HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting January 15, 2019
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
JANUARY 15, 2019
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., January 15, 2019, the Hon.
Hardie Davis, Jr., Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Few, Garrett, Sias, Fennoy, Frantom, M. Williams, Davis, D. Williams,
Hasan and Clarke, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
Mr. Mayor: Good afternoon, everybody. All right, we are here to do the people’s business.
There’s a lot that we’ve got in front of us today. I want to welcome you to your Chamber. We’ll
call this meeting to order. The Chair recognizes Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: Thank you I call your attention to the Invocation portion of our agenda we
would ask Reverend Marc Trimm, Lead Pastor of the Metropolitan Community Church of Our
Redeemer to please come forward to deliver our invocation after which we’d have our Pledge of
Allegiance led by our General Counsel Mr. Andrew MacKenzie. Please stand.
The invocation was given by Reverend Marc Trimm, Lead Pastor, Metropolitan
Community Church of Our Redeemer.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited.
The Clerk: Office of Mayor Hardie Davis, Jr. by the present be it known that Reverend
Marc Trimm, Lead Pastor, Metropolitan Community Church of Our Redeemer is Chaplain of the
Day his spiritual guidance and civic leadership serves as an example for all citizens of Augusta.
th
Given under my hand this 15 Day of January 2019 Hardie Davis Jr., Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Would you join me in thanking and congratulating Dr. Trimm for being our
Pastor of the Day. Thank you. (APPLAUSE)
The Clerk:
RECOGNITION(S)
December 2018 Employee of the Month
A. Congratulations! Mr. Marvin Coleman, Augusta Utilities Department as Augusta, GA
December 2018 Employee of the Month.
The Clerk: I call your attention to the Recognition portion of our agenda our Administrator
Ms. Janice Jackson along with the Mayor would like to offer our congratulations to the December
2018 Employee of the Month. Congratulation Mr. Marvin Coleman would you please come
forward along with Mr. Tom Wiedmeier, the Utilities Director, are there other members of your
department here, do you want to ask them to stand as we do this? (APPLAUSE) Dear Mayor
Davis, the Employee Recognition Committee has selected Marvin Coleman as Augusta, GA
employee of the month for December 2018. Mr. Coleman is wonderful to know and a pleasure to
work with as an employee. He has been with the Augusta Utilities group for the past five and a
1
half years. He has demonstrated his skills, craftsmanship by performing masonry work when
needed. His excellent skills has not only produced attractive work but has considerably saved
Augusta, GA in costs versus the hiring of contractors. He has allowed the Utilities Department to
build rooms and contain areas for just the cost of materials which has saved Augusta, GA
$18,300.00 on two separate projects. Marvin has always been a team player and is quick to help
others in any situation. He never shies away from any project and takes pride in his work. He
uses his talents to enhance the quality of life in Augusta, GA through community involvement. As
a volunteer he helped to deliver emergency generators to other water systems that had been
impacted by the last three hurricanes that affected Georgia. He is applauded for being one of
Augusta, GA most industrious workers. Based on this nomination Marvin Coleman’s outstanding
contributions to the Augusta Utilities Maintenance Group and service to Augusta, GA the
Employee Recognition Committee would appreciate you in joining us in recognizing Marvin
Coleman the December 2018 Employee of the Month. Congratulations. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Coleman: I just thank the Commission for recognizing me and thanking Mr. Orton for
nominating me. I’m just an example of the fine men and women who work in the Augusta Utilities
Department. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Wiedmeier: I would just like to say that I don’t know many that can work like Marvin
does. He’s a real craftsman and we’re very lucky to have him. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Saxon: I’ll say when I speak to his boss and say can we do this a lot of times the
answer is I can get Marvin to do that so thank you, Marvin. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Coleman: You’re welcome.
Mr. Mayor: Congratulations. Thank you so much for what you do for the City of Augusta.
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS
B. Ms. Angela C. Harden and Dr. Willie R. Rivers regarding justice for Melquan Robinson.
Mr. Mayor: As we come to this place to have this conversation and it’s an extremely
important conversation, I want to go beyond the normal conversation that we would have with
regards to sharing with you Pastor Harden, Pastor Rivers, that you’ve got five minutes. Give us
your name and address and I think you understand that that’s protocol. But I would also add the
following to this and that is as you share what you have with us because of the nature of this issue
that is before us. We largely will not ask you questions and we largely will probably not entertain
questions. As those of us in this room are fully aware, this is a matter that is being litigated. Our
prayers and our condolences were and are with the family of Melquan Robinson. The family
members that I see out in the audience that I know well. I’m not strangers to the Robinson family.
None of us sitting here today can say that we know how you feel. I don’t know what it is to lose a
child and I’m not going to make that cliché a statement that effectively is a lie. I don’t know how
you feel but what I do know is that you love your child. But I also know is that this community
has rallied around you and embraced you to the degree that we are able to understand some
2
modicum of your pain and your loss and you’re working to put the pieces back together to
understand not only what happened but why it happened and the process. I will tell you today that
this city and our community will continue to embrace you beyond this conversation. While saying
that I will also let everyone in the audience know that there have been multiple investigations that
have taken place and are ongoing. As a city we are fully cooperating with Law Enforcement. We
fully cooperated with the Attorneys of Record that the family has in fact all of the families have.
That process continues to go on to this moment and we will continue to be involved in
communicating as openly as we can as this conversation, this investigation as well continues. We
began a comprehensive inspection of all of our recreation and park facilities back in the fall of last
year which the media has already reported on and that work continues in an effort to make sure
that this type of thing never happens again in the City of Augusta. Those are the steps that we
have taken and we will continue to take proactive measures to insure that no other family has to
feel and express the pain that you are going through right now. As we continue to get that
information, we will release the details of those inspections. That information will and has already
been made available to the public and we will continue to do that. Internally we will do a better
job of making sure that the elected officials have that information at the point in time that it is
received in the Central Services and then communicated to the Administrator’s office. At that
point I want it communicated directly to the elected officials as quickly as possible. Going
forward, I believe it is fitting and proper that the Administrative Services Committee chaired by
th
the Commissioner from the 4 begin giving strong consideration to how we will engage going
forward at all of our parks and recreation facilities and perhaps give consideration putting together
a Safety Task Force to make certain that we’re taking proactive steps as a city and as a body to
make sure that our facilities are inspected, that those processes are taking place on a regular basis.
I will tell you as the Mayor of the city this tragedy has forever changed our community. There are
questions that we will never be able to answer for this family. The ones that we can answer we
will. We will pursue every answer that is within our reach and beyond that our government is fully
committed to ensure that the circumstances surrounding Melquan’s passing do not happen in our
community again. That is what we have done, that is what we are doing, and that is what we will
continue to do during our time here. With that being said, I want to give Pastor Harden and Pastor
Rivers their five minutes to communicate what they have.
Ms. Harden: Blessings and good afternoon to the Mayor, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners.
th
On October 15 2018 Melquan Robinson, Jr., was electrocuted and killed during a football practice
when he came in contact with a fence that caused his death. His family, his friends, Pastor, his
church family, teammates, classmates and community at large wants some answers. We
appreciated what we heard from you, Mayor, today. Our city government has been silent long
enough. It’s been three months and still no communication from our elected officials who was
elected to present, represent us. It’s a disservice to our community who was elected to represent
us. It’s a disservice to our community not to publicly address this tragedy. A child lost his life.
Why? Why did this happen? We know that he was electrocuted at Fleming Park but it did not
have to happen because the reports shows that many children and adults have been electrically
shocked at Fleming Park for decades and it’s been kept from the community and swept under the
rug and today we are demanding the rug to be moved. We understand that this started many years
ago under some others’ watch but now under your watch you have the authority, the ability, and
the moral responsibility to fix this. How are we going to fix it? The community has some concerns.
We want to start or we need to start with being transparent. The community would like to know
3
what actions have been taken since this incident happened. Why has no action been taken and
why haven’t the community been informed? Then you have the responsibility. Whose job is it to
inspect and ensure the citizens’ safety? Who is responsible? What caused the problem? Who was
negligent and who’s responsible for the solutions to this problem? Then there is a safety piece.
Based on the fact that Melquan lost his life, what has changed that proves that the parks are safe?
Is it fair to the community to assume that the investigation is ongoing, been successful and that the
problem is fixed? Should we assume that? If nothing has been done, then there is no way the park
can be safe. What’s the problem? Investigate and fix it so that no other person’s life or will it be
able to lose their life or will lose their life at Fleming or no other park. We need to be proactive.
Our solution is this. The community are requesting a community public hearing on this issue with
the City Administrator, Recreation and Parks Director, committee over Recreation and Parks and
the experts that’s investigating Fleming Park to discuss what would be acceptable by the
community for we all need input. In 1991 Crystal Underwood, age 8, was electrically shocked at
Fleming Park and she survived, praise the Lord. If this problem would have been properly
investigated and corrected in 1991, Melquan would not have been tragically killed some 27 years
later. Why did he have to die? Remember Melquan could have been your son or your grandson.
Thank you. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Rivers: My name is Willie R. Rivers, the Pastor of the First Dayspring Baptist Church
which is located at 2170 Greene Street, Augusta, GA 30904 I have listened at the Mayor and I
think had we had that conversation before we would not be standing here in your presence now. I
am just concerned about our moral compass in taking care of the problem that existed at that park
and since we have now discovered that we had a person hurt 27 years ago, not under your watch,
but it’s also the same river we are all in. But not only the time to rectify that situation and make
sure that every child is playing recreation at that park do it in a safe manner. They enter the park,
they go back home after being in the park. That’s my main concern. We’re just concerned about
the safety. Not in a delegation we’re just concerned about the safety of the park that your children
and my children who have access to that park to play in. We thank you for your time and I’m sure
that we will receive all the help that this committee can give us in taking care of that problem.
Thank you from the very depths of my heart, thank you. Thank you.
