HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-16-1999 Regular Meeting
Page 1
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBERS
February 16, 1999
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m.,
Tuesday, February 16, 1999, the Honorable Bob Young, Mayor,
presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Beard, Bridges, H. Brigham, J. Brigham,
Colclough, Handy, Kuhlke, Mays (2:18), Powell and Shepard;
members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
Also present were Ms. Morawski, Deputy Clerk of
Commission; Mr. Oliver, Administrator; and Mr. Wall, County
Attorney.
THE INVOCATION WAS GIVEN BY THE REVEREND McKNIGHT.
THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE WAS RECITED.
We have some visitors with us today I'd
MAYOR YOUNG:
like to introduce first before we go to the agenda. Sitting
next to me on my left is Chris Slighfield. He is the Deputy
Mayor of Waverly, which is in England. And his wife Jenny is
also with us. Where is Jenny? There she is in the back. She
is the Mayoress. And seated with the Clerk is Mrs. Pat Evans,
who is the Town Clerk of Godalming, England, and she is with
Nancy today. And Commissioner Handy remarked that Ms. Bonner
would look good in something like this. This is her
traditional ceremonial outfit she wears when she is the Town
Clerk. And, of course, Godalming is the city in England where
James Oglethorpe, founder of Georgia and founder of Augusta,
is from. And also with the group is John Oxenborough, who is
with the Friends of Oglethorpe Society. So we're happy to
have you with us and happy to have you observing today. So,
Madame Clerk, let's proceed with the order of business.
Yes, sir. We have some changes to the agenda.
CLERK:
We have one correction on Item Number 28, which should include
an approval of the condition as listed on the addendum agenda.
Some additional information: we have two talent bank
applications, one from Joyceen Boyle and Robert Osborne, and a
resolution from the Augusta Canal Authority. And we have four
additions to the agenda: two talent bank applications, one
for the Hospital Authority from Syteria Townsend and one for
the Sheriff's Merit Board from George Davis. We have a
request to approve an underground right-of-way permit to Qwest
Communications Corporation and a request to approve a grant
application to the Child and Youth Coordinating Council.
Mr. Mayor, talent bank applications
MR. J. BRIGHAM:
don't have to be approved, do they?
Page 2
These were just additional that we didn't have
CLERK:
at the time the agenda books went out.
That would be including them in the
MAYOR YOUNG:
background material with those items on the agenda. I don't
think we need to approve those. If you leave those on and
approve those, you're not approving the appointment, you're
just approving including them in the talent bank.
Well, those would be included anyway,
MR. J. BRIGHAM:
wouldn't they?
Would you like to strike those?
MAYOR YOUNG:
I don't see no need to make it an
MR. J. BRIGHAM:
addition to the [inaudible].
On the additions to the agenda, Items 1
MAYOR YOUNG:
and 2, there's a motion to strike. Is there a second?
Second.
MR. BRIDGES:
Any objection? Those are struck.
MAYOR YOUNG:
And you're saying that we cannot put
MR. H. BRIGHAM:
them--
No, sir, we're not taking out their talent
MAYOR YOUNG:
bank forms. That is just simply to--they're still nominated.
This does not affect their standing. Any other changes to the
agenda?
Yes, Mr. Mayor. The Attorney and I have
MR. OLIVER:
conferred. Item Number 37 relating to the building permits,
they have asked for a little more time to work with them as it
relates to the methodology, and we ask that that be postponed
until the next meeting.
Any other changes to the agenda? Does
MAYOR YOUNG:
anyone have any objection to any of these changes or additions
or deletions?
I would just like to ask a question far as
MR. HANDY:
the additions to the agenda. Do they have to be--I mean, why
weren't they presented in the book?
If I can respond. Insofar as Item Number 3,
MR. WALL:
that is something that I have been working on for some months.
I did not hear back from them until after the agenda deadline.
I spoke with them on Friday and they asked that--they would
Page 3
like to begin work on March the 1st and I told them I would
make the request, but the normal process would be to go
through this committee. Ken Geltsman may be here, who is a
representative of the company, and he can answer any
questions. But this has been something I've been dealing with
their legal department on for several months, but that's the
reason that one is an add-on. Insofar as the Children and
Youth Coordinating Council is concerned, they, I think, came
to the Clerk's Office at the end of last week, came to my
office yesterday. This is a grant that--a pass-through that
would have to be signed and in Atlanta by March the 1st, and
so I had requested that it be put on.
We don't have another meeting between March
MR. HANDY:
1st?
No, sir, this is the last meeting.
MR. WALL:
These corrections to the agenda, were the
MR. POWELL:
names on the--you have the names here and you say you have a
talent bank. The talent banks weren't in the book, is that
the problem?
Yes, sir.
MR. WALL:
While we're at it, we can nominate
MR. J. BRIGHAM:
people that aren't on this list.
Are there any objections to these
MAYOR YOUNG:
deletions, additions, or changes to the agenda? If I hear
none, then we'll proceed, Madame Clerk, with the order of
business.
Yes, sir. Under the consent agenda, Items
CLERK:
Number 1 through 27a.
PLANNING:
1. Z-99-14 - Request for concurrence with the decision
of the Planning Commission to approve a petition from Larry
Cheek, on behalf of Clifford Jones, requesting a change of
zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-2 (General
Business) on property located on the southeast right-of-way
line of Peach Orchard Road (U.S. Hwy. #25), 197 feet, more or
less, southwest of the southeast corner of the intersection of
Tobacco Road and Peach Orchard Road.
2. Z-99-16 - Request for concurrence with the decision
of the Planning Commission to approve with conditions: '1)
That the petitioner shall construct a six (6) foot solid wood
or slatted chain-link fence in addition to conformance with
the Tree Ordinance on the entire southern property line, and
2) That the future development of this property shall
Page 4
substantially conform to the Site Plan submitted', a petition
from Southern Partners, Inc., on behalf of Grover W. Carter,
Adele Carter, and Hilton R. Carter, requesting a change of
zoning from Zone R-1B (One-family Residence) and Zone B-2
(General Business) to LI (Light Industry) on property located
on the northeast right-of-way line of Barton Chapel Road, 183
feet, more or less, north of the northeast corner of the
intersection of Sharon Road and Barton Chapel Road (1632 &
1640 Barton Chapel Road).
3. Z-99-17 - Request for concurrence with the decision
of the Planning Commission to approve with conditions: '1)
That the egress and ingress be approved by Traffic Engineering
and that any costs of public improvements that are necessary
shall be paid by the developer, and 2) That the future
development of this property shall substantially conform to
the Site Plan submitted', a petition from Southern Partners,
Inc., on behalf of Thomas E. Hodge, III and Benjamin Russell,
requesting to remove the stipulations placed on the 1987
(Z-87-27) rezoning to B-2 (General Business) on property
located where the centerline of Skinner Mill Road extended
intersects the northeast right-of-way line of Boy Scout Road.
