Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-16-1996 Regular Meeting REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION-COUNCIL CHAMBERS July 16, 1996 Augusta-Richmond County Commission-Council convened at 2:00 P.M. Tuesday, July 16, 1996, the Honorable Larry E. Sconyers, Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Beard, Bridges, J. Brigham, Handy, Kuhlke, Mays, Powell, Todd, and Zetterberg, members of Augusta-Richmond County Commission-Council. ABSENT: Hon. H. Brigham, member of Augusta-Richmond County Commission- Council. Also present were Lena Bonner, Interim Clerk of Commission-Council; James B. Wall, Interim Augusta-Richmond County Attorney; and Cathy Pirtle, Certified Court Reporter. MAYOR SCONYERS: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Regular Meeting of the Augusta-Richmond County Board of Commission-Council. We're going to have the Invocation by the Reverend E.T. Martin, Pastor of the Springfield Baptist Church, and if you'll remain standing we'll have the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. THE INVOCATION WAS GIVEN BY THE REVEREND MARTIN. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE WAS RECITED. MAYOR SCONYERS: Do we have any additions or deletions, Ms. Bonner? CLERK: Yes, sir. We have a request for deletion of Item 34, to consider the approval to name an unnamed alley for Mr. David Dupree. Addition: To consider acceptance of the 1995 Urban and Suburban Financial Statements from Serotta, Maddocks and Evans; and confirmation of the polling of the Commission-Council on June 24th of the appointment of Mr. L. Phillip Christman to the Coliseum Authority. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, is that the ratification of the nomination? CLERK: Yes, sir. MR. TODD: And also I'd like to add on there to accept the resignation of -- is that Mr. Dick Frank that resigned? CLERK: Yes, sir. MR. TODD: And I'd like for it to be in the order of the resignation first, then the ratification second of the nomination, and I so move that we do it in that order in unanimous consent. MR. HANDY: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Todd, seconded by Mr. Handy. Discussion, gentlemen? MR. MAYS: Yes, Mr. Mayor, just on one point of clarification. On the petitions that we received in our packets in reference to the boat dock situation -- CLERK: That was just for information. MR. MAYS: But I think -- what I just wanted to clear up from the Council today, there were some representatives here and I think maybe what they were thinking was that they would be on today's agenda and wanted to make a statement. And I didn't know whether or not we wanted to maybe add that or if we wanted to put it to the next meeting, but there are, you know, some persons here in reference to that, whether we take any, you know, permanent action or not. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion? MR. MAYS: Here's what I'm asking: Does Council have any problem adding a representative in terms of doing that, that the gentleman or his wife wishes to make a statement in reference to it. And then whether we receive it as information or not. but I was thinking -- they were thinking that they were going to be a part of today's agenda. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I'll accept it as an amendment to that motion that we, by unanimous consent, hear from the concerned citizens in reference to boat dock. MR. MAYS: Thank you. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Handy? MR. HANDY: Yes, I accept that. Go ahead. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, thank you. That's agreeable. Further discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Todd's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. [MR. BRIDGES & MR. POWELL OUT] MOTION CARRIES 7-0. MAYOR SCONYERS: First order of business, please? CLERK: The first order is a Legal Meeting. MR. WALL: I have one real estate matter, Mr. Mayor, that I'd like to take up with you. I don't think it will take long, and since we've got a couple of Commissioners absent, if we could take it up. MAYOR SCONYERS: Do I hear a motion that we -- MR. HANDY: So move. MR. KUHLKE: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Handy, seconded by Mr. Kuhlke. Discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Handy's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. [MR. BRIDGES & MR. POWELL OUT] MOTION CARRIES 7-0. COMMISSION RETIRES INTO LEGAL MEETING, 2:18 - 2:52 P.M. MAYOR SCONYERS: Our meeting will please come back to order. Ms. Bonner? CLERK: A Delegation: Mr. Mike Miller of the Boy Scouts. MR. MILLER: It is my honor today to come before this group to make a special presentation. James E. West was the original Chief Scout Executive of the Boy Scouts of America, and our Trust Advisory Committee has met, and due to the generosity of an anonymous donor to the trust fund of the Georgia- Carolina Council, Boy Scouts of America, that gives us the privilege to present a James E. West Fellowship to Mayor Larry E. Sconyers this day 1996. And I'd like to leave this with you, sir, and thank you for your support of the community and your leadership. Thank you very much. [MR. MILLER PRESENTS A PLAQUE TO MAYOR SCONYERS.] MAYOR SCONYERS: We didn't need a speech, did we? I'm too humble to make a speech. Thank y'all. CLERK: Next we will hear from the delegation, Mr. James Smith, regarding the boat docks. MR. SMITH: Mr. Mayor and Council, we're in bad need of a boat dock. It's washed out at the end of it, got holes in it, and it's the only boat ramp we've got in Richmond County. The closest one below Lock and Dam is in Burke County, and it's 26 miles from the county line. And we've got a lot of people paying taxes on outboard motors and boats here in Richmond County, and we need some help. MAYOR SCONYERS: Gentlemen? MR. BRIDGES: Mr. Mayor? Is that the boat ramp below the Lock and Dam there? MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. It's down in Burke -- it's below the Lock and Dam, about a half a mile down there. MR. BRIDGES: I believe there is some of the one percent money to make improvements on that, if I'm not mistaken. I'm not sure how much at this point, but I think that's in the process for when we revitalize or spend the one percent money on the Lock and Dam and on that area down there. The boat ramp's included in that, if I'm not mistaken. MR. SMITH: Yes, sir, but hold it. Any boat owner in Richmond County that's got a number on the side of his boat, he pays taxes on it. I pay $45 a year. I got a friend of mine, he's got a bigger boat, more expensive boat, his is $110 a year. Now, you can imagine what these cabin cruisers these people got up here is paying taxes, and where is that money going? We pay it every year downstairs. Now, can you answer that question for me? MR. BRIDGES: Butch will answer it for you. MR. McKIE: It goes to the support of the General Fund like all other ad valorem taxes, to the general support of the running of County government. MR. SMITH: Yeah, but you don't have very many people that have boat motors come up here to ask y'all for recreation for the kids and for their wives. I reckon I'm the first one in Richmond County that's been up here before y'all for this. But we actually want to know where our money is going. It's a personal tax. We go down -- every year when we pay our property tax, we pay a tax on it, and we'd love to know where it's going. And like I say, we haven't got but one boat ramp in Richmond County since they closed Lock and Dam, and then you have to make appointments to come through Lock and Dam 24 hours before then. But if people want to go on a vacation to Savannah, if they got a big enough boat, they could have put it in down there. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Wall, does that have something to do with the Corps of Engineers? Do we need to check with them on that? MR. WALL: We do lease the Savannah Locks and that park from the Corps of Engineers. I don't know whether or not that ramp itself is a part of -- included in that lease agreement or not. I don't know how far down river it extends, but I'll be glad to take a look at that lease. MR. KUHLKE: Mr. Mayor, who is in charge of that park -- that activity within the city? What department handles that? MAYOR SCONYERS: The Recreation Department, I believe. MR. KUHLKE: I'd like to offer a motion that we accept this as information and that we ask the appropriate department head to report back to us at our next meeting on what repairs need to take place and submit a schedule of making those repairs. MR. BRIDGES: I'll second it. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Kuhlke, seconded by Mr. Bridges. Discussion, gentlemen? MR. TODD: Yes. Mr. Mayor, I know several years ago that the government went in and they done some work there at this landing. And as the gentleman stated, that the Corps of Engineers has decided -- and as the Mayor know, because you've worked diligently trying to get the Locks reopened, the Locks is locked or not operating. The only place to put in is upstream from the Locks. There's a good place there, and basically what we need is the same type landing downstream. It don't have to be as big as that one. Basically, I understand -- or if I understand the Corps operation correctly, that we can do, with almost a phone call, limited things in there as far as building something out there in the water or at the edge of the water or at least building a boat dock. If we can build what we build downtown here, then certainly -- that cost a couple million dollars, then certainly we can spend a few thousand dollars to correct that problem out there. As the gentleman has stated, that no one has complained as long as they could put in upstream because they could do the 24-hour notice and go downstream fishing. We have the Friends of the Savannah River that put in every year, and there are several dozen of them. I believe Mr. Miller Meyer is here, and he goes down river with them. That group is going to be in here, too, with the problem as far as getting -- going down river soon. And I think that we need some action with this motion and a timetable or turnaround time that we're going to bring it back and do something about this and make it where the average person is not going to tear up their boat and motor putting in, and I'm going to offer an amendment that we bring it back to the next regular meeting. I think that's enough time. MS. WATSON: That was in the original motion. MR. TODD: That was in the original motion? MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay. Further discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Kuhlke's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 8-0. [MR. POWELL OUT] CLERK: The next item is a request for concurrence with the decision of the Planning Commission to approve a petition from Elizabeth Holmes for a change of zoning from a Zone R-1A (One-family Residence) to a Zone B-2 (General Business) on property located at 2609 and 2613 Milledgeville Road. Item 2: A request for concurrence with the decision of the Planning Commission to approve a petition from Jay Willingham for a change of zoning from a Zone R-1A (One-family Residence) to a Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) on property located at 200 Pleasant Home Road. Item 3: Rivercrest Development Subdivision, Phase II, Final Plat - a request for concurrence with the Planning Commission to approve. MR. HANDY: Move for approval, Mr. Mayor. MR. BEARD: I'll second it. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Handy, seconded by Mr. Lee Beard. Discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Handy's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 8-0. [MR. POWELL OUT] CLERK: The next item is to consider approval of a request of a new application by James V. Fenimore for a consumption on premises liquor, beer and wine license to be used in connection with the T.J. Smiles Lounge located at 1250 Gordon Highway. There will be a dance hall. Disapproved by Public Services Committee July 9th, 1996. MAYOR SCONYERS: That's Item 31 on your agenda, gentlemen. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I move that we disapprove as the Public Services Committee did at the subcommittee meeting. MR. KUHLKE: I'll second that motion. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Todd, seconded by Mr. Kuhlke. Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. FENIMORE: Mr. Mayor, my attorney is upstairs in the Law Library and he was not prepared at this point in time to come and serve some papers. If I could have a five-minute recess before you finalize this vote, I'd like to have him down here and represent me. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Wall? MR. WALL: I think we need to do that. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I'll move that we table for five minutes. MAYOR SCONYERS: So you're going to withdraw your first motion, then go back and table it for five minutes? MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, that's a motion that we table the motion on the floor for five minutes. MR. KUHLKE: And second. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, we have a motion to table by Mr. Todd, seconded by Mr. Kuhlke. All in favor of the motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 8-0. [MR. POWELL OUT] CLERK: Items 4 through 6 were all approved by Finance Committee July 8th, 1996. [Item 4: Consider approval of a Resolution exempting all properties for which an initial tax execution has been issued from transfer of execution. Item 5: Consider approval of a Quit-Claim Deed from Augusta-Richmond County and Regency Condominiums, Inc. Item 6: Consider approval of a Resolution reaffirming the necessity of imposing fee for E-911 Service.] MR. J. BRIGHAM: Mr. Mayor, we bring this to you in the form of a motion to approve these items. MR. BRIDGES: Second it. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Brigham, seconded by Mr. Bridges. Discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Brigham's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 8-0. [MR. POWELL OUT.] CLERK: Items 7 through 11 were all approved by the Administrative Services Committee July 8th, 1996. [Item 7: Consider approval of the final budget for the 1996 CDBG and ESG funds. Item 8: Consider approval of the present daily parking rate ($1.75) at the Riverfront Radisson Hotel for Eastern Star Convention to be held on March 14, 1998. Item 9: Consider approval of the designation of Antioch Ministries, Inc. for the 1994 and 1995 HOME/CHDO funds. Item 10: Consider approval of rescinding the facade grant for 1038-1044 Broad Street in the amount of $60,000. Item 11: Consider approval of entering into an agreement with Mark Tigan as a consultant for the Olde Town Properties Project subject to the Internal Auditor's findings.] MR. BEARD: Mr. Mayor, I move that 7 through 10 for a consent agenda, and I would like to have discussion on 11 and 12. MR. BRIDGES: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, we have a motion by Mr. Beard, seconded by Mr. Bridges, that Items 7 through 10 be a consent agenda. All in favor of the motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 8-0. [MR. POWELL OUT] MAYOR SCONYERS: Item 11, please. CLERK: Item 11: Consider approval of entering into an agreement with Mr. Mark Tigan as a consultant for the Olde Town Properties Project subject to the Internal Auditor's findings. Approved by Administrative Services Committee July 8th. MR. BEARD: Mr. Mayor, during our committee meeting we had authorized our Internal Auditor, Mr. Kip Plowman, to investigate this and to bring the finding back to the body of the Commissioners, and we'd like to hear from him. MR. PLOWMAN: I went through this, talked to the Georgia Housing and Finance Authority people, and --sorry it took so long to get this. They are doing the tax credits as we're talking, so they just got back with me again this morning to finish this. Where we are is, we reviewed the contract with the Georgia Housing and Finance Authority members, which is now the Department of Community Affairs. That department is the one that administers the low-income housing tax credits and also will be involved with this Tigan contract as the consultants that help them go through the arrangements. The person I talked to is the one that will actually probably be in contact with him, or he will be in --Tigan will be in contact with. I also spoke to one of the executives there that actually handled this deal when he was in the staff. They pulled the original Olde Town file; looked through it; read the contract. They personally know this guy, and other people around the country essentially said he's got a good reputation, can do what he says he can do. And with the work that he's already performed on this, which I believe HUD financed the first part of that, he essentially said that while there are other people in the country that can do this, you know, you've got a good contract here, and he didn't see any motivation of going out and getting someone else. There are people in the state -- that was the other thing you wanted to look at, locally or in the state. There are some people in the state that do this. He thinks -- the fellow at the DCA believes that they are qualified to do this. This fellow seems to have a lot of experience and more national exposure, which he thought was important, and probably felt that he would have more experience than anyone in the state. While the people in the state are qualified to do it, I guess -- we didn't find any problems with it not to proceed, but, you know, that was the extent of the work we did. Have you got any questions? I know it's kind of a brief, quick summary here. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I'll make my comment brief. This was somewhat -- brought to us somewhat as a sole source. And I guess one good thing about going to the national conventions is that you get to at least dialogue and interact with some folks around the country that's in the business, and just a coincident that I met a young lady that's in the commercial real estate business in Atlanta and have someone on her staff that do this kind of thing and work with Georgia Housing and Finance and has worked with them in the past. I think to go another route at this point is probably not a good thing to do, we probably should continue, but certainly I think we got to be vigilant of the fact that when someone come in with a rush to do something almost sole source, that there is somebody else in the world. I think that -- you know, I believe there's only one god, but other than that I think there's probably several anything else in the world. MR. KUHLKE: I just wanted to ask a question that might pertain to this, Mr. Beard. But in the projected budget of the Community Development department there's a line item on there of $180,000 annually about a repayment of the principal on a loan. What is the connection between the report Kip's giving us and the payment that we are making under that department? MR. BEARD: If I understand it correctly--and Mr. Patty is there, too-- but I think that is dealing with the monies that we are paying back on the UDAG from Olde Town. Isn't that correct, Mr. Patty? MR. PATTY: This was a loan that the City guaranteed. They used the HUD funds that they'll get in the future, hopefully, to guarantee it. They did not pledge the sole faith and credit of the City behind it, but we've got to budget the money that's going to come out of the future HUD budgets every year to pay this loan basically. We borrowed the money -- it's a loan guarantee, but we borrowed the money from HUD, and we've got to pay it back as long as this thing is in the condition that it's in. And the purpose of this contract is for this guy to package this property so that he can sell it and get us out of that, but until that happens we're going to be paying $180,000 a year to HUD until Year 2005 when there's a balloon payment of $1,005,000 that's got to be paid. MR. KUHLKE: Is there any interest accumulation on this loan? MR. PATTY: Yeah. MR. KUHLKE: Now, let me see if I understand that. HUD gave us the money originally? MR. PATTY: HUD gave the City the money and the City passed the money on to these partners that rehabilitated and purchased these properties. MR. KUHLKE: And then HUD gives us money every year to pay them back money? MR. PATTY: Yeah, that's basically -- HUD gives us our annual funds and we can use some of that to pay them back. MR. BEARD: But if we weren't paying that money back, we would be able to use that money that HUD is giving us. MR. KUHLKE: Okay, that answers my question. I was just curious. MR. POWELL: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask Mr. Patty: Are you comfortable with this recommendation? MR. PATTY: Yes, sir. I think it's the best thing to do. MR. POWELL: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to accept Mr. Patty's recommendation. MR. BRIDGES: I'll second it. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Powell, seconded by Mr. Bridges. Further discussion, gentlemen? Mr. Beard, did you want to say something else? MR. BEARD: I was just going to make the motion he made. MAYOR SCONYERS: All right. Further discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Powell's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. MAYOR SCONYERS: Item 12, please. [Item 12: Consider approval for the subordination of the UDAG loan to the proposed refinancing by SouthTrust.] MR. BEARD: Mr. Mayor, on 12 here, I guess we need to hear from the attorney a little bit on this one and then maybe a couple of questions that need to be asked. MR. BATCHELOR: Gentlemen, I represent the developer of the Riverfront Center, which is the Radisson Hotel and the office building across the street which was originally built and financed with a 17 million dollar loan by First Union, which was a first mortgage loan, and a second mortgage loan from the City of Augusta, which was a UDAG loan. Under the terms of that UDAG agreement, it was contemplated that during the first seven years of the term of the UDAG loan, which began June 1st, 1992, that the developer could refinance that first mortgage loan, i.e., the 17 million dollar loan, any number of times during that seven-year period. Once that's over, they are locked in as far as the UDAG loan is concerned with the first mortgage lender, which would -- that would be May 31st, 1999, would be the last opportunity to do that. Right now the first refinancing, and maybe the only one, but the first refinancing of that first mortgage loan is proposed whereby money will be borrowed from SouthTrust and used to pay off the First Union loan on that project. And what we're asking is for approval by the now-consolidated government to subordinate the UDAG loan to the new SouthTrust loan, which will replace the First Union loan on this project, as is contemplated by the agreements that were entered into back in the late -- well, '89 and '90/91 when this transaction was put in place. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor? Sir, have there been a better -- window of opportunity to get a better or lower interest rate in the past? And -- that's basically my first question. MR. BATCHELOR: Well, that may be, but that really does not impact the government in this case because you the government are a lender in this thing, you're not a borrower. You don't have any obligation to repay any of the debt, so that is a decision that the developer-owner makes. MR. TODD: Okay. My other question is that I understand that the government is supposed to receive 20 percent of the net. MR. BATCHELOR: Well, there is a provision for contingent interest on the UDAG loan that provides for a payment of 20 percent of the net excess cash flow as designed in the -- as defined in the UDAG agreements, and those calculations have been given to Mr. Wall and, I assume, circulated to you all. The calculations have shown that there has been no net cash flow in the three years since the term began, beginning June 1st, 1992. Now, the fourth year has just concluded May 31st, '96, and we've got 90 days to make that calculation and provide that to you. I can tell you that I have been advised by the financial people that keep the records over there that the preliminary numbers for this last year make it appear at this time that there will be some payment due the consolidated government in the way of contingent interest in this -- for this last 12-month period. MR. TODD: And those funds that we're talking about possibly capturing through those net percentages, that money can be used in other UDAG areas? We can reprogram that money? MR. BATCHELOR: Yes, sir. MR. TODD: All right. There's been quite, I guess, a deal of debate over individuals getting community block grant money or UDAG money or whatever and not paying it back, and it seems to me that we had a contract here that was probably designed where it would not have to be paid back. So certainly -- you know, as we deal with the Coliseum issue and the deficit, we understand that basically anyone can run a deficit that want to run a deficit, so I certainly would like to hear, you know, what you guys are doing over there that's going to enable you to maybe send that 20 percent or a greater proportion of it back, net profit cash flow, to the local government. MR. BEARD: Mr. Mayor, while I have no problem with the refinancing of this, I think that the attorney has stated that it would be a difference in the interest rate there in refinancing it at some time. But we've also asked, and hopefully this could come to fruition, that a lot of questions are being asked by the Commissioners, as Mr. Todd just stated, and I would hope that at some time in the future that the attorney could visit our work session. Because there are many questions concerning the Convention Center and how it interrelate, and many of us new Commissioners really don't have a knowledge of how that's working, and I think it would be good for both entities to --for you to address that at some point in time. And maybe you could come to one of our sessions, and I'm sure the Mayor or the attorney would be glad to define this, and just enlighten us on what has taken place there because I think we need to know that. MR. BATCHELOR: We'd be delighted to do that, and if you will furnish me with the dates of your sessions. I have talked with the financial people and the management people, and we will put together that whole group and come and presumably have everybody there that can answer every question that you've got and educate you as to how that arrangement is set up. MR. HANDY: That's Thursday, July the 18th. That's the next work session. MR. BRIDGES: Mr. Mayor? If you could, sir, I'd like to hear sort of a summary of the relationship between the Convention Center and the Riverfront Development. I'm not -- I've been told that we own the Convention Center and one floor of the building across the street, that type of thing. MR. BATCHELOR: The government does own the Convention Center building, which is where all the meeting rooms are in the wing behind -- that butts up to the hotel, and that is leased to and managed by the hotel. And there are rental payments based on income of that facility. MR. BRIDGES: Do you know the rental payments? MR. BATCHELOR: I don't know. I mean, that's why you need the financial guys here to tell you exactly what those arrangements are from a financial standpoint. But that's essentially the process. And then there's a certain portion of that money -- of those rental payments and of income that the hotel gets that goes into a reserve fund to do a refurbishing over there, and that's part of the money that will pay for the refurbishing that was in the newspaper several weeks ago that was mentioned the other day, but then the hotel is responsible for paying the cost of refurbishing over and above that fund. MR. BRIDGES: I'd like to go back to one other comment you mentioned, too. Mr. Todd asked was there an opportunity before now to get a lower interest, and I don't -- I'm not sure if I followed you. Did you say we didn't want to do that or that wasn't an option we had or? MR. BATCHELOR: There may well have been an opportunity to do that. The question -- I mean, of course, but that's a decision that the owner makes. I mean, they may have thought the interest rates were going down further and were hoping for a better opportunity and maybe they missed their window. But the point is, I mean, that's the obligation of the owner-developer, and their decision, and it doesn't impact any -- it doesn't have any financial impact on the City-County as far as the UDAG loan is concerned. And, you know, Mr. Todd said something about how you can arrange things so that you don't pay money back. There is a very specific definition in that UDAG grant agreement as to what net excess cash flow is, and the calculations, I think, have been made consistent with that definition. And, you know, like I say, it appears that this year they've gone over the -- you know, made it over the hump and there will begin to be excess cash flows to be paid as contingent interest back on the UDAG loan. MR. BEARD: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the refinancing of the UDAG loan along with the meeting that I mentioned earlier to be made with the Commissioners and the attorneys. MR. ZETTERBERG: I'll second that. MR. WALL: Just for clarification, Mr. Beard, you're speaking of the subordination as what we're being asked to approve? The subordination; not necessarily the refinancing, just the subordination? MR. BEARD: Yeah, the subordination. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Beard, seconded by Mr. Zetterberg. Any discussion, gentlemen? MR. MAYS: Yes, Mr. Mayor. I had one of my constituents who had called and wanted to ask a question in reference to that. Mr. Watkins there. MAYOR SCONYERS: Is this the gentleman? MR. MAYS: Yes. Mr. Watkins. CLERK: We need you to state your name, sir. MR. WATKINS: My name is Tom Watkins; I am here to perhaps ask some taxpayer questions. I think a lot of things aren't clear on this thing, and I would encourage the Commission to take a look at this before -- a further look at it before they vote to subordinate this loan. For instance, are we -- is the County renting or leasing space from the Convention Center at this time? MR. BATCHELOR: No, it leases the Convention Center to the hotel. MR. WATKINS: Is there any requirement by contract that the County lease any space over there? MR. BATCHELOR: Not to my knowledge. Now, you understand, of course, that the Convention Center has nothing to do with this loan that we're talking about. That's a totally separate piece of property. MR. WATKINS: Okay. Is there any requirement or contract that the County lease anything? MR. BATCHELOR: On the Riverfront Center? MR. WATKINS: Right. MR. BATCHELOR: Not to my knowledge, no. MR. WATKINS: And I think -- I haven't seen any figures on what is the amount of the UDAG loan and what part was a partnership. Another question is, what is the monthly payment now? Who gets the principal reduction, the taxpayers or the private investors? What is the standing balance? And, also, I think the urgency question is a good question that's been raised. The interest rate stayed at 6.5 percent for a year three years ago. That's the question I have, and I would encourage the Commission to take another look at it before they pass the subordination. Thank you. MR. BATCHELOR: Well, I can tell you the UDAG loan is 7,700,000 and some change -- and I can probably, if you give me a minute, find the exact figure if you want to know it. And under the terms of the UDAG agreement there are no principal payments made on the UDAG loan until it becomes due. It's a lump sum payment at the end of the term. It bears no interest under the terms of the UDAG agreement --this is the way this program was set up. That loan bears no interest other than the contingent interest that comes out of the net cash flow as the loan progresses. The term of the UDAG loan is coterminous with the first mortgage loan, and so when the first mortgage loan is -- if it's refinanced, then the UDAG loan, by the terms of the agreement, becomes due on the same date that the first mortgage loan is due on, provided that the UDAG loan term cannot exceed 30 years. The term of the new refinanced loan from SouthTrust will be 12 years; the First Union loan has been outstanding a little over 4 years. So you will have -- assuming there's no more refinancing of the first mortgage, you would have a total term of 16 years, or 14 years less than the maximum that would be provided for under the UDAG grant agreement, and so to the extent things stay like this that would be a 14-year advantage to the government in getting the funds back to pay that. But that's the basis of the UDAG loan. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I guess my question is that it's my understanding that this -- and I understand the investment hopefully is more sound than the Olde Town properties were, but let's say that if the same situation happened, who is stuck with the debt repayment? The government on the second mortgage? MR. BATCHELOR: Well, if it decided to protect its position as a second mortgage holder, then it would have to pay the first mortgage. If the first - - if they decided not to do that and the first mortgage was foreclosed, then that would wipe the second mortgage holder out. MR. TODD: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. MR. MAYS: Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to ask Mr. Batchelor from a time standpoint on the urgency of approving the subordination, which I noticed in the motion there was to deal with a meeting in terms of one of our workshops, but are we running into any danger zone with any times? MR. BATCHELOR: We have got to close this by, I think it's August the 20th, which is the date that the First Union loan comes due. And so we've got -- yes, there is a time pressure as far as getting this thing completed by that day. MR. MAYS: Well, I guess if nobody else will I'm going to plead from the point of probably abstaining due to ignorance on part of the subject matter, and I guess I'll be that way by myself. But I think if it's been that much unclarity with the amount of involvement that the government -- even however it may be indirectly. And I think it's a good project, but there are a lot of questions that I think probably -- not necessarily from the part of the investors, but maybe part of it has been from maybe questions that we have not asked as a new government in terms of where are we involved with this particular project, what magnitude, and particularly some of the things that were inherited particularly out of the old City government, per se, and transactions that were made in that way. And I just think if we're going to have a sort of clearing-of-the-air meeting, per se -- because we've had a lot of projects that have come up, and this is probably the biggest one, but we've had some on smaller magnitudes of where word-of-mouth details have been put out, monies that have been promised to various persons to complete projects, no documentation of it, some projects basically to the point of maybe possibly going down the drain unless they are approved. And I just think if you're going to meet with us and clear the air on it within that period, then maybe it's incumbent upon us to refresh ourselves to a point, I think, of where we stand in this whole situation, bring us up to speed on it, and then bring it back to this committee to approve it at that time, and then I think that will basically clear the air on some of it. But whether anybody wants to admit to the point of whether they understand everything that you presented here or not, I'll take the side and speak up for the ignorant people, or the silent ones, and say that I don't. And I think that there are probably a lot more that have inherited this particular project, however good it may be, but that will not say anything basically about it. So if we are going to vote on it today and take a vote on it, then I'm going to have to vote present on it because I don't believe in having meetings to discuss an affair about something and then take the action on it first and then go back and repair it afterward. I think if you're going to do it, have the meeting, then approve what you've got to do. And that's not a knock on what you're doing, but that's just my feelings about it. MR. HANDY: Mr. Mayor, if Mr. Mays puts that in the form of a substitute motion, I'll second it for him, because I'm one of those ignorant ones that don't know what in the world Mr. Batchelor is talking about. MR. MAYS: I'll so move. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, I have a substitute motion by Mr. Mays, seconded by Mr. Handy. Discussion on the substitute motion, gentlemen? MR. J. BRIGHAM: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Wall, according to this document that's presented to us, we have no choice in the refinancing of this matter, do we? This is something that was previously approved by City Council? MR. WALL: Yes, that's correct. I mean, it was previously approved, the documents are there, and whether we necessarily agree with the transaction or not there are certain things that we're bound by. The subordination of the loan is not going to affect the consolidated government's position relative to the loan and relative to the indebtedness. Mr. Batchelor and I have talked subsequent to the committee meeting last week. He has offered to bring the people down here, just as he has offered here today. We've talked about that, and we intend to schedule that meeting, but my understanding from the committee meeting was that that was not something that we had to do or needed to do in advance on bringing this before the full Commission for action. So we do intend to schedule such a meeting to answer any questions, and Doug basically made the people available to whomever we want them to meet with. I have furnished certain of the financial information to Kip Plowman, and he has reviewed some of that. And so I think the subordination does not -- approving the subordination does not adversely affect anything that you're asking of Mr. Batchelor or that would affect any future decisions. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Let me ask you one other question. If we fail to approve, does it adversely affect us? MR. WALL: I think it does obviously. I mean, you've got a loan there - - it has the potential. I won't say that it neces-sarily does, but it has the potential to adversely affect us. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Thank you. MR. MAYS: Mr. Mayor, if I might, my motion -- substitute motion, rather, is not harshly intended. In fact, I believe, if nothing else, by law we are bound to deal with the approval. Again, I reiterate the fact that I made it based on the fact of out of ignorance and of answering questions. We are handling every day a lot of things that we are handling, many of us, for the very first time, and I think, if nothing else, other than if a constituent of yours asks you a question as to where do we stand in a particular project, what is the magnitude of it -- And my motion is not aimed in a negative way at Mr. Batchelor's nose. It's basically a motion that I think maybe since this is one of the largest things that we have inherited that this now-new government is involved in in terms of participation, we should have a review. We probably should have had it -- maybe one of the first things that we reviewed from City government. That's hindsight and I don't think anybody's to blame for it. But I think if asked a question on the street, if nothing else, we ought to be able to give a sensible answer if we are involved in it. And I think to say basically you've done something and then say you're going to have a meeting, then if we're not endangering the project -- and I do plan to vote for it, but I think to clear the air on what you've got, and if questions need to be asked -- the only thing that I'm saying is if it's not wrecking it, then meet on it, ask the questions, bring it back before this body, and then it's clear and it's put to rest once and for all. So it's not intended to harm or to put in harm's way the government and the proposal that's over there. That's not my intention at all, but it's merely to try and reverse maybe some of our trends that we might accidentally fall into from time to time where we do things and we turn around and we ask the questions later. MR. BATCHELOR: Mr. Mayor, let me say it is our intention to fully inform and fully educate this entire body as to that project, because this body is a partner in that project in a number of ways. And if it is possible to schedule that meeting in the next two weeks or before your next meeting -- which would be what, August 7th or something like that? MR. HANDY: 6th, I think. MR. BATCHELOR: The 6th? I am perfectly happy to table this until that time, schedule the meeting, and get the people down here and get everybody comfortable with it, because I know that once you understand everything that's going on over there you are going to be comfortable with it. This is one of your shining lights as far as your UDAG projects are concerned, and I think it is going to continue to be that. MR. POWELL: Mr. Chairman, I move that we table this item till further study. MR. BATCHELOR: Can I be assured that it gets back on the August 6th agenda? Because I really will be up against it if we don't get it approved by then. MR. MAYS: Well, I'll be glad to include in my substitute motion that date/time frame. And then, Doug, if we fail to have the meeting, then I don't mind voting for it if it's our fault and we don't set it up and put it together to come back and vote for what you've got. MR. BATCHELOR: Well, that's fair enough. And if you all will just give me a date and give me four or five days to get everybody together, because some of these folks have got to come from Atlanta, I'll be more than happy to put that together. And we can have it here or we'll host it in our office or at the hotel or wherever y'all want to do it. MR. MAYS: Next meeting, then? That would get us in within a comfortable time frame, I think, for you all as well. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I didn't hear the date. I was going to suggest that we do it on a committee meeting before the regular meeting, and that would certainly give them the days. But I guess you've set a date? MR. BEARD: I think, Mr. Todd, we need a special meeting for that, and I don't think we need to get involved with the committee meetings. Whatever that date, I would wish that the Clerk would schedule it so that it would not interfere with another meeting. MAYOR SCONYERS: I had asked Ms. Bonner to do that and that's what she's going to do for us. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I'm certainly glad to see the spirit of openness. Because it might have been just out of habit of a way of doing business in the past, but when this issue come to this board or to committee, at first it was kind of like shoved out there and saying we need you to sign off on it. And the information that we have is through inquiring through the County Attorney and through other individuals to get with the other parties and obtain this information, and certainly the greater the flow of the information, the better we're going to understand the issue and the more cooperative we're going to be. MR. BATCHELOR: Mr. Todd, I may have been slightly at fault in that, and I guess maybe it was my fault because I assumed that government officials, you know, were aware of the situation. And I think maybe that was my fault, and so, you know, to the extent that that happened in the beginning, I apologize. MAYOR SCONYERS: Do y'all want the motion reread, gentlemen, so we know what we're voting on? Are y'all comfortable with it without reading it? Ms. Watson, why don't you read the substitute motion, please. MS. WATSON: Substitute motion made by Mr. Mays, seconded by Mr. Handy, to schedule a work session within the next two weeks to be able to have this item back on the agenda for August the 6th. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay. All in favor of Mr. Mays' motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MR. KUHLKE ABSTAINS. MOTION CARRIES 8-1. CLERK: Items 13 through 23 were all approved by the Engineering Services Committee July 8th, 1996. [Item 13: Consider approval of a request from Castle Pines Mobile Home Park regarding relief of sewer tap connection charges to the Goshen Sewer Line. Item 14: Consider approval of execution of contract documents for Glenn Hills Bridge Safety Fence. Item 15: Consider approval of bid award to Mabus Brothers Construction Company, Inc. for Boykin Road Drainage Improvements Project. Item 16: Consider approval of Change Order Number One for the Traffic Signals, Phase II Project. Item 17: Consider approval to accept a donation by Mr. Rudy Bohler, President of Bell Investment Company, of right-of-way and easements on Parcels 4, 5 and 6 of the Barton Chapel Road Intersection & Drainage Improvement Project. Item 18: Consider approval of the option for Parcel 2 (Marks Church Road) of the Skinner Mill Road Extension and Agerton Lane Roadway & Drainage Improvements Project. Item 19: Consider approval of a request to ratify emergency sewer main and road repairs at Highway 25 and Lumpkin Road. Item 20: Consider approval of Quit-Claim Deed from Richmond County to Anna Maxwell Waller quit-claiming an easement granted by her to Richmond County on August 1, 1995, and approving a new utility easement from Anna Maxwell Waller to Richmond County to be recorded simultaneously with the Quit-Claim Deed. Item 21: Consider approval of condemnation of property in the name of Stephen H. Steinberg, et al, Parcels 130 and 131, Tax Map 22 of the Perimeter Parkway Roadway and Drainage Improvements Project. Item 22: Consider approval of Georgia Power Company's Encroachment Agreement in connection with a temporary bypass needed in connection with work planned for the crossing of Columbia Nitrogen Road (for period from August 1, 1996 until November 1, 1996). Item 23: Consider approval of the Land Application, Liming Program.] MR. POWELL: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move that we accept this as a consent agenda. MR. HANDY: So move -- second, rather. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Powell, seconded by Mr. Handy. Discussion, gentlemen? MR. BRIDGES: Mr. Mayor? Number one was disapproved. CLERK: Right, disapproved. Item 13 was disapproved. MR. TODD: Did we say 13 through -- I'd like to pull 13 out if it wasn't. MR. POWELL: Mr. Chairman, could I restate the motion, please? I would like to make a motion that we accept the Engineering Services findings and move that we accept it as a consent agenda as it stands in committee. MR. HANDY: And I got a second on that. MR. TODD: No further unreadiness, Mr. Chairman. Call for the question. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, I have a motion by Mr. Powell, seconded by Mr. Handy. Discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Powell's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. CLERK: Okay, we'll go back to Item 31, consider approval of the application of Mr. James V. Fenimore. MR. BATSON: If I might be recognized. Last week we were before the, I guess, subcommittee and did not expect that we would be back here so soon. The evidence that was raised at the subcommittee would require us to do a great deal of research and investigation and ask certain officials to produce certain information. We would like a continuance at this time and to not go forward with the application process. MR. POWELL: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we concur with the Public Services Committee finding. MR. KUHLKE: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, now, we already had a motion to that effect earlier. MR. TODD: Point of information, Mr. Mayor. That's correct, there's a motion on the floor. Mr. Powell hadn't arrived at the time that the motion was put on the floor, and we tabled the motion, Mr. Powell, for five minutes. MR. POWELL: Okay. I'm sorry. MR. TODD: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay. Further discussion on the original motion? MR. POWELL: I'd like the motion reread, please. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay. Ms. Watson, would you? MS. WATSON: As I have it, Mr. Todd had made a motion to deny the application; Mr. Kuhlke had seconded. Mr. Todd then withdrew that motion and made a motion to table the item for five minutes, and that was approved, so there is no motion on the floor. MR. POWELL: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that we go along with the findings of the Public Services Committee. MR. BRIDGES: Second it. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Powell, seconded by Mr. Bridges. Discussion now, gentlemen? MR. TODD: Yes, Mr. Mayor, a point of information. This Commissioner did not withdraw the motion, this Commissioner made a motion that we table the motion that was on the floor for five minutes. In the sense that five minutes has lapsed, I don't see a need to make a motion to un-table the motion, and so if I need to make a withdrawal of the motion so a motion could be made, I certainly will. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Wall, do you want to help us with that, please? MR. WALL: Well, I suppose we could have the court reporter read back as to exactly what was said. I did -- I'm like Susan, I thought I understood him to say that he had withdrawn the motion to make the motion to table, and I could be in error about that. I think you've got two motions that are effectively the same, and if you'll recognize Mr. Todd to withdraw the motion, then you would clear up any misunderstanding and we could proceed without getting hung up on a technicality. MR. TODD: Yes. Mr. Mayor, I'll withdraw the motion -- MAYOR SCONYERS: Thank you, Mr. Todd. MR. TODD: -- if the seconder will withdraw the second. MR. KUHLKE: Yeah. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay. Now we're back to Mr. Powell's motion. MR. BATSON: I had made a request for a continuance to see whether we can do this another day, at some point in time where we would have some time to put on some evidence and have a fair hearing about this. I don't know, I guess this is an out of hand denial of that request? MR. WALL: Well, I don't know that it's out of hand, Mr. Batson, if I may respond. I think the effect of this is to tell you that the Commission is prepared to vote on it, and if you have anything that you want them to hear, then I think you need to address it. Otherwise, I think the Mayor would call for a vote on the motion as it is, which is to deny the application. MR. BATSON: Okay. Also I'd like to say that we received notice, I believe it was Friday by mail -- Saturday by mail that we'd have the hearing today, and that's no time to get any response to talk about why crime is committed in certain areas or not, so that's why we'd request a continuance to be able to put forward evidence in response to the evidence which was just submitted last Tuesday or Wednesday. So that's why we need some time, so that y'all can vote in an educated and fair fashion. Thank you. MR. WALL: Mr. Mayor, as part of the discussion from the committee showed, the motion that was made was not premised solely upon the fact of the criminal activity that was discussed at this particular location, but it was also denied in the sense that this was a new application, there was no existing alcohol license, and under the alcohol license that is currently in effect, there cannot be adult entertainment in connection with alcohol sales. And that was a part of the original motion, which really doesn't call for any evidentiary presentation on the part of the applicant or the County. MR. BATSON: You know, I disagree in the fact that what adult entertainment will or will not occur -- you can't prejudge what entertainment will or will not occur out there. You can't define it and you can't prejudge what entertainment will or will not occur, so I think that our application has to stand on the basis of whether we're eligible for an alcohol license. What kind of entertainment we plan to provide or might provide is not a matter that you can deny the license on. MR. WALL: And I disagree, because the application shows that adult entertainment is what you intend to have out there. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, you know, as I understand it, we made a recommendation -- the Public Services Committee made a recommendation to this full board. The notice that they received is the notice that everyone receive, that they have to come before the full board and the full board have the final say. This is the vote on the license, whether we're going to grant it or deny it. Then the applicant have appeal rights, if we deny it, to come back and have a hearing, so this is not the last hearing on this issue as far as this license go possibly. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. MAYS: Yes, Mr. Mayor. In the essence of time, my comments that were made during the committee meeting, it can just be noted as reference in terms of official minutes for this particular meeting. MAYOR SCONYERS: Thank you, Mr. Mays. MR. HANDY: Mr. Mayor, I call for the question. MAYOR SCONYERS: Well, Mr. Beard had his hand up, and then we'll -- MR. HANDY: I'm sorry. MR. BEARD: I just wondered, is that the appeal time -- to the Attorney, when do they come back? What is the time line on the appeal time? Do they have an opportunity -- MR. WALL: We would give them notice of that, then they would have to request a hearing, and it would be within 30 days. MR. HANDY: Now, Mr. Mayor, I call for the question. MAYOR SCONYERS: Thank you, Mr. Handy. All in favor of Mr. Powell's motion to deny, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MR. MAYS VOTES NO. MOTION CARRIES 8-1. CLERK: Under Public Services, Items 24 through 30 were all approved on July 9th, 1996. [Item 24: Consider approval of bid award to Continental Construction Company for the addition to Hangar #5 Bush Field Airport. Item 25: Consider approval of a request from Harry Stierwalt for a consumption on premises liquor, beer and wine license to be used in connection with HMS Sports Pub located at 1511 North Leg Road. There will be a dance hall and Sunday sales. (This is a new location for an existing business.) District 3, Super District 10. Item 26: Consider approval (new ownership) of a request by Linda M. King for a beer and wine license to be used in connection with the Smile Gas Stores at the following locations: 545 Sand Bar Ferry Road, District 1, Super District 9; 2916 Washington Road, District 7, Super District 10; 2631 Wrightsboro Road, District 3, Super District 10; 1501 Laney- Walker, District 1, Super District 9; 1237 Gordon Highway, District 1, Super District 9. Item 27: Consider approval of a request by Alan Brosious for a 6-month extension on the purchase of his retail package beer and wine license used in connection with Pump N Shop #5 located at 2574 Tobacco Road. This request is due to a delay in construction of the store. Item 28: Consider approval of a request by Christopher P. Ballas to add wine to his consumption on premises beer license used in connection with Lil Luigi's Pizza located at 2525H Washington Road. District 7, Super District 10. Item 29: Consider approval of Augusta-Richmond Public Transit's Promotion Policy. Item 30: Consider approval of the following Officiant Contracts for the Recreation Department: Kim Schlein, Joseph Dickens, Inderal Middleton, Latonya Sapp, David Williams, and Calvin Holland, Sr.] MR. MAYS: Mr. Mayor, these items were discussed in full and open committee meeting of the Public Services Committee, and I make a motion they be approved. MR. TODD: Second, Mr. Mayor. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Mays, seconded by Mr. Todd. Discussion? MR. BRIDGES: Mr. Mayor, I'd like it noted that I vote against Number 25. Other than that, I vote in favor of the committee's recommendation. MR. HANDY: And, Mr. Mayor, I just want to ask is there any objectors to Item 26 since there's so many of them, they're all together. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, did we get the notation by Mr. Bridges? CLERK: Yes, sir. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, thank you. And what? MR. HANDY: 26, you know, any objectors. MAYOR SCONYERS: Do we have any objectors to Item 26? [No response.] No. MR. POWELL: Mr. Chairman, I'd also like to note my objection to Item Number 25. MAYOR SCONYERS: Did y'all get that? CLERK: [Indicates affirmatively.] MR. J. BRIGHAM: Mr. Mayor, can we -- I guess this is a question for Mr. Wall. Can we actually approve these privilege license on a consent agenda? Do we not have to vote on them individually? MR. WALL: As long as they are shown as a separate item and the vote is being counted as though it were separately for each item, then I have no problem with it. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Okay. On discussion on Item Number 25, was there any reason why these people in the past have not met the Sunday sales requirements as to food service during the committee? I'm sorry, I'm not privileged -- I wasn't privileged to listen to some of that. Was there any -- when was the last audit on food sales been, or do you know? MR. MEYER: They are moving into a new location in the shopping center. They previously had a license there and they had a restaurant facility, but this is their first request for Sunday sales. MR. J. BRIGHAM: It's their first request? MR. MEYER: Yes. MR. J. BRIGHAM: I thought there was already an existing license. MR. MEYER: There is, but it was in another location. They're changing locations in the same shopping center. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Did they have Sunday sales in the previous location? MR. MEYER: No, sir, they did not. MR. STIERWALT: Can I say something? I'm not going to be able to do Sunday sales this year anyway. I'm not going to -- the kitchen and all the stuff I'm trying to get together, I'm not going to make it. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Okay. So you're going to take Sunday sales off? MR. STIERWALT: Yeah. Sunday sales is not necessarily a major factor. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Okay. Well, I just wanted to find out. MR. STIERWALT: I just had a lot of customers requesting to see the races and stuff like that, and the sports, but setting up all the kitchen stuff, I don't think I'm going to get it all done in time anyway. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Well, that's the reason I'm asking the questions. Okay. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. MAYS: Yes, Mr. Mayor. I guess in that motion I'd like to, on 25, probably pull off the Sunday sales provision with that, which is by request, and that no prejudice be against the applicant. MAYOR SCONYERS: Is that what you wanted, sir? MR. STIERWALT: Yeah, that's fine. I wasn't -- I was almost going to say it to you, but I didn't know what to do with this when I asked for it. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Wall, did you want to say something, sir? MR. WALL: Mr. Mays just took care of it, and the point being that unless you allow him to withdraw he could not reapply for a Sunday sales license for 12 months, so I think that's the intent of Mr. Mays' motion is to allow him to withdraw that portion of the application. MR. MAYS: That's basically what I was talking about. Because we do that from time to time when equipment is not ready and they may have to check, whether it's with the Fire Department or whether it's with Miller's office, and then they may come back 60 or 90 days later when those facilities are ready. Of course, he's basically said he won't be doing it this year anyway, but that way it doesn't handicap him. MR. STIERWALT: Can I say something? I was hoping -- I have to reapply every year for a liquor license. I was hoping to re-do it again in January after I had everything done up, but when you say 12 months, that would be next August. MR. MAYS: It's without prejudice. That way whenever you come back, if you come in January, if you want to do the Sunday sales, then you can do the whole thing at one time if you're in compliance as far as with your kitchen and everything else and do it. MAYOR SCONYERS: I think we might need to vote this over, gentlemen. We have a little confusion here. Why don't, Mr. Mays, you re-make your motion so that -- and add those amendments to it. Wouldn't that be the best way to do it, Mr. Wall? MR. WALL: Yes, sir. I think Number 25 needs to be pulled out and -- MR. MAYS: Can we just pull it out then, then approve 24 through -- what is it, 30? CLERK: 30, with the exception of 25. MR. MAYS: Okay, pull -- if you would, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Wall wants to pull out 29 as well. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Wall, do we need to rescind that motion then? Because we had voted on that, didn't we? MR. WALL: We did not vote on it. MAYOR SCONYERS: We didn't vote. Okay. So what are we actually voting on now? I'm confused. CLERK: Items 24 through 30, with the exception of 25 and 29. MAYOR SCONYERS: 24 through 30, with the exception of 25 and 29. Okay. Mr. Todd, do you want to -- I mean, Mr. Mays, do you want to re-make your motion? MR. MAYS: Do you want to go through the consent ones first? Because I think we pulled 25 and 29 out to do separately. MAYOR SCONYERS: Right. Why don't we take 24 through 30, with the exception of 25 and 29. MR. MAYS: Okay, I so move. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Todd, do you want to second that? MR. TODD: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: Good. Discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Mays' motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. CLERK: Item 25: Consider approval of a request from Harry Stierwalt for a consumption on premises liquor, beer and wine license to be used in connection with the HMS Sports Pub located at 1511 North Leg Road. There will be a dance hall and Sunday sales. Approved by Public Services Committee on July 9th. MR. MAYS: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve Item Number 25, with the exception of the Sunday sales provision, and that it be allowed to be withdrawn without prejudice. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I second the motion. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Mays, seconded by Mr. Todd. Discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Mays' motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. CLERK: Item 29: Consider approval of Augusta-Richmond County Public Transit's Promotion Policy. Approved by Public Services Committee July 9th contingent upon Human Resources and Consolidation Manager's review. MR. MAYS: Mr. Mayor, basically what we've done through committee was to approve it there, with it to be further looked upon by Human Resources as well as by the Project Manager. That information, I believe, has been sent by Mr. Johnson to both. At this particular time it's not been acted on as yet, and basically what we have in that motion is that it still stands because it was approved upon the review basically from Human Resources. But I believe Mr. Wall wanted to comment on that. MR. WALL: The comment I wanted to make is, this would be incorporated into the personnel manual that is applicable to the County employees as a whole, and Mr. Johnson and I discussed this earlier as far as the intent is concerned. We do have a separate section insofar as promotions within the Fire Department, for instance, and this would ultimately be incorporated in the personnel policy that's applicable to County employees as a whole. And it was unclear from the way it was -- the way I read it, that perhaps this was going to be a stand alone, and I wanted to ensure that it's not a stand alone, that it's incorporated in the overall personnel manual. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, certainly I would like to know why we haven't heard from the Personnel Director or from the Project Manager or whether there are possibly problems. I see the Project Manager is standing up, so I'll yield. MR. CARSTARPHEN: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, Mr. Etheridge and I did discuss this briefly. We have reviewed it. We concur with the observation of the Attorney. We also have no objection to the procedure that is suggested. We think it would be appropriate that it be incorporated in a general manual, as the Attorney has suggested, but neither the Human Resources Director nor the Project Director see any objection to the process that is outlined in the suggested procedure, so we have no objection. MR. WALL: And in speaking with Mr. Johnson, that was his intent was to have it incorporated as of January 1 in the personnel manual. MR. CARSTARPHEN: We see no reason to delay acting on this if you wish to do so, with the provision that it be incorporated in a general manual. MR. MAYS: I so move. MR. KUHLKE: I'll second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Mays, seconded by Mr. Kuhlke. Discussion, gentlemen? MR. TODD: Yes, Mr. Mayor. There are some things in here that I couldn't agree to if I was a employee of the Transit, so based on that I'm probably going to vote no, and no further comment. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Mays' motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MR. TODD VOTES NO. MOTION CARRIES 8-1. MAYOR SCONYERS: Item 32, please. CLERK: The next item is to consider approval of an Ordinance to establish requirements regarding collection of grass, leaves, brush, etc. Second Reading. MR. WALL: This is the ordinance that I prepared at the direction of the Commission which imposes certain penalties as well as providing a mechanism for placing a lien on the property in the event that it's necessary for the County to go on. This is with the recognition that this ordinance will be implemented only after appropriate public announcements are put out informing the public that this ordinance is in effect and they will be put on adequate notice. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I so move that we accept this as the second reading. MR. POWELL: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: Motion by Mr. Todd, seconded by Mr. Handy [sic]. Discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Todd's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 8-0. [MR. MAYS OUT] CLERK: Next item, 33: Consider the reappointment of Mr. John Fleming for the Committee for Indigent Defense for a three-year term. MR. POWELL: Move for approval. MR. KUHLKE: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Powell, I have a second by Mr. Kuhlke. Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. BEARD: Mr. Mayor? While this does not reflect on the reappointment here, I would just like some clarification from the Attorney. Because we're talking about 33 and 35, and I notice we've been doing a lot of appointing to committees, and I want to know the legal aspect of this since I believe that the bill called for -- that these --there are certain districts that should be incorporated in your appointments. Where are we on that, and are we within the legal guidelines of doing that when we -- I know we've already made several and we continue to make them. Would you kind of clarify that for me in reference to appointments to boards and commissions? MR. WALL: Certainly. Insofar as Items Number 33 and Number 35, those are set up under other statutes, other rules other than those that are encompassed in the consolidation bill, particularly Section 13(f). And so, therefore, the requirements of Section 13(f) insofar as having a representative from each district are not applicable to that particular committee, the Indigent Defense Committee, nor is it applicable to the Region 12 board. I have provided to you -- to each Commission member a listing of the committees and boards and authorities that are affected by the Section 13(f) of the consolidation bill, as well as those boards that are not included. Now, as evidenced by the fact these two are not included on the -- those that are not affected, I guess I haven't fully listed all of them. But you are going to be called upon to make certain appointments that are mandated by state law to certain boards that are not under the control of the County Commission, and Section 13(f) deals with those that are under the control and appointing authority of the County Commission. I hope I've answered your question. MR. BEARD: I think you've cleared it up. I guess my other question would be, not directly to you but maybe a statement, is that I hope that we can pursue those and the others that you mentioned which we would have control over, pursue those in a manner that all districts, according to the bill, would be represented in that. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Mr. Mayor, this is no reflection on the nominee, but do we maintain talent bank applications on this commission and is it normally something that we would normally appoint ourselves without a recommendation? MS. BEAZLEY: That comes from the judicial area. Item 33 comes from the judicial area. And as far as the -- if I can respond to that, Mr. Mayor. As far as the appointments to the Community Mental Health board, there are stipulations as to who should serve. There are so many that have to fall in certain categories in the healthcare field. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. BEARD: One other thing. In other words, in making these appointments, they don't come from this body, they come from whatever body that has been authorized? MR. WALL: Well, the Indigent Defense Office -- you've got a six-man committee. This Commission only appoints two of those six, so therefore obviously there could not be one representative from each district. So you've got a situation where certain committees provide for representation to be appointed by this Commission-Council. Those entities are not covered by Section 13(f) of the consolidation act. The entities that are covered by Section 13(f) are the boards and authorities such as the Aviation Commission and those things that you have set up and have dele-gated certain powers to and certain duties, and those are the ones that are encompassed. But where you've got outside boards and outside agencies that say we want a representative from the government on there and the government is to appoint - - MR. BEARD: But did they make the -- the only thing I'm asking, Mr. Wall, you know, they made -- those entities made the recommendation. MR. WALL: That's correct. MR. BEARD: And I guess it's up to us to approve or disapprove those; okay? MR. WALL: That's correct. MR. BEARD: I just have a little problem about people saying that, you know, we want this person. And, of course, I know we have the option of not doing it or allowing it, but that kind of bothers me. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I guess we haven't had a Court Committee in a couple of years, but I do have some experience here in the sense that I was probably the last chairman of the Court Committee. And it seems that when I'm appointed chairman we kind of do away with things. I also was the last chairman of the Environmental Ecology Committee, but -- or maybe I do such a good job we don't need it. But I kind of understand the process of how the courts work and that judiciary decides on most of them, and we put two over there and we budget Indigent Defense. And no reflection on the appointee either, but I feel this is something that we need to go on and do to keep that function going. So -- and I think it would be probably to our detriment, like it is on Tax Assessor's Board, et cetera, to have more than six there. And I guess I'm the one -- one of the ones that's complained the loudest about not going on with the process of making these appointments because it seems that District 4 is probably not represented well when we passed the board --elected official sitting on the board, and I certainly want to get on with that. And as far as the Regional Mental Health go, that was a -- was it House Bill 100 or something that was passed a year or so ago, I think two years ago --three years ago? Thanks, Ms. Mulherin. And on that one, I think at the time that it was originated that Ms. Mulherin and others from over there come to us and said hey look, do you have any recommendations, because they were really recruiting folks, et cetera. And no reflection on this appointee either, and I think it's a good appointment, and they're supposed to have expertise in the area -- in different areas of mental health, et cetera, and we've often tried to appoint individuals that have a direct effect because of mental health, et cetera. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. J. BRIGHAM: Call the question, Mr. Mayor. MAYOR SCONYERS: We have a motion by Mr. Powell that was seconded by Mr. Kuhlke that we appoint Mr. Fleming. All in favor of Mr. Powell's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MR. BEARD VOTES NO; MR. MAYS OUT. MOTION CARRIES 7-1. MAYOR SCONYERS: Next item, please. Number 35. CLERK: 35: Consider Region 12 Board appointments from Richmond County. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I so move that we appoint the nominee from Regional Mental Health. MR. BRIDGES: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Todd, seconded by Mr. Bridges. MR. KUHLKE: Mr. Mayor? Ms. Mulherin, House Bill 100, I noticed that you made several references in your letter that specific positions needed to be filled by a certain racial group. And I'm not familiar with that bill, so could you explain to me why and how that works? What does that bill say? MS. MULHERIN: House Bill 100 states that 50 percent or more of the members must be family members or consumers of mental health, mental retardation, or substance abuse services; and also it says that the composition of the board must meet the racial, age -- all of the demographics of the area that's served, which includes our total 13-county area. MR. KUHLKE: Okay. Is that the total 13-county area on a cumulative basis? MS. MULHERIN: Yes. Yes. MR. KUHLKE: And let me ask you this: The smaller communities, do they cooperate with you as far as that makeup on your board? MS. MULHERIN: Yes, we're very close. We're one or two off, but we're very close. They're very cooperative. MR. KUHLKE: Okay. Thank you. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Ms. Mulherin, do you recommend in all them counties people to serve on your board? MS. MULHERIN: If people come to us, I contact county commissioners and say we would recommend in some way. The people that we're recommending this time, two people are current members of the board, and we're recommending reappointments because they've been very active and good members of the board; they've already been oriented. And then with James Kendrick, who is resigning from the board because he just doesn't have the time to spend, recommendations have been made from the outside. But Jeanette Cummings replaced Mr. Kendrick, and part of the reason is because of her knowledge of state budgets and we handle the budgets for Regional Hospital, Gracewood, the mental health centers. We have close to 100 million dollars, money that goes through, and so we're looking for people that have budget knowledge, family members -- a broad base of knowledge. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Did you review any of our talent bank applications for this board? MS. MULHERIN: No. MR. BEARD: Mr. Mayor, I register the same complaint with this one. And I just feel like -- I guess I'm one of those people who feel also that we should have term limits on everything and that a few people should not be appointed to the same positions. We have a lot of people in our community who have expertise in a number of areas, and I just think that we should utilize all the talents of our community and not just a few people. So I just want to get that on the record. MS. MULHERIN: House Bill 100 limits two terms -- two three-year terms. If somebody is appointed initially for two years, they can serve up to two complete three-year terms after that. But the House Bill 100 limits the terms of members, and they don't allow people who have served on community service boards or regional boards to be reappointed to the other board so that they can spread it out. I think the bill tried to look at that, too. And I agree with you that we need new people on boards, but with ours as complex as it is right now with managed care coming and other things and the people who have been dedicated and going to meetings and attending meetings, I feel that they're -- the two that we've requested be reappointed are excellent candidates for reappointment. MR. HANDY: Mr. Mayor, I call for the question. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a nomination. MAYOR SCONYERS: Do you want to hold that -- MR. HANDY: Yeah, I'll yield to him. MR. J. BRIGHAM: I'd like to nominate Dr. Andy Lloyd to replace -- the new one, I'm trying to remember -- Ms. Cummings. MR. HANDY: No, James -- he's replacing James Kendrick. Replacing Kendrick, not Ms. Cummings. She's been nominated. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Well, in place of Ms. Cummings as a nominee. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, a point of information. I'd like some information on the nominee. Is the nominee here that Mr. Brigham is entering? If not, then certainly I'd like to see a talent bank or at least some information from my colleague. MR. J. BRIGHAM: The nominee is a Ph.D. candidate in psychiatry, and I believe he's stationed -- he's a public service official at Fort Gordon and we have his talent bank application in the talent bank. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to move that we table the nominations until we can have time to look at the talent bank application, and I request the talent bank application from staff. MAYOR SCONYERS: I don't hear a second to Mr. Todd's motion. We didn't get a second to your nomination either. MR. J. BRIGHAM: I didn't know that a nomination required a second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I'm sorry, excuse me, we didn't get a move that the nominations be closed or whatever. MR. KUHLKE: I move the nominations be closed. MAYOR SCONYERS: Thank you, Mr. Kuhlke. MR. BRIDGES: Mr. Mayor, who are the two nominees here? Which position is this? MAYOR SCONYERS: Do we need to separate this, Jim? I think we do, don't we, because we're going to get this confused if we don't. CLERK: We're going to vote on Ms. Cummings first and then Mr. Brigham's nomination. MS. MULHERIN: That will lower the racial composition of the board. MR. HANDY: Jerry, is your person black or white? MR. J. BRIGHAM: He's white. MR. HANDY: Well, she can't have that. It's got to be mixed. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Freddie, we've got three black representatives in Richmond County. This board isn't three-fourths black. MR. HANDY: Well, read the House Bill 100, Jerry. It's not me, I didn't set it up like that. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, further discussions? MR. HANDY: It's always been that way from the beginning. MR. J. BRIGHAM: We've always had two white and two black for the last several years up until last year and then we had three black members from Richmond County. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Mays and then Mr. Todd. And why don't we get Ms. Mulherin to kind of help us straighten this out. MR. MAYS: Mr. Mayor, I would -- I think we went down this road in 1994. This particular bill -- and I'm not trying to take Nita's job, but probably the last time we maybe went around something that she was trying to deal with us, we had to go back and redo it, possibly because of the same thing that we're getting into today. It has specific requirements. It was scrutinized very, very carefully for us to do it in terms of background, in terms of everything that was laid out, and we took a long time to put this together. And I don't think Jerry has any harm in making his motion. I think it's a very good nominee that's there. But one of the things that hit us slap in the face before was that in terms of when the criteria was brought forth and the board at that particular time on that particular day decided to do something slightly different, and then we had to go back and we had to correct it according to what the bill called for. And unless we're fixing to reverse the whole bill, the whole process in it, then I would hope that we would go ahead on and approve the recommendation in terms of that the board is set for in terms of the replacement nominee, and that's just my observation on it, and that we go ahead and that we do it. Because from the standpoint of where we sit in this area and of being somewhat the lead county in our whole health district period, regardless of what it relates to, whether it's mental health, preventive health or anything else, Mr. Mayor, I think it would be a disgrace if we get into the dragging out process of what we've done. This is one of the things that have kind of risen above the political process, per se, and has been able to go forth on a professional level and be able to do it with people that have had those particular concerns in mind, and I hope we can go ahead and move on with it. MS. MULHERIN: I would like to say that I know Dr. Lloyd also. He used to work for the mental health center and he's a very knowledgeable person. He's a good person that would serve on boards, too. Ms. Cummings would. If we don't have the nominees we have, a balance, we'll have one less African- American on it, which will throw our board a little bit more out of balance as far as the state requirement goes. But I appreciate whatever you decide to do. MR. TODD: Ms. Mulherin, for the benefit of the individuals that may not know that you evolved from the local Richmond County Regional to the state level and your responsibilities that you have to keep this per the House Bill, and maybe also you can tell us the other counties that's involved as far as geographics, et cetera, and also the population, you know, percentages in those counties, minority/majority community, and it might help at least explain why sometime we go a little heavy on this end to make it overall balance out. MS. MULHERIN: We serve the 13-county Augusta area. We have McDuffie, Warren, Wilkes, Lincoln, Taliaferro, Richmond, Burke, Emanual, Jenkins -- six counties south of here. Warren County has appointed an African-American to our board -- we have several others. Right now I don't have my list, but I can get you a list of the demographics of it. House Bill 100 wanted to make sure that the board, not only the demographics by race and sex but by consumer and family member, was balanced because people are giving input into planning, and we're planning for the future of the mentally ill, mentally retarded, and people with substance abuse problems of this entire region. And with managed care coming, with all of the other things that are happening, it's very important that we get good people on the board. Mr. Brigham, your nominee is an excellent person, too. I like working with him very much. And Jeanette Cummings is an excellent person. So whoever you would appoint would be an excellent board member, and I just need to speak for the law as far as the balance also. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I guess my follow up would be: How many Ph.D.'s do you have on the board at this time and what do it call -- MS. MULHERIN: Zero. No Ph.D.'s. MR. KUHLKE: Mr. Mayor, we've got two nominees for this one position, the way I understand it. You've got three -- you're recommending three people, Ms. Mulherin. MS. MULHERIN: Two reappointments and then one new appointment. MR. KUHLKE: And one is being -- MS. MULHERIN: Replacing James Kendrick. MR. KUHLKE: Yeah, but we also have thrown another name in there, and I didn't know whether -- MS. MULHERIN: One of the other board members is here with me, M.J. Shirey, who is a family member who is up for reappointment. And Mrs. Shirey has gone to just about every meeting around the state and was very instrumental in the passing of House Bill 100, has a son who is schizophrenic, and is one of the most active family members that I'm aware of. Has not missed any board meetings other than when she's been out of town. MR. KUHLKE: I don't know Dr. Lloyd or the other lady, either one of them. I'm just saying that you've got two nominees for one position, and the way I see it is that we vote and one of them's going to get it. MS. MULHERIN: Sounds good. MR. KUHLKE: Am I right, Attorney? MR. WALL: Yes, sir. MS. MULHERIN: It's democratic. MR. TODD: Not necessarily. Mr. Mayor, I call for the question. MAYOR SCONYERS: Well, we'll take care of it, Mr. Todd. We just don't want to do something wrong here. [MAYOR SCONYERS AND MR. WALL CONFER.] MAYOR SCONYERS: After consulting with our attorney, we feel like it's best to call it in order so there won't be any confusion; okay? So M.J. Shirey does not have any opposition; is that correct? So do we have a motion -- MR. KUHLKE: I move approval. MAYOR SCONYERS: Thank you, Mr. Kuhlke. MR. HANDY: Okay, I need to hear what you're approving, now. MR. J. BRIGHAM: M.J. Shirey. CLERK: The two that didn't have any opposition. MR. HANDY: Oh, the two that are -- that's Shirey and who else? MR. J. BRIGHAM: That's it. MR. HANDY: No, you said the two. CLERK: You're just doing Shirey, though, Mr. Handy. MAYOR SCONYERS: We're just going to do Shirey right now. MR. HANDY: All right. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, let the record reflect that Ms. Shirey seems to be a female Caucasian. MAYOR SCONYERS: That's so noted, Mr. Todd. We had a motion by Mr. Kuhlke. Did I have a second to Mr. Kuhlke's motion? MR. BRIDGES: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: Seconded by Mr. Bridges. All in favor of Mr. Kuhlke's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, a point of information. What happened to the motion that I put on the floor in the order which it was put on? MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Todd, we're trying to make it simple so we don't get everything confused here. Can you help me, Mr. Wall? MR. WALL: Mr. Todd, we had -- basically had a nomination for post number -- what I'm going to refer to as post number three, but you had no other nominations for the first two appointments, which were renominations, and so my suggestion to the Mayor was to separate them, go through each of the three posts. And the first post you've just taken care of; the second one there's been no other nominations, and presumably that one will be approved; and then you've got two nominations for the third post. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I guess to the County Attorney: My motion would be still on the floor then as far as the third post go to approve the recommendation for Regional Mental Health. MR. WALL: That's correct, and that would be in the form of a nomination. MR. TODD: Thank you. MAYOR SCONYERS: Can we go ahead with the second one now, Mr. Wall? Yes, sir. MR. WALL: MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay. LeJeune Hickson. MR. MAYS: Move Dr. Hickson be approved. MR. HANDY: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Mays, seconded by Mr. Handy. Discussion on that? MR. TODD: Yes. Mr. Mayor, I'd like to know the race and gender for Mr. Hickson. MR. HANDY: Ms. Hickson. She's black and she's a lady. MR. TODD: Okay. Thank you. MR. HANDY: And she's a doctor, but not a Ph.D. for medical education. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. J. BRIGHAM: Mr. Mayor, both of these were for reappointment to terms that have not expired; the third one is for the remainder of an unexpired term? MR. WALL: No. Full three-year term. MR. J. BRIGHAM: All these are full three-year terms? How do we have four members with -- three coming up at the same time? MS. MULHERIN: The way it started out, from the very beginning it was the same way. MAYOR SCONYERS: Any other discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Mays' motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. MAYOR SCONYERS: Now we've got Cummings and Lloyd. Do we -- how do we handle that, Jim? MR. WALL: Cummings will be first. MR. BEARD: Do we need a motion? MR. WALL: No. You've got a nomination for Jeanette Cummings was made first and she would be voted on first, and then Dr. Lloyd would be voted on if necessary. MAYOR SCONYERS: So all in favor of Ms. Cummings -- how do we -- a motion or just we need to vote on that? MR. WALL: Just vote. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay. All in favor of Ms. Cummings, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MR. BRIDGES, MR. J. BRIGHAM & MR. KUHLKE VOTE NO. MOTION CARRIES 6-3. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, so Cummings is 6-3, so we don't need to vote on Lloyd; right? MR. WALL: Correct. MAYOR SCONYERS: Thank you. I think that's the hardest thing we've ever went through, gentlemen. CLERK: Item 36 is to consider appointment of Emergency Management Director. MR. HANDY: Move for approval. MR. ZETTERBERG: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Handy, seconded by Mr. Zetterberg. Do we have any discussion, gentlemen? MR. J. BRIGHAM: Mr. Mayor, don't we need to say Ms. Tucker's name for the record? MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, I'm sorry. We were on a roll, I didn't want to stop us on that good roll there. This is for Ms. Pam Tucker to be appointed to Director of Emergency Management. MR. CARSTARPHEN: Just a point of information, what you may want to do is to remove -- make that an exception to the resolution that you passed on March 5th which sets the procedure for the appointment of all department directors and take that as an exception and act on it, therefore, you won't be in violation of your resolution. I would suggest that. In the conversation that the Mayor and I and others had concerning this, there are a couple of other -- at least two other positions that you may want to consider in this same approach, that being an exception to the policy that you approved on March 8th. Those two are the Chief Tax Appraiser, which I understand is appointed by the Board of Tax Assessors, and the Executive Director of the Board of Elections, which is appointed by, as I understand it, the Board of Elections. Those are somewhat unique and you may want to consider taking those as an exception to your standard policy as well as the one that you're proposed to act on today. Now, you do not have to act on those today, but I'm just suggesting that if you are going to exclude some from this policy, that they be also considered. MR. HANDY: Mr. Mayor, I'll accept that as an amendment, and we can add those two into it and we can --that will be -- they could be behind us. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay. Mr. Zetterberg, is that -- MR. HANDY: If nobody has a complaint about that. MR. ZETTERBERG: Second. MR. BEARD: I was just wondering if those were all of them, that you mentioned, or are you going to get all of them? Are you going to look at all -- because you may have omitted a couple of them. MR. CARSTARPHEN: I can't answer that question today because I would -- I would work with the Attorney and identify any others. Those were two that were identified to me, but I'm not familiar enough with the law to know for sure and I would work through the Attorney on that. MR. BEARD: I just wanted to make sure that it just wasn't the ones that you mentioned there, that you were going to look and consider all of those that may be in that category. MR. CARSTARPHEN: If you're comfortable with that, I would work with the Attorney to do so. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor? May I point out that the Warden for RCCI would be one such individual that is recommended by the Department of Corrections. And I would also like to hear the grounds for the Executive Director of Emergency Management being separated out. I heard that we wanted to do it, but I didn't hear a justification, and I believe that it's something to do with the state level make the recommendation, but I need a clarification. MR. WALL: Well, let me respond to Mr. Todd's question and then make a comment if I may. Under the state law, this body recommends to the Governor, but the Governor is the one who actually makes the appointment of the Director of the Emergency Management. And so in essence what you would be doing here is asking that that appointment, which has already been made and is still in effect, continue in existence and that she be the Director of the local Emergency Management. Now let me comment insofar as the Board of Elections and insofar as the Tax Assessor is concerned, so that when somebody comes back and reads the minutes there's not any confusion. It is my position that this body does not have any authority over the appointment of the Elections Director, nor does it have any authority other than approving any contract and funding of the Chief Tax Appraiser. So although Mr. Carstarphen speaks in terms of making those exceptions, I think that it's more in the sense of simply acknowledging the fact that they are the directors of the Board of Elections, and appointed by that entity, and that the Chief Tax Assessor has been appointed by the Board of Tax Assessors and acknowledging the fact that he continues in existence. And I see that as, in effect, the same motion that is being made insofar as Ms. Tucker, that you're acknowledging the fact that she has served in that capacity, has been appointed by the Governor, and that you desire that she continue in that capacity. And I would ask that the motion be framed and couched in those terms, less it be construed that this Commission is in fact appointing those individuals, which is contrary to the law. MAYOR SCONYERS: Is that so noted, ladies? MR. HANDY: Whatever needs to be put in it, that's the way I want it. You can word it any way you like. CLERK: Okay. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, in reference -- I know we're not discussing the Tax Assessor's Office other than what the process is, and we're going to have to deal with it sooner or later. And it's my understanding that we're not working under a contract at present, and it gravely concerns me that we're not working under a contract in the sense that this is a gentleman or agency or individual or personality that's going out representing County government as far as assessments go, et cetera. And if -- you know, I think some of the individuals that have complaints about their assessment would probably have some good grounds in reference there's no contract, and I think it's incumbent upon us to look at that and take that corrective action. We either should approve the contract or call on the Board of Assessors to remove the Chief Assessor. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Handy's motion, seconded by Mr. Zetterberg, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. MR. HANDY: Mr. Mayor, I just want to make a comment, that make sure Ms. Bonner have the wording right, as the Attorney instructed. CLERK: Yes, sir. MR. HANDY: Because my name is on the line. CLERK: All right. MAYOR SCONYERS: Item 37, please. CLERK: Item 37 is to discuss the renewal of the lease of the Cotton Exchange Building and possible relocation of the Convention and Visitors Bureau. MR. KUHLKE: Mr. Mayor, I bring this information to the Commission primarily for maybe discussion and maybe not discussion but just maybe for some input. This comes from the Space Allocation Committee. But I've been made aware that the lease on the Cotton Exchange Building expired last October, and if you will recall, the first floor is occupied by the Museum, the second floor is occupied by the Convention and Visitors Bureau. It's my - - and I have a mistake in the memo, but it's my understanding that when we went to a month-to-month lease, particularly the lease with the City -- and the City leases the first floor and Convention and Visitors Bureau leases the second floor. But when it went to a month-to-month lease, the first floor, the City's lease, called for a 10 percent increase in that lease. That was not called for in the Convention and Visitors Bureau's lease. But I visited with Mr. Pat Blanchard and Mr. Barry White with the Convention and Visitors Bureau a couple of months ago, and we talked about this. There was some concern on the part of the Convention and Visitors Bureau that possibly the location that they are now in was not the best place for that particular agency to be and they may want to take a look at an alternate location. Attached to this memo is a letter from Charles Dillard that gives a little history on the lease of the building, and also a memo from Mr. Barry White, with a proposal from Bailey and Associates on a new location for the Convention and Visitors Bureau. I have not really discussed in any detail with Mr. White what their desires are, but I do need to let you know that those leases are expired, that the rents now -- the lease with the City is -- and I think we've got to go back and retroactively pick up 10 percent on that lease with the City for the first floor back to October of '95, and that the lease on the Convention and Visitors Bureau continues on a month-to-month basis. The landlord would like to have one tenant for that building, which is us, the City. And so I'll entertain any questions in regards to that, and I've asked Mr. White, who is the Director of the Convention and Visitors Bureau, to be here in case you had some questions for him. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I'll just give a couple of thoughts. If I was king for a day or, rather, Mayor for a day, I would certainly suggest that we move the marketing division of the Convention and Visitors Bureau to the Coliseum Authority space, and I think certainly there should be some space in that building that's not being used. And, also, I would probably move the administrative part of it -- and I know sometimes it's tough to separate administrative functions; it make it very difficult to manage. But I would look to the state to move the administrative part of it, or at least some aspect of the Convention and Visitors Bureau to the state Welcome Center that they are just working on. It make a lot of sense to me that we would be out there possibly on I-20 where we could do the kind of things that Convention and Visitors Bureau should probably be set up to do versus down on Reynolds Street. And that's just a thought. And I know we're going to have an opportunity to discuss this later, but certainly it seems that the Coliseum Authority and the Convention and Visitors Bureau to do some cost sharing in the sense they kind of generate their revenue from somewhat the same pot as far as marketing go, this community and the Coliseum and the Bell Auditorium. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. MAYOR SCONYERS: Thank you, Mr. Todd. Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. HANDY: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. I'd just like to ask Mr. Kuhlke, that price is in line with commercial buildings downtown, $4,000 a month? MR. KUHLKE: I'm not sure. Mr. White, do you want to answer that? MR. WHITE: We've done some research and that works out, Mr. Handy, to about $11.87 per square foot. The going rate downtown is, I think, for premium office space, around 11.50 a square foot. After the increase it's going to be a little bit higher than what the average is. MR. BRIDGES: Mr. Mayor, what's the free-standing building on Ninth Street that we're talking about here? MR. KUHLKE: Go ahead, Barry. MR. WHITE: The free-standing building on Ninth Street is the building that was used -- I think it's an old train -- part of a train station or train depot. It's the building that was used as the offices for the construction team that built the Radisson and the conference center. It's directly across from the Boll Weevil Restaurant. MR. KUHLKE: Ulmer, it's right by the parking deck to the Radisson. MR. BRIDGES: Will that building require any upgrade as far as fire codes, ADA, or anything like that? MR. WHITE: It's pretty much gutted inside, so it'll have to be rebuilt on the interior. MR. KUHLKE: Ulmer, the proposal that they received is the developer is willing to spend up to $50,000 to finish the building off in accordance with all the codes and so forth, and then they made a proposal on leasing the facility on a five-year, seven-year, and ten-year term. I just -- I want you to know I'm just bringing this to you. I think that the Space Allocation Committee has got some more work to do, but I just wanted to make you aware of that. And then I think Mr. White and his board needs to come back to us with a recommendation on what they would like to see, and then we can evaluate that. MR. BEARD: Mr. Mayor, I was just going to make a motion that we receive this as information and let the Space Committee work with the -- with Mr. White and those and make a recommendation back to this body. MR. BRIDGES: I'll second it. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Beard, seconded by Mr. Bridges. Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. HANDY: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. I just want to make a comment. One of those ideas Mr. Todd came up with about the Civic Center is not a bad idea. And we already have that building, they need money, and that would help. Why would we go renovate another building and rent and we could put it in that building? That's something we need to think about. MR. J. BRIGHAM: Mr. Mayor? Mr. White, is this something we've got to do immediately about this lease that hasn't been anything done with? MR. WHITE: We were advised by our attorney that we not enter into any leases at this time because of the organizational makeup right now in the Augusta-Richmond County government, so we are tentative and we're leasing month to month, you know, and -- MR. J. BRIGHAM: There is no outside opportunity you're likely to be kicked out next month or anything, is there? MR. WHITE: Not that I know of. As long as he doesn't have anybody ready to move in we're going to be there. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Beard's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. CLERK: The next item, we will consider acceptance of the 1995 Urban and Suburban Financial Statement from Serotta, Maddocks & Evans and Cherry, Bekaert & Holland. MR. GREENWAY: We have both the annual audit reports for the old City and the old County, and we have Rick Evans from Serotta, Maddocks & Evans and Ken Fields from Cherry, Bekaert & Holland, so if there's any discussion or anything that y'all would like to talk about I'm sure that they might be able to answer any questions or I might be able to answer any questions. This was presented as information, I believe, at the Finance Committee last week. MR. HANDY: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to accept especially Cherry, Bekaert & Holland for information. We haven't had a chance to look at it because we just received the other one on last week in committee meetings. And then maybe come back and put it on the agenda for a later date. MR. GREENWAY: So y'all haven't seen the -- MR. HANDY: No. We have not seen it, no. MR. POWELL: I'll second that motion. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Handy, seconded by Mr. Powell. Discussion, gentlemen? MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I guess in the motion we're saying that we'll discuss it at the next meeting and the individuals or entities will be back to discuss it with us? MR. HANDY: Well, we can't discuss it without them. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Todd, did you want to make that amendment to Mr. Handy's motion with a timetable on it? MR. TODD: I believe it's already been cleared up for me, Mr. Mayor, that we're accepting one and accepting the other one as information -- the one we haven't seen as information. MR. HANDY: What do you need, Mr. Todd? MR. TODD: I was trying to find out, Mr. Mayor, the intent of my colleague's motion. Is it to accept one -- the one that we received the other week in committee, to accept that, and to accept the one we're receiving today as information? MR. HANDY: Right. Because, see, the committee meeting only had some of the Commissioners there, not the full Commission, and this one we haven't seen, so it's best for us to have a opportunity to look at both of them and then bring it back with another meeting with everybody to be here to ask questions. Because ain't no since in bringing back one at a time, just come back together with both of them. MR. TODD: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. MR. EVANS: Mr. Mayor, I might like to add also that there were two other reports, a single audit report and a report on the sales tax, that I would like included in this, because I don't want to have to come back again for those two. We discussed all three of those reports in the Finance Committee last week, so if we could include all those in there. MR. HANDY: That'll be fine. I accept that. MR. GREENWAY: Would you like to put it on -- the City of Augusta report on the Finance Committee for next week? At least it could be brought and discussed then, and then come before Commission for both of them. Would you like to approach it from that standpoint? MR. HANDY: Yeah, but we'll handle that. Thank you. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor? I would certainly -- even though I haven't had an opportunity to review the report, I would certainly rather have the opportunity to hear the explanations or the comments in reference the management letter, the single audit on the sales tax, rather than to hear it through the newspaper, from the individuals or consultants that we are paying. So -- and I guess I'm understanding that we're going to vote to accept this as information and bring back the experts to the next regular meeting to explain to us, you know, what's the ingredients and how did they come to the conclusion they did as far as the audit go, the management letter, the separate audit for the one-penny tax. And I realize that there's no way to keep this out of discussion as far as the press go, so I believe I'd rather hear today from the consultants or the professional service folks. And before we actually act on it as far as officially accepting it, then perhaps we, you know, wait till next meeting. And I guess I'm trying to gather whether that's the intent of this motion. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Handy, do you want to respond to that? MR. HANDY: I think I said I will accept Mr. Evans coming back to explain those two -- I think I said that. But whatever Mr. Todd want, I'll be willing to give it to him, whatever he wanted. If he want to hear it now about those two letters, the sales tax and the management letter, it's fine. If not, when they come back they'll have the same opportunity to present their finding to the full body. MR. TODD: Yes. Mr. Mayor, I'd like to, if he's accepting -- my colleague is accepting that amendment, I'd like to hear it today versus hear it secondhanded. MR. HANDY: That's fine with me, Mr. Evans. MAYOR SCONYERS: Well, do you want to withdraw your motion then, Mr. Handy? MR. HANDY: No, everything else stands except this management letter that Mr. Todd wanted to hear. So how would I need to put that, Mr. Attorney? MR. WALL: I think you've accepted the amendment, which is to accept it as -- your motion is to accept these as information to allow y'all to study it and come back with questions at a later meeting, but with the amendment that there will be some explanation at this point given by the accountants. MR. HANDY: Okay, that'll be fine. MAYOR SCONYERS: Now, is that what you wanted, Mr. Todd? MR. TODD: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. MR. EVANS: May I make one comment before -- you do not have a copy in front of you at this point in time of the sales tax report nor the single audit report, which includes management letter comments. I think Glenn has gone to get some copies of those for you, but it's hard for me to comment on those without you having them in front of you. I'm willing to do whatever you would like, Mr. Todd; I just think you should have a copy of those in front of you. MR. HANDY: Mr. Todd, could we not hold up the meeting and then come back, and then whatever way you want to present it we can come back and put it on the agenda any way you like? Because we don't have the books before us for everybody. MR. TODD: Well, certainly, but I think there is some corrective actions that should have already been taken as far as the management letter suggestions go, and certainly if they haven't been took, then I want to know why and want it to be done in a timely manner. And that's my concern. MR. HANDY: You are correct, Mr. Todd. And I agree with you 100 percent, there are some things that need to be corrected, and those items were brought out. MR. EVANS: I can comment to that as well, Mr. Todd. We have made contact with all the agency offices and any departments that have been mentioned in the management letter comments. Several of them have responded back to us requesting a how-to approach to solve some of those problems, and we have responded back to them, so those procedures are in process. MR. TODD: Thanks. I have no further questions, Mr. Mayor. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, are we ready to vote? Mr. Handy just stepped out of the room. Mr. Handy made the motion. Can we vote without the maker of the motion in the room? He doesn't have to be here? All right. Do y'all need Mr. Handy's motion read? All in favor of Mr. Handy's motion to receive it as information, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 8-0. [MR. HANDY OUT] CLERK: Okay, the next item is to ratify the telephone polling of the Commission-Council on the appointment of Mr. L. Phillip Christman to the Coliseum Authority for the -- first we need to accept the resignation of Mr. Dick Frank. MR. TODD: I so move, Mr. Mayor, that we accept the resignation letter of Mr. Dick Frank. MR. HANDY: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Todd, seconded by Mr. Handy. Discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Todd's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. CLERK: The next item is to ratify the telephone polling of the Commission-Council on June 24th of the appointment of Mr. L. Phillip Christman to the unexpired term of Mr. Dick Frank to the Augusta Coliseum Authority. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I so move that the Board of Commission approve the Mayor's nominee. MR. HANDY: Second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Todd, seconded by Mr. Handy. Discussion, gentlemen? MR. MAYS: Yes, Mr. Mayor. I have no problem voting for the nominee, I just wanted to ask Jim, because I was out of town on that day when we confirmed it --which I would have voted for your nominee, but with what you did in here legally, not being a part of that confirmation, do I need to abstain from that or just -- I can vote like I want to? MR. WALL: You can vote. You're voting to ratify it. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. TODD: Yes. Mr. Mayor, I understand that this has caused somewhat of a problem for another entity on us not taking action in a timely manner, and certainly I would hope that we will do everything we can to avoid this happening again and would urge the other entity, if it's --if their legal counsel feel it's necessary, you know, to maybe go back after we ratify this and have a special meeting and correct the situation. MAYOR SCONYERS: Thank you, Mr. Todd. Further discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Todd's motion to approve and ratify, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. CLERK: Next item, 38: Consolidation Project Manager. MR. CARSTARPHEN: I'll be brief. The Human Resources Director has prepared a preliminary draft of a position description for the Equal Opportunity Director. I want to distribute copies to each of you. I do not want to ask you to act on it today; rather, I want to ask you to review it over the next few days and get any thoughts or comments that you might have to Mr. Etheridge or to myself. We expect to work further on this first draft, but we wanted to solicit your input in that process as well. I want to emphasize again that this is a preliminary draft. It's a first cut, and we would like for you to review it at your leisure and give us any thoughts that you have. And I would suggest, if you can, direct those to Mr. Etheridge, but if you cannot get to him I'll be happy to take them as well. The second item was placed on the agenda at the request of Mr. Zetterberg regarding his role as the Chair of the Computer Services Subcommittee, and I'll yield to him at this time. MR. ZETTERBERG: Thank you, Mr. Carstarphen. We have essentially consolidated the automation departments about the City and the County, and although the final organizational chart has not been approved or even furnished to this committee for approval, it is my opinion that we need to identify a single manager at this point, an interim manager, and I will nominate Ms. Nancy Bonner as the head of this consolidated department on an interim basis as the interim head of the computer management department. MR. KUHLKE: I'll second that. MAYOR SCONYERS: Okay, we have a motion by Mr. Zetterberg, seconded by Mr. Kuhlke. Further discussion? MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, may I have the motion reread? I was listening probably to a couple of conversations at the same time. MS. WATSON: It was to appoint Ms. Bonner as interim director of Information Technology Department. MAYOR SCONYERS: Did you hear that, Mr. Todd? MR. TODD: Yes, I did, and it was my understanding that Ms. Bonner is interim director. MR. ZETTERBERG: We have been working on the condition where we basically had a City automation department and a County automation department, and the two individuals, as far as I was concerned, were both interim department heads. And what I'm suggesting now, my motion is to consolidate that position as one single head of that department on an interim basis prior to us reorganizing the department and prior to us going out and selecting the final department head. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I'll just call for a roll call vote. MR. HANDY: Could I ask a question before you do that? MAYOR SCONYERS: I was just going to say was there any other discussion on that. MR. HANDY: Right. I would just like to know, Mr. Carstarphen, when would this be coming back up on your list and with the meeting that you and the Mayor and myself have concerning finalizing this department and what the purpose of putting an interim in and how long it's going to take. We only have about five more months before the whole government will be put together, and how are we going to benefit with this? MR. CARSTARPHEN: The efforts to develop a final recommended organizational structure for the Information Technology Department are well under way. I would expect that process to be concluded within the next two to three weeks. I think the proposal that Mr. Zetterberg has made will provide some clarity in terms of resolving some of those issues, or some opportunity for doing so, but I do not anticipate any unusual delay in bringing the recommendation to you. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, if we're having some personality clashes or some problems, then maybe we need to just put this department up front to deal with. I am concerned about this board taking actions that may favor one individual or another, and if there is someone that needs some disciplinary action as far as the administrators go, then we need to deal with that. I don't want to take the coward's way out on it. MR. ZETTERBERG: I think this just makes good management sense. We're running basically one ship; we need one captain at this particular time. It'll clear up any problems that we have with individuals taking individual directions that may be contrary to what a single head would be doing. It has no -- there is no intent to make this --align this to -- that this individual who is appointed on an interim basis would have any more favored position in the selection process. We're not trying to obviate that process whatsoever, but it's clearly one ship, and one ship would be better steered by one individual at this time. MR. KUHLKE: Mr. Todd, from my perspective, just observing, I don't think we're talking about anything other than professional differences among the two individuals. They have been cooperative, but there are some clearly different perspectives, and I think Mr. Zetterberg's recommendation is to identify one interim director as opposed to two. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I'm going to support my colleague from the -- to my right in the sense that, you know, we put enough faith in him to head up this special committee, but I do have some reservations. MR. ZETTERBERG: I think we can applaud all parties for the cooperation that we've gotten. We did get off to a slightly rocky start, but most of the differences are professional in nature. But clearly we need to have one head, and I would hope that we would move very, very rapidly towards this interim basis and then on to selecting the final individual based upon the recommendation of Mr. Carstarphen and that committee. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. HANDY: One other question, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Carstarphen, how long before you say this department will be together, intact, ready for a full-time director? MR. CARSTARPHEN: I cannot give you a specific answer, but I do not anticipate it would be longer than -- I do not anticipate that our recommendations to you would be later than 30 days from now. MR. HANDY: Okay, we accept that. We will accept that. MR. CARSTARPHEN: Thank you. MAYOR SCONYERS: Further discussion, gentlemen? MR. POWELL: Mr. Chairman, I too have some concerns with the process that is being taken. I just want to note that, that I think we're kind of going around the set pattern and I do have some concerns. I'm going to support the motion, but I have concerns about it. MR. HANDY: Call for the question. MAYOR SCONYERS: Thank you, sir. Mr. Todd has requested a roll call vote. CLERK: We'll start with Mr. Beard. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I'll withdraw my call for the roll call vote. MR. HANDY: Who are we going to nominate now? CLERK: Nancy Bonner. Nancy Bonner's name is up for nomination. MR. HANDY: Oh, it is? MR. POWELL: As an interim. MAYOR SCONYERS: Do we need the motion reread? MR. HANDY: No. No, everybody else knew except me. That's fine. I'm fine. MAYOR SCONYERS: All in favor of Mr. Zetterberg's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. MAYOR SCONYERS: Next item, please. MR. CARSTARPHEN: The third item is just to remind you that you have scheduled a work planning session for 8:30 a.m. this Thursday, the 18th, at the Civic Center. We ask that you be present between 8:30 and 9:00; we want to start promptly at 9:00. We'll have coffee and doughnuts at 8:30. You have an agenda which accompanied this agenda, which I hope you have reviewed. If you have any thoughts concerning that, we welcome them. In the absence of any objection, we will use that agenda as our working agenda for that meeting Thursday. MR. HANDY: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to accept that if you want to, for information or whatever way you want to handle it. MR. CARSTARPHEN: Just to approve the agenda. MR. HANDY: Okay. I make a motion to approve. MR. KUHLKE: I second. MAYOR SCONYERS: I have a motion by Mr. Handy, seconded by Mr. Kuhlke. Discussion, gentlemen? All in favor of Mr. Handy's motion, let it be known by raising your hand, please. MOTION CARRIES 9-0. MAYOR SCONYERS: Mr. Wall? MR. WALL: Mr. Mayor, I wonder if I could ask the Commissioners insofar as trying to work with Doug Batchelor to set up the meeting, would next Wednesday be a convenient date, and would you prefer morning or afternoon? MR. ZETTERBERG: Afternoon. MR. WALL: How late? 3:00? 2:00? MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, some of us sometimes work part-time, and certainly I think that we need to set up some of these meetings where it's after hours versus morning or middle of the day. MR. WALL: 5:00? MR. TODD: Great. MAYOR SCONYERS: 5:00, gentlemen? The 25th? MR. WALL: It's Wednesday the 24th. Wednesday the 24th. MAYOR SCONYERS: Where are we going to have it at? The meeting room? CLERK: The meeting room. MR. TODD: Mr. Mayor, I and my colleague, Mr. Brigham, was having a discussion, and in the sense we have individuals coming from out of town, professionals, on this issue of the -- that we're talking about now setting up the meeting, the refinancing of the loan, perhaps we need to go on and make that sacrifice of doing it earlier. He did say that he had some folks coming in from Atlanta, didn't he, or from somewhere? And if you bring them in at 5:00, what time that puts them back on the road will cause maybe a hardship for them. That's just a concern and I'll yield to that. CLERK: 2:00? We could do it at 2:00. MR. HANDY: They're going to fly down, Mr. Todd. They're going to fly down. MR. POWELL: And they own the hotel, now. MR. TODD: Okay, we'll keep it 5:00. MR. WALL: May I suggest 5:00, and then if there's a problem we'll try to work with them. MR. TODD: That's a good point, Mr. Powell, they own the hotel, and maybe if they stay overnight we can get some money back. MAYOR SCONYERS: Any other business? MR. HANDY: If not, Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to adjourn. MAYOR SCONYERS: That's a non-debatable motion. Thank you, sir. Our meeting is now adjourned. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5:06 P.M. Lena J. Bonner Clerk of Commission-Council CERTIFICATION: I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission-Council, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of Augusta- Richmond County Commission-Council held on July 16, 1996. ______________________________ Clerk of Commission-Council Witness my hand and official seal this 23rd day of July 1996. ______________________________ CATHY T. PIRTLE, B-1763 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER