HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-09-1999 Meeting
I
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE ROOM - August 9, 1999
2:00 P. M.
PRESENT: Hons. Bob Young, Mayor; H. Brigham, Chairman; Powell, Vice-
Chairman; Beard and Shepard, members; Jim Wall, Attorney; Randy Oliver,
Administrator; Clifford Rushton, IT Director; Rob Sherman, License & Inspections
Director; Paul DeCamp, Planning Commission; Keven Mack, HND Director; Richard
Leach, Library Director; Lena Bonner, Clerk of Commission and Nancy Morawski,
Deputy Clerk of Commission.
Also Present: Stacey Eidson of The Metropolitan Spirit, George Eskola ofWJBF
Television, other members of the news media and Hons. Bridges, Colclough and Mays,
Commissioners.
The Clerk: We have a request to add one item.
Mr. Shepard: I'll make the motion to add it to the agenda.
Mr. Powell: Second.
Motion adopted unanimously.
I
A request to approve the petition for retirement on Robert M. Russ, was
read.
A request to approve the petition for retirement on Melba L. Dismuke, was
read.
A request to approve the petition for retirement on James R. Isdell, was read.
Mr. Powell: I move approval.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Motion adopted unanimously.
A request to consider approval of retroactive salary adjustments regarding
reclassification of Accounting Technician I position, grade 43, to Payroll Supervisor,
grade 48 and Accounting Clerk II position, grade 39, to Payroll Technician, grade
41, was read.
I
Mr. Wall: It is still my opinion that you cannot grant retroactive pay increases.
There have been situations where corrections were made in the computations of salaries
but these were not retroactive salary increases. You have the authority to correct an
administrative error but you can't go back and change the rate of pay.
Mr. Beard: Are you saying that we've never done this before?
Mr. Wall: To the best of my knowledge we have never granted a retroactive pay I
increase. We have made corrections where the corrections were applied retroactively but
we have not gone back and changed someone's salary and retroactively implemented
that.
Mr. Powell: I so move that we approve the County Attorney's recommendation
that there be no retroactive increase.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Beard: For the record I do think when it's our fault, our employees should
not have to suffer.
Motion fails with Mr. Beard and the Chairman voting "No".
. A request to approve reclassification of Library Assistant II, Grade 39 to
Library Assistant I, Grade 40; reclassification of Library Assistant II, Grade 39 to
Library Assistant III, Grade 37; reclassification of Secretary II, Grade 38 to
Secretary III, Grade 37; elimination of Mender, Grade 35; creation of
Administrative Assistant II, Grade 43, was read.
Mr. Leach: We are asking to do it at this time because we have vacancies in these I
areas and we can make these adjustments without affecting any existing personnel.
Mr. Powell: I move for approval.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
After further discussion, Mr. Oliver: My recommendation is to let it be done as
part ofthe budgetary process although I understand why he wants to proceed now.
Motion adopted with Mr. Beard voting "No".
A request to consider a communication from the Indigent Defense Tripartite
Committee to increase the compensation ofthe Director from $43,142 to 550,830,
was read.
Mr. Jack Long spoke in support of the increase in salary for the Director.
Mr. Oliver: The salary history for this position was $28,551 on 8/8/97. On
10/20/97 it went to $42,000 and on 10/20/98 it went $43,142. While you may wish to
make some adjustment, we believe something more modest would be appropriate.
Mr. Powell: And in October it would increase another 3%.
I
I
Mr. Oliver: Yes, and that would bring it to $44,436.
Mr. Shepard: I move that we deal with this request in the budgetary process.
Mr. Powell: I second the motion.
After further discussion, the motion was adopted with the Chairman voting "No".
A request to create a Department of Growth Management, which includes
Planning & Zoning, License and Inspections and Housing and Neighborhood
Development as recommended by the Management Study with no change in funding
or staffing, was read.
Mr. Oliver: There is a lot of coordination within these groups and in the long run
we think this will enhance the overall coordination among these departments and be in
the best interest of the government. We don't see any appreciable change in funding or
staffing but we think it's more of a coordination issue.
Mr. Beard: I so move.
Mr. Chairman: I'll second it for discussion.
I
Mr. Oliver: Mr. Patty would be the head of it and Mr. Mack and Mr. Sherman
would remain in their positions.
Mr. Powell: Would Mr. Patty be compensated for this?
Mr. Oliver: He has asked for consideration in that regard. He wants to do it and I
think that would be reasonable for consideration in the budgetary process.
Mr. Powell: I would like to look at it a little further before I make a decision.
Mr. Shepard: I'd like a little more time to study this and I would like to retain it
in our committee for one meeting more and I'll make that as a substitute motion.
Mr. Powell: I second that.
Mr. Chairman: Let's vote on the substitute motion first.
Motion fails with Mr. Beard and the Chairman voting "No".
Mr. Chairman: Back to the original motion.
I
Motion fails with Mr. Powell and Mr. Shepard voting "No".
The Committee next discussed the matter of the Augusta Neighborhood
Improvement Corporation project.
Mr. Mayor: An issue we've been working on for the last six months is the effort
to improve housing in the inner city area of Augusta. We have put together a model
based on a program we've seen in Chattanooga, Tennessee that has been very successful.
We have gone through the motions of creating the Augusta Neighborhood Improvement
Corporation that was taken from an old non-profit which had made some loans in the
City back in the '80s and had been dormant but still had some active accounts. We've
restructured it and the mission of this group is to develop and implement housing and
economic development projects for the benefit oflow- and moderate-income citizens in
Augusta. There are four main objectives to accomplish this. I. Identify and plan viable
neighborhood development projects with faith based and community based organizations.
2. Identify, secure and manage private and government resources to develop and
implement projects. 3. Implement and manage selected projects and provide technical
assistance and financial management on development projects. 4. Identify and market
home ownership, rental housing and rehab opportunities in the project area. We have
representatives from HUD here today who are working with us on the front end. We
have a couple of requests from the Committee today. First, we need some seed money
and we've asked the Committee to appropriate $1 million from HUD which could be a
combination of CDBG and HOME money for this organization. This group also needs
access to property that's held in the Land Bank for its housing development program.
They also want the City ask the Tax Commissioner to move forward against property
owners who have outstanding liens in Laney Walker and the targeted area where the
development begins. We hope to get houses under construction by next spring and we
need the backing of the City as we begin to talk with the banks. We will have some town
meetings to discuss our plans with the people in the neighborhood.
After further discussion and comments from representatives of HUD, Mr. Oliver:
We have $800,000 in 1999 CDBG money and that will need to be reprogrammed. The
Mayor has indicated that this group will send us a proposal as to what they're going to do
with the $1 million so we can send it through the Citizens Advisory Committee. 20% of
the money can be used for administrative costs; $200,000 is the most that can be used for
office furniture, tlxtures, salaries, etc. The rest of the money would have to come from
the private sector. Our sales tax money can only be used for infrastructure.
Mr. Wall: The only word of caution I have is there is concern about urging the
Tax Commissioner to focus on a particular area insofar as judicial foreclosure because
then you're using the government to take property through a ta:'{ lien to facilitate
economic development. We need to be cognizant about that as you move forward.
Mr. Oliver: You could direct us to begin the reprogramming process for the
million dollars.
After further discussion, Mr. Shepard: I would make a motion that the
Administrator identify the $800,000 from the '98 funds and $200,000 from 2000 funds
I
I
I
I
and that we receive a proposal from ANIC which will be sent to our Citizens Advisory
Committee.
Mr. Powell: I'll second the motion.
Mr. Beard: I will abstain from voting since I'm on the board.
After further discussion, Mr. Oliver: We need to carry the funding back to the
earliest year so let's say that funding would come from current and previous years and up
to $200,000 next year.
Mr. Shepard: I'll accept the amendment.
Motion adopted unanimously with Mr. Beard abstaining.
I
A request to establish base salary of all state court judges at $94,400.00.
Approve annual cost-of-living increase to state court judges in order to maintain
consistency between periodic pay increases granted to Richmond County
Constitutional Officials and that of state court judges. Approve application of the
same formula for state court judges that is used for these officials. The formula
would be as follows: Whenever the employees in the classified service of the state
merit system receive a cost-of-Iiving increase or general performance based increase
of a certain percentage or a certain amount, the base salary of all state court judges,
whether set by local law or by the county governing authority, shall be increased by
the same percentage or same amount applicable to said employees. If the cost-of-
living increase or general performance based increase received hy state employees is
in different percentages or different amounts as to certain categories of employees,
then said base salary of all state court judges shall be increased by a percentage or
an amount not to exceed the average percentage or average amount of the general
increase in salary granted to said employees, was read.
Mr. Powell: I move for approval.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Motion adopted unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Lena J. Bonner
Clerk of Commission
NWM
I
I
l\Dl\1INlSTRATIVE SERVICES
AGENDA
COMMITTEE ROOM - August 9, 1999
2:00 P M.
1. Approve the petition for retirement on Robert M. Russ.
2. Approve the petition for retirement on Melba L. Dismuke.
3. Approve the petition for retirement on James R. Isdell.
4. Motion to consider approval of retroactive salary adjustments regarding
reclassification of Accounting Technician I position, grade 43, to Payroll
Supervisor, grade 48, and Accounting Clerk II position, grade 39, to Payroll
Technician, grade 41.
5. Approve reclassitication of Library Assistant II, Grade 39 to Library Assistant I,
Grade 40; reclassification of Library Assistant II, Grade 39 to Library Assistant
III, Grade 37; reclassification of Secretary II, Grade 38 to Secretary III, Grade 37;
elimination of Mender, Grade 35; creation of Administrative Assistant II, Grade
43.
6.
Consider a communication from the Indigent Defense Tripartite Committee to
increase the compensation of the Director from $43,142 to $50,830.
I
7.
Create a Department of Growth Management, which includes Planning &
Zoning, License and Inspections. and Housing and Neighborhood
Development as recommended by the Management Study with no change in
funding or staffing.
8. Discuss Augusta Neighborhood Improvement Corporation project.
I
"
,
I
I
I
ADDENDUM
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AGENDA
August 9, 1999
2:00 P. M.
ADDITION TO THE AGENDA:
1.
Establish base salary of all state court judges at $94,400.00. Approve annual cost-
of-living increase to state court judges in order to maintain consistency between
periodic pay increases granted to Richmond County Constitutional Officials and
that of state court judges. Approve application of the same formula for state court
judges that is used for these officials. The formula would be as follows:
Whenever the employees in the classified service of the state merit system receive
a cost-of-living increase or general performance based increase of a certain
percentage or a certain amount, the base salary of all state court judges, whether
set by local law or by the county governing authority, shall be increased by the
same percentage or same amount applicable to said employees. If the cost-of-
living increase or general performance based increase received by state employees
is in different percentages or different amounts as to certain categories of
employees, then said base salary of all state court judges shall be increased by a
percentage or an amount not to exceed the average percentage or average amount
of the general increase in salary granted to said employees.