HomeMy WebLinkAboutCalled Commission Meeting May 12, 2020
CALLED MEETING VIRTUAL/TELECONFERENCE
May 12, 2020
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, May 12, 2020,
the Honorable Hardie Davis, Jr., Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. B. Williams, Garrett, Sias, Fennoy, Frantom, M. Williams, Davis, D.
Williams, Hasan and Clarke, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
Mr. Mayor: I will call this meeting to order. Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: Mr. Mayor, you have a quorum.
The Mayor gave the invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United
States of America was recited.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, let’s do this in terms of the agenda items. Let’s take items 4
and 5 and then we’ll go 3, and then 2 and we’ll close with item 1.
The Clerk: Okay.
4. Motion to approve of Master Agreement for Security and Fire Alarm Services
provided by Johnson Controls International for nine Augusta Utilities facility
locations.
Mr. Hasan: Motion to approve.
Mr. Mayor: Do I have a second?
Mr. Clarke: Second.
Mr. Mayor: I’ve got a motion and a second. The Chair recognizes the commissioner
th
from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: I’ve got a problem. Can I get a little bit more insight on what we’re
doing with Johnson Controls? What is this again?
Mr. Mayor: Johnson Controls again is, this is a master agreement for fire protection.
That’s what this is. This is again for nine Augusta Utilities facilities. Johnson Controls is in the
business of building management systems and also fire protection and security control. That’s a
standard agreement. In this case it’s a master agreement for them to provide those services to the
City of Augusta.
Mr. M. Williams: What I saw that master agreement I didn’t know what that was but when
you say fire control, I’m trying to relate it to the Fire Department and what they’d actually be
doing. I didn’t understand.
1
Mr. Mayor: They’re in the business of building management, fire protection systems.
They do all of that type of work.
The Clerk: Video surveillance, that sort of thing of the buildings.
Mr. Mayor: They do all of that across the country. Quite frankly across the globe. In this
case we’re enlisting their services at our Utilities buildings.
Mr. Brown: They also use them for alarms.
Mr. Mayor: That’s correct.
Mr. M. Williams: Like I said when I saw master agreement I didn’t understand it. I’ve got
no question about it. I can support that.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second. I’ll tell you a story about Johnson Controls
on another day and it’s a good story though.
Motion carries 10-0.
st
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, in the words from the commissioner from the 1 in a former
life when I was the lead Project Engineer from Monsanto’s Biotech plant over there Johnson
Controls installed the building management system and other building control systems for us.
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: They do good work.
The Clerk: You can attest to that.
Mr. Mayor: I can attest to that.
The Clerk: That’s good information, sir.
5. Motion to approve award of Construction Contract to Reeves Construction Co. in the
amount of $3,447,514.40 for Resurfacing Various Roads as requested by AED.
Award is contingent upon receipt of signed contracts and proper bonds. Bid 20-164.
th
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Garrett: Thank you, Mayor. Motion to approve.
Mr. Hasan: Second.
th
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner from the 9.
2
Mr. M. Williams: I think I had that item pulled for a couple of reasons. I’ve got no problem
with the construction work that Reeves has been doing and the payment of that. My question is
someone can call and have Reeves to move a worker through a (inaudible) commissioner gave me
some heartburn and I don’t want to approve contracts for anybody if they don’t go through process.
There’s a way of handling anything but that was my concern. It really wasn’t about the contractor
itself but the relationship that must be or could be either formed or already formed in my opinion,
Mr. Mayor. So I’m not against the contractor but the process that happened before I hope would
never again happen to anybody without going through the proper channels I guess is the best way
to put it.
Mr. Mayor: I understand. We’ve got a motion and a second to approve it if the Chairman
of Engineering Services concurs with approval but would like a little bit more background input
going forward.
Mr. M. Williams: Not necessarily going forward. I mean I think Reeves is not a new
contractor with Augusta. They’ve done a lot of work for a lot of years here. I can name several
that’s been here for a long time and I say again I’ve got no issue with their work but if we have a
relationship with that and we’re going to approve three million some odd dollars for a company to
come in and they can move people around because someone called I’ve still got heartburn with
that and I’m probably going to have it for a while. I’m just (inaudible) about it. If you want to go
ahead and approve this contract, I don’t want to hold it up for that. I wouldn’t hold it up anyway.
I wouldn’t hold up a company who’s been doing a good job but I need us as a party to understand
the relationship that I thought it had with a company that is making millions of dollars off the City
of Augusta. So you’ve got a motion and second to approve. I’m going to vote for it as well but I
think it needs to be brought to the light.
Motion carries 10-0.
3. Motion to approve conducting Special Called/Legal Meetings before each regular
called meeting of the Augusta Commission.
The Clerk: I think the designated time was 12:30, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am, 12:30.
The Clerk: To standardize the special called legal meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Frantom: Motion to approve.
Mr. Clarke: Second.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, I have a question.
3
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: That’s just for the time that we’re in right now, right?
Mr. Mayor: That is correct, sir.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, all right, sir.
th
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: My question has been answered.
Mr. Mayor: All right, roll call vote.
Motion carries 10-0.
2. Augusta Housing and Community Development (AHCD) to introduce the COVID-19
Small Business Relief Program and seek Commission support.
Mr. Frantom: Motion to approve.
Mr. B. Williams: Second.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, I have a question.
th
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, when this came last week many of my
Colleagues know we ended up losing a quorum. We assumed we voted to approve it but
Commissioner Sias has some caveats that also were with that and that was also you know provided
that HUD approved it and it comes back when it has been approved by HUD at that particular
time. That was part of the motion last week and today we’re just saying motion to approve but
that was a part of that last week. Do we need to make a substitute motion to attach that to it or
should that be understood?
