Chapter 4
No License, No Problem
Sealed, Signed, and Supposedly Fine
A stamp, a seal, a signature too,
A set of plans for the City to review.
The license expired, but what could go wrong?
The plans were approved, and construction moved along.
Ask a few questions, point out the dates,
And watch how the City responds when someone investigates.
WELCOME TO KENNESAW.
Section 01
The Paper Trail
This story begins in June 2025, when building permits were requested for five new homes in Galt Commons: 1947, 1949, 1951, 1953, and 1955 Galt Commons.
The construction plans submitted with those applications bore the seal and signature of Tony Franklin Miller, a Georgia-registered architect (License No. RA009671) associated with Charlotte, North Carolina-based Miller Architecture.
Mr. Miller's Georgia registration was obtained through reciprocity with North Carolina, where he previously held Architect License No. 6201.
Initial Plan Review
The City's permit records reflect a building plan review assigned to William "Bill" Hand, with a result of "Deny."
The architectural plans bore Mr. Miller's seal and signature dated June 3, 2025.
The specific reasons for the denial are unclear from the records reviewed.
Revised Plans
Revised construction plans were uploaded to the City's permitting system.
The plans again bore Mr. Miller's seal and signature, this time dated June 13, 2025.
The City's records reflect another building plan review assigned to Bill Hand, again resulting in "Deny."
The records do not explain the reasons for the denial.
New Year. New Contractor. New Permit Applications.
A new contractor requested building permits for the same five homes.
This time, the City's permit records reflected an "Approved" building plan review assigned to Bill Hand, dated June 12, 2026.
But something about the paperwork caught my attention.
The approved plans themselves bear a City of Kennesaw review stamp dated June 22, 2026, ten days after the approval recorded on the permits.
Likewise, the "Approved Plan Set" was not uploaded to the City's permit records until June 22.
Why did the City record an approved plan review on the permits ten days before the plans were stamped as reviewed or the approved plan set was even uploaded to the permitting system?
Section 02
One Small Problem
The plans approved in June 2026 reflected revisions dated September 9, 2025.
They also bear Mr. Miller's professional seal and a handwritten date of September 9, 2025.
There was just one problem.
HIS GEORGIA ARCHITECT LICENSE EXPIRED ON JUNE 30, 2025.
The documents therefore appear to bear a professional seal and signature dated more than two months after his Georgia registration expired.
An architect's registration expiring after plans were properly prepared and sealed is one thing.
Applying a professional seal and signature after that registration has expired is another.
Yet in June 2026, the City of Kennesaw approved plans bearing that September 2025 date.
Section 03
Asking the City
JULY 15, 2026
Concerns Raised with Building Services
I raised these concerns with the City of Kennesaw's Director of Building Services and Building Official, Scott Banks.
My correspondence identified the apparent lapse in the architect's Georgia registration, the discrepancy between the City's recorded approval date and the dates reflected on the approved plans, and several other concerns.
Despite follow-up correspondence, Mr. Banks did not even acknowledge my concerns, much less address them.
JULY 23, 2026
A Formal Letter from the City Attorney
Eight days later, City Attorney Fred D. Bentley Jr. sent a formal letter on behalf of the City of Kennesaw.
Rather than explaining the apparent licensing discrepancy or conflicting plan review dates, the City's response offered two particularly noteworthy assertions.
Both statements deserve a closer look.
ASSERTION NO. 1
“The State of Georgia does not require single-family homes to be constructed from professionally sealed plans.”
ASSERTION NO. 2
“The absence of an engineer's or architect's seal, the expiration of a seal, or the presence of a current seal does not affect the City's review of plans for single-family homes.”
But before we get to that, there was another interesting statement later in the City's response.
Mr. Bentley invited me to:
“identify the specific provisions of the 2018 International Residential Code, as amended by the State of Georgia, that you believe are not being satisfied”
An interesting challenge.
Especially considering that Georgia adopted the 2024 International Residential Code, effective January 1, 2026.
Apparently, someone forgot to update the reading list.
But back to the architect's license.
Section 04
What Does Kennesaw's Own Ordinance Say?
Let's start with Mr. Bentley's first assertion.
He's correct that Georgia does not generally require every single-family home to be constructed from professionally sealed architectural plans.
But there's an important distinction between Georgia's general requirements and those imposed by Kennesaw's own ordinances.
Drawings and Specifications
Subsection (c), Design Professionals, provides:
The design professional shall be an architect or engineer legally registered under the laws of the State of Georgia regulating the practice of architecture or engineering and shall affix his official seal to such drawings, specifications and accompanying data, for the following:
Among the listed categories:
(2) Buildings and structures three stories or more in height.
The five Galt Commons homes in question are three stories tall.
Kennesaw's ordinance therefore appears to establish a professional design requirement for these homes, regardless of whether Georgia generally requires sealed plans for single-family residences.
And the ordinance doesn't simply require a professional seal. It specifies a design professional legally registered under Georgia law.
If Kennesaw's own ordinance requires a legally registered design professional for three-story buildings, how can the expiration of that professional's registration have no bearing on the City's review?