FINANCE:
4. Motion to award a purchase order for the lowest bid
for a two (2) year lease of a Landfill Refuse Compactor for
the Public Works Department Landfill Division for a total
lease cost of $309,836.64.
ENGINEERING SERVICES:
5. Motion to approve option in the amount of $272.00
to purchase a permanent easement and a temporary construction
easement in connection with 60-Inch Raw Water Treatment Line
Project owned by Betty J. Johnson, Tax Map 34-1, Parcel 21.
6. Motion to authorize condemnation of 1.410 sq. ft.
of permanent easement and 400 sq. ft. of temporary easement
(Tax Map 34-1, Parcel 18) of the 60-Inch Raw Water Line
Treatment Project which is owned by Wilbur Williams and Ethel
Williams.
7. Motion to authorize condemnation of 1,560 sq. ft.
of permanent easement and 440 sq. ft. of temporary easement
(Tax Map 34-1, Parcel 12) of the 60-Inch Raw Water Line
Treatment Project which is owned by Elise Jones.
8. Motion to accept counter proposal of $3,625.00 from
R.A. McElmurray, Jr.
9. Motion to authorize engineering services for Morgan
Road Improvements with Patchen Mingledorff & Associates in the
amount of $110,900.00. Also, approve Capital Project Budget
#296823665 in the amount of $110,900.00 for the project.
10. Motion to approve Capital Project Budget and
engineering proposal from W.R. Toole Engineers, Incorporated,
in the amount of $85,000 for the Windsor Spring Road Improve-
ments Project to be funded with funds set aside for this
Page 5
project in Special 1% Sales Tax, Phase III.
11. Motion to approve final change order of $10,620.94
to Blair Construction, Inc., for work completed on the Davis
and Camilla Road Sewer Improvement Project.
12. Motion to approve award of low bid to AquaSouth
Construction, Inc., who submitted a bid of $295,505 regarding
the improvements to Faircrest Pumping Station.
13. Motion to approve final change order of $298,148.81
to Beam's Pavement Maintenance Company, Inc., for work
completed on the Fleming Heights Water & Sanitary Sewer
Improvement Project.
14. Motion to approve tree replacement bid awards as
follows:
Barrett Tree Company $10,302.50
Lone Oak Tree Farm $ 9,180.00
Bold Spring Nursery $ 4,221.00
Wagon Hammock $17,425.00
$41,129.50
15. Motion to approve declaring four houses and two
mobile homes located near the Landfill as surplus and sold at
public sale.
16. Motion to authorize condemnation of 1,380 sq. ft.
of permanent easement and 400 sq. ft. of temporary easement
(Tax Map 34-1, Parcel 22) of the 60-Inch Raw Water Line
Treatment Project which is owned by James Pollard.
17. Motion to ratify execution of the CSX Railroad
Permits for the Jack and Borse of two existing railroad spurs.
PUBLIC SAFETY:
18. Motion to receive as information the '98 LEPC
Annual Report.
19. Motion to approve the appointment of Ms. Terri L.
Turner, Assistant Zoning & Development Administrator, to the
Augusta LEPC.
20. Motion to receive as information the Augusta Fire
Department's Biannual Report and the '99 Activities Calendar.
21. Motion to approve addendum to CPS contract for Tax
Assessor's Office.
22. Motion to approve the addendum to Bi-Tech Software,
Inc., financial software contract.
23. Motion to allow the Augusta Fire Department to form
a Mutual Aid Resource pact and to join and become a member of
the Georgia Mutual Aid Group.
PUBLIC SERVICES:
24. Motion to approve granting an extension to Mr.
Johnny Glasker (March 15, 1999) on his liquor license for
Johnny's Supper Club & Restaurant with the understanding no
further extensions would be granted.
25. Motion to accept a tentative allocation of $50,000
from the FAA 1999 Airport Improvement Program for design of a
project to rehabilitate the aircraft-parking apron.
Page 6
26. Motion to approve submission of a Scrap Tire Code
Enforcement Officer and Recycling Grant Application for FY
1999/2000. Funds to be taken from License & Inspections.
27. Motion to approve new ownership request by Larry
Young for consumption on premises liquor, beer & wine license
to be used in connection with Lotto Cafe located at 1801
Kissingbower Road.
PETITIONS & COMMUNICATIONS:
27a. Motion to approve the regular minutes of the
Augusta Commission held February 2, 1999.
MR. SHEPARD:I move we approve Items 1 through 27a as a
consent agenda.
So move--second, rather.
MR. HANDY:
Any discussion? All in favor, please vote
MAYOR YOUNG:
by voting aye.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like the record to note
MR. POWELL:
that I vote no on the Public Services items that are--if there
are any with Sunday sales.
Do you have specific numbers, Mr. Powell?
MAYOR YOUNG:
No, sir. I didn't see it in any of them,
MR. POWELL:
but I just want to make sure I cover that.
The record will so reflect.
MAYOR YOUNG:
[MR. MAYS OUT]
MOTION CARRIES 9-0.
Mr. Young, as a citizen, may I ask, was
PUBLIC CITIZEN:
Number 28, Z-99-9, was it to be placed on the consent agenda?
No, sir, we went through 27a. Item 28 is
MAYOR YOUNG:
next.
CLERK:Item 28: Z-99-9 - Request for concurrence with
the decision of the Planning Commission to approve a petition
from George L. Goodman, on behalf of Leonard H. Lifsey,
requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family
Residence) to Zone R-1C (One-family Residence) on property
located on a Bearing S 14 48'40" W and being 168 feet, more or
less, south of the south right-of-way line of Toms Drive, and
also being 595 feet, more or less, west of the southwest
corner of the intersection of Spring Grove Drive and Toms
Drive.