Mr. Mayor: No, we can just amend that but I mean one of the concerns I have as we
continue to talk about this is we’re six weeks into when we first started this conversation. We need
to move as expeditiously as possible to get resources to people, businesses in this community and
at the end of the day, we turned this into a loan program so let’s just move forward with it and get
th
it done and move on. Commissioner from the 4.
th
Mr. Sias: Yes, sir, thank you. If I may suggest to my colleague from the 6 no amendments
are required. I believe they’ve already sent a draft. Once we had voted on it under the expectation
they’ve already send a draft for them to review so no amendments in my view are necessary.
4
Mr. Mayor: What I’d like to see happen or advise of the paperwork that businesses are
going to be submitting, let’s make sure that gets sent out because I don’t think we’ve seen that at
this point and I think that’s a critical path item for those of us who are on this call. All right,
th
commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I agree with everything that’s been said but when you’re
talking about the businesses, I guess my question is who decides on which business and who’s on
first and what’s on second so to speak. Every business is suffering in this epidemic we’re dealing
with but if we’re going to designate how do we qualify those who through HUD, through what
program and then if we don’t get it back and we don’t see it, how do we be fair about it?
Mr. Mayor: Well, I haven’t seen the latest version. I can’t speak to that but I would hope
it would be a similar process that we talked about three weeks ago where there was a group, a
small group of people, we had somebody from the banking industry, we had somebody from the
business community and then of course our staff. I’m hoping that’s still what is going to move
forward but again I think the goal right now is to approve it. We lost of quorum last week. That’s
the critical piece and like I said, making sure that we get those dollars in the people’s hands and
as quickly as possible. We cut checks on Friday and every Friday we ought to be cutting checks,
send the money to those businesses that have been vetted and approved and in order for that to
happen, they need to have all been submitted by, any businesses chosen need to have that
information, send it in to Finance by Wednesday at noon so that a check can get cut and go out the
door by Friday.
Mr. M. Williams: And I agree with that but the problem is, Mr. Mayor, you know about
cutting checks, you just said about cutting checks, being processed by Wednesday and the checks
will be cut Friday. But which business is going to be processed is my question. How do we
determine who’s on first and what’s on second? We’ve got a limited amount of money. Now if
it’s unlimited it don’t make no difference because all the businesses are going to be able to come
to the table but if certain businesses going to come to the table and everybody’s heard it, whether
it be large or small. So I just want to make sure we’re not opening up a floodgate here and don’t
know where you’re going to stop at because it’s going to stop somewhere now. If people that need
it, they need it. And I’m willing to do it today if possible and I want to be fair about who gets
what.
Mr. Mayor: I think we all agree on that. Let me go to the Administrator’s office and
hopefully they’re going to give us some clarity around the documentation. The Chair recognizes
Administrator Sims.
Mr. Sims: Mayor and commissioners, staff is ready to (inaudible). Director Hawthorne
Welcher (inaudible).
Mr. Mayor: Okay, let’s get them in here then. All right, Director Welcher, Mr. Evans.
Mr. Welcher: Yes, sir, good morning. I hear a lot of questions. I think the first question
(inaudible) asked was the application (inaudible) approval process? If you could bring your
attention to your booklets. There were two documents that were provided. One was a two-page
5
summation of what the program is and the eligibility requirements and then second attach the
application. It is a condensed application that also speaks to requirements of those (inaudible)
what we anticipate and (inaudible) so upon acception of a complete application package we look
at 14 days to review the approval process of which we will then move to a recommendation period
(inaudible) with our commission. Now there is a committee that is comprised and made up of
members of two financial institutions, a deputy director from a City of Augusta, also a local
business owner as well as made up of also (inaudible) so there is a five member loan committee
that is already in place. A five member loan committee has already gone through a process of
looking over our documentation of what our rubrics is. The rubrics is also attached to the
application submission for which you have a part of. What we try to do is make it a fair process,
a process wherein we had a condensed inception as well as a condensed review and vet process
(inaudible). As you indicated it is not about the money but it is (inaudible). So you have a two-
page summary and we can answer any additional questions that you have.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I heard Mr. Welcher and I understand what
he’s saying. My question still stands though how do we determine, and we need to approve this
and I’m certainly going to vote to approve it, but how do we distinguish who is qualified because
everybody, every business person now is going to tell you they’re affected by this epidemic. And
you know that and every business person has, especially the small business people like the barbers,
(inaudible). The retail stores are going to be affected but if we’ve got the small businesses who’ve
still been trying to get in for 15 years but you’ve got somebody that’s been in for a good while and
they’re feeling the pinch now. I’m just trying to figure out how do we do this. That’s not my
expertise. That’s why we’ve got a director like Mr. Welcher who makes the big bucks, who is
supposed to know how to do this and I’m asking him just to share with me how it’s going to be
done. You’ve got a loan committee. A loan committee scares me when I walk in the room with a
loan committee. I know the answer has always been when I went in the room with a loan
committee. So we need to be real about this and say these are the guidelines and I think Mr.
Welcher is going to handle that but I think this body ought to come back to this like Commissioner
Sias said so we’ll know without just going out and then it’s done. It may not make sense to nobody
but (inaudible).
Mr. Welcher: Real quickly what I want to ask you is a small business owner in the loan
program is something that you have already had. Augusta, Georgia has had a small business
development loan program that’s already been in existence. From a (inaudible) perspective what
we’ve done, to your point, we have not taken out the same program. We’ve taken the same
program and we’ve condensed the requirements based on a pandemic of where we are. We’ll just
go over a couple of those, we’re not going to go through all of them, but you asked a question
about who is eligible, what type of (inaudible) are eligible, what are the basic terms, so just allow
us to go over a couple of those things. You have, this two-page document that you have that was
a part of your booklet, this is what we’re reading off of. We’ve condensed the program. We know
that it’s tight, we know it is compliant based on CDBG guidelines so we feel very good and
confident about this program. This program has also been one that is now being modeled from a
HUD perspective. It’s asking other cities to reach out to us based on this condensed program that
we’ve put forth. So I’ll go over some of the eligibility requirements per your concern.
6
Mr. Evans: Yes, sir. Commissioner Williams, your concerns are spot on and Mr.
Welcher’s point is how we designed it. So you’re going to talk about four basic components of
eligibility. It has to be a locally operated business obviously in Augusta Richmond County. We’re
asking that they provide 2020 calendar year first quarter financial statements so that the review
committee can see the documented demonstrated financial need (inaudible) in comparison to the
previous quarter of a similar nature. And that’s where we meet the requirement of the federal
government that says you have to show that you’re responding to the pandemic. We’re asking that
they provide the ability to create or retain a job which (inaudible) federal funding. We’re asking
(inaudible) in good legal standing with the City of Augusta (inaudible) arrears on taxes (inaudible)
meets requirements so that we as a government aren’t supporting any business financially that is
not operating within the rules this Commission set forth. (inaudible) but to highlight the point Mr.
Welcher made to your concern, Commissioner Williams, about a (inaudible) so we have
completely divorced underwriting guidelines from this program. This is an emergency response
to provide economic relief so we are not checking credit scores, we are not going through a
traditional underwriting process like we would for a small business loan. We are simply trying to
see a documented demonstrable need, ensure the ability of the recipient of funds to meet federal
law and expediting the disbursement of those funds for you.
Mr. M. Williams: I gave my question, I got some answers. I still think this body needs to
know when that process has been done and come back to this body. There’s been a motion to
approve it and I’m waiting to take the vote.
th
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I could be in error on this but early on in this
program did it have the D&B request as well, Mr. Welcher, or did ya’ll remove that?
Mr. Welcher: I couldn’t hear you, Commissioner.
Mr. Mayor: Refer to the Dunn and Bradstreet request.
Mr. Hasan: Yeah, did ya’ll take that out?
Mr. Welcher: No, it’s still a part of it, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Why?
Mr. Evans: That is a requirement for any entity to receive federal funds.
Mr. Hasan: Well, I will tell you from my experiences with barber shops and beauty shops
and being in a small business myself, let’s go with small and super-small. The super-small
businesses, the barber shops and beauty shops, very few, probably less than 5% I think (inaudible)
and the Dunn and Bradstreet criteria, a lot of them won’t be able to get served through this process.
7
Mr. Welcher: We’ll go back and take a look at that. I think from our perspective we try
to, it’s one of the compliance measures. It’s one also that has been tested. You are familiar with
our Seeds for Life program. You have some hair salons and beauty shops as well. That was not
an issue that we encountered however if we go back and see where it’s not of a regulatory
compliant need we will move to take it out.
Mr. Hasan: And how soon do you assume that HUD is going to give you confirmation of
the program?
Mr. Welcher: So with that I think where we are with your approval today and based on
what you all approved last week it will allow us to be able to take the plan or program, submit it
to our HUD regional office in Atlanta to look over it, understanding that they have to provide an
official response within a 30-day time period, but that is still not an official approval. Your official
approval, what we’re waiting on right now, all over the country, states and locally, we’re waiting
on instructions to be able to submit it and this is something that is coming directly from
Washington. They are providing instructions in regards to exactly how to amend your consolidated
and your annual plans to include this COVID money. So in talking directly with the Director of
the HUD Regional Office in Atlanta, I talked to her directly on last week, and what she indicated
is that they are currently in the process of trying to provide these instructions for submission. The
issue that they’re having right now is the issue with the fact of making sure that once we provide
submissions, applications for submission to be able to move forward with this funding, that their
financial IT systems can keep pace with that. So in my mind I’m anticipating from the
Commission, I’m anticipating a 30-day turn around whenever we’re able to make that submission.
Mr. Hasan: How do you define the submission? Applications of request or information
you’ve got in hand from the City?
Mr. Welcher: What I identify for submission is a instructural submission that will come
down just as other notices have come down from HUD which we have not received. As an official
submission. However we still have the latitude to be able to take this plan today and say, hey, our
community has been deemed favorable of this program, we are providing (inaudible) to Atlanta to
apply for you all to review this and make comments in regards to our compliance of a plan that
we’ve submitted. We know what we have is compliant with HUD. We feel very confident about
it and keep in mind, Augusta, Georgia at any given time can sort of move forward.
Mr. Hasan: Let me slow it down, Hawthorne, and ask you a quick question. In approving
this today what’s your next step?
Mr. Welcher: My next step in approving it today is providing this plan to our HUD regional
office via email.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: I’m good, sir. I’m just waiting to vote.
8
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Madam Clerk. Oh, I’m sorry. Commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Garrett: You know I appreciate all the good information that Hawthorne and his group
have brought forth today. One last think that I have you know you were talking about cutting
checks on each Friday. Would it be possible to get a list of the businesses that this is helping each
Friday?
Mr. Mayor: I think all of that is possible and would be a reasonable expectation. I’m not
convinced based on what I just heard that we’re ever going to get to the point of helping anybody.
Mr. Garrett: Hawthorne, is that possible?
Mr. Welcher: Yeah, most definitely. We could provide that once we make a commitment
and checks are (inaudible).
Mr. Mayor: I’m going to state this for the record otherwise I’d be remiss in my role and
that is we’ve gone this has been six weeks we’re effectively talking about this and we’ve gone
from taking general fund dollars to this what I call a very complicated process. We’ve pivoted
from general fund dollars to using federal dollars which again the issues real or otherwise around
“gratuities clause” are effectively eliminated. At the end of the day what we heard from our
business community with the survey that was conducted all of which you have seen includes HCD
is that cash flow and operating expense money to date is critical path. If what I’m hearing is we’re
going to be waiting another 30 days to get resources into people’s hands then you know people are
back to work now. They’re going to be back to work 30 days from now. We need to figure out if
the Commission is voting on this and approving this and we need to mobilize whatever group
you’ve got and get them in a room and move expeditiously with putting up on a website for people
to apply right now and get those vetted. A 14 day vetting process is too long and again you’re
talking about most businesses during that survey process said our operating expenses are roughly
th
about $5,000 a month and so whatever the pot of money is the Commissioner from the 9’s
perspective, we need to move on and get dollars into people’s hands. They don’t need a D&B
number. They need to fill out a two-page application and say this is where I’m hurting at whether
it’s a restaurant, hair salon, barber shop, we need to get those dollars into their hands as quickly as
possible. Madam Clerk, I’m ready for a roll call vote.
Motion carries 10-0.
1. Discuss requiring that face-coverings or masks be worn in the City of Augusta
government buildings during the COVID-19 public health emergency and recovery.
Mr. Sias: This is an issue that is proposed to go for 60 days, for a limited timeframe on it
and it is to protect our workers and the public and one of the things is as we know we’ve heard
from Washington, DC to Richmond County COVID 19 can get you at any time and anything who
you are. And we now know if you’re going in the White House west wing you’ve got to be wearing
a face mask or face covering so this proposal is not to infringe on anybody but to ensure for the
next 60 days as a minimum that we have some kind of protection plan in place and this is for the
9
Municipal Building as mandatory only. That means we have the masks that we can provide to
anybody who don’t have one and secondly, if someone says well, I’d rather not come in but I still
want to do my city business, they can do that online from the smart phone, tablet or computer so
we’re not killing anybody’s rights but simply protecting everybody that’s involved here. The
Municipal Building is one of our most public buildings where we have interaction with folks. So
I won’t belabor that point. It’s just a 60-day proposal and the Marshal will run that at the entrance.
I move to approve.
Mr. Fennoy: I second it.
th
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner from the 10.
Mr. Clarke: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m for wanting everybody to be protected and
nobody can get sick. I want to make that abundantly clear. But I am also concerned about
constitutional rights and I think that we’re touching on a delicate matter there so I just wanted to
put that out there. That’s all I have to say.
st
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: I want to, if the motion hadn’t been seconded that Commissioner Sias made
I want to go ahead and second that motion but you know we are required to wear seat belts and
that’s for the protection of everybody that’s in a vehicle. We’re required to wear a helmet on a
motorcycle. So there are a lot of requirements that are put upon us for protection and also
protection of the citizens in general so when someone comes to the Municipal Building unless we
are absolutely sure that they don’t have, not infected with the virus we need to do what in the
health profession they call universal precautions and that is to treat everybody as if they are
infected so everybody can protect themselves and protect the people around them. So I support
the motion and that’s my piece.
th
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you. This epidemic is really bad and we know that and lives are
still being lost and I think the Commission is trying to do what it can to prevent any further loss of
life but we can’t just rule on the Municipal Building. All our facilities belong to the City. If we’re
going to require someone to go in with a mask then we’ve got to get all our facilities if we’re going
to do that. We can’t have some we care about and some we don’t. We’ve got to make sure, I still
think it’s too early for the employees to go back to work. That’s my opinion and I still stick to
that. I still think this thing is still spreading. We don’t know where it is, we don’t know who got
it. Commissioner Fennoy talked about motorcycle helmets. In South Carolina you can ride a
motorcycle with nothing on if you want to. You ain’t got to have no helmet. It depends on where
you are. But I understand what the law says about seat belts and that kind of thing but the
government who is going to operate, we’ve got to protect everybody or nobody. If we’re going
to, what about the Judicial Center? What about the branches of the water department and the Tax
Commissioner’s office? We’ve got to take everybody if we’re going to do this. So how do we
manage just to protect one and not everybody else? What cost is going to occur to do that? If we
are that afraid why are we opening the government back up as early as we are? We can’t see it,
10
we can’t feel it, we’ve got to take precaution. We’ve got employees coming back in the building
and be ready to work with one another and the public so I can’t see how we can specify the
courthouse. If we’re going to do it we’ve got to be uniform. In our Rec Centers, everything that
we are doing with this government has to be under the same rules. Ain’t no picking and choosing
what we like and what we don’t like. The Commission meeting is online. We’re screening our
meetings. We’re not going into a public facility so if we’re going to wear a mask, I ain’t got no
problem with that. But we’ve got to be uniform. Everybody’s got to have them. We’ve got to
protect all our workers not just some of them. So how do we do that, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: I think we are going to hear about that in just a second. We’re going to
recognize Administrator Sims.