Ms. Harden: And I apologize I did not give my address, my name is Angela C. Harden,
2407 Crystal Court, Augusta, GA 30906. Thank you so very much.
Mr. Mayor: Pastor Rivers, I can assure you that as the Mayor of this city I will be more
proactive in communicating because I will get the information in real time going forward. And as
soon as I’m able and prepared to say something to this community about what’s happening, I will
do just that along with the members of this body. That is our posture today in going forward. But
I want to assure you that not just you but I want to talk to the Robinson family that’s here today.
This is a sensitive matter and we are not as a city hiding, ducking and moving away. We are
moving proactively to try to find all of the answers so that again it never happens to anyone’s other
child. At the point in time that we have all of the facts and we fully understand what has taken
place that caused this situation we will communicate that. We will be very forthright in that. Your
attorneys have been engaged again with our legal counsel as well and those lines of communication
will remain open as we go through this process. That is our commitment from the City of Augusta
to each and every one of you. To the community at large we will again be as open and forthright
4
with you as possible letting you know that while this was the Robinson’s son, I said this when this
first happened as Ms. Jackson, my wife and I who they know very well went and visited the family
when this happened. While Melquan Robinson was not my son he is the community’s son. He is
the community’s son and we will uphold that. These are not just feeble words but we will uphold
that. I appreciate you, thank you for coming to share with us.
Dr. Rivers: And again we thank you for your words that you made earlier. I’m very
appreciative. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. As we get ready to go to the remaining portion of our agenda
today, I know often times people want to exit and if there are those of you who want to exit at this
time, you certainly can. We’ll pause long enough to give you an opportunity to exit the Chamber,
if you would like to, okay, if you would like to. All right, we’ll stand at ease for just five minutes.
We’ll stand at ease for five minutes. --- that are happening as it relates to the City of Augusta. As
many of you are aware, our Smoking Ordinance became effective January 1, 2019 and our
Planning and Development Department has put together a Compliance Guide that is available.
This information was communicated and transmitted to our businesses, those existing businesses
in the fall of this past year and to any new businesses that are signing on to do business in the City
of Augusta. Augusta, Georgia now is a again a Smoke Free City and it gives specific guidance
about where smoking is not allowed. I would encourage all of our business community, our
partners, our stakeholders to be aware of this. There is also a decal that is available as a business
owner to again place in your business. Again that information is very handy. I would encourage
all of our partners, our businesses in the community to take an opportunity to either access the link
that was sent in the information that was communicated in the fall of last year. This certainly is a
momentous step from a community standpoint. I want to share something with the Commission
at this time as well that is of extreme importance to us and it’s a matter that I believe at the
appropriate time we may engage in a conversation about this in Executive Session and that is the
issue of the FCC actions concerning small sale deployment. Federal Communications
Commission has engaged private companies particularly communication companies and they’re
commandeering rights of way and other public property for the benefit of private companies. Now
I’m a pro-business individual but when our private, when our rights of way are under attack but
more importantly what’s also included in this rule making that the FCC is engaged in is of grave
concern particularly when it comes to franchise fees. Whenever our communications companies
have franchise fees that we are collecting and receiving, they are now pursuant to this proposed
rule from the FCC, they’re providing these same companies with an opportunity to offset the
franchise fee whenever there are paid channels, free services to schools and other public buildings,
they’re allowing them to recoup those fees and take them back. When you talk about revenue
from a municipal perspective, those are things that are of grave concern certainly to me and I’m
sure the same would hold true to our Finance and Planning Department when it comes to the
budgetary process. So I want to bring that to everybody’s attention. It is something that is
extremely concerning to municipalities across this country without question and it’s something
we’ll be talking about on next week during our meetings at the US Conference of Mayors. There
is an FCC Litigation Fund as well that many cities are involved in because of how damaging this
could be to our communities particularly with their abilities to take rights of ways and also the
offset of the franchise fees. So I do want to make mention of those things. It is important to us
that we be aware of these types of things and what potential impact they could have on our cities.
5
And those are some things that as we’ve been tracking them over the last several weeks I wanted
to bring everybody’s attention, I’ll probably bring that back up again during our Executive Session
of how important it is. Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: I call your attention to our Consent Agenda, our Planning items. If there are
any objectors to any of our Planning petitions would you please signify your objection by raising
your hand once the petition is read. I call your attention to:
Item 1: Is a request for a change of zoning from an R-2 (Two-family Residential) to a Zone
R-3B (Multiple-Family Residential) affecting property known as 259 Clark Street.
Item 2: Is a request for a Special Exception to expand an existing Family Personal Care
Home affecting property known at 5007 Old Waynesboro Road.
Item 3: Is a request for a Special Exception affecting property known as 3729 Wrightsboro
Road.
Item 4: Is a request for a change of zoning from a Zone A (Agriculture) to a Zone B-2
(General Business) affecting property known as 3711 Benchmark Drive.
Item 5: Is for a Special Exception requesting for a property known as 3711 Benchmark
Drive.
Item 6: Is a request for a change of zoning from a Zone LI (Light Industry) to Zone R-3C
th
(Multiple-Family Residential) affecting property known as 636 11 Street.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of those Planning petitions?
Mr. Mayor: Without objection.
The Clerk: I call your attention to our Public Services portion of the agenda. If there are
any objectors to any of our alcohol petitions, would you please signify your objections by raising
your hand once the petition is read. I call your attention to:
Item 8: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection
with the location 2443 Peach Orchard Road.
Item 9: Is a request for an on premise consumption Wine License to be used at a location
th
144 8 Street.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to either of those alcohol petitions? Mr. Mayor,
members of the Commission, our Consent Agenda consists of Items 1-29 with no objectors to our
Alcohol or Planning petitions.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, if there are no objections and so to those I’ll entertain any motions to
th
add or remove from the Consent Agenda. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9
the Chairman of Engineering Services.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m glad we don’t have two birthdays in the
same year because Tom Wiedmeier had a good birthday last week. So today I’ve got a couple of
items I want to pull and I want to start with Number 9, Mr. Mayor. Not that I’m against it but I do
need some discussion. I want to pull 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 24 and 25, 27 and 28, Mr. Mayor.
6
Mr. Sias: Do we have to run through that again, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yeah, we will, we will. Madam Clerk, did you get all of those?
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull Item number 17.
st
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from the 1 the Chairman of
Finance.
Mr. Fennoy: I have a question about Item number 6.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Item number 6 is pulled. The Chair recognizes the Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to add agenda item number 30 to the
Consent Agenda with the change at the end appointment not Ex-Officio, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: With objection, I’m just cutting up.
Mr. Fennoy: I’ve got a question but ---
Mr. Mayor: All right.
The Clerk: Number 30, you have a question?
Mr. Fennoy: --- yes.
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so we’re not adding to the consent agenda.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Ms. Davis: Move to approve, Mr. Mayor.
M. M. Williams: Second.
CONSENT AGENDA
PLANNING
1. Z-18-61 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve with the conditions below a petition by Nicole Cooper requesting a change of zoning
from Zone R-2 (Two-family Residential) to Zone R-3B (Multiple-Family Residential) to
7
expand a Family Personal Care Home to a Group Personal Care Home affecting property
containing 0.17 acres and known as 2059 Clark Street. Tax Map 027-3-044-00-0 DISTRICT
1. 1. Limit the number of allowed clients to 9 residents upon completion of 400 sf rear
addition. 2. All setback and lot coverage requirements set in the Augusta Zoning Ordinance
Section 17-(R-3B zone) be met. 3. Maintain the existing living rooms as is in order to keep
high quality of living for residents. 4. The applicant must provide four () improved on-site
parking spots in the rear; surface material to be approved by Augusta Engineering Dept. 5.
The applicant must maintain all local and state business licenses.
2. Z-19-01 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve with the conditions below a petition by Teddy R. Crafton Jr. requesting a Special
Exception to expand an existing Family Personal Care Home serving boys (Fresh Start for
Boys) into a Group Personal Care Home in the R-3A (Multiple-family Residential) Zone per
Section 16-2 (d) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting
property containing 1.02 acres and known as 5007 Old Waynesboro Road. Tax Map 336-0-
256-01-0 DISTRICT 8 1. The home shall be limited to twelve (12) residents to comply with
the current square foot requirements. 2. The home shall be staffed and maintained in
compliance with all State Department of Community Health regulations for A Child Care
Residential Home. 3. A private room shall be continued to be provided for owner/staff to
conduct business. 4. The applicant must maintain a City of Augusta business license and
continue to maintain a license with the State of Georgia. Proof on compliance with the
minimum requirements of Chapter 290-2-5-18 of the O.C.G.A must be provided, and the
applicant must provide annual inspection reports. 5. The home must maintain all licenses
without a 12-month lapse of the Special Exception is void. 6. The existing septic system must
be inspected by the Richmond County Department of Public Health to ensure its capacity.
3. Z-19-02 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve with the conditions below a petition by A. Anthony Atkins, on behalf of BAH, LLC,
requesting a Special Exception to construct a business park in the B-2 (General Business)
Zone with 30% of the gross leasable area of building is designed for and occupied by
commercial, retail or service tenants per Section 22-2(f) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property containing 2.58 acres and known as 3729
Wrightsboro Road. Tax Map 040-0-013-05-0 DISTRICT 3 1. Any proposed development
must adhere to approved conditions of the 2016 rezoning case, Z-16-11 and all required
development regulations.
4. Z-19-03 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve with the conditions below a petition by Lionel Prather, on behalf of Benchmark
Seat, LLC, requesting a change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B02 (General
Business) affecting property containing 1.99 acres and known as 3711 Benchmark Drive, Tax
Map 029-0-077-00-0 DISTRICT 3 1. The conceptual plan provided is for zoning review
purposes only. Issuance of development permits shall be contingent upon submission of plans
meeting all applicable development standards.
5. Z-19-04 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve with the conditions below a petition by Lionel Prather, on behalf of Benchmark
Seat, LLC, requesting a Special Exception to construct a business park in the B-2 (General
Business) Zone with 30% of the gross leasable area of buildings is designed for and occupied
by commercial, retail or service tenants per Section 22-2(f) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property containing 1.99 acres and known as 3711
8
Benchmark Drive. Tax Map 029-0-077-00-0 DISTRICT 3 1. The conceptual plan provide is
for zoning review purposes only. Issuance of development permits shall be contingent upon
submission of plans meeting all applicable development standards.
PUBLIC SERVICES
7. Motion to renew the Sec. 3311 Rural Transit grant application between the Georgia
Department of Transportation (GDOT) and Augusta, Georgia for July 1, 2019 to June 30,
2020. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 8, 2019)
8. Motion to approve New Location: A.N. 19-01: request by Anita Jones for a retail package
Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Master Food Mart located at 2443 Peach
Orchard Rd. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee January
8, 2019)
10. Motion to authorize the Planning & Development and Legal Departments to research the
steps necessary to amend the city’s alcohol ordinance to allow Augusta & Co. to serve free
samples of local products to visitors and locals. (Approved by Public Services Committee
January 8, 2018)
11. Motion to approve the Fire Fighter Physicals Contract with University Health for the
Augusta Regional Airport. This is an amendment to the Augusta Richmond County Contract
for fire fighter physicals (RFP 17-196). (Approved by Public Services Committee January 8,
2019)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
16. Motion to approve the proposed drafts of the dedication plaques for the following
projects: 1)Maxwell Library Renovations 2)Reynolds Street Pedestrian Bridge 3)Augusta
Records Retention Center Annex 4)Augusta Public Transit Operations and Maintenance
Facility and 5)Augusta Wellness Center (Approved by Administrative Services Committee
January 8, 2019)
PUBLIC SAFETY
20. Motion to approve Accountability Court FY19 Supplemental Grant. (Approved by
Public Safety Committee January 8, 2019)
21. Motion to approve an Amendment of the Contract with Pierce Manufacturing in
reference to RFP 17-137 Emergency Apparatus/Fire Pumper to Pierce to purchase three (3)
Pierce Engines, and to authorize the Mayor to execute the appropriate documents.
(Approved by Public Safety Committee January 8, 2019)
ENGINEERING SERVICES
22. Motion to approve additional funding of Professional Services Contract to implement
Cityworks AMS software and Integrate with enQuesta CIS Software in the amount of
$200,000.00. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee January 8, 2019)
23. Motion to approve the Award of Bid Item 18-278 – Articulated Dump Truck to Yancey
Brothers. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee January 8, 2019)
26. Motion to approve award of Bid #18-294 for the Construction of Brussels Street Pump
Station Abandonment Project to CBH Excavation in the amount of $139,560.40. (Approved
by Engineering Services Committee January 8, 2019)
9
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
29. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Augusta Commission held
January 2, 2019 and Special Called meeting held January 8, 2019.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a motion and a second.
The Clerk: That was you, Mr. Williams?
Mr. M. Williams: Sure it was. It don’t matter. I’m on the right side of the Mayor today.
Mr. Mayor: I’ll tell you what let’s dispose of Item 30 first, voting.
Mr. Fennoy: What are we voting on, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: We took 30 off of the Consent agenda ---
Mr. Fennoy: Okay ---
Mr. Mayor: --- yeah, if you’re going to talk about it in just a minute, you’re on deck.
The Clerk: Consent Agenda including all items that have been pulled as listed. Anything
that’s left that’s what we’re voting on.
Mr. Fennoy: --- I was right what’s left.
Mr. Clarke votes No.
Motion Passes 9-1. \[Items 1-5, 7- 8, 10-11, 16, 20-23, 26, 29\]
The Clerk:
APPOINTMENTS
30. Motion to appoint Commissioner Sias to serve as Ex-Officio on the Richmond County
Board of Health replacing Commissioner Dennis Williams and appoint Commission Dennis
Williams to the Augusta Aviation Commission as in previous years. (Requested by Mayor
Pro Tem Sean Frantom)
st
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Ms. Bonner ---
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: --- does the appointment to the Board of Health, is that a consensus
appointment by the Commission or does each Commissioner have an appointment to that board?
10
The Clerk: No, sir, that’s a consensus appointment from the Commission that you made
the appointment during the regular committee appointments at the beginning of the year.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay and I guess my next question is that what allows Commissioners to
change their appointments throughout? I know it takes six votes but so any other Commissioners
if they wanted to change their appointments that could be done the same way this is done?
Mr. Mayor: I’ll answer that, Ms. Bonner. As I understand it what has taken place in this
thnd
instance is that the Commissioner from the 4 and the Commissioner from the 2 they talked
about it and said here’s what we’d like to do. Do you mind swapping committee assignments with
me? It’s certainly well within their right to have that conversation. What’s being done now it’s
been brought before us to one make everybody aware of it and for you all to vote on it. As Ms.
Bonner indicated, we made these appointments last week or two weeks ago at our organizing
meeting and the committee assignments of record are the ones that they’re wanting to swap, that’s
what happened.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: So part two of your question is if you had a conversation and said hey, the
th,
Commissioner from the 9 you know, I like this better. Would you swap with me? We’ll entertain
that at the time too. I will tell you I would want to discourage all of that. I think that when we
made the assignments a week ago or two weeks ago there was thoughtful consideration given to
that and again based on what we’ve learned over these four years, we thought these were
opportunities for individuals to go and make contributions and not only make contributions but be
able to come back to us and keep us informed of what’s going on. But if we’re going to go back
and forth and you know say well I don’t like that and do you mind swapping with me you know
we may as well not even do it.
Mr. Fennoy: And the last part of my question ---
Mr. Mayor: Certainly.
Mr. Fennoy: --- Mr. Mayor, is that if this if we decide to do something like this it should
be requested through the Mayor Pro Tem?
Mr. Mayor: I’m glad you brought that up. There is no such thing as Mayor Pro Tem
appointments. That’s one of those practices you know it’s one of those practices that we have. If
you go to the Charter, if you go to the Code, it says that the Mayor and who is selected as the
Mayor Pro Tem will meet and if they disagree then we’ll come out here and we’ll hash it out. But
the reality of it is we’re pretty much on the same page with what we were thinking when we were
th,
in the back. That’s how this process is supposed to work. The Commissioner from the 7 the
Mayor Pro Tem, has simply put it on the agenda okay? What we could’ve done is said here’s
what’s going to happen and been done with it but there are no Mayor Pro Tem appointments. That
was the first thing I was hit with when I first got here. That, that’s not how that works. If you go
to the Code it specifically talks about here’s how the appointments are made in terms of those
committee assignments. I don’t get a chance to vote on it other than what we’re doing back here.
11
That’s the only time. I don’t even get a chance to vote on what you have in front of you right now
but to the degree that we have it I would encourage you to you know vote on it and let’s move
forward. I don’t object to it. I’m okay with it, yeah, I’m okay with it. All right, the Chair recognizes
th
the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. M. Williams: Ms. Bonner, I guess longevity don’t get you nothing but gray hair so I
guess there’s no sense in me even thinking anything else. But, Mr. Mayor, what you just explained
is exactly right. The Mayor Pro Tem and the Mayor decides on appointments but if we’re going
to decide we want to swap then we may be doing that all year long. I may get in half of this year
and want to change with somebody else and if I can get somebody to agree with me like the other
folks have I’ll be coming back to put it on the agenda to make the swap. So I think the process
you just reiterated to us is the right process but I mean it really don’t make a difference with me
but I just don’t want anybody else to think they’ve got an advantage because if you do it and I feel
like tomorrow, today or whenever I want to do it I don’t want you holding me, not you personally
I’m talking about the body, to say no you can’t do that. So once you open the door and we open
up a lot of doors around here that we can’t close so I just want, I mean I can support it but if the
door’s open when somebody else comes and wants to do the same thing, I don’t want no static
there either so longevity has taught me one thing to just listen closely. I’ve been sued for not even
voting but it didn’t go nowhere because I know the rules and rules is I didn’t have to vote at that
point. But my point is though we want to change things and the rules have already been established
but we want to come in and along the way we want to change the rules or we want to take our ball
and go home if you don’t play by our rules. So either way it don’t matter to me but if we open
that door and I decide in the next two years that I want to change if I get somebody to go in with
me I’m coming back with a change.
Mr. Mayor: Yeah, it’s certainly well within your right to have the conversation. All right,
st
okay, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Motion to approve.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Voting.
Motion Passes 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: We’re going to go top to bottom, Ms. Bonner.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
12
6. Z-19-05 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
th
approve with the conditions below a petition by Ivey Development LLC, on behalf of 11
Street Canal Group, LLC, requesting a change of zoning from Zone LI (Light Industry) to
Zone R-3C (Multiple-family Residential) affecting property containing 4 acres and known
as 636 Eleventh Street. Tax Map 046-2-094-00-0 DISTRICT 1 1. The final submitted plan
must adhere to all zoning requirements set in Section 18, including height, density, lot
coverage and setbacks. 2. Any increased density greater than the zoned 29 units per acre
must be reviewed and approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals. 3. Any setback and lot
coverage requirements that are not met must be approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals.
4. Number of parking spaces shall be determined by the Planning Commission through the
parking variance process. 5. Should the petitioner fail to close within 12 months of this
approval, the R-3C zoning becomes null and void and parcel reverts back to the original
Light Industrial District. 6. Proposed internal drives shall meet all standards of the Augusta
Traffic Engineering Department. 7. The existing sidewalks adjacent to the properties must
adhere to current ADA standards. 8. Issuance of development permits shall be contingent
upon the submission and approval of plans meeting all applicable development regulations.
st
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Rob, where is this located?
Mr. Sherman: Do you know where Phoenix Printing is ---
Mr. Fennoy: Yes.
Mr. Sherman: --- across the street.
Mr. Fennoy: On the corner?
Mr. Sherman: It’s not a corner but it does to the north of it is the Canal. It’s about 4 acres
directly across so if you go up Telfair turn left go across the canal Phoenix is on your right, this
property is on the left.
Mr. Fennoy: Before you get to Thompson Wrecking?
Mr. Sherman: It is.
Mr. Fennoy: Right across the street from it, okay, all right.
Mr. M. Williams: The old skating rink used to be there.
Mr. Fennoy: Before my time.
Mr. M. Williams: Yeah, before you moved to Augusta not before your time before you
moved.
13
Mr. Fennoy: Motion to approve.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right, I’ve got a motion and a second to approve, voting.
Mr. Hasan out.
Motion Passes 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: I’d like to encourage Ivey Development Group that you see Augusta’s open
for business, very good.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
9. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 19-02: A request by Jeremy LaFontaine for an
on premise consumption Wine License to be used in connection with Joe’s Underground
th
located at 144 8 Street. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 8, 2019)
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Bonner, I don’t have a problem with this,
I’m going to support it. I’ve got several calls though about the on premise consumption businesses
that don’t have sufficient restrooms area. And I guess my question is before we approve this and
that’s something that probably is in standard here but I’ve got several calls about a couple of places
that’s really got a good clientele but the restroom facility is not adequate. And whether we’ve
been addressing it I don’t know but my question is does this have adequate restroom space there
for men and women?
Ms. Walton: Commissioner Williams, I’ll let the applicant answer that for you.
Mr. M. Williams: Well, the applicant ought to say yes I mean if he’s the applicant. I think
somebody else who maybe not ---
Ms. Walton: Okay, I’ll give this answer to you as well. When we do these applications,
we have to have the Health Department approval and the Fire Department approval. They are the
ones that check these things ---
Mr. M. Williams: Okay ---
Ms. Walton: --- they’re the ones that are supposed to make sure but this location has been
grandfathered in also.
Mr. M. Williams: --- okay and I’m in support of this business so I don’t want to get into
that but I just want to have an avenue to get to the other point and that is if the Fire Department
and the Health Department has been inspecting other buildings the calls that I got. And I went by
14
and checked on them and I don’t mind sharing after this thing with Rob or whoever I need to share
it with. There’s not sufficient and several other businesses that I went in so that’s why I asked this
question not just for this young man but for everybody else that’s coming in we need to make sure
that those things are done. But I’m going to make a motion to approve and I’ll get with you or
Rob after that and give you some names so you can ---
Ms. Walton: Yes, sir.
Mr. M. Williams: --- verify, okay.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Mr. Mayor: I’ve got a motion and a second, voting.
Motion Passes 10-0.
The Clerk: Mr. Williams, do you have a problem with us doing 12, 13 and 14 as
companion?
Mr. M. Williams: No, no problem, I think they’re going to be related ---
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. M. Williams: --- as companion.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
12. Motion to approve a contract amendment with Reeves Young LLC for Construction
Project Management Services for Augusta’s Transit Operation and Maintenance Facility
project and task the Administrator to come back in 90 days with a recommendation of how
to proceed forward in terms of a project management plan. (Approved by Public Services
Committee January 8, 2018)
13. Motion to approve a contract amendment with SKANSKA USA Building Inc. for
Construction Project Management Services for Augusta’s Transit Operation and
Maintenance Facility project and task the Administrator to come back in 90 days with a
recommendation of how to proceed forward in terms of a project management plan.
(Approved by Public Services Committee January 8, 2018)
14. Motion to approve an amendment to increase the value of the Architectural and
Engineering services contract with Wendel Companies dated March 25, 2013 for the Design
of a Transit Operation and Maintenance Facility for Augusta, Georgia and task the
Administrator to come back in 90 days with a recommendation of how to proceed forward
in terms of a project management plan. (Approved by Public Services Committee January
8, 2018)
Mr. Mayor: All right ---
15
Mr. M. Williams: I’m ready.
th
Mr. Mayor: --- the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’ve got no problem with the Administrator
coming back in 90 days. My question is though can some language be put into these agreements
that we’re doing not for the timeframe to do it but even after that can’t we do something? We keep
saying well we don’t have project managers or they didn’t do a good job or they didn’t manage
the project right. Can’t we can’t some language through the Attorney be put in so that whoever
we get not just during the time when it’s done but, Dennis, we got a train coming through?
Mr. D. Williams: I apologize.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, apology accepted, I think. Okay but my question to the Attorney
is can’t some language be put in that we can hold these firms or these contracts accountable I mean
afterwards. I mean why do we keep saying we’ve got to wait 90 days to bring somebody back or
we got somebody that didn’t do a good job or can’t some language be put in there where we can
go back on whoever it is not just this one but any of them?
Mr. Mayor: Well, that’s two separate issues, Commissioner, those are two separate issues.
What the Administrator’s coming back with is how will we internally handle project management
going forward ---
Mr. M. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: --- that was the issue that was brought up in the committee conversation and
that’s the issue of we have capital projects of this nature. We historically have had a project
management group that’s been our Procurement standpoint for construction project management
we’ve taken that approach. But now what we now find ourselves with particularly with regards to
the train situation is that you’ve got a project that is moving very quickly or at least we would like
for it to and whether or not we have the resources in-house to be able oversee and be the project
managers here internally that’s the challenge, that’s what Ms. Jackson is supposed to be coming
back to us with in 90 days.
Mr. M. Williams: I get that and you know I’ve been here a while and I heard that
conversation and I’m in agreement about bringing something back but regardless what she brings
whether it be someone in-house or how we do it my question goes back to we had several
companies to manage projects for us ---
Mr. Mayor: Yes ---
Mr. M. Williams: --- that was a failure, in my opinion, the management part of it but we
had no way to get back, no way to recoup anything from them because and we’re going to talk
about this pipe that’s sweating now. It’s on this list to be pulled down and how we got to wrap
this because the management should’ve caught all of that and they didn’t but we got to pay
16
somebody else now almost $200,000 dollars to do something that should’ve been caught. So am
I speaking ---
Mr. Mayor: --- okay no, all right, two things. I want to recognize the Administrator in just
a second so we’re talking about so we’ve really got three items here we’ve a motion to approve
contract amendments that’s the main motion. What’s been added to that is the issue around how
we will handle project management moving forward, that’s Item number 2. Attorney MacKenzie,
th
the Commissioner from the 9 raises a very germane point and that is the issue of claw back
provisions in our contracts. That’s what he’s referring to. And I think that statutorily we have
some language that we probably could give consideration to as we’re going through the
procurement process of having some claw back provisions in there particularly with regards to
project execution. If the project is delayed for reasons x, y and z those are things. So I think those
are the things that you’re talking about which is paying folks and then we come back and we’ve
got change order after change order and we’re expending resources as opposed to bringing
resources back. So I want to go in this order. Ms. Jackson speaks to the issue of the 90 days and
then Attorney MacKenzie, if you’ll speak to the third item and that’s the issue around claw backs.
Ms. Jackson: Actually my request is not around the 90 days. I understood it based upon
the discussion that we had last week. I am requesting a friendly amendment to Motion 12 to
accurately reflect the services being provided by Reeves Young. The wording of that motion is a
amendment with Reeves Jones LLC for Construction Project Management Services. They’re
actually not providing project management. It should take out project management for
construction services by Reeves Young. Reeves Young is doing construction in number Item 13.
SKANSKA is actually doing project management services. And then in Item 14 Wendell is
providing design services so if we could change just scratch the work Project Management from
the Reeves Young item, Item 12, I think that would be an accurate reflection of what we’re actually
amending the contract to do.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, do I need to have a talk with my Clerk about the wording
of these things or do they come from the Administrator’s Office because when I get this and I sit
down and look over what I’m doing and try to make sure that I’m addressing the right issue but
it’s something totally different then do Tasha, Ms. Bonner or Nancy or someone, I mean who ---
The Clerk: They come from the originating department.
Mr. M. Williams: --- okay, well these things should’ve came in the order in which it
would’ve been. Now if this conversation had been it went through the normal process with nobody
pulls it and we approved it then we wouldn’t have been approving what we should’ve been
approving or shouldn’t have been approving.
Mr. Mayor: All right okay, so all right so we’ve got a couple of things that’s in front of us
all right. All right, we’re going to come back to the amendment conversation. Attorney
MacKenzie, I want you to speak to the issue around the third component of what the Commissioner
th
from the 9 is wanting to get after. Again I know this is just a conversation but I want I want you
to at least answer that then we’re going to come and take these three items and make sure we get
the right language out.
17
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I’m happy to address that. Yes, obviously we can make
modifications to agreements to include whatever terms in there that are needed to address each
circumstance. We actually do have for most of our construction contracts built in liquidated
damages provisions in case there are delays. A lot of that will depend on what the cause of the
delay is if it’s due to weather and things like that then that’s typically not a provision that he can
pin onto the contract for that. These terms are usually negotiated, they’re usually recommended
by the department which would usually be in the best position to be able to determine what the
needs are and we can certainly try to take a more proactive approach to across the board clauses
where you have a number of required clauses. One of those is liquidated damages that’s designed
to protect the city in the event there is a problem. A lot of these issues here are change orders.
That means they were not within the scope of the original agreement and the department is
typically the one that’s saying there’s a need to make an adjustment that is different than what the
original agreement was so that’s what a lot of these are. But we’re certainly happy to look at those
and take a more proactive approach and including additional protection if needed.
Mr. M. Williams: So, Mr. Mayor, who would determine, I mean it came through
committee but who would determine whether the Administrator or would it be the Legal Counsel
who says we need additional protection or do we have the department who says that because I
mean what really bothers me is the fact that after the fact we always come up with what we
should’ve done of what they didn’t do. But then we’ve got no recourse because they’re gone.
They’ve been paid, they moved and everything else but we got nothing in place to go back after
somebody who may not have no money but still in business. We ought to be able to at least stop
them from doing other work somewhere, I mean that’s how you get a good price on whatever
service you’re trying to get.
Mr. Mayor: I think all of those things are certainly relevant. The overarching goal I think
from all of this is that we have an opportunity as a Commission to really look at how we do business
from a procurement standpoint and when there’s opportunity to have claw back provisions when
we have a project management firm that’s doing work and/or a contractor I mean GDOT has again
done a better job now their transportation projects. But I think the overarching concern is that we
want to make sure that Augusta has seen, viewed and perceived that they’re open for business. We
don’t want to have so many onerous regulations that restrict us like some of our neighboring
communities etc., who are going through that challenge right now but at the same time I do think
th,
to your point, Commissioner from the 9 we want to make sure we’ve got those requisite
protections in place that can make us better from a procurement process and so we’ll look forward
to doing that. I want to get back to the meat of this and that is there’s a friendly amendment that’s
being requested in Item number 12 and that is to strike the words project management and this is
for construction services for Augusta’s Transit and Operation, we’re going to strike that. In Item
number 12 the reality of it is these items that have come forward on this agenda really should’ve
been a dollar amount and what the functions should’ve been. It makes it easier for us to be able to
look at it quickly and then make a decision on it so to your point we can do better. Is there a
friendly amendment for 13 or is that one okay?
Mr. M. Williams: They’re companion items ---
18
Ms. Jackson: 13 and 14 are fine ---
Mr. Mayor: All right, the same thing.
Ms. Jackson: --- yes, 13 and 14 are fine as they are ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Ms. Jackson: --- written correctly.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, very well okay all right, that’s the friendly amendment on Number 12.
All right, Commissioner, state your inquiry. What else do you have?
Mr. M. Williams: No, that’s good.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the
th
4.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir. Move to approve these with the amendment of Item 12.
Mr. Fennoy: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a motion and a second, voting.
Mr. Garrett out.
Motion Passes 10-0.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
15. Motion to approve First Vehicle Services, Inc. provide fleet maintenance service to
Augusta, Georgia with the emergency response time being reduced from 120 minutes to 90
minutes – RFP 19-225. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee January 8, 2019)
th
Mr. Mayor: The Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Douse, two questions we talked in
committee about local business not minority business, not just small business but local businesses
doing business with Fleet who we pay some $3. something million a year. Can you help me
understand where we are with that and what, was anything ever changed or brought back?
Ms. Douse: Sure. I have a report showing that the total local amount of spending for 2018
from First Vehicle Services is $934,000 dollars which is 37.75% of the total contract amount. The
total amount that we use for vendors that they spent for vendors was about $2.4 million dollars.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay and you said spent and I don’t want to get into the reason but you
know when you say spent I need to know what direction that was spent in, I mean what service
19
was those because I’m thinking if those are parts I mean that would be good for that kind of
numbers to be done inside our city but I’m talking about services not just parts.
Ms. Douse: Right, it was both parts and services.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, I guess you’ve got a list I can get of those services?
Ms. Douse: Sure, I can provide more detailed information to the Clerk.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, I’d like to have that too. The other thing is the reduction of time
responding from 120 minutes to 90 minutes. How are we going to proceed, how are we going to
know that it still ain’t 120 minutes, I mean is there a punch clock or punch card or clock, how do
we know that the time has been reduced?
Ms. Douse: After each call is made for towing services after hours that information can be
accessed and we can monitor from that standpoint.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay I heard that but I don’t understand that so help me understand. I
mean you’re going to make a call. I got my cellphone here, I make them all the time and my
cellphone records it I can go back and pull it up. So if there’s a call and time called recorded other
times when the vehicle’s picked up I guess if I call from the phone, how do I know? That’s what
I’m trying to figure out, how do I know?
Ms. Douse: So I can best equate it to a Triple A type service call for towing. Your call
would be monitored as far as when that call was received and when the dispatch towing service
was there to pick up your vehicle.
Mr. M. Williams: Who’s the towing service?
Ms. Douse: For 2019 they would have to put out a bid for towing services.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, so there’s no mechanism in this government that’s got a clock, a
way to monitor from my understanding because, I mean if we reduce if from 120 to 90 which it
ain’t a whole lot but it’s still reduced, how do we know? How can we manage, how can we
maintain the data on that?
Ms. Douse: I’m going to let Ron Crowden speak to a little bit more specific that can
hopefully answer your question, okay?
Mr. M. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Crowden: Other than what Ms. Douse has indicated we check the records on that. If
you want more of a determination we have to contact the employee to make sure that you know
the record that the tow service has on file as when it was dispatched, when it arrived and when we
got the car or vehicle back to its home base if you will. We would have to get with the employee
to verify that the information is in fact correct ---
20
Mr. M. Williams: So, Ron, I guess ---
Mr. Crowden: --- it’s sort of riding with the tow service. I don’t know how else to
(inaudible).
Mr. M. Williams: --- and I don’t either. That’s why I’m asking this question because
you’re saying you have to get with the employee. We don’t have anything in place now and that’s
why I was asking was there something in place if we dropped it from 120 minutes to 90 minutes
what’s in place to assure us that that’s going to be effective? Right now we’re just voting on
something that we have no way of policing to see how that’s done.
Mr. Crowden: 98% of the towing after hours is being done through the Sheriff’s Office.
Normally our other departments don’t work after hours except we do have on call for Utilities and
Maintenance when required. We do several after hours recovery for Utilities and we have been in
contact with them from time to time to make sure that they’re being picked up you know in a
timely manner and brought back. Other than that as you indicated we really are at the mercy if
you will of written records and employee feedback.
Mr. M. Williams: That’s all, Mr. Mayor, that’s all I’ve got.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Crowden, is this a substantive contractual change?
Mr. Crowden: (Inaudible).
Mr. Mayor: Okay, why is it being brought before us?
Mr. Crowden: It was the will of the committee to reduce the Administrative Services
Committee to reduce the 120 to 90 minutes in our contract.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and we just happened to have that conversation?
The Clerk: They’re renewing, they’re (inaudible) contract.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, so that’s why I was asking.
The Clerk: Yeah, they’re renewing their total contract.
Mr. Crowden: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and this was the data point in that.
The Clerk: Right they asked that it be modified, the wait time ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay ---
21
The Clerk: --- in committee.
th
Mr. Mayor: --- all right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4, Chairman of
Administrative Services.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir. Mr. Crowden, the same process you had to verify the 120
minutes you’re saying you use that same one for 90, am I correct?
Mr. Crowden: Correct.
Mr. Sias: And when ya’ll need to follow up on a call if there’s a vehicle that’s been towed
from an emergency situation and you follow up on it you look at the written record provided by
the contractor and then if you have a question from there you follow up with that agency or the
driver whoever requested it, am I correct?
Mr. Crowden: Correct.
Mr. Sias: And that’s basically kind of a simple process if you’re interested in verifying the
timeframe, correct?
Mr. Crowden: Correct.
Mr. Sias: Move to approve.
Mr. D. Williams: Second.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you. I mean this is going to be approved anyway but I’m just still
confused here because if there had been no verification how, what sense does it make to change it
through committee or this body if I mean if it’s going to be the same thing? I mean so ---
Mr. Mayor: Yeah ---
Mr. M. Williams: --- I mean that ---
Mr. Mayor: Yeah ---
Mr. M. Williams: --- we’re just saying something up here. That’s all we’re doing.
Mr. Sias: Call for the vote.
22
Mr. Mayor: --- you know I didn’t understand this one and I didn’t know if they were
talking about ambulances or what but it’s picking the people up when the car breaks down, the
truck break down that’s what this is all about.
Mr. Sias: (Unintelligible) bill to bring it back.
Mr. Mayor: Yeah, we are in the weeds, we are in the weeds. All right, yeah, that’s in the
weeds, all right, voting.
Mr. M. Williams votes No.
Motion Passes 9-1.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
17. Motion to deny the Protest and Appeal of Corizon Health regarding RFP #18-200 Inmate
Medical Services for the Sheriff’s Office and RCCI (approved by Administrative Services
Committee January 8, 2019)
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, if my colleagues looked in the sleeve of
your agenda book this weekend on the coversheet of that you’ve got where Commissioner Mary
Davis asked Ms. Bonner to send out based on her comment a statement I made last week at the
committee cycle which was I believe in the last ten years there have been some modifications
about some waiver possibilities mistakes such as notarizing or checks missed checks on the
procurement process and things of that nature. And so with that being said Ms. Bonner sent out
some information to us so I’m hoping that most of my colleagues got them, Mr. Mayor, because
you have a phrase and I agree they do have it as a common set of facts. And so if you don’t mind,
Mr. Mayor, I’d like to read here some of the things I was talking about last week around it, do you
mind?
Mr. Mayor: Well, it depends on how long it is.
Mr. Hasan: It’s not that long, Mr. Mayor, just to make a point about what the Commission
st
when they took action on this in June the 21, 2011.
Mr. Mayor: Let me ask you a question ---
Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: --- it may be more prudent can you direct us to the page and then ---
Mr. Hasan: Page 13.
Mr. Mayor: --- all right and what paragraph, sir?
23
Mr. Hasan: It’s not but one paragraph where it says Mr. Russell but I will say the part he
may have something that highlighted there ---
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. Hasan: --- but right above the first highlight you’ll see where it says what we’re
attempting to do is the immediate direction. Do you see that?
Mr. Mayor: Yes.