I would note that the addendum says that
MR. OLIVER:
Page 7
this property be accessed through Dogwood Subdivision to
, to add to
Barton Chapel Road and there shall be only 28 lots
what the Clerk said.
MR. H. BRIGHAM:I move for approval, Mr. Mayor.
Second.
MR. KUHLKE:
Mr. Patty, do you have anything you would
MAYOR YOUNG:
like to present with respect to this petition?
We did have some objectors to this. And the
MR. PATTY:
petitioners, toward the end of their presentation, stated that
while the zoning they were seeking would allow considerably
more than 28 lots, it was their intention of only developing
28 lots in this 10.8 acre tract, and that it was also their
intention not to have access through the subdivision where
folks live that were objecting but rather through Dogwood
Subdivision, which is right on Barton Chapel Road. So we're
recommending approval with those two conditions, and I think
there was a fair consensus from the people who were there that
that was a good settlement.
All right. Is there anyone else who would
MAYOR YOUNG:
care to speak to this item? Is there any discussion among the
Commissioners, any questions? There's a motion on the floor.
All in favor, please vote aye.
[MR. MAYS OUT]
MOTION CARRIES 9-0.
CLERK:Item 29: Z-99-13 - Request for concurrence with
the decision of the Planning Commission to deny a petition
from Cecile Morgan, on behalf of Allean P. Tyler, requesting a
Special Exception for the purpose of establishing a family
personal care home as provided for in Section 26-1,
Subparagraph (h) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for
Augusta-Richmond County, on property located on the southwest
right-of-way line of Castlewood Drive, 170 feet, more or less,
southeast of a point where the centerline of Riverlook Drive
extended intersects the southwest right-of-way line of
Castlewood Drive (2422 Castlewood Drive).
MR. KUHLKE:I so move, Mr. Mayor.
Second.
MR. J. BRIGHAM:
Anyone have any questions, any comments?
MAYOR YOUNG:
Anyone in the audience here to speak on this item? All in
favor, please vote aye.
[MR. MAYS OUT]
MOTION CARRIES 9-0.
Page 8
CLERK:Item 30: Z-98-155 - Request for concurrence
with the decision of the Planning Commission to approve a
petition from the Augusta Commission per Section 35-7 of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance seeking to revert the current
zoning of HI (Heavy Industry) to Zone R-1A (One-family
Residence) for property located generally at the intersection
of Windsor Spring Road and Spirit Creek Road, and consisting
of two tracts located more specifically as follows:
(a) Property located on the east right-of-way of
Windsor Spring Road and west of the right-of-way of
Spirit Creek Road; and
(b) Property located 1,520 feet southwest of the inter-
section of the centerlines of Windsor Spring Road
and Spirit Creek Road.
MR. POWELL:So move.
Second.
MR. COLCLOUGH:
Mr. Patty, what property is this?
MR. BRIDGES:
This is Mr. Arrington's property, the old
MR. PATTY:
race track.
Is he not opposing this?
MR. BRIDGES:
I don't know why he's not here, but we--you
MR. PATTY:
remanded this back to the Planning Commission for further
consideration, which I took as a form of a postponement. And
because of the timing and not being able to do any legal
advertisement before our next meeting, we put this on the
agenda for discussion at our meeting last Monday. And the
consensus at the pre-meeting, and we put this on the floor
briefly, the consensus was that what we sent over here was
proper. While there was probably consent for B-2 on the
front, on the back, which is back behind Fairington
Subdivision and backs up to Walton Acres and some of those
other subdivisions, Mr. Arrington, through his attorney, was
seeking to see us change our recommendation from R-1A to R-1C,
which would have meant considerably smaller lots back here,
and the Planning Commission was not in favor of doing so. And
we told him that, and I think--I don't know if there was
anything specifically said about this coming up today to him,
but at the beginning of every meeting that we hold we announce
that all these items will come forward to the next Commission
meeting and we give the date. So he had ample notice, and I
think--you know, my feeling would be you could proceed to vote
on this.
Page 9
Any questions or comments? All in favor,
MAYOR YOUNG:
please vote aye.
[MR. MAYS OUT]
MOTION CARRIES 9-0.
CLERK:Item 31: Motion to approve the hiring of an
Aquatics Center Director (Recreation Specialist I) up to the
midpoint level, $35,419.00.
MR. KUHLKE:So move, Mr. Mayor.
Second.
MR. HANDY:
Where is Mr. Beck? Would you like to
MAYOR YOUNG:
speak to this, Tom?
Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, we
MR. BECK:
advertised for this position over the last couple of weeks and
we found that the kind of salary that we feel necessary for
this job will require this midpoint level to get the kind of
person we need in a facility like this, so, henceforth, we're
recommending it.
Could I hear the Administrator's opinion
MR. BRIDGES:
on that?
When salary ranges are developed, they're
MR. OLIVER:
developed from minimum to maximum, with the midpoint of the
salary range being what the average person in the job makes
across a wide representation. Mr. Beck, and I don't know
which one he's selected or is going to recommend, brought to
me two candidates that were eminently qualified for this
position. I think one of them was from Texas, if my
recollection is correct, and the other one is from Atlanta.
They have experience in running these types of facilities.
This is going to be a world-class facility, and to have that
type of facility we believe that you have to be competitive as
it relates to the pay structure. If you recall, we had asked
for some flexibility on that, and the Commission decided that
they would like to make those decisions and that's why we
brought it to you today.
And this midpoint is really--you're just
MR. BRIDGES:
saying I need flexibility to go up to that if I need to; is
that correct?
That's correct.
MR. OLIVER:
I would like to hear, Mr. Oliver, the
MR. J. BRIGHAM:
difference between this position and the marketing director at
Bush Field.
Page 10
I can't really tell you. Because when the
MR. OLIVER:
marketing director at Bush Field was gone out with--I mean, I
don't have any idea what the comparable--I mean, remember that
the bottom of the salary range is for the least qualified
individual and the top of the salary range is for the most
qualified individual. So, consequently, you could have
somebody that would be eminently qualified that may command a
higher salary and you may have somebody that's marginally
qualified who you don't, and I don't think you can make those
types of recommendations until you actually look at it. As I
say, Mr. Beck is down to two resumes, and both of those
resumes indicate the experience necessary to operate a center
of this type and to get us off on the right foot.