Mr. Sims: Commissioners, some of the things you brought up are some similar concerns
that staff also has. The first thing you mentioned about us requiring only for the Municipal
Building we also see that as a challenge because we have other buildings and not requiring
employees or other guests coming to our buildings not requiring you to wear a mask creating an
inconsistency. We also recognize that (inaudible) masks our employees as well as our guests will
wear the masks. If we put in place requiring masks that might incite or make it worse for people
and create a hostile or tense situation for our staff as well as inconsistencies that we have just the
Municipal Building and we don’t have our other buildings employees might have a concern about
why they’re not being asked to wear a mask or the perception potentially that we’re showing some
type of more appropriate treatment for Municipal Building employees versus other employees in
our other facilities. We have some concerns about that as well. While we all do know that the
virus is spreading, we all know that wearing face masks or face coverings helps prevent the spread
of the coronavirus. My recommendation remains the same as far as strongly recommending face
masks or some face covering.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Sims, I think you came up with this plan about phasing in about the
opening up this government. What’s your recommendation on all our facilities and how do we
protect everybody, even the courts and everything else? What’s your recommendation on that?
Mr. Sims: That was part of our plan for phasing in. We know that all of us potentially can
get the coronavirus. We realize that the only way we can do it is be very (inaudible). We also
recognize (inaudible) social distancing is in place and we are trying our best to phase in our
approach. We don’t want all of our employees back at the same time. That’s why we have the
phased in approach. We also recognize as far as our buildings making sure they are frequently
cleaned. These are the things we’re doing right now.
Mr. M. Williams: My question is about the masks for the courthouse, the Municipal
Building. What’s your recommendation for all our facilities because if we’re going to phase them
back in people are going to be coming back in. Children, seniors and all the other stuff we’ve got
to deal with in our Rec Department once we open them back up. How do we do that? Do you
recommend just doing the courthouse right now and then phasing in?
Mr. Sims: The Recreation and Senior Centers were always our last thing because we knew
that would be a mass of people. So that was our last stage. We recognize that we have to closely
11
monitor each step. The Recreation Centers were Phase 3 in June. It was also strongly
recommended to wear masks for our employees or our visitors or guests. But as far as requiring
that was the (inaudible) that we all had for making the masks or face coverings a requirement.
That was never the recommendation. It was always about strongly recommending (inaudible).
Mr. M. Williams: So you’re recommending that we just do the courthouse and not the
other branches of the government that we have to (inaudible). Are you recommending doing
everybody when we do one, we do, you know it’s like the children, you have to feed them all. You
can’t give some of them food and then the rest of them water. So what’s your recommendation
for that?
Mr. Sims: The judge extended the courts opening until June so the courts are still closed
unless there are certain circumstances. But as far as our building we are recommending our
th
employees come back the 18, that would be the second phase and the third phase Recreation and
Parks and our Senior Centers as well as our Libraries.
Mr. M. Williams: I’m asking about the masks.
Mr. Sims: We are strongly recommending that people wear masks but we’re not implying
that as a requirement. We are strongly recommending and that is consistent with the state. It’s
not a requirement. It’s strongly recommended.
Mr. M. Williams: Do we do everybody or we just do, recommending is one thing. We’re
talking about now 60 days for the courthouse. I’m saying that you just can’t do the courthouse.
You’ve got to do everybody. I’m not in support of that at all because I think it’s too early but my
question to you is you’re recommending just doing the courthouse right now.
Mr. Sims: I recommend if you go in any facility you have on a face mask or a covering.
Mr. M. Williams: That’s your recommendation to the commission.
Mr. Sims: Recommend personally.
Mr. M. Williams: Not personally. As Administrator, you’re telling the Commission that
we need to do this for all our facilities, right?
Mr. Sims: Yes, I would not suggest singling out one facility for wearing masks. If it is the
will of the Commission for people to wear masks or make a requirement it would be for all our
facilities people would be strongly recommended to wear a mask, not just in one facility.
Mr. M. Williams: People are getting in altercations in other cities if we require some people
to do it and some don’t. Some have masks, some won’t. Some say they won’t put it on their face,
some say they don’t need it, some say they don’t want it. That’s my reason for the question.
Mr. Mayor: Attorney Brown, is there a probation from a statutory perspective that
says you cannot wear masks or require masks to be worn in government buildings?
12
Mr. Brown: No, we have not been able to find any statutory prohibition against it but I
hasten to say that you should have some concerns about instituting that policy. It is not popular
policy around the state. We have searched ACCG, GMA, we’ve had attorneys for those
organizations also search for us and they have found few or any other counties who are taking that
approach. As Jarvis said one of the problems you have is that if you’re going to do it you need to
do it across the board for all your buildings. Secondly, you clearly could run into the possibility
of having an enforcement problem. I think that’s been demonstrated around the country that it
does create (inaudible) for the point of contact for whoever will be enforcing this. And if you have
it across the board throughout your buildings you probably do not have Marshal resources to be at
every building. Some have unprofessional enforcement staff doing the enforcement. Those are
some of the concerns. And lastly I would say that if you decide to adopt this measure you need to
do it only for 30 days because it’s done within the powers granted through the state of emergency.
The state of emergency only lasts 30 days. They can be renewed at the end of those 30 days but
you cannot come out of the gate legally and say 60 days. You need to do it 30 days. Right now
the governor has a 30-day order that goes through June 13. If the governor extends it, you can
extend the mask wearing for another 30 days. If the governor does not extend it then locally the
Mayor would need to put in a state of emergency in order to keep the mask going for the complete
60 days. But we are highly concerned, I have spoken with the Administrator and with the HR
Director and all three of us are concerned about requirements. We are not sure you are going to
get, we are not sure that you would not get compliance without requiring. I think strongly
encouraging it, providing masks, you would probably have a higher rate of compliance but of
course whether you do it or not is a policy call that is beyond me or the Administrator or the HR
Director but we did want to share our concerns with you for you to consider.
th
Mr. Mayor: We appreciate that, Attorney Brown. Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: Just for the record the Municipal Building, as far as the Commission goes, is
different from any other building. That is technically the seat of the government. That is where
we have commission meetings, we have the greater number of people coming to do city business
and attend commission meetings and other things as well. So that is our number one standard
there. I have no problem with the attorney saying about the 30 days versus the 60. That makes
sense so I will amend my motion to say 30 days versus 60. And again as far as compliance goes
we guard a few buildings in Augusta Richmond County. The Courthouse itself is done by the
Chief Judge so that’s not in our purview at the moment. The Municipal Building is and the other
employees and things we have out there we can encourage them, these locations out there
(inaudible). These guys that have been out there working, inspecting, digging, trenching, running
water lines, supervising water lines by contractors, these folks never did stop working. But the
bottom line is and I didn’t hear an outcry about protecting them so the bottom line is we need to
do this at the Municipal Building and my stance on that 30 days and that’s my amended motion.
st
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ve got an amended motion. Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, I think we need to do it at all of our buildings. And I know that
there are some buildings that, a good example this past Saturday I was riding by Dyess Park and I
saw about 150 people out there barbecuing, eating. Nobody had on any masks, nobody was
13
practicing safe distancing. There was nothing that we could do about that. If someone is entering
a building that is operated by the city, then we need to do what we can to protect that person and
protect the employees that are working in that building so 30 days is okay. We need to go to all
of our buildings.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ve got a motion and a second. The amendment is for 30 days and
the question is are we extending this to the other government buildings minus the Judicial Center.
th
Commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Garrett: Thank you, Mayor. I have one final question for this and maybe I’ve missed
it during all the conversation but will this require all the employees to wear masks inside the
building at all times?
Mr. Mayor: Administrator Sims, I think the caveat will be in those instances where they’re
sitting in their offices alone. There’s no requirement to wear a mask when you’re sitting in your
office alone.
Mr. Sims: That’s correct. As you can see now I don’t have on a mask. When I entered
the building I have a mask but as far as when you’re in your office and you are in the office alone
I don’t think you would be expected to have on a mask if you’re in your office alone.
Mr. Garrett: What if you work six feet apart from somebody in a shared office?
Mr. Sims: That would be different. If you’re able to be beyond six feet, (inaudible). My
stance has been setting as far as strongly recommending for (inaudible) with a mask or face
covering.
Mr. Garrett: Okay, thank you.
th
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I think that if we’re going consider one building we ought
to consider them all. I can’t support doing just one building and you leave the other people out to
kind of fend for themselves so to speak. If it’s that important, it ought to be that important all the
way around. It can’t be important downtown or south side or west side. It’s got to be important
all over. It don’t even make sense to say we’re going to protect or we’re worried about this area
with people coming in because people are coming in all the offices. So I can’t support that. That’s
my opinion.
Mr. Mayor: All right. I think we’ve already made one amendment to the original motion.
That’s the 30 days to be consistent with the Governor’s executive order. But there’s currently a
press conference that’s taking place right now where the Governor is going to likely extend the
closure of bars, nightclubs and those types of facilities and at the same time I think that we’ve
already seen in his previous executive order the Governor has indicated that if you’re out in public,
you should be wearing a mask and should be continuing to social distance. The Governor has also
provided guidelines through the state licensing board, cosmetologists, etc. that if you’re going into
14
those facilities, you have on a mask and so for us to couch and/or politicize this, it’s not necessary.
At the end of the day any of our front facing facilities that people are coming into to conduct
business, they should be included in this motion. The Municipal Building, the Walker Street
Building, the Planning and Inspections Building on Marvin Griffin Road, the satellite location for
the Tax Commissioner and Utilities Offices on Peach Orchard Road as well as the one on
Washington Road. Those should be included in this because they are our primary front facing
facilities and they need to be included in this motion from an amendment standpoint and then we
need to vote on this and adopt this for a 30-day period of time with the expectation that if necessary
we’ll continue to extend that beyond 30 days. That’s what I would encourage us to do.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, I don’t disagree with what you just said but I think it does change
the nature of the motion. Do we have the manpower from the Marshal’s Department to enforce
this across the organization? For what it becomes now is it’s a strong recommendation as persons
come and go. They have an opportunity to do that now. I have no problem with mandatory for
this building even though I question whether based on what I heard the attorney says around all
these executive orders that the Governor has mentioned and I’m going to try to make some sense
of this one. Just like I believe that he said we can’t do 60 days, we could do 30 days. Also what
has been obvious in all the Governor’s executive orders is we can’t make it more restrictive or less
restrictive and so he has never made it mandatory so can we make it mandatory? But at the same
time I do think at the end of the day even if we decide to go with the mandatory in the Municipal
Building we don’t have the manpower to do it across the organization so I think by default the
motion probably needs to be considered to make it strongly recommended because I do agree that
all our buildings should be considered in this motion and so if I need some clarity I don’t mind
trying to clarify that. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Each department will have to have some level of enforcement themselves
when you’re conducting business with the general public. When people are entering in our
facilities I think there’s been a consistency at the adoption of the phased in plan on last week in
terms of when we bring folks in and who gets brought in and so the Governor’s “order that we
couldn’t be any more restrictive or less restrictive than him” that applies to general businesses,
we’re talking about people coming in our buildings and it is well within our statutory right to be
able to put this in as a requirement. It is well within our right to be able to do that. It does not
encumber any of things that the Governor had in his most recent executive order.
