HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommission Meeting March 6, 2007
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
MARCH 6, 2007
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., March 6, 2007, the Hon.
Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Holland, Smith, Harper, Grantham, Hatney, Beard, Williams, Cheek,
Bowles and Brigham, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
The invocation was given by the Reverend Charles E. Goodman, Jr., Pastor, Tabernacle
Baptist Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited.
The Clerk:
PRESENTATIONS
A. Dr. William A. Bloodworth, President Augusta State University. RE: Present and
future plans for ASU. (Requested by Commissioner Don Grantham)
Mr. Brigham: A lot of you who are not aware as to what Augusta State is doing and what
it means to Augusta is right here in this gentleman’s mind and in his heart particularly. So that’s
why he’s here today and I’d like to hear from him.
Mr. Mayor: Great. And, Dr. Bloodworth, I know of the big plans and all and I hate to
put a five-minute time limit on you but I’ve got to keep it fair for everybody.
Dr. Bloodworth. Five minutes will be fine. It’s my first time in 13½ years to have this
opportunity. I know if I’m not brief I won’t have it again. I’d hate to wait another 13½ years.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Dr. Bloodworth: I’m going to give just a very brief update about Augusta State
University. Let me begin by trying to explain why we do what we do. We do what we do
because students need higher education. I refer to this as the million-dollar deal. The student
who graduates from college earns over a lifetime at least a million dollars more than someone
who just graduates from high school. So we’re adding value and we’re adding dollars to the
lives of our students and we have some very special students and I think about them a lot and I
think about the students in the future. 48% of the children in this nation under the age of
eighteen now live in families with no college experience. In this nation 50% of the students in
grades K-12 qualify for free or reduced price lunches which means they don’t come from rich
families. And we are the kind of institution that helps meet the needs of those kinds of students.
But I think if you could ever measure the value of a college university by the, by the addition of
education value to the lives of a student, you would understand why a school like Augusta State
University is so important to this community. Last fall we had 6,573 students. That’s an
increase of 22% over five years. That means 6,573 students to whom we could add and to whom
1
we try to add great value to their lives. 60% of those students define themselves as white, non-
Hispanics. The others define themselves in other ways. 65% of our students are women that
means only 35% are men. That’s the kind of school we are, most of our students come from this
area. And we’re very pleased to have students who come here from Augusta. 95% of our
students come from the local area. And we’re pleased to do the kind of work that we do for
them. We’re bursting at the seams. We have a campus on Walton Way and we have a facility
on Wrightsboro Road and we know that as we grow we will run out of that space on Walton
Way unless you can figure out some way to give us land around our campus or turn Walton Way
into a five-lane road. I don’t think you can do that. We have a master plan. We know what we
have to do in the future once we get above about 7,200 students. We have to be holding more
classes on Wrightsboro Road. The future of Augusta State University is for expansion along
Wrightsboro Road where Christenberry Field house is now, where on the other side of the road
our University Village Student apartments are. So that’s our plan. At some point in the future
when Augusta State University has 14 or 15,000 students there will be more of the campus on
Wrightsboro Road than there will be on Walton Way. Now we need some help. We’re not
asking for your help we need some help from the State. We need to build buildings. We have
what looks like a gorgeous campus. You know how attractive it is. But all those new buildings
are replacement buildings. We have not actually increased the number of classes and
laboratories and office spaces in any way that’s commensurate with what it looks like. So we
continue to need space. We’re basically out of space right now for a lot of our functions. We’re
making a pitch to the Board of Regents for a very large 40 to 45 million-dollar facility, which
has to be on Wrightsboro Road and has to include some funds for the purchase of land on
Wrightsboro Road. That’s where we’re going. It’s a great institution. I’m so honored to have
been here for 13½ years and for those years ahead of me in the future, I love this community, I
love the kind of school we are, I love the kind of students that we serve. And I thank you so very
much for listening to me today.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Dr. Bloodworth, let me say before you leave and then, Mr.
Cheek, I’ll come to you. As a member of the ASU foundation board and as a graduate of
Augusta College I appreciate everything that you’re doing and in any way that I can personally
help you, and I would say this goes for the rest of the Commission, with regards to the Board of
Regents in getting the funding we’re more than happy to do it. So thank you for all that you do.
Dr. Bloodworth: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Dr. Bloodworth, in order to give credit where credit
is due the past 13 years have seen unprecedented growth an improvements at Augusta State.
And I for one feel and I’m sure the rest of the Commission does too that under your leadership
our college has come so far and as a citizen and a representative of the people of the City of
Augusta I wanted to thank you for what you’ve done and I know for what’s on your heart to do
in the future.
Dr. Bloodworth: I’m just glad I could stay out of the way of people who knew how to get
things done.
2
Mr. Mayor: Thank you so much.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: All righty, Madame Clerk, we will move on to the consent agenda.
The Clerk: The consent agenda consists of items 1-22. Items 1-22. For the benefit of
any objectors to our alcohol petitions I call your attention to the Public Services portion of our
agenda. If there are any objectors to the alcohol petitions when they are read would you please
signify your objections by raising your hand.
Item 1. Is a petition for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer and Wine license to be used in
connection with Kokomo Joe’s located 1204 Ellis Street.
Item 2. Is a retail package Liquor, Beer and Wine license to be used in connection with Bo’s
Package located 3001 Peach Orchard Road.
The Clerk: Are there any objections to those alcohol petitions?
Mr. Shepard: None noted, Madame Clerk.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any additions to the consent agenda? Commissioner
Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, item 25 was sent forward with no recommendation pending a
read by legal on the DBE portion of the contract and if that would be something we needed to
hold up on due to current legal actions. If we have a read on that ---
The Clerk: (INAUDIBLE)
Mr. Cheek: Well, just in short, are we good or are we not good?
The Clerk: We’re good.
Mr. Cheek: Well, I would like to see, if that, if those questions being answered and uh,
due to the fact that the leaves are beginning to grow we can get these pictures made I would like
that be added to the consent agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Great. Do we have any further additions to the consent agenda?
Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor I ---
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Mayor Pro Tem.
Ms. Beard: Number 26 should be added ---
3
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. I’m going to propose that we move 23
and the reason it’s put on the regular agenda is because we did not have enough attendance at the
Public Service committee meeting to where I had to excuse myself from voting. But since this
vote is written on committee schedule and now if we do have our committee as well as
commission in order I’d like to recommend that be put on as well as number 27. I don’t see a
reason not to move this into the consent agenda.
Mr. Cheek: Aren’t we due a ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Aren’t we due a report back concerning 27?
The Clerk: Commissioner Cheek, yes, sir, you are. I spoke with Ms. Gloria Lewis.
She’s out of town today, however, she sent the report and it is in your book.
Mr. Cheek: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any further additions to the consent agenda?
Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: 28 Mr. Mayor. Is that something that would be okay with the body?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: I would like an additional cycle to adjust the language and do, in that, Mr.
Cheek if that would be appropriate. I would like to request that be held for one time. The
th
Legislature I understand is out of session until the 19. We have plenty of time to pass another
resolution. I need to deal with um, specifically how the several classes of the Commissioners
may be dealt with. Some may be cut off after seven years, some may only have seven years to
serve and some may have more than that under the interpretations of the resolutions as presently
drawn. I’d like to make it more definite so that you knew a little more how each Commissioner
fits into what category.
Mr. Mayor: So you’re asking to defer that to the next commission meeting?
Mr. Shepherd: If we could defer. Yes, sir. As to the Civil Court Marshall, it can go
forward.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s ---
Mr. Grantham: Do it all at one time.
4
Mr. Mayor: --- do it all at one time. Okay, any further additions to the consent agenda?
Okay, any items um, Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Are you going to ask for items to be deleted as well?
Mr. Mayor: Um, what items to be deleted?
Mr. Shepard: Thank you. I would like a little more time on one other matter and that is,
you will recall that in your mail this week you should’ve received the Table of Termination letter
copies from the IRS on the 1977 pension plans specifically. Pension council suggested that we
first re-pass the 1977 pension plan as is and not merge it in one action but go ahead and pass that
again with all its tax approved changes and I would ask that that be withheld for one cycle only.
And then proceed, and then that would be number six ---
Mr. Mayor: That’s agenda item six.
Mr. Shepard: --- and then proceed with the merger of the 1998 Defined Contribution
Plan, the ’77 Pension Plan, the GMEBS plan and the No Plan Plan.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, I don’t have a problem with that, we’re dealing with two
different situations here and if we want to make them inclusive that’s okay, but I think there’s
some more dialog to be held on number six as to not only extending the time but requesting
additional information that I think would be us in an a better position to make a decision. And
I’d be happy to discuss that now or I’ll wait until that item comes up on the agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don’t know if this is the proper time but the
addition to our agenda concerning the landfill that we could discuss in Legal. Could that be
added?