Mr. Hasan: Okay and I wanted to start from there.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, continue.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, thank you, sir. What we attempted, this is the Administrator speaking
to the Commission in 2011. What we attempted to do is meet the direction of the Commission
that we receive to make the process easy to understand clearer to the people that are in process to
make the ability to appear easier to understand to give the Procurement Director, I’m sorry,
Purchasing Department the opportunity to fix issues that are specific to our current process. For
an example if somebody does not have a piece of paper notarized and that’s an issue that we run
into on more than one occasion where individuals have failed to meet the entire process by simple
things of notification or notarization of a piece of paper they’re thrown out. We have been roundly
criticized by the Commission by being nitpicky in that particular area and unfortunately, the rules
say you’ve got to do it all right. This gives us the go ahead or the ability to look at the mirage of
the bid and not look at the details that have been involved in throwing some of the things out which
have gathered us additional costs and in some cases and/or lawsuits and much discussion by this
Commission. We this attempt, well, with this attempt he’s go we but I think he’s saying with, with
this attempt to fix those issues in a manner we feel was fair to both the department heads who have
to work with it, the people have to work with the process, the bidder and the people that benefit
from that process the citizens there and (unintelligible) this was an attempt to do. So what are we
saying, Mr. Mayor, if my memory serves me correct what was happening we was in (unintelligible)
Procurement Department in particular and they were very successful I mean very clear about it
and very successful in defending the code of Augusta-Richmond County. But however there were
still some concerns about why those cases were being thrown out when it came to issues of this
magnitude. So the Commissioners decided to do a remedy and create a waiver process or create a
process even it was a process and something needed to be appealed before it ever came to the
Commission. You know you will find that on this page here and go to Page 35 where we’ve got
some of the ordinance when the Commission dropped an ordinance to make some modifications
and it says invitations for bids and specifications. You’ve got that but you also have this is an
authority to authority on 30, 54 I’m sorry authority to resolve protests. The Procurement Director
and the Administrator should have the authority prior to the final decision by the Commission to
settle and resolve the protests of an agreed bidder or offer or contractor, actuary or perspective
concerns of solicitation or award of a contract meaning many times those things with the
Procurement Director and the Administrator can get together and look at that and some of those
protests can possibly be resolved before they get here. On the next sheet, Mr. Mayor, 61 Waiver
24
of Technicalities. It says Augusta, Georgia has the authority to reject all bids or proposals or any
bid or proposal that is non-responsive or not responsible and to waive technicalities and
informalities. So the process is there, Mr. Mayor. The reason I really brought this up was because
when Ms. Sams is doing her job many times we say well we don’t have a choice and in 2011 the
Commission took action when it comes around technicalities such as notarization, when it comes
down to the checking of a box and things of that nature that we do have some leeway or there’s
some remedy for that. It also says when it comes to a protest if that issue is not resolved with the
Administrator, the Procurement Director, and the business at hand if it’s not resolved then the
Procurement Director sends that person or that company or that entity a letter and let them know
that this won’t be resolved something official even though they sat down with them and then that
moves on eventually if the person appeals to come to the Commission. So there are other ways
those issues can be resolved when a person don’t check a box. Those issues, there’s some relief
there and the Commission took action on that in 2011.
Mr. Mayor: All right ---
Mr. Hasan: And so I so I mean is there any questions about anything I just said because
you have it pretty much (unintelligible). I wanted to know if anybody agrees or disagrees with it.
Mr. Mayor: --- well my question to you is the documents that you’re referring to that have
been transmitted to everyone what, where did they originate from? I see Article 9 Article 1 what
(inaudible).
Mr. Hasan: Well, that would be that would be the new ordinance that they revised in the
and I’m sorry, our Clerk sent it out by request of Commissioner Davis.
Mr. Mayor: Right, I understand that, but the larger document in other words the originating
document all of these are excerpts from a document and what is that document?
Mr. Hasan: Well, that document would be the revision I guess the revisions made in the
ordinance for the procurement process this was what was sent to us because it identified a zero end
on the matter at hand which was those kinds of issues that would waive us and things of that nature.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so Madam Clerk ---
The Clerk: I think it’s on the cover page the ordinance on the procurement code of that
memo ---
Mr. Mayor: --- so this is a procurement code that we have ---
The Clerk: --- it’s the procurement code and it’s under the ordinance that was adopted by
the Commission.
Mr. Mayor: --- all right.
Mr. M. Williams: Question, Mr. Mayor.
25
Mr. Mayor: All right ---
The Clerk: The Attorney has the ordinance.
th
Mr. Mayor: --- okay. All right, so this is what the Commissioner from the 6 is referring
to is that while the meeting minutes are the lead to this discussion this comes from the current
procurement code.
Mr. Hasan: Current procurement code, yes.
Mr. Mayor: And you’ve referenced a series of section and articles from the current
procurement code that in your mind based on what’s been adopted by the previous Commission
the authority to make those decisions is already available, they’re empowered to do that as it is
today, is that what I’m hearing?
Mr. Hasan: Yes, if you have somebody to protest a potential bid then that person can sit
down after being notified they can sit with the Administrator and the Procurement Director and sit
down and try to resolve that conflict. If that is not done, then the Procurement Director will send
that company in writing that they still whatever is being they’re not able to do business and if they
appeal that process then it comes on to the Commission through that process. Waiver for
Technicalities means that they can also do that too when you’re talking about checking a box and
things because like I said the Procurement Department was only doing its job but the Commission
never took the time and said okay let’s try to remedy some of this because we’re going to court by
the check of a box. So there’s never, this is not an indictment against our Procurement Department
whatsoever. It is something that we have at our disposal as a government that the previous
Commission we can ignore it or we can honor it but it is there and that’s what I wanted to let it be
known that it exists.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, so I’m going to ask a real simple question and that is what is
your expectation? We have a motion to deny this protest and appeal but this is a larger
conversation that has happened I know on multiple instances certainly in the four years that I’ve
been here. And so the question that’s before us right now is when you have these ‘technicalities’
where there’s an expression of grief and others that want to relieve that John Doe and
(unintelligible) said well you know I just didn’t feel like that little line right there but everything
else is here. What recourse do I have? And so instead of it being subjective it needs to be purely
objective and say all right let’s resolve that right now so that’s how we got here. So what are you
recommending we do? I mean right now the matter before us is to the motion is to deny this.
Mr. Hasan: I have a motion for you if you don’t mind ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay ---
Mr. Hasan: --- a substitute motion ---
Mr. Mayor: --- if it’s different from this.
26
Mr. Hasan: --- it’s different than that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right very well the Chair recognizes all right so hold on a minute
th
I’m going to come back to you. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir and I was the original receipt of this agenda item at committee
th
level that wasn’t a request reference to what my colleague from the 6 is saying. That was an
appeal that was sent to Procurement for that I mean it was denied and that is how it got to the
Commission and so that process was actually enacted if I’m not mistaken. But I saw where they
had wrote a letter requesting a letter of appeal to the Procurement Director for that item and it was
denied and therefore the next step was to come to the Commission.
Mr. Mayor: The Administrator’s in there before it gets to the Commission.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so again what we can do is be in this subjective phase. If the current
code and ordinance said this is what we have the ability to do and we need to be able to move
swiftly and do that. All right, let’s dispose of the matter before us. We’ve got Item number 17,
th
the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Motion to refer this item back to the Administrator, General Counsel and
Procurement Department to address it in accordance with the process outlined in the procurement
ordinance #7314 and as a request for a waiver.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Hold on, hold on, hold on. All right, so that motion failed that substitute fails
it didn’t have a proper second. All right, the Chair recognizes the Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to make a motion to approve
the agenda item as it reads on the screen.
Mr. M. Williams: Second.
Mr. Hasan: Let me ask a question, Mr. Mayor, if you don’t mind, a follow up question.
Mr. Mayor: All right, hold on, hold on. All right, I’ve got a motion and a second,
th
everybody just suspend. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, the item came through committee because the business
owner the company had a right to come to them after being turned down through whether it be the
Administrator or the Procurement, they had a right to come like any other person and say I want
to appeal to the Commission. We listened and we turned it down and sent it to full Commission
so it’s really resolved once we vote in here now. Now my colleague read the history back in 2011
and those things are true but any business can still come and say I want to speak to the body
because I don’t think I was treated fair. But as long as we done dot our ‘i’s’ and cross our ‘t’s’
27
then the railroad tracks or whatever we’ve got to cross everything is fine so we done done that.
There’s nothing to do now but vote on this item as it’s written and move to the next one. I’ve got
three more items I’ve done pulled ya’ll ain’t, I’m willing to trade up.
Mr. Mayor: You did that, you did that and I thought we were going to be able to go home
th
since you’re trying not to. All right, I’m going to go back to the Commissioner from the 6. I will
rd
tell you that again to the degree that he’s brought this forward the Commissioner from the 3 has
raised this issue as well where again I see this happen all the time, Madam Clerk, where whether
you’re completing a grant application and you miss one thing you know I’m going through the
school application right now. And we’re very fortunate that when a 17-year old misses something
somebody’s who’s in that mission says oh you need to fill this out and they give us a call, that’s I
see that happen all the time even when it comes to grant applications. And while I understand we
th
have currently codified code and ordinances the Commissioner from the 6 is correct that there
needs to be a subjective approach to you know I sent you five pages instead of seven pages. If the
vendor of record is reputable and is able to do the work I would rather we not throw them out
th
because you had that process. So I’m going to go back to the Commissioner from the 6 and
maybe he can find a better way to articulate a substitute.
Mr. Hasan: Let me say this, Mr. Mayor. First I want to say however we do with this is
fine. I just wanted to say that we don’t have other options. I think that’s where we get locked and
say we don’t have a choice but to do this and this ordinance here clearly let’s us know there’s other
ways to do business. And I feel confident in saying Mr. Mayor, you can ask the Administrator if
you want if you chose to when we’re saying we already went through the process the question for
me to the Administrator is has she, Ms. Sams and the company sit down with this company? Has
that been done?
Mr. Mayor: All right, Madam Administrator.
Ms. Jackson: No, I have not met with the company directly.