I seem to be a little confused about this at
MR. BEARD:
this point, and I just feel like we need a little more time to
look into this and maybe get a little more input as far as
myself. I am concerned, so I just don't feel like I can
support this at this particular time.
When is the center, Mr. Beck, scheduled to
MR. OLIVER:
open? Because you may want to explain to them the timing, and
obviously that's your decision if you'd like to postpone this,
but you may want to advise the Commission when the center is
scheduled to open and what you anticipate the time frames to
be.
The schedule of the center to open is on
MR. BECK:
time. We've had a great construction contract. It's due to
be completed April 1st. We're hoping right now tentatively to
have the grand opening around April 15th on the facility, so
getting someone on board as soon as we can is going to be very
important in getting off to the right start in the facility
and for that person to be able to become familiar with the
site prior to, and the facility, prior to the actual opening
of the facility. I would like to add that there are not many
of these natatoriums across the southeast. We're going to be
one of a very certain few across the southeast to have a
facility of this venture. And, again, I would like to
emphasize what we're trying to do is get started off on the
right foot by having a qualified person who has experience in
sports management as well as this type of facility management,
and we feel like these candidates do have that. Unfortunately,
the way the ranges--as Mr. Oliver stated, the way the ranges
were set up initially, it may have been a little low as to the
commensurate salary for this type of position. But we have
the range set as it is now, and what we are asking for is to
go to the--up to the midpoint to be able to offer the job to a
qualified person.
Page 11
Will this person also be responsible for
MAYOR YOUNG:
hiring the other staff members out there?
That's correct.
MR. BECK:
So you can't hire any other staff until
MAYOR YOUNG:
you get this person on board?
Well, obviously we would want him to be
MR. BECK:
involved. Now, there's two other full-time staff positions
that come with the facility, but this position is the one
that's going to require the most amount of experience, so
that's why it's critical.
We have a motion on the floor and a
MAYOR YOUNG:
second. All in favor, please vote aye.
MR. BEARD, MR. HANDY & MR. MAYS VOTE NO.
MR. H. BRIGHAM, MR. J. BRIGHAM & MR. COLCLOUGH ABSTAIN.
MOTION FAILS 4-3-3.
CLERK:Item 32: Consider appointment to the Augusta-
Richmond County Tax Assessor's Board (22nd Senate District)
for a four (4) year term.
(A) Mr. Herman F. Fort
(B) Mr. James B. Norris
Do we have any additional nominations? I
MAYOR YOUNG:
believe our procedure is we vote on these in the order they're
listed, so .
all in favor of Mr. Herman Fort, please vote aye
MR. J. BRIGHAM, MR. KUHLKE & MR. POWELL VOTE NO.
MR. BRIDGES, MR. COLCLOUGH & MR. SHEPARD ABSTAIN.
MOTION FAILS 4-3-3.
Mr. Fort does not have six votes, so let's
MAYOR YOUNG:
move on to the next name. The next name is Mr. Norris.
All
.
in favor of Mr. Norris, please push the green light
MR. MAYS VOTES NO; MR. BEARD & MR. HANDY ABSTAIN.
MOTION CARRIES 7-1-2.
CLERK:Item 33: Consider appointment to the Augusta-
Richmond County Tax Assessor's Board (23rd Senate District)
due to the resignation of Mr. Donald Skinner. This appoint-
ment will fill the unexpired term ending April 24, 1999, and a
new four (4) year term.
(C) Mr. Harvey Johnson
(D) Mr. Jeff Padgett
Page 12
All right. The first name listed is Mr.
MAYOR YOUNG:
Harvey Johnson.
All in favor of Mr. Harvey Johnson, please
vote aye.
MR. J. BRIGHAM & MR. KUHLKE VOTE NO.
MR. BRIDGES, MR. POWELL & MR. SHEPARD ABSTAIN.
MOTION FAILS 5-2-3.
Mr. Johnson does not have six votes. The
MAYOR YOUNG:
next name is Mr. Jeff Padgett.
All in favor of Mr. Padgett,
please vote aye.
MR. BEARD, MR. H. BRIGHAM, MR. HANDY & MR. MAYS VOTE NO.
MR. COLCLOUGH ABSTAINS.
MOTION FAILS 5-4-1.
And Mr. Padgett does not have six votes.
MAYOR YOUNG:
Is there a nomination from the floor? Madame Clerk, let's
move on to the next item then.
CLERK:Item 34: Consider appointments to the Augusta
Hospital Authority. Three (3) seats up for appointment.
(E) Ms. Susan Reed-Allen
(F) Ms. Joyceen Boyle
(G) Ms. Catherine Cato
(H) Rev. Clyde Hill
(I) Mr. Charles Lamback
(J) Mr. Bernard Starceski
(K) Ms. Syteria Townsend (added)
(L) Mr. Pat Blanchard (added)
Let me point out here you are to submit three
MR. WALL:
names for each of the three seats. Now, you can submit the
same name for multiple seats, but, I mean, nine names need to
go to the Hospital Authority and they would then pick one of
the three that you recommend. So, I mean, you can nominate
the same person for three different seats if you like, but--
So you can send three names or as many as
MAYOR YOUNG:
nine names, is that what you're saying?
That's correct. That's better stated.
MR. WALL:
All right. Well, let's start down the
MAYOR YOUNG:
list then. (E) Ms. Reed-Allen, please vote aye.
Mr. Mayor, a question here. I mean,
MR. BRIDGES:
Page 13
basically we're voting for all six, so how are we doing this?
I'm a little confused here.
Well, we have to send over three names for
MAYOR YOUNG:
each of the three vacancies, and you can send all three names
for all three seats or you can send as many as nine names,
three separate names for three separate seats.
Well, are we going to send--the first one
MR. BEARD:
actually would be for the first seat and send those three
names, and then go to the second one and the third one?
That would be my suggestion, that you do it
MR. WALL:
by seat.
Let's do it by seat then. That's fine.
MAYOR YOUNG:
We could just send everybody over if you wanted to.
That might be a good idea, Mr. Mayor. That
MR. HANDY:
might be a better good idea.
All right. Would someone like to make a
MAYOR YOUNG:
motion?
I'll make a substitute motion that we send
MR. HANDY:
all the names that are listed on this and let the Hospital
decide which one they want on this particular list.
Second.
MR. KUHLKE:
Mr. Wall, do you want to say something about
MR. WALL:
that?
Mr. Mayor, I do.
MR. J. BRIGHAM:
Well, Mr. Henry Brigham had his hand up.
MAYOR YOUNG:
What happened in this case to Item 34,
MR. H. BRIGHAM:
this person that we had added?
That would be Item (K), Mr. Brigham.
MAYOR YOUNG:
Okay. So, in that case, she should
MR. H. BRIGHAM:
appear on 34(K); is that right?
Mr. Mayor, if I might suggest, maybe the way
MR. WALL:
to approach it is are there any of the seven names that are
listed that any Commissioner wants to remove from the list and
maybe approach it from that standpoint, and then the other
remaining names would be submitted.
Page 14
I would also like to--and this name is
MR. J. BRIGHAM:
not on the list, but I would like to also nominate Mr. Pat
Blanchard, who is already on this board.
Okay. So (L) on Number 34 would be Mr.
MAYOR YOUNG:
Pat Blanchard. If someone wants to nominate someone else,
we'll have nine names. That would take care of it.
Mr. Mayor, I'll yield to you. You can
MR. HANDY:
nominate somebody if you'd like to use my position. Do you
know someone you'd like to put on there?
I'll nominate Freddie Handy to this.
MAYOR YOUNG:
Oh, no. No, no. Someone else. That'll be
MR. HANDY:
a conflict if I get on this. I mean, since it's open and
since we need two more names, that'll eliminate all of this.
Well, why don't we just send over the
MAYOR YOUNG:
names we have then.
Do we have a motion we send over the
names we have on the list?
.
MR. SHEPARD:So move
Second.
MR. HANDY:
All in favor, vote aye.
MAYOR YOUNG:
MOTION CARRIES 10-0.
CLERK:Item 35: Consider appointments to Sheriff's
Merit Board. Three (3) members from the Augusta Commission to
be appointed.
(K) Mr. Robert J. Buchwitz
(L) Mr. Carmie Bryant
(M) Mr. Bernard Harper
(N) Mr. Robert Osborne
(O) Mr. Richard Muns
(P) Mr. Tom Perry
(Q) Mr. Chuck Stevens
(R) Ms. Helen Williams
(S) Mr. George Davis (added)
Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to do
MR. HANDY:
the same we did for--
Mr. Handy, just a moment. We also need
MAYOR YOUNG:
the name of George Davis.
Page 15
You have to pick three, I believe, Mr.
MR. OLIVER:
Handy, on this one.
We have to do the picking on this one.
MAYOR YOUNG:
Let's just go down the list.
MR. BRIDGES:
Well, I mean, I don't even know part of
MR. HANDY:
these people on this list.
Well, that's why you can abstain.
MR. KUHLKE:
No, that's why I need to vote.
MR. HANDY:
MR. KUHLKE:Mr. Mayor, let me take it in a group. I'd
like to make a motion that we appoint Mr. Robert Osborne, Mr.
Richard Muns, and Mr. Tom Perry, and we'll see whether they
get a vote or not.
I'll second that.
MR. J. BRIGHAM:
All right. All in favor of Mr. Osborne,
MAYOR YOUNG:
Mr. Muns, and Mr. Perry as a group, please vote aye.
[VOTE COUNT UNCERTAIN]
MOTION FAILS.
MR. BRIDGES:Mr. Mayor, I'll follow in the same vein
and recommend Mr. Carmie Bryant, Mr. Tom Perry, and Mr. Chuck
Stevens.
Mr. Bryant, Mr. Perry, and Mr. Stevens.
MAYOR YOUNG:
All in favor of Mr. Bryant, Mr. Perry, and Mr. Stevens, please
vote aye.
[VOTE COUNT UNCERTAIN]
MOTION FAILS.
Mr. Mayor, I think we'd be better off
MR. OLIVER:
taking these perhaps one at a time.
We will go down the list. Item (K) under
MAYOR YOUNG:
Item 35, Mr. Robert Buchwitz.
All in favor of Mr. Buchwitz,
.
please vote aye
MR. J. BRIGHAM & MR. KUHLKE VOTE NO.
MR. H. BRIGHAM, MR. COLCLOUGH, MR. HANDY & MR. MAYS ABSTAIN.
MOTION FAILS 4-2-4.
Page 16
Let's go to the next name: .
MAYOR YOUNG:Carmie Bryant
MR. J. BRIGHAM & MR. KUHLKE VOTE NO.
MR. H. BRIGHAM & MR. SHEPARD ABSTAIN.
MOTION CARRIES 6-2-2.
Mr. Carmie Bryant will be the first of the
MAYOR YOUNG:
three chosen. Now, Item (M), Mr. Bernard Harper.
All in
.
favor of Mr. Harper
MR. J. BRIGHAM, MR. KUHLKE & MR. SHEPARD VOTE NO.
MR. BRIDGES & MR. HANDY ABSTAIN.
MOTION FAILS 5-3-2.
Let's move on to Item (M), Mr. Robert
MAYOR YOUNG:
Osborne.
All in favor of Mr. Osborne, please vote aye.
MR. COLCLOUGH VOTES NO; MR. BEARD, MR. BRIDGES, MR. HANDY,
MR. MAYS & MR. POWELL ABSTAIN.
MOTION FAILS 4-1-5.
Mr. Osborne gets four votes. This is very
MAYOR YOUNG:
much like it's done in England, I'm sure. All right, let's go
on to Item (O) under 35, Mr. Richard Muns.
All in favor of
.
Mr. Richard Muns
MR. BRIDGES, MR. MAYS & MR. POWELL ABSTAIN.
MOTION CARRIES 7-3.
Mr. Muns gets six votes. Item (P), Mr.
MAYOR YOUNG:
Tom Perry. .
Please vote now for Mr. Perry
MR. SHEPARD VOTES NO; MR. COLCLOUGH & MR. POWELL ABSTAIN.