Mr. Mayor: We need unanimous consent. This is the agenda item that is before us.
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir, it’s the only one ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: --- the only one proposed for addition. It has to deal with the purchase of
the land gas, gas collection system at the landfill.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
5
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if somebody can tell me the urgency in bringing that forth. I
talked with Mr. Johnson from committee yesterday but uh, I need to know before I agree that
into Legal. What’s so pressing, Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Well it’s, it’s good news in our mediation session, which we didn’t
anticipate. I did need just to present this to you today. It is subject, if it’s held that’s fine I just
needed to have it on the record that I presented it to you. If you want to move forward today, I
would like for you to move forward. It is possible to uh, as Mr. Johnson said wait, but I would, I
would certainly council if you could add it to the agenda and see fit to do that I would um, I think
it would be a good move but it also I’d like to see it just, just considered as being added and if
you don’t consent to it being added I will have the record that we tried to add it. It didn’t get
completed until yesterday very late. We worked very hard to compose an appropriate agenda
item and um, I just while the matter was in hand I wanted to go ahead and give it to the body but
it is sufficient if we just consider it but decline it based on the lack of unanimous consent to add.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, you got to like that unanimous consent?
Mr. Mayor: Um?
Mr. Williams: I just feel like we should have time. If that was some of the essence,
something that was an emergency then I think we should’ve looked at it but ---
Mr. Mayor: No unanimous consent to add. Okay, do we have any items to be pulled for
discussion?
Mr. Grantham: --- number six is gonna be pulled for discussion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
The Clerk: Are you pulling that one, Mr. Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Yes, I am.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: Pull item number 10.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: I’d like to pull item number 3.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
6
Mr. Williams: Item 9, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Any further items to be pulled for discussion? Hearing none I would look
for a motion to approve the consent agenda. But first, Madame Clerk, could you read back the
additions to and items to be pulled for discussion.
The Clerk: Yes, sir. Items on the consent agenda with the additions of items 1-22, with
the addition of items 25, 26, 23, and 27 for consent. Items pulled for further discussion, item 6,
I’m sorry, item 3, 6, 9 and 10. And for the benefit of any objectors to the item 23, alcohol
petition added, the petition is for an on premise consumption beer license to be used in
connection with the Forest Hills Golf Club. Are there any objectors to that alcohol petition?
Mr. Shepard: None noted Madame Clerk.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, I would move for a motion to approve the consent agenda.
Mr. Williams: So moved.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
CONSENT AGENDA
PUBLIC SERVICES
1. Motion to approve a New Application: A.N.07-09: request by Wayne Blackburn for an
on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with
Kokomo Joes’s located at 1204 Ellis Street. There will be Sunday Sales. District 1. Super
District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 26, 2007)
2. Motion to approve a request by Bo Yun Chang for a retail package Liquor, Beer &
Wine license to be used in connection with Bo’s Package located at 3001 Peach Orchard
Rd. District 6. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 26,
2007)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
4. Motion to approve an amendment to the mothball ordinance concerning the time period
that a house can remain boarded up. (Approved by Commission February 20, 2007-second
reading)
5. Motion to approve retirement of Mr. Paul Anderson under the 1977 Pension Plan.
(Approved by Administrative Committee February 26, 2007)
FINANCE
7. Motion to authorize Tax Commissioner to release county tax liens on the following
properties: 098-2-042-00-0; 167-080-00-0; 096-1-141-00-0; 154-0-169-00-0; 096-1-197-00-0;
057-4-003-00-0; and 167-0-150-00-0. (Approved by Finance Committee February 26, 2007)
8. Motion to approve declaring the furnishings of the motel at Augusta Regional Airport at
Bush Field surplus and available for public auction during the first week in May 2007.
(Approved by Finance Committee February 26, 2007)
7
11. Motion to adopt a resolution regarding the impact of the Public Service Commission’s
decision concerning franchise fees. (Approved by Finance Committee February 26, 2007)
ENGINEERING SERVICES
12. Motion to authorize execution of an agreement with Parsons Water & Infrastructure,
Inc. to provide Construction Manager at Risk Services for the James B. Messerly WPCP
2003 Master Plan Improvements Project Preconstruction Phase in the amount of
$395,859.16 subject to receiving a letter from Parsons stating their DBE participation is
voluntary. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 26, 2007)
13. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #051-0-189-00-0 3950
Barrett Street, which is owned by James E. Argyle Jr. and Martha Raye Argyle, for 500 sq.
feet for a temporary construction easement. PW Project: Belair Hills Subdivision
Improvement Project. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 26, 2007)
14. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #012-0-019-03-0 Banking
Center on Center West Parkway, which is owned by Augusta-Richmond Real Estate
Holding Company, for 653.93 sq. ft. of Right-of-Way I fee and 1,170.55 sq. ft. of
Temporary Construction Easement. PW Project: Washington Road Intersection
Improvements Project. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 26, 2007)
15. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of property #230-0-005-07-0
Youngblood Drive, which is owned by Jerry W. Miles and Sharon G. Miles, for 32,581 sq.
ft. of right of way in fee and 2,383 sq. ft. for temporary construction easement. PW Project:
Youngblood Drive Project. (Approved by Engineering Services committee February 26,
2007)
16. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #230-0-005-08-0 2030
Youngblood Drive, which is owned by Will c. and Stephanie L. Duncan, for 2,778 sq. ft. of
Right-of-Way in Fee, 298 sq. ft. of Temporary Construction Easement and 589 sq. ft. of
Temporary Driveway Easement. PW Project: Youngblood Drive Project. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee February 26, 2007)
17. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #051-0-188-00-0 3952
Barrett Street, Augusta, Georgia, which is owned by James E. Argyle, Sr., for 584 sq. ft. of
permanent drainage utility & maintenance easement and 692 sq. ft of temporary
construction easement. PW Belair Hills Subdivision Improvement Project. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee February 26, 2007)
18. Motion to approve an Option for Right-of-Way between Pioneers, Incorporated, as
owner and Augusta, Georgia as optionee, in connection with the Belair Hill Subdivision
Improvement project, for property located at 1721 Lincoln Avenue (051-0-073-00-0),
Lincoln Avenue (051-0-074-00-0), 1714 Orange Avenue (051-0-075-00-0), Orange Avenue
(051-0-185-01-0), 3959 Barrett Street (051-0-228-00-0), 3961 Carolyn Street (051-0-250-00-
0), 3943 Carolyn Street (051-0-259-00-0), 3913 Bolton Street (052-0-094-00-0), 3915 Bolton
Street (051-0-095-00-0), Ruth Street (065-0-015-00-0), 3908 Ruth Street (065-0-016-00-0)
3909 Murray Street (065-0-027-00-0), Padrick Street (065-0-053-02-0), Flagler Road (065-0-
062-00-0), for a purchase price of $22,541.00. Said subject property consisting of 7,781 sq.
ft. in fee, more or less, and 32,576 sq. ft., more or less of permanent drainage, utility and
maintenance easement, and 44,429 sq. ft., more or less, of temporary construction
easement. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 26, 2007)
8
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
19. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Augusta Commission held
February 20, 2007.
APPOINTMENT(S)
20. Motion to approve the appointment of William C. Lockett to the Board of Tax
Assessors to fill the un-expired term of Gloria Frazier ending 4/24/07 and for a new four-
year term ending 4/24/11 representing Super District District 9.
21. Motion to approve the appointment of Freddie Sanders to the ARC Coliseum Authority
representing District 8.
22. Motion to approve the following appointments from the ARC Legislative Delegation:
Richmond County Sheriff’s Merit Board, J.R. Riles, Carey Martin, Garney C. Browing;
Riverfront Development Review Board, Melvin Ford, Pete May; ARC Personnel Board,
Dr. Willie Mazyck, Latiza Gardner; General Aviation, Humphrey Peterson, David Fields;
ARC Coliseum Authority, Jack Usry, William Fennoy, Booker T. Robinson, Adrian
Arnold; Canal Authority, Turner Simkins, Jeannie C. Allen; Augusta Ports Authority,
Frank Carl, Lawrence Washington; ARC Historic Preservation, Brittany Patrick, Lara
Plocha; ARC Human Relations Commission, Dr. Thomas Clark, Ronnie Few; Augusta
Aviation Commission, Cedric Johnson, Karlton Howard; ARC Planning Commission,
Ashby Krouse, III, Y.N. Myers, Jr.; ARC Board of Zoning Appeals, Chris Booker, Harvey
Johnson; ARC Tree Commission, Diane Sprague, Ruth Jones; ARC Animal Control
Board, Darry Brown, Jerry Maccario; ARC Citizens’ Small Business Advisory Board,
Harold Pettiway, Robert L. Lowry; ARC Board of Tax Assessors, Bryan Simpkins, Robert
O’Neal; ARC Library Board, Audrey Thomas.