I would welcome an explanation.
Section 05
Does an Expired License Really Not Matter?
Now let's examine Mr. Bentley's second assertion.
According to the City's formal response, the expiration of an architect's seal does not affect its review of plans for single-family homes.
Georgia's professional licensing requirements suggest otherwise.
GEORGIA LAW
O.C.G.A. § 43-4-16(c)
No plans, specifications, drawings, reports, or other documents shall be sealed and signed by an architect unless: (1) The architect has a current registration to practice in this state...
GEORGIA RULES AND REGULATIONS
An Architect shall not affix, or permit to be affixed, his SEAL or his name to any drawing, specification, or other document or perform any other act as an Architect unless holding at the time a current certificate of registration in the State of Georgia.
Both provisions establish that an architect must hold current Georgia registration when signing and sealing professional documents.
Yet the plans approved by the City bear a seal and signature dated after the architect's registration expired.
WHAT IS A PLANS EXAMINER SUPPOSED TO VERIFY?
The International Code Council (ICC) offers a professional certification for Building Plans Examiners, a certification held by Kennesaw's own Bill Hand.
The official ICC Building Plans Examiner Examination Outline specifically identifies the following responsibility:
“Verify that the project is designed by approved persons when required, and has required approvals.”
ICC Building Plans Examiner Examination Outline ↗
That seems particularly relevant here.
The professional certification held by the individual assigned to approve these plans expressly identifies verification of required design-professional qualifications as part of the examination.
Plan Review
The building official shall examine or cause to be examined each application for a permit and the accompanying documents, consisting of drawings, specifications, computations and additional data, and shall ascertain by such examinations whether the construction indicated and described is in accordance with the requirements of the technical codes and all other pertinent laws or ordinances.
Notice that last part.
“All other pertinent laws or ordinances.”
The City's plan-review responsibilities aren't limited to checking whether a building meets technical construction standards.
Its own ordinance expressly requires the building official to ascertain compliance with other applicable laws and ordinances.
Which brings us back to the City Attorney's assertion.
If Georgia law prohibits an architect from signing and sealing plans without a current registration, Kennesaw's ordinance requires a legally registered design professional for three-story buildings, and the ICC identifies verification of required design-professional qualifications as part of a plans examiner's responsibilities, why would the City consider that registration status irrelevant?
Otherwise, what practical purpose do these requirements serve?
Section 06
A Lack of Understanding?
Perhaps the most ironic part of this exchange was the City's characterization of my concerns.
In his July 23 letter, Mr. Bentley asserted that the issues raised in my earlier correspondence were unsupported and reflected a lack of understanding of Georgia's laws and regulations.
An interesting assessment.
Especially considering that the City's response did not explain how its position could be reconciled with the requirements outlined above.
Nor did it explain the ten-day discrepancy between the approval recorded in the permitting system and the date stamped on the approved plans.
I wasn't asking the City to accept my interpretation without question.
I was asking it to reconcile its own records and decisions with the laws and ordinances governing its work.
Instead, I received a formal letter from the City Attorney questioning my understanding of those requirements.
Section 07
The Bottom Line
Five homes.
One architect.
Plans bearing a professional seal and signature dated after the architect's Georgia registration had expired.
A City permitting system reflecting approval ten days before the approved plans themselves reflected completion of the review.
And a formal letter from the City Attorney asserting that an expired professional seal does not affect the City's review of single-family residential plans.
But the larger issue isn't simply whether the City made a mistake. It's what happened when those apparent mistakes were brought to its attention.
Rather than acknowledge the discrepancies, investigate the concerns, or explain how the City's own ordinance applied, the City chose to defend its position.
And it did so through a formal response from its legal counsel, using taxpayer-funded resources to dispute valid concerns raised by a resident.
I find that particularly troubling.
Public resources should be used to ensure that municipal government operates lawfully, transparently, and responsibly. They should not become a substitute for acknowledging and correcting legitimate problems — or a weapon to silence those who dare to question the City.
As I previously wrote to Mr. Bentley and other City leaders:
“No municipality is infallible. Mistakes happen. What distinguishes a well-run government is not the absence of mistakes, but the willingness to acknowledge them, correct them, and restore public confidence.”
“Public service carries with it an obligation of transparency, accountability, and fidelity to the statutes that govern municipal government. Yet I continue to observe the City choose defensiveness over transparency and justification over correction.”
Those statements remain just as relevant today.
THE RULES ARE WRITTEN DOWN.
THE DATES ARE DOCUMENTED.
THE LICENSES ARE PUBLIC RECORD.
I wasn't asking the City to take my word for anything.
I was asking it to reconcile its own records with the requirements it is responsible for administering.
Apparently, that was too much to ask.
WELCOME TO KENNESAW!
Section 08
Check It Out for Yourself
As of this chapter's original publication, the public licensing records identified Tony Miller's Georgia architect registration as "LAPSED" and his North Carolina architect license as "DELINQUENT."
Readers can independently review those records or request the underlying municipal documents.