MOTION CARRIES 7-1-2.
And Mr. Perry gets six votes.
MAYOR YOUNG:
I believe that gives you three, Mr. Mayor.
MR. OLIVER:
Mr. Bryant, Mr. Muns, and Mr. Perry.
MAYOR YOUNG:
CLERK:Item 36: Consider appointments to the Richmond
County Hospital Authority.
At-Large Position Jewish Faith Position
Page 17
Mr. William E. Johnson Mr. Brian J. Marks
Mr. Levi W. Hill, IV Mr. Haskell D. Toporek
Mr. Hugh Hamilton Mr. Stephen E. Brett
We need to choose one from each group; is
MAYOR YOUNG:
that correct?
Yes. Here the Hospital Authority submits
MR. WALL:
three names and you pick one of the three, and it depends on
when the date of the creation--whether it was before or after
'64 is the methodology.
We'll go first with the at-large position.
MAYOR YOUNG:
.
All in favor of Mr. William E. Johnson, please vote aye
MR. KUHLKE VOTES NO; MR. BEARD, MR. BRIDGES, MR. J. BRIGHAM,
MR. HANDY, MR. MAYS & MR. SHEPARD ABSTAIN.
MOTION FAILS 3-1-6.
All right. Next,
MAYOR YOUNG:Mr. Levi W. Hill IV,
.
please vote aye
MR. BEARD, MR. COLCLOUGH, MR. HANDY, MR. MAYS &
MR. SHEPARD ABSTAIN.
MOTION FAILS 5-5.
.
MAYOR YOUNG:Mr. Hugh Hamilton, please vote aye
MR. BEARD, MR. BRIDGES, MR. HANDY, MR. KUHLKE, MR. MAYS
& MR. POWELL ABSTAIN.
MOTION FAILS 4-6.
Mr. Mayor, I can end this. I can change my
MR. HANDY:
vote if we go back to the one that had five votes.
Mr. Hill?
MAYOR YOUNG:
That'll be fine.
MR. HANDY:
All right.
MAYOR YOUNG:Mr. Handy votes for Mr. Hill
. Thank you, Mr. Handy.
then, so that gives Mr. Hill six votes
Thank you. We need to get this over with.
MR. HANDY:
Now let's take the next position.
MAYOR YOUNG:All in
.
favor of Mr. Brian Marks, please vote aye
It would help me, Mr. Mayor, if you don't
MR. HANDY:
mind, is any of these people already on there?
Page 18
I cannot answer that.
MAYOR YOUNG:
Jim, do you know that?
MR. HANDY:
I didn't bring my book with me, I can't
MR. WALL:
answer that. I'm sorry.
Okay. Because I'm lost with these names
MR. HANDY:
today.
Mr. Johnson was eligible for reappointment,
MR. OLIVER:
according to the letter. And Mr. Marks currently serves in
the Jewish Faith position, again according to the letter from
University Hospital.
Okay. Thank you.
MR. HANDY:
We were voting on Mr. Marks, if the
MAYOR YOUNG:
Commissioners would please complete their votes.
MR. BRIDGES, MR. H. BRIGHAM, MR. COLCLOUGH, MR. POWELL
& MR. SHEPARD ABSTAIN.
MOTION FAILS 5-5.
Mr. Marks has five votes.
MAYOR YOUNG:The next is Mr.
.
Haskell D. Toporek, please vote aye
MR. BRIDGES, MR. MAYS, MR. POWELL & MR. SHEPARD ABSTAIN.
MOTION CARRIES 6-4.
Thank you, Mr. Handy. Mr. Toporek gets
MAYOR YOUNG:
six votes, so that ends it. Madame Clerk?
CLERK:Item 38: Motion to approve pass-through grant
award to AKA Sorority for the renovations of the John M. Tutt
House - final payment (closeout) in the amount of $2,000.00
from the Department of Community Affairs.
And I would ask that that be done subject
MR. OLIVER:
to us doing a final audit of the use of those funds. I would
note that that grant was from 1994, which was some time ago,
and I just want to make sure that those funds are spent
appropriately--or have been spent appropriately.
.
MR. BEARD:I so move
Second.
MR. H. BRIGHAM:
Page 19
Mr. Mayor, I don't have any problem with Mr.
MR. MAYS:
Oliver's attachment, but there is no expiration date with
reference to that pass-through, is there?
Is there an expiration date, Mr. Oliver?
MAYOR YOUNG:
This grant went directly to the Clerk's
MR. OLIVER:
Office. I mean, Mr. Mays, we would still request the money
from the state, we would just hold the money until we were
assured that the funds have been spent in accordance with the
grant. The grant was actually signed--I think it was 1994 I
read. But we would request the funds from the state. I can't
tell you from--I don't see anything, glancing at it, that
provides for a limitation of time.
My only problem with it--and not that we
MR. MAYS:
shouldn't be prudent and know where our money goes, and I'm
going to talk about that in Item 42, but I think if we haven't
done it since '94 and the interest hadn't been in it--and I'm
not saying don't do it, but I think if it's cleared through
DCA's channels--and you got people sitting in a state agency
and you got representatives or senators that sponsored it.
You know, this is not the first time when we've, quite
frankly, messed around with small bits of money coming through
on pass-through grants. And I've seen us handle six and seven
figures of money, and that's prior to your coming, Mr. Mayor,
where we've not had that kind of hassle, and then we get into
$2,000. It just seems like, you know, at times we get into
the attention-drawing business of giving the impression of
some things that may not be present, you know, when they don't
have to be, and that's my only reason for knowing whether or
not there was an expiration date on it.
I was just going to say that the young
MR. H. BRIGHAM:
ladies who handle these funds are here, and I'm sure that they
will get us the necessary documents to clear themselves as far
as this is concerned. I mean, I don't mean today, but I'm
sure that they can present us with it.
We are the grantees, so therefore we are
MR. OLIVER:
responsible for the expenditure of the funds.
My only comment is we're responsible for a
MR. MAYS:
lot of funds, but I just see us sometimes being picky about
some and then not so concerned about others. That's the only
comment I'll make. And if it means voting yes to get the
little measly $2,000 through, I'll do that.
