“We didn’t really think we could [cut and clear] vacant lots,” she said, “but after rereading the ordinance and talking it over with the attorneys, it’s pretty clear we can keep up the vacant lots.”

It would require following the same steps they use for unmaintained yards, including notifying the owner, giving them 10 days to move and clear weeds, and filing a lien after city workers did the job

“We’ll begin to enforce it on the vacant lots as well,” she said. She also said staff was securing bids from contractors willing to mow and weed the designated lots, and are researching the possibility of using an herbicide that would slow growth without killing it off.

Council Member Chris Smith, Post 1 East, asked if the city could put a limit on the amount spent annually on the work. Knight said $35,000 could be taken from the $100,000 in the budget for planning and zoning contract work.

Return of the gazebo

Johnston said Newton Federal Bank had approached him about building a gazebo on the square. In 2014, the county and the community approved the project, but the council voted 4 to 2 not to move forward.

Smith said he did not support the construction of a gazebo, “but I would support a large-sized tent, where they can put it up and take it down.”

The gazebo, he said, would change the face of the square. “The film industry says it takes two shots away from the square.” He also said the president of the bank, Johnny Smith, told him the council had to vote unanimously to approve the project.

Hawnethia Williams, Post 2 West, reminded the council “we need to do what’s best for the city.”

Johnston said he hadn’t heard Smith say the vote needed to be unanimous, and would contact Smith to talk to him about it. The Newton Federal Bank board approved amount of money to build it. Their understanding is the community supported it.”

Knight also reported that staff and legal had not been able to find any regulations that say the city has to leave the traffic lights up on the square. She talked to the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) and was told it was the city’s “prerogative to take down devices if we want to. They thought it was probably put up [in the first place] because [the Square had a] state highway and it would help truck traffic.

“They feel like there’s no liability for us if we take down the lights and put up a stop signs,” she said. “In most cases, they felt because it’s a pedestrian-friendly zone, it would be safer to remove them.”

The council had approved removing the lights at the July 18 meeting, knowing that the lights would not be removed until September. If there had been safety issues with removing the lights, the council could then vote against removing the lights.