PUBLIC SERVICES
23. Motion to approve a New Ownership Application: A.N. 07-07 request by Scott Allen for
an on premise consumption Beer license to be used in connection with Forest Hills Golf
Club located at 1500 Comfort Rd. There will be Sunday Sales. District 3. Super District 10.
(No recommendation from Public Services Committee February 26, 2007)
PUBLIC SAFETY
25. Motion to approve acquisition of Digital Orthophotography through contract with
Kucera International. (No recommendation from Public Safety Committee February 26,
2007)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
26. Motion to approve a Resolution to allow CSRA RDC to continue to operate and
administer the Coordinated Transportation System for the year 2007-2008.
APPOINTMENTS
27. Consider the recommendations of the CSRA Economic Opportunity Authority, Inc. to
reappoint the following for a four-year term on the Authority: Marion Barnes,
Chairperson, Imogene Ford, V-Chair, Sara Leiden and Archie Shepard and receive a
report from the organization relating to their goals and objectives for 2006 and 2007.
(Deferred from the February 6, 2007 meeting)
9
Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Hatney votes No.
Motion carries 9-1 [Items 1-2]
Ms. Beard abstains.
Motion carries 9-1 [Item 4]
Mr. Brigham abstains.
Motion carries 9-1. [Item 11]
Motion carries 10-0. [Items 5, 7-8, 12-22, 23, 25-27]
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Before we go to those pulled agenda, I’d like to have just a minute of uh,
personal privileges if I can to speak to this body.
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In my serving as a Commissioner I tried to do
what the constituents in my district needed and that’s to be that representative. I’m, I’m troubled
here now. In the last few weeks when we’ve met and we’re trying to have this commission
meeting and to speak for those people who can’t speak for them selves I represent a lot of
people. What I’m getting to Mr. Mayor is that the two-minute rule that we talked about here in
trying to work and you asked us to work with you and I think I complied with that 100%. When
I was Mayor Pro Tem and we had to go on to make assignments I gave all that to your authority.
Had no problem with that at all. I’ve been trying to work as diligently as I know how and hard
as I know how but I’ve got the worst of everything in this community. The very worst, but I feel
like I’m trying and I don’t think it’s gonna work Mr. Mayor so if you need to call the Marshal or
the Sheriff, get the Judge or whoever you need to be here, I’m gonna speak for the people I
represent. I represent the worse part of this community and always have been the worse part of
th
this community and still hadn’t got even a 10 of what they should get. Hyde Park was just in a
previous meeting just a few minutes ago, Mr. Mayor, a subcommittee meeting I think, went very
well. But because I represent the blighted area and because I got the most problems, I’m
probably talking more than anybody else on the floor and I’m going to continue to do that, Mr.
Mayor. I’m being up front with you, I’m telling I don’t plan to hold your meeting up, I don’t
plan to run your meeting but I plan to be the voice that the people elected me to be. I’m not
gonna pass this way but one time and this time is almost ended. But it’s been on my heart, I
have employees calling and talking about how they feel that they’re not being represented. I’ve
got constituents telling me that because you think I don’t hold to too many rules that you’re
gonna address issues you know is wrong and I feel like that is terribly wrong, Mr. Mayor. I think
10
you’re supposed to be the leader, you talking about prayer breakfasts. I said I wasn’t going to no
breakfast ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams ---
Mr. Williams: This is my point of privilege ---
Mr. Mayor: We will not get into personality ---
Mr. Williams: This is not personality, Mr. Mayor. I’m telling you that I am a
representative of the people of District 2 and of this city and I wanna support that and I’m gonna
do that. But I feel like you have tried your very best to silence my district from getting the
representation that they need to have. And I’m saying to you that you’re not gonna do that.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, the two-minute rule that is called for by the rules that govern
us governs each commissioner. Each commissioner is abiding by those rules. It does not play
favorites.
Mr. Williams: That’s not true, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: It does not play favorites.
Mr. Williams: That’s not true, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham.
Mr. Williams: That’s not true.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I want to note that I abstained on item number 11.
Mr. Mayor: Duly noted. Mr. Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: Madame Clerk, all the alcohol. Thank you.
Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, item number 4.
Mr. Mayor: Madame Pro Tem.
Ms. Beard: Abstain.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Madame Clerk, let’s move into the items that have been pulled.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
11
3. Motion to approve granting a 15’x15’ easement at Big Oak Park, Boy Scout/Wheeler
Road to Bell South. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 26, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don’t have a problem with the easement. My
question comes in after we discussed it last week. I was riding home and noticed that before we
approve it at this body that the work has already begun and I would just like to ask the
Administrator how construction can begin on a project for an easement’s granted.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: I’m not aware of the specifics of that, sir, but I’ll be happy to check into it
and get back to you.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beck.
Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. I can answer that question. That
was simply a misunderstanding on timeframe with Bell South. It was my understanding that it
was going to be June before this work was to begin and they went ahead and started the work. I
got the agenda item to you as soon as I possibly could.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, is that not any part of the park. Is that not somebody to be
notified when that work was started? I mean that doesn’t add up to me so I’d like to hear
something better than that. The department’s shut down, nobody’s there, nobody, no workers I
can understand it but is there any activity going on. Shouldn’t somebody have recognized this
body or should we not reach out to Bell South and tell them we don’t wanna do it. We got
another offer to make for them. I just don’t understand that.
Mr. Mayor: Is anybody ready to make a motion either way on this one? Commissioner
Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: I make a motion to approve.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Harper and Mr. Holland vote No.
Mr. Williams abstains.
Motion carries 7-2-1.
12
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: That item we just voted on, that is just the $3,500.00 that we’re gonna be
used back in the department. The back up had seven thousand seven something. I just want to
be clear that we’re not, we just approved that the thirty-five and not the seven thousand to be put
back into the program.
The Clerk: That’s the next item, Mr. Williams.
The Mayor: That’s the next agenda ---
Mr. Williams: Huh? I just wanna make sure.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Next agenda item, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
6. Motion to approve petition to merge the 1998 Pension Plan, the 1977 Pension Plan, the
GMEBS Pension Plan, Employees with no pension plan and submit a 180 day notice of
cancellation to GEBCorp/Nationwide. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee
February 26, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham, I believe this was yours.
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My reason for pulling this is to discuss, Mr.
Shepard has asked in regards to the ’77 plan getting approval prior to merging on any two plans
together is one being the ’77 plan. But what I wanted to do today was discuss this item and to let
the employees know that something is working in their behalf. That we are looking to get the
proper information in order to establish the proper benefits without a plan for our employees
including our public safety officers. Now, let me go a step further. I feel like that the plan
presented as what was discusses in the Administrative Services is one area was well received,
however I don’t think we’ve gone the last question or the last bit of information that is necessary.
One of the most important features of these plans is what’s going to happen to our employees
when they retire and what health care benefits do they have and what type of prescription
benefits will they have. So, this is not included in this present plan as presented. Therefore
leaving us with an unknown as what I call a blank check to be written by the government. So
I’m asking that we continue to explore these efforts, I talked to Mr. Burns and several other
people and gave this information asking GMA to come and discuss this with us and to get the
final dollars that we would have as a cost to this program and see if you can’t do something that
is finally at once right for our employees.
Mr. Mayor: Would you like to put that in the form of a motion?
13
Mr. Grantham: That’s in the form of a motion.
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Grantham: And, Mr. Mayor, in addition to that I mentioned the fact that we need to
be expeditious on this so I’m asking that this information be elected by and acted on prior to
th
April 15.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Grantham.
Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Coach Holland.
Mr. Holland: Before we vote on this may I just simply make this statement in reference
to this particular pension plan. I think for some time now we’ve tasked staff to go out and try to
bring back a plan that would be beneficial for all of our employees. As I look around up here
and I see all of us sitting up here and I think most of us sitting up here have a very good pension
plan. And I think what we really need to do is to pay attention to what we’ve tasked staff to do.