Mr. Hasan: So where is the manpower to enforce it, Mr. Mayor, if you make it all
mandatory?
Mr. Mayor: I think the question around enforcement and manpower while it’s an attractive
conversation and argument I don’t think it has full merit. It’s almost like saying we’re not fully
staffed in the Sheriff’s Office or the Marshal’s Office. There are things that we are able to do
given the manpower that we have. The reality of it is as an expectation now we’re going to do
everything we can to provide for the health, welfare and safety of not just those who are out in the
general public but our employees as well and so the questions around enforcement, again, while I
generally share them I do not believe that it should stop a very important policy decision.
15
Mr. Hasan: I’ll go back to the Administrator’s comment as well. Unless they’re six feet
from each other then there’s no requirement to wear the mask in the office. So (inaudible) be
thinking that everybody who doesn’t have an office has to remain at home doing business. They’d
have to be six feet apart, Mr. Administrator, that has to stand, but also, Mr. Mayor, I think, I find
it a little interesting that you said you don’t think it has merit. I think when you look at the family
of the security guard that was killed and the families across the country to say that it doesn’t have
merit in an attempt to enforce it, this is a very serious matter and so I don’t think we should be
dismissing (inaudible).
Mr. Mayor: Let me clarify and be real clear when I say, didn’t say it didn’t have merit, it
says –
Mr. Hasan: You said it, you said it.
Mr. Mayor: -- overarching conversation or concern from a public policy standpoint. We
do a lot of things in this city and we don’t have the manpower to fully enforce and/or to see the
execution of. This is just one example of where we raise the concern around who enforces and
how well we’re going to be able to do that. And so to that end it has not stopped us from making
good public policy decisions going forward. It’s just like the smoking ordinance and they’re not
smoking in downtown. We don’t have 50 people to run around downtown trying to make sure
nobody is smoking in places.
Mr. Sias: For the third time and hopefully that will be a charm to get this item addressed
and put to bed is that we will have mandatory face coverings in the Municipal Building and all our
other buildings but the Municipal Building will be the only one with law enforcement required and
I’m just kind of shaping that in my mind at the moment. If the desire is to protect to do with all
the buildings we know we don’t have the enforcement. We just know (inaudible). It could be
random coming through this kind of thing like that and employees asking people to put a mask on.
As the Tax Commissioner has said that their folks will be asking folks to put a mask on to do
business with them in their locations so let me restate that again. We’ll have mandatory face
coverings in all our buildings for the next 30 days with the Municipal Building being the one
with Marshal enforcement.
Mr. Mayor: All right, thank you. We’ve got a motion that’s been amended and a second.
Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Clarke and Mr. M. Williams vote No.
Motion carries 8-2.
Mr. Brown: Now that the Commission has passed, approved this policy in an effort to give
weight to the enforcement it would be advisable that this policy be converted into an ordinance
that has enforcement powers. This is a public building. People do feel strongly about their rights
and constitutional rights in a public building as citizens of the state and citizens of the public. We
suggest that this policy be converted into an ordinance.
16
Mr. Mayor: That was the thought from day one. That was the intent.
Mr. M. Williams: No, that wasn’t the intent, Mr. Mayor. Hold it now.
Mr. Brown: And also in terms of Commissioner Hasan’s concern the Governor, no more
th
restrictive, no less restrictive executive order expires at the end of the day on the 13. Therefore
th
we would recommend that our policy and our ordinance begin at 12:01 on the 14 to not run into
conflict with the Governor’s executive order. He did not extend that portion of his order to the
th
June 13 so we would not be in conflict with the Governor’s order beginning at 12:01 on the 14.
But we believe that a policy of this magnitude need to be as you said in the form of an approved
ordinance on the books of Augusta.
Mr. Mayor: This will be a temporary ordinance for a 30-day period of time that we could
come back and revisit as this pandemic persists.
Mr. M. Williams: That’s not what we voted on, Mr. Mayor. We didn’t vote on the
ordinance. It’s a policy that the Commission voted on and you can’t just change the order because
you feel like that or because you think that’s best. I disagree with that because the enforcement
part in the Municipal Building versus our other buildings you’re going to have private people
coming in even in our Municipal Building I think our Marshal’s going to be challenged with this.
May even be a lawsuit. There are a lot of people that don’t believe this epidemic is what it is. A
lot of people think this is something just happening and they don’t need any protection. So we’re
going to bend up in a bad situation trying to correct something that’s going to end up worse than
what it really is now. So our legal mind had just told us before we took that vote the pros and the
cons. We still took the vote. We still voted to do it but you can’t just turn your head now and
change it to something else that we didn’t vote on because we realize we should have talked it
through some more. I’m sorry. I’m not going to put the people at risk, put the Marshal at risk.
This thing is already wild. We’re going to create some more disturbances in this community
because of this crazy vote that the Commission just took a little while ago about nothing. We don’t
know how long this thing will be going. If it was going to last 30 days that would be one thing.
But we don’t know. You going to continue to have the masks from now on? You going to continue
to have the masks until somebody says it’s gone? So who gave us the authority to say it’s not
going to be here long? We’re not really thinking about the general public. We’re thinking about
ourselves. I’m through.
Mr. Mayor: Attorney Brown, what do you need from the Commission?
Mr. Brown: If you do not want to attempt to create an ordinance today, I would suggest
that that be on the agenda for Tuesday and the ordinance be drawn up in line with the policy for
all the buildings and for a period of 30 days which would be renewable.
Mr. Mayor: I think we’re going to get a motion for that right now.