Mr. Hasan: And so step two has not been done and this is what this ordinance is saying to
us that’s our first line of defense when it comes from the person’s appeal process or waiver. And
here’s why I say this is a grand opportunity to abide by this ordinance and I’m going to say this,
Mr. Mayor, and I’m going to leave it alone. And that is if I understand correctly about what we’re
engaging in right now this is not to stop in my mind the awarding of it. This has allowed this
company to participate because it didn’t check a box. They may not get, this is not to stop to keep
them from getting the contract. this has allowed them to participate in the move forward for the
check of a box and that’s what the Commission sought fit to recommend so we, so it’s not we’re
taking the bid and giving it to somebody else. So it don’t get no simpler than to say okay let’s go
back and look through the whole process again and allow this company to participate. They’re not
guaranteed anything.
Mr. Mayor: I believe the gentleman knows of what he speaks.
Mr. M. Williams: Don’t say that, Mr. Mayor, you know what that means now.
28
Mr. Mayor: No, I know what it means ---
Mr. Hasan: It’s important that I know.
Mr. Mayor: --- I know what it means and I know what you all heard in that neighborhood
meeting was incomplete and inaccurate.
Mr. M. Williams: But Mr. Mayor, Point of Order please?
Mr. Mayor: All right, so I’ve got a motion and a second. All right I’m going to recognize
st
the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. M. Williams: I had a Point of Order.
Mr. Mayor: He’s got his hand up as well, just everybody just hold on, we’re fine, we’re
fine. We can debate as long as ya’ll want to.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, every time I have an opportunity to talk about our department
heads and how efficient they are I do that. And I think in Ms. Sams we have a very competent
director, department head that has been going to State Court, going to Federal Court and each time
she comes out on top because of the efficiency of her department. We had a Dr. Malik from the
Carl Vinson Institute who came before this body and said that he has evaluated procurement
departments all over the country and not one time has she seen a department that’s as efficient as
the one that we have here in Augusta and I think that because of the history we need to abide by
her recommendations. I feel that if this goes to court based on the recommendation of Ms. Sams
you’re going to come out on top. I mean it’s been proven time and time and time again because of
the way she runs her department. So and then I think if we allow if we even consider someone
that’s been deemed noncompliant if we put them back in the game then we have got to do that for
other companies and other companies that we have deemed noncompliant because they did not
add this to their package, it’s going to open up a whole new can of worms and I’m not, I don’t
think we’re prepared to do that at this particular time.
Mr. Mayor: Well, the gentleman is very passionate about this matter and I think we tend
to do this all too often. This is an instance where the information that has been brought to us by
rdth
way of the Commissioner from the 3 and articulated by the Commissioner from the 6 I think
it’s extremely germane and we tend to do this often and when it comes to procurement matters we
make this about the department director. I too, I’m going to be the hardest and most ardent
defender of our directors and our staff here. This is not about our director. This is about how we
do business. This is not only about how we do business but this is taking a very absolutist approach
to how we do business even though the law affords us other options to be able to address matters
like this and our way to couch it is to say well we’ve got the best director in the State of Georgia.
And while that’s true that’s not the question that’s before us. The question that’s before us is the
law as it is written gives us these options, these steps to take, and what we’re saying is subjectively
we’re just not going to take them. We’re just going to take the first one and we’re going to stop
there. And I think we need to revisit that as we move forward because we want to be open for
business and we shouldn’t make this about our Director of Procurement which is what we tend to
29
do as opposed to being open for business. We have a motion and a second of the underlined motion
number seventeen but again emphatically say let’s not make this about our department director.
This is about how we do business as a city. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from
th
the 10 and we’re going to vote on this.
Mr. Clarke: Mr. Mayor, will the motion be repeated again please?
Mr. Mayor: It is number seventeen, it is the underlined motion that’s before you on
seventeen.
Mr. Clarke: Thank you.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I asked you for a Point of Order.
Mr. Mayor: All right, state your inquiry.
Mr. M. Williams: Yes, sir, I mean this is not about any director, not about persons or
director but and I understand about local businesses that want to do business. But I understand too
that if we go back and do this now after refusing other folks in the past that’s going to open up
another gate for us to have to face because we didn’t do it before. Now those are the rules so if
you don’t have no rules then that’s one thing but since we have rules you may not like them I’d
like to get local businesses in. We just got through talking a local vendor $3. Something million
dollars with Fleet Management and we ain’t talked about no local stuff and I try to get that
conversation started then. But we have been through these points so much to EF Number whatever
EF Number is and the vendor didn’t even need one, didn’t even fill it out zero and the bid got
thrown out. So if we’re going to go back now and open up that can of worms because if you let
somebody else go because they missed one sheet of paper, didn’t sign one dotted line we’ve got
to do everybody like that. So we need to do the, if it's a rule it’s a rule I’m sorry if you missed it
you ought to have somebody like the Mayor’s got that can call you and tell you you missed it, if
you ain’t go nobody that can tell you you missed it than you’re going to get on the boat, it’s simple
as that.
Mr. Mayor: All right so ---
Mr. Hasan: Point of Personal Privilege pleas?
Mr. Mayor: --- I’ve got a motion and a proper second ---
Mr. Hasan: Give me 30-seconds.
Mr. Mayor: --- voting.
Mr. Sias: Number 17 right?
Mr. Mayor: On 17.
30
Mr. Hasan: Point of Personal Privilege Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: All right everybody just hold on we’re voting now, we’re voting.
Mr. Hasan votes No.
Motion Passes 9-1.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor Point of Personal Privilege on this 30-seconds.
Mr. Mayor: Well I’m not seeing you do anything in 30-seconds.
Mr. Hasan: Well give me a try I’m on record now.
Mr. Mayor: I’m going to give you a minute.
Mr. Hasan: A minute thank you sir. Mr. Mayor my whole process, based on what I’m
hearing from my colleagues I understand what they’re saying but if we’re going to do this at the
end of the day that’s going to be our approach moving forward we might as well take this out of
the code, if that’s the approach we’re going to take from what I’m hearing because clearly this was
nothing about the Procurement Director our Administrator was very direct the director of the
department was only doing his job this was some ways to deal with some of those issues. If we’re
going to open this up we’ve go to do everything retroactive for doing an living by our own policy
then we ought to just remove this from the code, thank you Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk.
Mr. M. Williams: 18 and 19 can be companion Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: No ---
Mr. M. Williams: But I mean ---
Mr. Mayor: --- everybody can add another one to the list.
Mr. M. Williams: --- I was trying to help you out.
Mr. Mayor: Items 18 and 19.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
18. Motion to approve the bid award for the Municipal Building Condenser Water Pipe
Installation to Contract Management of Augusta, GA in the amount of $79,900.00. Bid Item
18-222A. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee January 8, 2019)
31
19. Motion to approve the bid award for the Municipal Building Drainpipe installation to
Contract Management of Augusta, GA in the amount of $77,369.00. Bid Item 18-223A.
(Approved by Administrative Services Committee January 8, 2019)
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you Mr. Mayor I guess my question is to this is if add those
numbers together you’re going to come up with about $156,000 dollars. My question is this going
to fix this issue or are we going to come back and face this issue again now. If we’re going to
spend this kind of money and then to wrap the pipes that should’ve been wrapped when they was
put in if it was that simple it looked like they would’ve done that. So I guess my question is is that
going to fix this or that’s going to give us a temporary fix.
Mr. Mayor: I don’t know but I’m going to ask the Deputy Director of Central Services and
he’s going to give us a real good answer.
Mr. Crowden: Good afternoon Commissioner, Commissioner this should fix this issue.
Mr. M. Williams: This should fix this is what you said.
Mr. Crowden: This will fix this.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay that’s what I want to hear, that’s what I want to hear this will fix
this. And if this is going to fix it Mr. Mayor this almost $160,000 dollars-worth of what we’re
doing I’m going to make a motion to approve but if this comes back not just in the two years I’m
here but at any time in life I’m coming back down here. Motion to approve.
Mr. Sias: How about after life?
Mr. M. Williams: Or anybody that comes back you just stay in your lane ain’t nobody
coming back.
Mr. Mayor: All right I’ve got a motion and a second, voting.
Motion Passes 10-0.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
24. Motion to approve RFQ #18-263: Task Order Program (2018) for Utilities Department
in the amount of $6,000,000.00 for execution by Beam’s Construction, Inc.; Blair
Construction, Inc.; Garnto Southern Construction, Inc.; Gearig Civilworks, LLC; Legacy
Water Group, LLC; North American Pipeline Management, Inc.; Reynolds Construction,
LLC as qualified and selected contractor. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee
January 8, 2019)
32
th
Mr. Mayor: All right the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you Mr. Mayor Tom committee was your birthday now and today
you don’t get two birthday’s you know that don’t you.
Mr. Wiedemeir: I understand.
Mr. M. Williams: Tell me how can we award to all of these companies when there’s a bid
process, how can we determine if it’s a bid process for four or five companies to ---
Mr. Wiedemeir: This task order list will be contractors that are deemed qualified to do
work for our smaller and work in emergency work we will bid among these seven contractors
unless it’s a tremendous emergency then we’ll just have to get whoever we can get. But our intent
is to compete our small and emergency work among these seven companies.
Mr. M. Williams: --- so these seven companies would be the go to companies to get small
and local businesses in other words Blair Construction is unanimous in being any of these would
be the construction companies you go to for ---
Mr. Wiedemeir: For smaller projects and emergency work.
Mr. M. Williams: --- so the $6 million-dollars how does that play because I don’t
understand it. And you’ve got a total of $6 million-dollars you’ve got six or seven companies.
Mr. Wiedmeir: Right so that’s $6 million-dollars is establishes a budget will probably
carry us to or maybe even a little more than two years based on our history of work so that just
authorizes that amount of money. When we expend that $6 million dollars we come back and
either redo this RFQ or ask for additional funds to be approved.
Mr. M. Williams: But they didn’t bid on it how did they get selected I guess my question
how did they get selected to be these ---
Mr. Wiedmeir: Qualifications.
Mr. M. Williams: --- they had qualifications.
Mr. Wiedmeir: Yes.