They’ve been out there for some time trying to bring forth a good plan. Now I don’t think that
any plan we bring forth, there are ten of us, are going to agree on it. But I think the plan we have
now and the plan that we voted on in Administrative Services is now a fact Mr. Mayor, you even
agreed to that one when we were in Administrative Services. But all of a sudden since we’ve
come in here now everybody wants to kind of change their minds about this particular plan. And
I think, Mr. Burns, this was evident in their committee have done an outstanding job. And the
longer we wait the longer it’s going to take for our employees to have an opportunity to have an
option to save funds for their retirement. And I think that is utterly unfair to them. So I think
what we need to do as a commission, we need to approve this plan and then if there is something
else that needs to be added to this plan at a later date I don’t see any reason why it can not be
added because it has been done before. Our employees need to be looked out for. We need to
take care of our employees and we’re not doing that. And that’s one of the reasons why we have
such low moral within our government. So they need to know that we are looking, I agree with
Mr. Grantham they do need to know that we’re looking out for them and looking our for them
we need to pass this plan to let them know that this is something that they have an option to take
part in and they and option to feel that in the future that there’s something’s that’s going to
benefit them. So we need to stop playing around with this and let’s do what’s best for the people
of our government.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. Obviously this is an issue we’ve been working on for
a long time and it’s one that has been an impact on our employees as it does on our citizens as
they help bear the cost for this plan here basically. I agree wholeheartedly with what
Commissioner Holland has said. As we invest in our employees we need to do it in a way that’s
conducive to making their lives better not only while they work here but give them a future to
14
look forward to when they are fortunate to spend enough years here to be able to retire. I also
understand some of the questions we have about the long- term debt, the long-term indebtedness.
What I would suggest we do is we ask you to call a special meeting to specially deal with this
complex issue. Nothing else on the agenda but the retirement plan and then suggested by April
th
17, which is our second meeting in April that we have a vote up, down or sideways on what the
results of that special meeting might be. We, as Coach Holland says, I’ve been here five years
and this is part of the discussion we’ve had every year for five years and we’ve got people that
are not willing to retire because they don’t know what’s going to happen, people that are trying
to figure out what’s best for them and I think that this is one of those things that after a special
called meeting focused totally on retirement issues that hopefully can answer all those questions
th
that we have that we then vote it up or down in April, on April 17 and I would like to make that
recommendation.
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk, could you schedule that meeting please? Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: (INAUDIBLE)
th
Mr. Russell: What I’m after, sir, is a special called meeting prior to April 17.
Sometime in the next 20-30 days, twenty days or so and then be prepared for an up/down vote on
th
April 17 which is my understanding our April meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and that would give my office the opportunity to
have the um, the document here to be approved as the IRS approved it. It is a complex
document, it does not, it does not lend an easy read. I sent it out in advance of this meeting but
did not put it on this meeting. For technical reasons I would definitely suggest that we follow the
Administrators recommendation and have a single meeting where the ’77 plan is approved as
restated and approved by the IRS, that was a five year plus process and it’s one we have seen to
conclusion. We are ready to move but I would like to have it in a technically appropriate form
for you to pass.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Yeah, I would just like to ask Mr. Burns how many alternative plans we
investigated and reviewed as opposed to the defined pension plan.
Mr. Burns: We also ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Burns.
Mr. Burns: We also were with GEBCorp and they submit a proposal as well and they
had a chance to review all of our data.
Mr. Bowles: I would suggest we get that before our meeting so that we can look at all the
alternatives.
15
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, in light of the fact that many of our employees work until five in
the afternoon and that this impacts them the most and the State of Georgia’s recognized that
meetings during normal business hours impact working people I just humbly request that this
body consider holding the meeting later where our employees who want to attend come get first
hand information without having to take the day off or skipping out on their job to come listen to
the um, the commission debate this.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: I’d to hear from Mr. Burns that of what his recommendation is for this
plan.
Mr. Burns: My recommendation is to um, approve the plan as submitted, but I have no
problem with holding off for the 30 days.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Commissioner Harper.
Mr. Harper: You know I understand what the argument is but one thing I need to get
some clarity on with what Mr. Russell has stated that we wants to refer this back to the full
commission?
Mr. Mayor: He wants a special called meeting for presentation before the entire
commission.
Mr. Harper: Okay. With being said once we have that special called meeting, is this
special called meeting opened up to other plans and, and the plan that was approved by the um,
Administrative Services uh, what happens? You know we approve something in Administrative
Services to go forward with it. Now are we opening the door for everybody to come in? That’s
what I’m trying to get, you know ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham:
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I know this is my second time but this is not the
idea to abolish this plan as recommended. It’s only to add to what is already there and that is the
insurance coverage is so important to our employees and in speaking to Mr. Burns this is an area
that we have so many unknowns right now that we do not know what that cost is going to be, we
do not know what share the employee will have, we do not know how a person retiring at 55 will
carry insurance until they can qualify for Medicare. So we need to explore these areas
particularly and add to this plan. I’m not saying take away. We need to know what the bottom
line is for this government in paying for the retirement for our people. And that’s the only
request that I have in front of you right now.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Harper.
16
Mr. Harper: I’ve got a problem with that. My thing is with that special called meeting, is
that meeting going to be a discussion of the plan that was approved out of Administrative
Services or are we gonna to open the door for the plan? That’s my question.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Russell, would you like to clarify on what your intent was with
the special called meeting.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, my intent with the special called meeting was to answer
questions and provide additional information about what’s on the table. If there are other
questions out there that we need to respond to it would be obviously be necessary for us to do
that. But my initial intent was to take what was passed by Administrative Services and hopefully
answer the questions that are there regarding benefits, long-term fiscal impact and of those
nature that have made some of the commissioners unwary.
Mr. Mayor: Wary.
Mr. Russell: (UNINTELLIGLE)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham, I don’t believe in your motion you included
scheduling the called meeting.
Mr. Grantham: And that includes scheduling the called meeting. I said that we would
th
have a decision and have a meeting prior to April 17.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
th
Mr. Grantham: But April 17 suits me fine.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Grantham: And I’ll add that as an amendment, Madame Clerk do you need to write
that in?
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Is there any further discussion?
Mr. Holland: When are we gonna have this meeting and again along with what ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: --- Mr. Harper said, you know is this meeting gonna be opened to other
companies to come in and share information cause it seems to me that this is just a delay tactic.
Mr. Mayor: I don’t think it’s a delay tactic. I think it’s just a, as Commissioner Grantham
said it’s just as important to give it some time to fully review the proposal. I know that, what
17
was the, you intended on having the meeting scheduled within the next couple weeks so that we
th
can have a decision at the April 17 meeting.
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir, and that was fully my intent was there was apparently some
questions about that that needed to be asked. Because of the complexity of the issue and the
impact on our employees and our citizens, it would seem to be worth our while to dedicate a
significant meeting to deal with these issues. At that point we would either be able to move
forward, backwards or stay where we’re at, at that particular time.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Administrator, are you saying that you’re recommending
we have a work session on this plan that’s in here and if by chance during the review and
research of this as we discover something that might better benefit our employees is added that
be also given consideration. Is that what I’m hearing?
Mr. Russell: It is not a work session, sir. I’ve recommended a special meeting um, a
called meeting so it would be a formal session of the Commission of which you can vote on
issues and questions at that particular point in time. Obviously my intent was to answer
questions about the present plan that’s on the table and passed by Administrative Services. I
hear from some commissioners on the bias that there may be some other issues out there in
reference to other plans but it is not my intent to talk about other plans. My intent is to answer
questions about the plan that’s on the table and move forward with that either up or down.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Madame Clerk, could you read back the motion? You didn’t want me to ask you that!
The Clerk: Well, I’m going to summarize it. The motion was to, well Mr. Grantham’s
motion was to defer this and ask GMA to come in to provide additional information regarding
th
the plan and that this be accomplished by April 15. And that was to include the special called
meeting that the Administrator had requested.
The Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I’ve gotten a little confused so I want to ask the question that
concerns one of my concerns. I assume that we’re also going to discuss the present pension
plans that we already have and deciding whether or not we want the change as planned not only
just the plan that has been proposed.
Mr. Mayor: I take it that that is the intent of Mr. Russell. I think the spirit of everything
that’s going on at the present time is how can we come to an agreement on a way to do better for
our employees.
Mr. Brigham: Well, I think whether it be a new plan or the current plans we do have I
think that’s what the discussion’s about. I don’t think it’s about other proposals cause I don’t
think there has been any other proposals.
18
Mr. Mayor: Okay we have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion
commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Williams votes No.
Mr. Holland abstains.
Motion carries 8-1-1.
Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk.
FINANCE
9. Motion to approve identifying city properties for sale for committee review and
authorize Fleet Manager to research for an auctioneer. (Approved by Finance Committee
February 26, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, I believe, was this yours?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I had this time pulled. I’m in support of identifying the city
properties. We talked about that and uh, getting an auctioneer and other, and I’m in agreement
but I think we need to just get the property first together to see what we gonna be selling or what
we’re gonna sell it all or not sell it all. We was gonna do this last year and we didn’t. I’m
proposing that we go ahead and get those properties lined up and together so we as
Commissioners can look at them and then we’ll make a decision as to who’s being sold and
So my motion is to
who’s not being sold and how much, not how much but, but where we are.
go ahead and approve this, just wait on the Fleet Management researching an auctioneer
but to approve the lists being brought together and brought back to this commission.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second on that motion?