I'll give you that chance right now. All
MAYOR YOUNG:
in favor, please vote aye.
Page 20
MOTION CARRIES 10-0.
CLERK:Item 39: Endorse Resolution of the Canal
Authority to increase membership.
.
MR. KUHLKE:So move
Second.
MR. HANDY:
Any discussion? All in favor, please vote
MAYOR YOUNG:
aye.
MOTION CARRIES 10-0.
Item 40: Endorse Resolution of the Augusta
CLERK:
Ports Authority to increase membership.
.
MR. HANDY:So move
Second.
MR. BRIDGES:
All in favor?
MAYOR YOUNG:
MOTION CARRIES 10-0.
CLERK:Item 41: Motion to accept FAA/AIP Grant 3-13-
0011-19 in the amount of $683,074 and associated LPA Work
Authorization #6 Design Development of Terminal Renovations-
Bush Field Airport in the amount of $1,166,905 and authorize
LPA to initiate only Phase I of Work Authorization #6 in the
amount of $594,575.00.
So move.
MR. HANDY:
Second.
MR. POWELL:
Mr. Oliver, you had recommended a--
MAYOR YOUNG:
I recommend the alternative motion that's
MR. OLIVER:
put in there. The reason that I believe this, I think it's
essential that the airline agreements--the substance of the
airline agreements be agreed to prior to going forward. My
understanding from Mr. McDill is that we have to encumber the
contract to get the grant. We can do this. However, without
those airline agreements in place, we place this Commission
and this community at risk that those agreements either may
not reach fruition or that the agreements may not have the
terms that are in the best interest of the community.
Page 21
Would someone like to offer a substitute
MAYOR YOUNG:
motion?
I'll just go ahead on and amend my motion
MR. HANDY:
and accept that. You don't have to make a substitute motion,
just add it into my motion.
Well, does the alternative form of the
MR. SHEPARD:
motion make it consistent with the action we took at the
special meeting last week?
Yes, sir, it is.
MR. OLIVER:
Mr. McDill, did you want to address the
MAYOR YOUNG:
Commission on this?
Yes, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Oliver and I had this
MR. McDILL:
discussion previously, that without the benefit of the
contract with LPA--and we do have an LPA representative here
today who can speak in more detail to this. But without the
benefit of that contract, we don't need the grant. The grant
is for the express purpose of doing the design development, at
least the first phase of the design development. The first
phase of the design development is intended to put us in a
position where we can have in hand the information that we
need to arrange a contract with the airlines. Without the
benefit of that information, I'm afraid we're not in a
position to progress the contract to that point.
I don't have any objection, Mr. Mayor, to
MR. OLIVER:
spending some minor sum of money to assist in those
negotiations, but it's clearly unnecessary to spend $683,000
to do that. Because without those airline agreements in
place, the carriers at the airport potentially hold us hostage
to this deal.
Any Commissioners have any questions?
MAYOR YOUNG:
I spoke with Mr. Skinner this morning. I
MR. KUHLKE:
tried to reach you, Mr. McDill, and your line was busy. But
let me remind the Commissioners of this, and this is a concern
that I have as a Commissioner. What we passed last week was
the inducement of a bond issue. At that meeting we asked you
to come back with a contract for the engineering work in
conjunction with an agreement with the airlines. And the
reason for that was a protection issue, as far as I was
concerned, that we wanted to be assured that we were going to
be protected if we did the work and we got the money from the
airlines. The fear that I have as a Commissioner and a
citizen of Augusta is this: that if we proceed immediately
Page 22
with the design work and we spend that amount of money, and
for some unknown reason we have a difficulty with the airlines
coming up with an agreement and we do not issue bonds, we're
going to look very, very foolish. And I don't think that
that's the right approach to take. However, I understand in
being able to deal with the airlines you may need to get a
little bit more specific, and the information that you gave us
in the special session gave us some cost breakdowns, gave us
some scheduling and things like that.
I would prefer to see this body approve the grant
application, but possibly you coming back to us with a
schedule of how your work would be done, what you need to do
first possibly to diligently do your negotiations with the
airlines, and that kind of information rather than looking at
the bar chart I think you had on your presentation last week.
I don't have anything in my hands to tell me what the value of
work in each phase is, so I'm going to have to vote for the
motion that's on the floor. And I know I'm being windy, Mr.
Mayor, but I wanted--I think it's important for you to know
that we are supportive of the program, but technically we've
got a little problem right now and we've got to figure out how
to work that out. So I'm assuming just in simple terms that
we are approving the grant, but we're asking you to defer on
the contract until some details can be presented to us that
makes a little more sense, that will give you some latitude to
move ahead with the airlines.
My understanding, Mr. McDill, is that the
MR. OLIVER:
contract needs to be encumbered before--because we will not
meet again till then. And I think, Mr. Kuhlke, that the
motion that I put in the background provides for the grant
agreement, authorization for the contract, with no
authorization for any phase until airline agreements are
executed or formal agreements reached on any funds transfer
and payments in lieu of taxes. And I think that addresses
your issues, doesn't it, Mr. McDill, better than to just
approve the grant?
Well, it may perhaps address it better than
MR. McDILL:
just approving the grant, but the grant is for the express
purpose of phase one of the LPA contract. Again, we don't
need one without the other.
Al, in the agenda book you have an outline,
MR. KUHLKE:
I think, of the work that you want to get done, and it appears
to me that even though it may be in phase one, there are a
number of segments of work that have to take place. It's my
understanding that if we approve this and we got to the point
of where you stopped in phase one, that the liability to the
taxpayers of this community would be around $100,000 less.
You would probably go with long-term parking, which might
Page 23
reduce that to about $40,000. And I think what we would be
doing here is authorizing something and we don't really know
what the end result is going to be. And I think, frankly, if
we did that and the worst-case scenario came about, we would
be crucified, and rightly so.
You know, I remind you again this is--
MR. McDILL:
neither the grant nor the LPA contract is funded by taxpayer
contributions.
But, Al, it is funded by taxpayers.
MR. KUHLKE:
It came from an eight percent ticket tax on
MR. McDILL:
airline ticket sales that goes into an aviation trust fund
that is appropriated back to airports on the basis of
passengers that flow through the airport. If we don't use
these funds, they will go to another airport in another city.