Mr. M. Williams: Qualifications now and bid is two different things Tom I mean if I’m
qualified to fly and airplane but I want to fly you I’ve got to do something. So they’ve got the
qualifications I get that ---
Mr. Wiedmeir: And they will still bid the work. For each task order we put out there they
will bid for that work it’s an expedited bid process essentially.
33
Mr. M. Williams: --- my last question to Mr. Wiedmeir is how much money do you have
in the Water Department Tom?
Mr. Wiedmeir: Just barely enough.
Mr. M. Williams: Same answer I get every time but so moved Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to approve.
Mr. Garrett: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right, voting.
Mr. Hasan, Mr. Frantom and Mr. Clarke out.
Motion Passes 7-0.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
25. Motion to accept proposal from Zimmerman, Evans and Leopold, Inc. (ZEL Engineers)
to provide engineering services to design the Utilities Department’s Fort Gordon B Street
Water Main Replacement project at a cost of $80,295.00. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee January 8, 2019)
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk can we add I think you also had 26 on that list.
The Clerk: No sir 27 and 28.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right we’ll leave it as is. All right the Chair recognizes the
th
Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor I got my answer on 25 I’m going to make a motion to
approve that item and go on to the next one so my motion is to approve.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
The Clerk: Are you making them companion sir for 27 and 28 or just for 25.
Mr. M. Williams: No, no just for 25.
The Clerk: Okay don’t get it twisted.
Mr. M. Williams: Don’t get it twisted.
Mr. Mayor: All right voting.
34
Mr. Sias, Mr. Hasan and Mr. Clarke out.
Motion Passes 7-0.
The Clerk: 27 and 28 can be companion sir?
Mr. M. Williams: Yes Ma’am.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
27. Motion to approve entering into a Project Framework Agreement with the Georgia
Department of Transportation for ADA and Sidewalk Improvements Along Kissingbower
Road (Marschalk Rd to White Rd, PI #0015958) as requested by AED. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee January 8,2019)
28. Motion to approve entering into a Project Framework Agreement with the Georgia
Department of Transportation for ADA and Sidewalk Improvements Along Walton Way
thth
(7 Street to 11 Street, PI #0015959) as requested by AED. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee January 8, 2019)
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay 27 that means I understand the ADA Sidewalk Kissingbower Road
is a very narrow road it’s hardly enough room for two cars to pass there, you can’t park a car have
a car parked there and get by there it’s just impossible you can’t do that. So there’s no sidewalk
but if they’re going to put sidewalks I’m hoping they’re going to put curbing and if they’re going
to put curbing then sidewalks we really done took up some room. What about the right-of-way
has that been acquired where is the right-of-way and where’s the curbing is all that going to be in
place or just going to be a sidewalk like they did on Kratha Drive now?
Mr. Speaker: For the Kissingbower Road Project we’ve had that project designed by a
professional engineer one of our own colleague engineers. From what I remember there is we’re
going to stay within our existing right-of-way and we’re going to cover up the drainage ditch and
pipe it and then we’re going to install the curbing, gutter and the sidewalk if I, it’s been a while
since I looked at it.
Mr. M. Williams: But there is no drainage ditch I mean theirs is no piping there and that’s
why when I saw this item it really stood out Mr. Mayor because many park in that area along there
there’s an embankment that goes down where maybe there was a ditch that water now runs into
the park. But I’m concerned about the room of the area that’s going to be going to house the
sidewalk.
Mr. Speaker: The sidewalk is only along one side of the street it’s only along the side with
the, it’s a Family Dollar if I remember right. So there will be a ADA installed in front of the church
which is just to the west of the Family Dollar and then the improvements will be installed on the
north side for lack of a better word the north side of Kissingbower where the Family Dollar stop
35
their improvements down to the church. So there’s a gap in there in the sidewalk the sidewalk,
sidewalk and sidewalk and so we’re going to fill in the gag.
Mr. M. Williams: But there will be curbing I’m asking the question because if you’ve got,
and we did some work like that where we had no curb and the sidewalk meets the street and cars
can easily, and they’re going to use it trust me. If there’s no curb because the street is very narrow
even though Mayor Davis thinks he’s a good driver trying to get around there you’re going to have
to get up on that sidewalk unless there’s a curb. So is there a curb that’s going to be added or just
sidewalk because we’re talking about ADA accessible. And I understand you can roll a
handicapped type situation or wheelchair type situation there but if there’s no curb then we’re
asking for trouble I believe in my mind.
Mr. Speaker: We told the design consultant to design it per GDOT standards I don’t,
GDOT has two standards one you have the curb and gutter the other one there’s a separation
between the edge of pavement and the beginning of the sidewalk or the edge of the sidewalk. I
don’t remember off the top of my head which one this is so let me go back, look at the design and
I can give you a firm answer.
Mr. M. Williams: I would hope before this is approved Mr. Mayor that we do look at that
because this is vitally important to have that. In a situation in a curb too Mr. Mayor when you go
through there from the Dollar Store you talked about Family Dollar whatever it is there there’s a
curb, traffic is running pretty fast in there too as well. So if we don’t do a curb I think we’d be
doing a disservice to the sidewalk, maybe Malik can answer.
Dr. Malik: Obviously the agenda item is really to sign the Project Framework for GDOT
so we can federal funds but we will look into the design as we proceed with the design.
Mr. M. Williams: So this is not to do the work this is just to acquire the federal funds.
Dr. Malik: Yes sir.
Mr. M. Williams: Yeah can Mr. Mayor can we have that brought back to this body before
the work is begun to make sure that because the two standards you’re talking about ain’t just
GDOT there’s two standards in the City of Augusta one side of town got one and the other side
got another one and we’re trying to change that to make sure that everybody’s got the same
standard so.
Dr. Speaker: Yes we can bring that back I mean I have the design on my computer on my
desk I just don’t have it with me ---
Mr. M. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Speaker: --- so I can answer that question for you.
Mr. M. Williams: So do I need to approve these two agenda items with the same
stipulation?
36
Mr. Speaker: Well let me just clarify 28 is a different project same program different
project and 28 that project has not been designed yet that project will require us to do a design and
then build it. So Kissingbower Number 27 the project has been designed and is ready to be
constructed and this agenda item gives starts the process to go GDOT’s Planning and Development
Process to get the funding to build it. Number 28 it’s the same process but there’s an extra step
and that is in order to start this project through GDOT for Number 28 there’s a design component
to that that is not in Number 27. So 27’s basically ready to go 28 will require an engineering
design and then construction but both of these require these project agreements to get the process
through GDOT.
Mr. M. Williams: Now I’m hearing you say 27 is ready to go and when you say ready to
go I’m thinking it’s ready to go, go not just ---
Mr. Speaker: It’s ready to go in the fact that it’s been designed and it can be constructed
but we have to go through GDOT’s process because of the funding mechanism.
Mr. M. Williams: --- okay. So yeah we’ll come back and make sure the curb is there and
okay on 28 there is curbing on Walton Way I’m sure there’s curb there so the sidewalk will be just
the issue with Walton Way.
Mr. Speaker: It’ll be sidewalks and handicap ramps and reconfiguring of some of the
driveways.
Mr. M. Williams: So moved Mr. Mayor.
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. Mayor: I’ve got a motion and a second, voting.
Motion Passes 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: On last night there was a communication that was sent out to everyone about
wanting to go into Executive Session just for a few moments and ---
Mr. Fennoy: Can’t hear you Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: --- I said last night there was communication sent out to all the Commission
about going into Executive Session to talk about two matter and I’d like to move forward with
that, it shouldn’t take us long.
Mr. M. Williams: I don’t agree Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Sias: So moved.
Mr. Frantom: We’ve got a motion to approve.
37
Mr. M. Williams: --- I don’t agree to go into Executive Session I mean when you go into
Executive Session someone else may have some issues as well. If they want to and I don’t have
any but when you go into Executive Session you need to know, I mean if Sean Frantom decides
he wants to bring out executive position then you know we won’t need to do that.
Mr. Mayor: Hold on hold on all right I just want to make sure we dispose of all of this
before us right now everybody voted Madam Clerk?
The Clerk: Items 27 and 28 is unanimous and then we have to enumerate what we ---
ADDENDUM
31. Motion to go into Executive Session.
Mr. MacKenzie: This would be a motion to go into an Executive Session to discuss
potential litigation and personnel.
Mr. Frantom: So moved.
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right we’ve got a motion and a second, voting.
Ms. Davis out.
Motion Passes 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: While we’re waiting on the stragglers, I do want to let everyone know that
th
today is MLK’s birthday 90 birthday. There is an event taking place this afternoon I believe it’s
at I think it’s at Reed I think it’s at Reed Presbyterian ---
Mr. Hasan: Covenant.
Mr. Mayor: --- Presbyterian Covenant at 7:00.
Mr. Speaker: Where is that?
Mr. Frantom: On Walton Way.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, on Walton Way so that’s going to take place at 7:00 and that’s a
community it’s an interfaith MLK event at 7:00.
LEGAL MEETING
A. Pending and Potential Litigation.
B. Real Estate.
C. Personnel.
38
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right we’ll call this meeting back to order the Chair recognizes
Attorney MacKenzie.
32. Motion to authorize execution by the Mayor of the affidavit of compliance with Georgia’s
Open Meeting Act.
Mr. Kenzie: I would entertain a motion to execute the closed meeting affidavit.
Mr. Hasan: So moved.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
thth
Mr. Mayor: All right I’ve got a motion from the 6 and second from the 7, voting.
Mr. M. Williams and Ms. Davis out.
Motion Passes 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: All right Madam Clerk is there any other business before us?
The Clerk: No sir that’s it.
Mr. Mayor: All right this meeting is adjourned.
\[MEETING ADJOURNED\]
Lena Bonner
Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy
of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of The Augusta Richmond County Commission held on
January 15, 2019.
______________________
Clerk of Commission
39