Mr. Holland: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: And I agree with that motion but we currently have a contract with an
auctioneer and we are making sure that didn’t exclude or if we could get around finding another
auctioneer for the real estate or if that auctioneer did real estate. So I agree but still in the same
time we need to have the uh, Mr. Crowden researching to see if our current agreement includes
real estate services or not.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
19
Mr. Bowles: Make sure we’re not in violation of that agreement.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Crowden.
Mr. Crowden: The auctioneer that’s currently approved by the commission for sale of
surplus property is licensed in the state of Georgia to sell real estate. However the RFP that went
out for his services did not specifically indicate real estate so I’m, and I can pass that off to the
Attorney for review but I believe he would say that we need to go out for another RFP. That’s
where I’m at with that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Hatney, did you?
Mr. Hatney: Just one question. The land bank, do we have the staff?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: I believe we have an executive director now.
Mr. Hatney: My question for asking that. I thought that Fleet Management was going
for automobiles.
Mr. Crowden: Yes.
Mr. Hatney: Then you gonna ask him to be looking for an auctioneer?
Mr. Mayor: No, and I think based upon what was just said is that I think the proper line
of procedure is to go about it the way that Commissioner Williams suggested, identify the
properties and now it sounds to me as though we’d have to go out for and RFP for a new
auctioneer. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Yes, sir, I’d make a substitute motion that we do as Commissioner Williams
said and at the same time go out with an RFP to find the right service provider to go out for the
auction services for the property once it’s identified.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second?
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute motion and a second. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. I think we’re all in agreement but I just think ought
to look at what we’re gonna sell first. Now when Fleet Management sells their surplus cars they
don’t just gather them up and sell them they go through them, they figure out what whether
we’re gonna need it, whether we’re gonna build something on it, whether we’re gonna lease that
20
property. If we go out now and get an auctioneer and not knowing how much we got or what
we’re gonna do, I think we’re kind of putting the --- How long would that take to do an RFP?
Four months?
Mr. Mayor: Can you support Mr. Bowles’ substitute motion?
Mr. Williams: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute --- Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: I believe the question Commissioner Williams raised was, are these parcels
going to be brought back to the Commission. What we have is four auctioneers ---
Mr. Mayor: Absolutely. Okay, we have a substitute motion and a second. Madame
Clerk, could you read back the substitute motion?
The Clerk: The motion was to approve identifying the city properties for sale for
committee review and authorize an RFP for auctioneer services.
Mr. Cheek: Just for clarification.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Does that include the 22 acres in Columbia County?
Mr. Bowles: That’s for the Commission to decide.
Mr. Mayor: That’s for the Commission to decide. Okay, if there’s no further discussion
Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign of voting.
Mr. Holland and Mr. Harper vote No.
Mr. Grantham out.
Motion carries 7-2.
Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
10. Motion to approve a budget amendment to accept $3,500 in unbudgeted (new)
revenues and allocate the funds to specific activities in the department. (Approved by
Finance Committee February 26, 2007)
Mr. Holland: Uh, yes, sir, Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland.
21
Mr. Holland: --- I had this item pulled for some clarity and clarification on the funds that
are being dispersed here. I’d like to get some clarity on this and in fact in our backup we have
where this money is being dispersed to some different organizations and I’d like to know who
made the decision on uh, dispersing this funds to these different organizations and how do we
disperse the funds in reference to the summer day scholarships. I see it’s $3,500 for summer day
scholarships and youth athletics and I would like to know how that money is divided up and how
it’s dispersed and who’s chosen to get that money.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beck.
Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, these areas were targeted just with
three areas of many within the department that, who’s budget was reduced this past year. Our
funding for our summer day camps has been reduced, our funding for the state park’s been
reduced, our funding for all of our youth travel for our baseball and softball teams was totally cut
out and that’s, that’s why these three areas were identified by staff as three of the biggest areas of
need. In reference to the question regarding the scholarships this will just be a fund where we
will be able to deposit these monies into to be able to have expenditures to offer scholarships for
children who cannot afford summer day camp.
Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor, what funds are we speaking of?
Mr. Beck: Carrie J. Mays.
Mr. Holland: So the scholarships will be coming from the Carrie J. Mays center?
Mr. Beck: They will be specifically allocated to the Carrie J. Mays Summer Day Camp
Program.
Mr. Holland: And the account for the, the travel account will be placed where?
Mr. Beck: That will be in our Youth Athletics account.
Mr. Holland: Under the Recreation Department.
Mr. Beck: Yes.
Mr. Holland: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: I think I asked this question earlier, Mr. Mayor. I just want to make sure
that we just, that the backup says $7,700 but we’re only approving the thirty-five that go back
into the program. He needed the other money to go back into the general fund, is that right?
Mr. Mayor: Is that correct?
22
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Williams: Okay. I just wanted that clarified, that’s all.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Can we get a motion on that?
Mr. Holland: Motion to approve.
Mr. Bowles: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Cheek and Mr. Grantham out.
Motion carries 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: I believe we’re into the regular agenda now?
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
24. Discuss a methodology to increase city buses during peak ridership periods. (Requested
by Commissioner Marion Williams.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, we asked the Administrator and the Transit Director to come
back to us with something about the bus and the bus situation to alleviate the early morning late
evening capacity which is overfilled and people are still sitting on the floor, there’s still
transportation issues that’s out there now. Mr. Heyward Johnson stated that we have somebody
to call back, the bus driver called back to get somebody to come pick up the passengers that
maybe the other bus couldn’t pick up. Well, something’s got to happen with that. By the time
they there to that person, they got to get to their jobs. I think that’s a poor way of transporting
our people. We ought to be able to get a small bus during the peak hours or a van or something
to charge those same fares that our bus charge and be able to help with that. So I’m waiting to
hear something from either the Administrator or Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. I spoke to Mr. Johnson this morning. Those numbers are that we
looked at in reference to the over crowding are somewhat down that what they, I don’t know if
they’re down or not but the numbers are still within the limits that would require, that are
established to keep the bus in a safe mode basically. As you know and we’ve talked about it on
several occasions, as long as you don’t stand in front of the white line, standing on the bus is
available and a fairly standard practice in a lot of communities there basically. I think that our
23
concern is for those busses that are above and beyond that capacity where people would be
standing across that white line which would put them in a situation that would be somewhat, it
would be less than acceptable from a highway safety standard there basically. Um, looking at
the last numbers we talked about this morning, you’re talking seven, eleven, twelve people or so
that are well within the capacity of the bus to handle in a standing mechanism. We’re still
looking at that and I still agree that we need to make sure that we have a way to pick up those
extra people. It is my understanding that at last week as we talked about that there was some
discussion on the financing of that there and we’ve still have reached and impasse on how to
fund that at this particular point in time to run a trail bus or a trail van at this point. And we’re
looking at ways to make that as cheap as possible. But at this point it’s beyond the savings that
we’ve asked him to come up with. Bottom line at this point is as long as there’s nobody in front
of the white line the buses are deemed safe. If there are people above that level we are sending a
van to pick those people up.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Russell, I guess what you’re saying is that as long as they’re not over
the white line they won’t go through the windshield but they can go out the side when, whatever.
We talked about the safety facture in people riding the bus, were sitting on the floor and I don’t
what that actually alleviated yet but we’re sitting on the floor and when you got people standing
you got people paying you to ride the bus but they got to stand, because they don’t have the
transportation they need and they gotta use our public transit, transportation they ought to at least
be worthy of a seat. So anybody sitting or anybody standing on the bus riding is, first of all it’s a
safety hazard when the bus stops. Are we gonna have the money to pay somebody if there’s an
injury or something because we do know they’re standing but they didn’t cross the white line.
They’re behind the white line. And this is not pointing the finger at you, we need to find out can
we use a, another bus in the peak hours just going to work and getting off of work for those
people. We want to increase the ridership, Mr. Mayor, we talking about our transit. Nobody’s
gonna get on our transit and just take a ride when they, when it’s a fifty/fifty chance they got to
stand up if they ride it. We going to really lose more money in that respect when we’re trying to
increase the ridership so I don’t know what Mr. Johnson did but I think we need to be brought
back here, I see Mr. Johnson behind there, you might want to come say something, Fred.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson, would you like to speak to this issue?