17
Mr. Sias: Mr. Brown, you said you kind of preset your question. You said if the
Commission don’t want to try to get an ordinance today. Explain what would be the process to
initiate an ordinance today. A temporary ordinance.
Mr. Brown: We didn’t know which way the Commission was going to go with this policy
or if it was going to approve the policy or for what buildings. So we have an ordinance in basic
th
draft at this time to begin on the 14 of this month.
Mr. Sias: So in anticipation of whichever way you felt the Commission might go, you have
something that’s kind of drawn up. I would like to hear what that is if it wouldn’t take too long to
read it and maybe we can get that approved as far as our first vote. Obviously it’s not going to be
unanimous so it will require two readings. If our Chairman would engage us in allowing you to
read that, I would request that.
Mr. Mayor: I think that’s an excellent idea and in lieu of that I think what is really needed
at this point is a motion to adopt temporary ordinance implementing face coverings in government
buildings pursuant to what’s already been discussed. I think that’s the basic motion.
Mr. Brown: I know we’re on the public airwave at this time. To try to give you the best
legal advice I can which usually should not be in public. I would say because this without a doubt
will be controversial and I will be extremely surprised if we do not get a constitutional challenge.
And because we expect potential litigation from this I think we should go strictly by the book and
technically if you’re going to have an ordinance passed, it needs to actually be before you.
Mr. M. Williams: That’s exactly right.
Mr. Sias: Mr. Brown, I don’t disagree with you on that so I will request to our Clerk that
we put this on the next agenda, on the next special called meeting but also just caution our staff,
our attorneys and our commissioners, this is just my personal thought. You can also invite trouble.
So I would just caution us on that as well so bottom line then I totally agree so my request here is
the Clerk to put this on the next agenda as, or on the next special called meeting if there is a special
called meeting to adopt the ordinance for the face covering for the next 30 days.
Mr. B. Williams: Are we going to have face masks at the sites for people who come and
don’t have face masks?
Mr. Mayor: At the point in time that this body adopted the phased in reopening we
explicitly talked about the expectation that the general public would be required to wear masks
coming into the building. In the event that someone showed up and did not, we would have a
small supply that would be made available to those individuals that could be handed out at
government buildings. That was explicitly stated at our meeting at which point in time this body
moved forward to adopt the phased in reopening.
Mr. Sias: The stock is available.
18
Mr. M. Williams: A small amount of masks for the building. If you’re going to do that
then you’ve got to be prepared for whoever comes, not just a small amount. You’re asking people
to wear that. The average person ought to wear a mask. I’ve got the N95. You can’t limit the
amount you have and tell other folks I don’t have any more. You’ve got to be equipped. If you’re
going to do this, first of all this ordinance thing is going to get me, I’m hyped up about the
ordinance. The attorney, we didn’t instruct the attorney to draw up an ordinance and if he had
something previous written down and then it wasn’t in front of us, somebody done had the meeting
before the meeting. So since that didn’t happen, I’m going back to the Mayor’s issue about
whether or not we’re going to have sufficient amount of masks at every site that we’re asking
people to come in the building with one. Enforcement, supplies, all that thing we hadn’t even
talked about.
Mr. Mayor: I think, Madam Clerk, this is going to be on the next scheduled agenda absent
there being another special called meeting in terms of the conversation about drafting an ordinance.
The Clerk: Is that to authorize the attorney to draft the ordinance? Is that’s what’s going
on the agenda or is it the ordinance? I’m not sure what we’re placing.
Mr. Mayor: I think the motion here is to authorize the attorney to draft an ordinance. That’s
what the motion is here today and then we’ll have that brought before us at our next meeting
th
whether it be a special called or the 19.
Mr. Hasan: Has that motion been made? Commissioner Sias made the motion?
Mr. Mayor: That was what he was making. He asked a question.
Mr. M. Williams: Golly, I’ll tell you what.
th
Mr. Mayor: But if you want to fully make that motion, commissioner from the 6, you
certainly can.
Mr. Hasan: Commissioner Sias, it was his item.
Mr. Sias: I did not put that in the form of a motion. I made that request to go on the agenda
which is not a motion and not required for this for approval. I made a request to go on the agenda
to the Clerk. To go on the next commission meeting or the next special called meeting. It was my
request for an agenda item and to approve that as an ordinance.
Mr. Hasan: I think it should be, Commissioner, because I don’t have it all in my head, Mr.
Mayor, if you’re going to do anything you make it so he can bring the ordinance back because if
you just put it on the agenda then you’re still going to have to go back and do the ordinance as a
result of the next meeting. The motion now is to give him the authority to go and bring the motion
back at the next meeting, the ordinance back at the next meeting.
Mr. Sias: So move.
19
Mr. M. Williams: Well, ya’ll still haven’t learned the rules yet.
th
Mr. Mayor: The clarification on that is, commissioner from the 6, is motion to task
attorney with drafting an ordinance for face coverings and bring it back at the next meeting. That
was the motion.
The Clerk: And Mr. Mayor, could we specify is it going to be at the special called meeting
or the regular meeting?
Mr. Mayor: I think given the phased in this needs to be at a special called meeting.
The Clerk: It will be at the 12:30 meeting then.
Mr. Mayor: Right.
The Clerk: Okay. I didn’t hear a second. Did we get one, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Fennoy: I second it.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk.
Mr. Clarke and Mr. M. Williams vote No.
Mr. D. Williams out.
Motion carries 7-2.
\[MEETING ADJOURNED\]
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 Called Meeting of the Augusta Richmond County Commission held on May
12, 2020.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
20