Mr. Johnson: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, as was discussed, we did discuss this at
the last uh, Public Services Commission meeting and that um, by Federal and State law, I mean,
if there is a standee line and that is deemed that you can not have anybody standing in front of
that line. Based on the information that I presented at the last meeting yes, we do have times
where we are beyond the seating capacity of a bus, but we are still not approaching, most of the
time, nowhere close to the standee line. As I mentioned at the meeting yes, we want to improve
the service we provide for the citizens of Augusta-Richmond County. But in order to provide
that better service even to put a bus to follow a bus that would still be an expense. So you will
still, I would suggest if that was the idea you just put the buses back on because then you would
end up with a bus just following another bus down the road just in case it gets overloaded. But
you’re still gonna have that expense with the bus being out there. So that my recommendation
24
would be if that is the will that we look at providing the service that was eliminated, putting it
back on because that would help the people. It would eliminate their stay of having to wait for
hours down to thirty minutes. But as mentioned there is a cost of approximately four hundred to
a half million dollars that to uh, to provide that service.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor I make a motion that we uh, reinstate the bus route the
way it was originally before we made the cut.
Mr. Harper: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is not to add or take away from the buses. I
want to ask Mr. Johnson a question if he will. The information he provided to us last time --– the
number of excess passengers and I think it’s probably back to four or five days out of about ten
or twelve days in the past. Is that correct?
Mr. Johnson: Right, sir.
Mr. Grantham: And out of those days if we had more passengers than seats if I recall, I
don’t have that with me right now, but there was never any day that was more than three
passengers that exceeded the capacity of that bus. And so if you have a Federal regulation to
have a standee line you have the bus driver that has to uphold that type of environment then you
know, I can remember standing up on buses a lot of times when I rode ---
Mr. Holland: You were younger then!
Mr. Grantham: What’s that?
Mr. Holland: You were younger then.
Mr. Grantham: Yeah. And then, again, I got up and gave my seat to (inaudible) person.
The point I’m making too is that is it that I feel like if you need to look at a advertising program
on our buses, I go throughout this country looking at buses and all of them have some
advertisements on that that are helping pay for the services in --- County. And we don’t have
that. We don’t have anything inside the bus, any advertising medium. We don’t have anything
outside the bus. I’m gonna ask you if you would amend that motion, will not that motion, I
gonna go ahead and make one, I don’t see --- win. And we’re gonna ask him to provide us with
some advertisement information in regard to what we can do on these buses. That’s a revenue
source that we’re not exploring. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion on the floor and a second. Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: Mr. Johnson, you mentioned that there’s a state, I think, and federal
regulations that allows the standing on buses as long as they are behind the white line. My
25
concern about that is it doesn’t take but one person to get hurt. It doesn’t take a whole ten/fifteen
people standing up. I’m not sure how a person’s gonna maintain their standing if you have to hit
the brakes quick or if you hit the back of another vehicle. That’s my concern and I’m not saying
what you’re saying is not true, that’s not what I’m say, but to me it’s dangerous to have one
person standing.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If we vote this in, how are we going to fund it?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: The funding for the additional dollars we spend out of the general fund.
There is sufficient in the contingency account to cover that and we have additional dollars we’ll
be talking about at the middle of the month that would be able to provide that service.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I wish Mr. Johnson would come back cause I believe the only
route that was consistently overcrowded was the Washington Road route on the departments fees
that they provided us and I’d like to know if there’s any difference since those figures were
compiled and provided us if that is still the only route that is consistently overcrowded.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: Um, let me sort of remind you about what I did hand out. What I handed
out was the numbers but at the end of it was just a average but also that was highlighted red
numbers that showed that even though maybe for the average during the time period it was only
like one or two that was overall that was as you recall a lot of different red numbers that at
certain periods of the day that was a lot of red numbers. But when you extended it out over the
whole period that average still fell in. Yes, Washington Road was one of the main ones that was
typically overcrowded but that was a lot of overcrowding during various times on all three
routes, the East Augusta, the Washington Road and the Augusta Mall. Since that time since the
first of the month and as you recall I’d also mentioned that because of the timing of it and trying
to get a report back, we didn’t get a chance to actually review it at the first of the month. We
th
actually started on the 8 of the month. But yes, Washington Road was one of the main ones
that had an overcrowding problem but there was overcrowding on all of the routes at various
times.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I hope I’m still within my two minutes but the figures you
gave us the only route that was consistently, Monday through Friday overcrowded was
Washington Road. There was no other route on the figures that you gave us that was
consistently overcrowded. It might be overcrowded one day a week but not four or five like
Washington Road and those we’re the figures that ya’ll generated for us. I would like to see
26
some more figures. If we need to do anything we need to only fix those routes that are
overcrowded. We don’t need to fix the entire system to fix an overcrowded route.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Harper.
Mr. Harper: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Johnson um, do your buses have, trying to get
the right name for it, safety handles on your buses in the middle of it you know, that’s when
people are standing up they’re holding on to something?
Mr. Johnson: Right, sir.
Mr. Harper: They have the uh, circle or the got the bar.
Mr. Johnson: They have the bar going down both sides and you have bars that go vertical
and horizontal.
Mr. Harper: Okay so, so when you said that if you allowed to have standees is that, that’s
not considered a safety hazard in the state of Georgia?
Mr. Johnson: No, sir.
Mr. Harper: I understand, in other words, it’s not a safety hazard?
Mr. Johnson: No, sir. Um, um, that’s why they have a standee line ---
Mr. Harper: Right.
Mr. Johnson: That’s why it’s called a standee line.
Mr. Harper: Right, right. I’m familiar with that. I used to drive buses, charter and line
runs. Um, my question to you sir is since you’re the head of the department, your best
recommendation how we can alleviate the problem we have because you know I understand both
my colleagues and they got good arguments especially with advertisement, my colleague Marion
Williams but the bottom line is you know, normally people pay to get on the bus, and I’m not
trying to make a joke of it, they pay to get a seat to get to where they’re going. They don’t pay
to stand up cause if that’s the case you know we might as well the standees ride free and give
them a choice who wanna stand and who wanna sit. What is your best recommendation for us to
handle the problem that we have the situation we’re in so we will not be impacted to too many
people?
Mr. Johnson: Based on everyone having a seat I would, I would put all three buses back
on. That would guarantee that everyone would have a seat.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
27
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’ve heard the concerns about people standing and certainly I’m
concerned if they get over the white line or there is just not enough room for people to get on a
bus but let us not forget that if you go to any major airport, any major city, any major mass
transit system, you ride the rail up at the Atlanta Airport for instance, it’s designed for people to
stand mostly. These are mass transit systems like the MART and the other subway systems and
the buses in Chicago, Atlanta, Washington, DC and everywhere else. You have to right-size
your fleet to accommodate the folks without over-sizing it to break the bank and that’s what
we’re trying to do and I agree with us trying to add perhaps ridership where there’s not adequate
room on the bus to carry the people that are at the stops, but I don’t see us going to face a state
where everyone has a seat which doesn’t exist anywhere else in any other major city. That is not
factual and it’s cost effective and certainly in our financial times we are, for every dime we take
to add to the bus service we have to find it somewhere else to make it up in the general fund
without going in the red. Something we pledged we wouldn’t do. So I’m very concerned about
that but I urge members of this body that uh, having been to these major cities and certainly I
know we travel, to take time and ride public in those cities and you’ll see that the conditions of
people standing. Holding on the rails is fairly prevalent everywhere you go.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Madame Clerk, could you read back the original motion?
The Clerk: The motion was to reinstate the bus route before the cuts.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
The Clerk: That’s a tie, Mr. Mayor. Let me just read this.
Mr. Brigham, Mr. Smith, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Grantham and Mr. Cheek vote No.
Mr. Mayor: I will due to the fact that the budgetary impact and that I think there’s still
some more work we can do to address this issue. I’m going to vote No on that.
The Mayor votes No.
Motion fails 5-6.
The Mayor: Next agenda item.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
30. Motion to ratify the authorization letter dated February 21, 2007 regarding the closing
and sale of the “pension property” to Watermark project developer, The Foxfield
Company, and committed to partner with the developer in a reasonable amount in sharing
the clean-up costs.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bowles.
28
Mr. Bowles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’ve got a question for the Attorney if it would not
be legal for us to use the surplus sales tax funds since it was purchased with sales tax dollars to
fund the cleanup of this property.
Mr. Shepard: Would it be legal to fund, I’m sorry, Mr. Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Would it be legal to fund the cleanup of this property with sales tax dollars.
Mr. Shepard: Because it would be necessary to the improvement of the property um, my
opinion although you didn’t ask me before hand would be that it would be part of the
improvement of the property and could be so utilized if we could fine the appropriate category in
the previous SPLOST. If the appropriate category having been, meaning having all these
projects being funded. Now that category would have to be specifically identified and I would
do that before I would make a specific ruling but I do think that it’s part of the development of
the property, we could use that money as you suggest. But I’ve got to see which categories are
fully funded and which are not.
Mr. Mayor: Would anybody else like to speak on this issue? Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: I make a motion to approve.
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: I think we argued about this same piece of property for 6-8 months as to
whether or not a few months at least whether or not it was, the transaction itself was um, legit
and I don’t understand how we can think about using SPLOST funds to clean up something
that’s already out there. We shouldn’t use SPLOST funds at all. That’s just what I’m trying to
ask. And I also don’t know what the estimated cost is.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I agree with uh, Commissioner Hatney about the
funds. Now we don’t know what the cost is of this property but I guess my question is where’s
the study to show what level of contamination that we’re gonna have to clean up in the
beginning. We already approved, we got 6/7 signatures to, to do it but I hadn’t seen a study.
Now we just got through dealing with Hyde Park and not been official we had a licensed firm to
do Hyde Park and brought back a study, but I’m waiting to see something to show us what’s the
level of contamination in this particular spot from anybody.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, as part of the due diligence the purchaser looked at this
property he hired American, a environmental service provided the initial study in reference to
29
doing the testing of those plots and I’ve been able to provide that to Mr. Williams. It’s not a full
blown study as was done in Hyde Park but it does provide the information necessary to develop
the initial cleanup opportunities there. There were random samples taken, the levels of materials
in the soil was observed and they were provided through schematic diagrams. As we move
forward with that we did a second level of testing and it was potentially wise to connect some of
those dots as we move forward. I did have some conversation with the environmental attorney
representing Mr. Kitchen yesterday and based on that we’ve got a email from him that speaks to
a potential cost of dealing with this particular item here basically. And I’ll be happy to share that
with you. What that basically shares, and let me put the caveats there that he so artfully put in, is
as we deal with environmental issues it’s like peeling an onion on occasion and it could be worse
that what you see or it could be better and as you do the remediation and move forward with that
you’ll find that um, that you’ll, the data might change it might get better it might get worse. It’s
my understanding that we have found nothing there to this date that would not be unexpected in
that kind of environment uh, some heavy metals uh, and those kinds of things that would be
similar in a railroad yard which was there or a um, I guess a junk yard at some point that were
there. Based on their initial feelings and initial study it looks like a minimum of 12,000 tons of
contaminated soil that would need to be removed from the site. That’s soil at this point is not
thought to be hazardous enough to require placing in a hazardous waste dump but would just be,
had to be removed and could be handled by our landfill which would help to reduce some of the
costs there basically. It’s their estimate that to move the 12,000 tons of soil would cost
approximately $699,000 as you note in the e-mail. In addition to that site restoration costs,
which would bring the site back to where we’re at now would cost approximately $165,000.
With the additional delineation sampling between $29 and 45,000 as you continue to check what
you’ve got and look at filling in the dots at this particular point in time. Because of the fact we
have the ability to use our landfill we can reduce some of the impact of that. You and your
previous, in previous landfill approvals have approved the rate of $10.00 per ton as opposed to
the $32.50 per ton that this number was figured on. That $10.00 a ton is for a beneficial rate use
that has been previously approved by the Commission and what that very simply means is we
would take that dirt and be able to use that and as we fill one cell C3, I believe is what Mark told
me and use that as part of the capping material there. By using that savings rate we would
savings of approximately $270,000, which would reduce the $699,000 figure to approximately
$429,000 for the 12,000 tons of material that they anticipate moving. In addition to that is we do
the site restoration, we would be able to use dirt from our landfill that is dug out as we dig the
landfill and instead of having to purchase dirt we would be able to move forward with that and
use that dirt to um, bring the site back up to the top of applicable level as it is today. I think
what, what needs to be said and we’ve said regularly is that that is our property. We have
determined that there are environmental issues there and that property is required to be cleaned
up. We can do it in partnership with Mr. Kitchen as we move forward with this project or we
can do it ourselves and then sell the land thereafter but at some point no matter what we do it’s
my understanding that we have to clean that property up and we will have to do that in a fairly
um, expedient manner based on what we’ve got. Mike Smith from EPD, we’ve had some
conversations about that, he was the gentleman that requested that we fence it right off the bat
because of what we found and we were able to do that. But the bottom line is it remains a
parking lot for the next twenty years as it has in the past. We’re still gonna have to do that
environmental cleanup.
30
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell, one thing. After we’ve gone through and I think I might be
anticipating Commissioner Hatney’s question, best estimate cost to the city when you include,
right now when you include the developers $200,000 would be approximately ---
Mr. Russell: $644 minus the $200 and that does not take into account the use of our soil
because we would not know how much of that soil we would have to use until we get into that
and that’s based on our current knowledge of the site. And let me say that again. That’s based on
---
Mr. Mayor: I understand.
Mr. Russell: --- our current knowledge of the site.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor and my fellow Commissioners, I’ve been sitting here just now
listening. When we are for budgetary reasons decided not to fund the bus routes because it was -
-- but my concern here is and I did sign to go ahead forward with this and I don’t have no
problem with it but it’s gonna be hard for me to vote for it because of the fact that we don’t know
the actual cost nor do we know where the money coming from. And without that being the case
I can’t vote for it. --- That’s all I can say.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: I think when you deal with these kinds of things as you continue to move
forward the best you’re gonna get is an estimate of how much the cost is going to be and that’s
unfortunate but as you develop the process and continue to move into the ground, if it gets worse
the cost goes up. If we find areas that are contaminated enough which we don’t anticipate but if
we do that would require the use of a hazardous waste site um, then obviously the cost goes up
there. I think what you’ve got in front of you are best estimates given the knowledge that we
have with the site at this time and I’m not to sure how you put your arms around anything any
better than that at this particular point in time. The cost for this can be handled in several ways.
Mr. Bowles suggested we look at SPLOST. In addition it could come out of the sales price of
the property so that’s one of the options that are available to us.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This piece of property is not on the grounds or
any other contaminated list. We have not gotten any report from any professional uh,
engineering or any studies from anybody to say uh, how much. I think we’re gonna have to do
something. I proposed last time that we’re gonna have to move the, excavate, is that the word,
George, that we use to move the soil.
Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir.
31
Mr. Williams: Well, we’re still gonna have to do that now and uh, and we talked about
than maybe putting up $100,000 and let the builder pay the rest. But I’m a little bit concerned
that we don’t know where the money’s gonna come from and we don’t know how much money.
And that’s been the, the problem with it all the time. We wasn’t opposed to it, I wanted a hotel
and we’re getting condos and maybe condos and hotels now. But before we can give a blank
check I think we need to know a little bit more about where the funds are gonna come from. I
asked Mr. Jessup who did a great job to get me copy of the whatever report they had and I
thought that was an environmental report somewhere and find out it wasn’t but from a law firm
here through another company Mr. Meadows her, I guess that’s the persons name, I don’t know
if that’s the name of the firm or what. But the hotspots are the areas that are there is dissipating I
think with the depth as you dig in this area. We had that much sense. We knew that once you
removed the soil, then somebody mentioned about what you gonna do with the soil if it’s bad
and where it’s gonna go and where you gonna put it at. There’s to many ifs for us to just jump
out there and we don’t, we can’t get the buses going cause we in a budgetary constraint now we
got a serious situation. I just need to know some more information myself before I vote to
continue that Mr. Mayor and that’s my ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Beard.
Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, now when we started with this project it was like uh, we were
going to do condominiums and the cost would be something like 80 million and now uh, they’re
looking at many other things on this property. What does this mean to us? And my
understanding is, this gentleman is doing the same type project in Savannah and we have had
very few developers to come. No, I won’t go there, but I have had people to say they knew of
people who were willing to come and put up hotels and different things in Augusta but no one
has come forward. Now, Mr. Russell, what will be the financial impact of this project to this
city? What will it mean for the City of Augusta?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Ms. Beard, I think that if you do the condominium development and that if
you do the hotels potential and there’s been discussion about and I have, that I received today a
request from Mr. Kitchen to be considered for the Tee Center officially and the hotel properties
there, working partnership with us. I think your tax base increased and the impact on downtown
would more than cover the initial cost of any cleanup over the first year of operation and even in,
during construction I believe you’ll see that as they look at the taxes there. Once again and you
need to recognize, that once we have discovered these issues that if we let this deal go away we
still will provide for cleanup. I mean we will be required to clean this property up and it will
come out of dollars that are allocated by the city as opposed to sales dollars from the project or
whatever and we will not at this particular point, unless somebody brings something else to the
table have a project there. We will spend whatever it takes to clean it up if it stays a parking lot
for the next period of time. And we are required to do that by federal law now.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles.
32
Mr. Bowles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The preliminary projections for this property were
about $800,000 a year in property taxes. That was before the hotel so I think we’ll be well in
excess of a million dollars a year in property taxes generated and I would just ask that every
Commissioner consider that we’ll recoup the cost of this uh, investment within the first year and
probably won’t even have to pay for considering the sales tax dollars that we used to purchase
the property can be used for the cleanup. I would just like to call for the question.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. No further discussions, no further
discussion. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Harper and Mr. Holland vote No.
Mr. Hatney abstains.
Mr. Williams votes Present.
Motion carries 6-2-2.
Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
31. Update from the Administrator on the racetrack. (Requested by Commissioner
Williams – deferred from The February 20, 2007 meeting)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. Since our last meeting we’ve
been looking, continuing along the process that you asked me to continue on. And we have
identified four pieces of property that meet the standards that are being passed out at this
particular time which include a minimum of one mile length in direction, no serious natural
topographical restrictions, frontage on a major highway, the lands currently vacant. We’re
looking a ten-minutes drive from Bobby Jones Highway and no substantial impact to the flood
plain or known wetlands. We have identified four pieces of property that currently meet those
requirements. We’ve begun contacting property owners to determine if they have an interest in
selling their property. The first one or two individuals we talked to pricing would be an issue I
think but as directed we are continuing forth with that project to come back with a
recommendation and a cost that would be required to purchase land that is in a private sector.
Once again as you know we did look at a public sector opportunity there and that did not present
itself so uh, while the process has been somewhat slow we are continuing to move forward. I
still think personally it’s a valid option for us. The issue will be how much can we afford to pay
for private land at this particular point in time.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We voted to uh, to go and do this uh, still got
investors that want to invest their money into it. We didn’t get into the bolts and nuts of the, this
whole racetrack deal but that was a $30 million dollar impact per year that will be brought to this
33
community. I’m a little bit disappointed in that the Development Authority who’s stewed over
the 1700 acres. And in meeting with some of them they said that they was meeting with some
people that maybe potentially wanting to use that property but they didn’t know who they were,
they didn’t know how much land they were gonna need and they’ve been stewing over this land
for 15-20 years and nothing has been brought to us. Now I’m just amazed that this city, who’s in
a budgetary restraint position right now, we don’t have any money but we’re not proactive. Now
this is just like golf. I don’t play that game but this is something that will bring a lot of revenue
to this community. And we can do what we’ve been doing, that’s nothing or we can tell the
Development Authority that they need to show us something within thirty days. Now how can
they meet with a group that they, and they said that they weren’t allowed to know the people so
they just walked in and say a first name basis. They don’t how much land they don’t know big
the firm is, if there is a firm. I really don’t understand it. How can we let a group like that stop a
$30 million dollar impact to this community, not to the city but through the economic dollars that
will be brought through that uh, venture. And when the Development Authority can’t say we got
A, B or C, and they need 200 acres, two million acres of land and that’s what we’re gonna use to
hold up a project that we know is viable. I think this Commission needs to take a strong look at
that Authority and maybe change that Authority or do away with that Authority or take the
Authority and make something happen.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: Now my Attorney I see him raised up, maybe he’s got an answer that ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Williams: --- could help us out of what we could do. But something needs to be
done when we already own the land.
Mr. Shepard: Well, Mr. Williams, I, certainly you asked about a three-part question,
which I think is something that we can research for you. I would not be comfortable saying we
could just abolish every one of them, abolish the Authority is out, certainly as their terms come
up you replace them with appointees that are more favorable to the Commissions position but
um, you know I would be happy to render an opinion about your options within reach.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, thank you. So from what I’m hearing we are pursuing sites and
it’s going to become a matter of funding at some point in the future, maybe selection of a
different site and we’re also looking, are we looking at uh, the noise issues and all that we faced
with the original sites.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Obviously the sites we’re looking at are as I said in the memo, we’ve
identified sites with no consideration to zoning, ownership or availability of utilities. We were
looking for a block of land at this particular point in time. It’s my understanding that the land
34
that we have discovered is four areas that we are looking at would probably not create the same
kind of noise issues that we currently face with the other area. Obviously when you do a
racetrack similar to building an airport there’s gonna be a noise issue no matter where you put it.
But um, it would seem to me at the moment that the four areas we’re looking at, the more
prohibitive issue would be cost as opposed to um, zoning or noise or availability of utilities.
Mr. Cheek: And for the record, Mr. Mayor, the airplanes flying over were louder than
the cars on the track and I’m just gonna just for a moment piggyback on what Commissioner
Williams just had to say. I’ve listened with interest at the explanation given with the voting
down of the utilization of this site with the promise of marketing it as a mega site in competition
globally with people who can offer tax breaks in the sense and quite frankly we can’t. I’m
amazed at the level of pride taken in the fact that we are going to be maintaining a vacant lot that
is being dumped on currently in favor of something that could in fact grow into a motor sports
park like we had in the 50’s and 60’s and lost. Like other cities are building like Homestead, FL,
Kansas City and several other cities are building in favor of maintaining a stagnant status quo
and that industrial corridor and it’s a sad. Mr. Administrator, I support you in your efforts,
please continue.
Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: I’d just like to make a point here. I heard Mr. Russell say something about
noise. I’m reminded of the trip that we took to Chicago and our hotel was right outside or right
next to the train track that ran over the hotel, right next to the hotel that you walk out of the door
you walk right to the train. And all night long that train ran and that train made noise but not one
person did we hear complaining about the noise that the trains make. All we heard was the
progress that the city was making. That’s all they talked about. Nobody complained about the
noise. So we need to get away from making excuses about the progress that we can make in this
city. We’re not going to have anything perfect in this. We not going to build hotel’s perfect, we
not going to build cafeteria’s perfect, we’re not going to build anything perfect. There’s always
going to be some people, some residents in some areas that’s going to be built and people are
gonna complain about it. But as long as we’re progressing it’s better for the city and it’s better
for the people. So we’ve got to stop complaining about the noise. The noise is gonna be there.
When the riverboats, when those boats come here down on the river they make noise all daylong
and half the night. Next thing you know they’re gone and they’ve spent money, they ate food
and they’re gone. It’s the same thing with the racetrack. They’ll come here they’ll race, they’ll
spend money, we’ll look at our taxes go up, we’ll look at the money that we’ve made and what,
they’re gone. So we’ve got to stop making excuses about what we can do in this city in terms of
progress in this city for the city. So I mean it’s just a, it’s, it’s a win, win case for us it’s a win,
win case. So we need to make some progress on this and stop dragging it along.
Mr. Mayor: Can we get a motion to receive this as information?
Mr. Cheek: So moved.
35
Mr. Holland: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Hatney out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: I believe that disposes of the agenda, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
LEGAL MEETING
A.Pending and Potential Litigation.
B.Real Estate.
C.Personnel.
Mr. Shepard: I stated earlier I have some legal business. Would the commission take up the
last item to include Real Estate, Personnel and Pending and Potential Litigation.
Mr. Mayor: How’s everybody feeling? Can I get a motion –
Mr. Brigham: I make a motion we go into legal.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
[LEGAL MEETING]
Mr. Mayor: I’ll go ahead and call the meeting back to order. Mr. Shepard.
Motion to authorize execution by the Mayor of the affidavit of compliance with
Gerogia’s Open Meeting Act.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d ask for a motion to add and approve, not add
but approve the execution of the open meetings, closed meeting affidavit.
Mr. Williams: So move.
Mr. Shepard: -- which indicates we discussed topics of personnel and pending and
potential litigation.
36
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by the
usually sign.
Mr. Bowles out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, in the area of personnel, I’d ask we add and approve a
adjustment to the compensation of our engineer, which you wanted to personally
announce, and I will let you have that glory.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Ladson, you’re hired. I will let you announce the compensation, Mr.
Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: $110,000, Mr. Ladson, and two months’ severance pay.
Mr. Mayor: Congratulations, and let me just say, everybody sitting up here appreciates
the great job you’re doing.
(Applause)
Mr. Mayor: Buy that house now. We need the best and the brightest to stay in town.
Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Let me say for the record that severance would be if terminated without
cause. Obviously, if he is terminated for cause, no severance package would be involved. This
is our standard language.
Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to that effect?
Mr. Cheek: So move.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual
sign.
Mr. Holland: Don’t nobody abstain.
Mr. Bowles out.
Motion carries 9-0.
37
Mr. Cheek: Voting in abstentia. The ghost of Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, in the case of – in potential litigation coming out of the
settlement of the Partridge Inn payoffs, I would ask that I have authority to deposit
disputed monies into the registry of the court failing negotiations and that would be up to
the full amount of interim interest which is $151,000.
Mr. Hatney: So move.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual
sign.
Mr. Bowles out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: With no further – you have nothing further, Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I have nothing further.
Mr. Mayor: With no further business to come before the body, we stand adjourned.
Thank you, everybody, for your time.
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Lena J. 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
March 6, 2007.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
38
39