The deadline on this for both the contract and the grant is
for March 1.
If we approve the grant and approve the
MR. KUHLKE:
contract, with the contract being deferred until you can get
the agreement with the airlines back to us, would that be what
you wanted to do?
I don't see how it would, Commissioner, in
MR. McDILL:
that the airlines have asked us to go further with the design
to give them hard numbers on what the project is going to
cost.
I was just going to ask Mr. McDill if--you
MR. BEARD:
know, I think all of us would like to see something worked out
on this. Am I to understand that you cannot get the contract
with the airlines if we don't approve the first part of this
motion today?
Phase one of the LPA contract. That gives
MR. McDILL:
me the information that the airlines have requested to
complete the negotiations. Now, I cannot assure you that
we're going to come to terms with the airlines. It may be
that we complete this phase of the design and put it on the
shelf--plans on the shelf until such time that we can come to
terms. The money is not wasted.
Approving the grant is fine, but if we
MR. SKINNER:
don't have a contract to support the use of the funds, the FAA
is not going to give us the money. And I don't know whether a
couple of you saw--or any of you saw a couple of weeks ago in
the Augusta Chronicle, our good president is suggesting that
they transfer six billion dollars from the AIP fund to the
general fund of the United States. If that happens and we
Page 24
lose $683,000--I can understand where Mr. Kuhlke is concerned
about if we don't receive for this project he'll get a lot of
complaints from the community. But I can tell you, if we give
away $683,000 that belongs to us, that belongs to Bush Field,
not paid for one dime by the taxpayers of Richmond County,
then we're going to have egg on our face. And we've worked on
this project for years, not just months. We presented this a
year and a half ago and we had tentative, I'd say, approval to
proceed with it. We're at the point right now that I think if
you vote this down today, you have killed the project for Bush
Field.
Now, you have asked us to take you into all of our
decision-making, and I have confidence in you folks that after
all we've done at Bush Field, that you're going to support us
and allow us to proceed with this contract with LPA.
Otherwise, forget it and we'll plant cotton out there where Al
McDill has put steel and airplanes. We'll give up this
airport if we don't go ahead now and proceed with this
building program. There's no way that we can continue to
operate forever as an airport as we are doing now. We've
looked at it, we've gotten the best legal and technical advice
we could get, we've had support almost completely from the
Bush Field Aviation Commission, and I see no reason why we
should delay this project. Augusta is the second market in
the state of Georgia, and if any of you are concerned that
airlines aren't going to fly into this market, you're wrong.
Delta might not, ASA might not, but somebody is going to fly
into this market. We're not going to give up air service in
Augusta. So I would encourage you to vote for the grant and
allow us to assign the phase one contract with LPA.
Otherwise, you might as well kill it.
There is a date certain by which you have
MAYOR YOUNG:
to accept this?
March the 1st.
MR. McDILL:
March 1st. Is there a date certain at
MAYOR YOUNG:
which time this grant expires after you accept it?
March the 1st. We don't get it unless we
MR. McDILL:
can get approval.
I don't understand that. If the
MAYOR YOUNG:
Commission approves the receipt of the grant before March 1st,
then is there some time table or constraints on how long you
have to spend the grant money?
No.
MR. McDILL:
The funds just have to be encumbered, as I
MR. OLIVER:
Page 25
understand it, by March the 1st. So you can accept the grant,
encumber the funds, but authorize no expenditure. My concern
is that Delta or whoever the airline is will use as a
negotiating strategy when this comes back the fact that they
don't want any transfers between the two Aviation Commissions
or any payments in lieu of taxes, and that they will preclude
those through the use of the agreement. And I believe that
issue should be addressed head up instead of waiting for that
issue to be addressed, you know, four to six months from now.
Gentleman, I think that is the issue
MR. SKINNER:
that's hanging up this thing right now. We have been told to
transfer funds, and the whole issue at Bush Field is hung up
because we can't decide what to do about the General Aviation
airport. This is something that--I just don't feel that Bush
Field growth should be prohibited simply because we can't
transfer money. And I think if it's decided that it's legally
done, if the AIP funds are granted to Daniel Field and not
Bush Field revenue, then I think that's something that has to
be worked out. But to hold up a building program--and I'm
glad to hear the Administrator bringing that up. I wondered
what's the hangup on this thing. He just answered--he just
told you what the hangup is. And our good Mayor this morning
had a story in the paper about two million dollars. That two
million dollars had nothing to do with Daniel Field, that was
a transfer of money from Bush Field to the General Fund. I
got a call that said our mayor is in Salt Lake City and he has
told the airport director to transfer two million dollars. I
said transfer the two million dollars and they'll pay it back
next week. That was not for something other than a transfer
of money. Now, unfortunately, we had to get the FAA involved
to get our money back. But I just can't see us hanging up a
commercial airport where the transportation depending on the
entire community and all the industrial development and
everything else and transferring a few dollars to the General
Aviation airport. That is not fair to the people that fly.
Mr. Oliver said he believes that people that use airplanes
should pay for it. I agree with that. People that use
airplanes at Daniel Field should pay for it, too. I would
hope that you consider this without tying this up with
transferring funds.
Mr. Mayor, I would ask Mr. Skinner if in
MR. SHEPARD:
the interim from the special meeting, if the Augusta Aviation
Commission has expressed itself on one of these two policy
alternatives, the one you are advocating today or the one the
Administrator is advocating. Has either of these or both been
put before them for a vote for the full commission? I know
you're the chairman, sir, but has the commission expressed
itself?
Page 26
Mr. Shepard, the reason we did not, I had
MR. SKINNER:
a call from the Mayor, two Commissioners, the City Attorney,
and the City Administrator, said I would appreciate if you
wouldn't vote at Bush Field for this project, you're getting
out in front of us. We came to a meeting in the Mayor's
Office, and we held up the vote on this whole project till we
could meet with you folks, and we did that last Monday. And
now we thought we were go and we're going to lose this money,
$680,000. I would have encumbered it anyway. We've got a
professional man to deal with the airlines--
Mr. Skinner, I think we have a difference
MR. SHEPARD:
of professional opinion. I think it's our Administrator's
opinion, and is it not our lawyer's opinion, that the
alternative resolution which has been proposed by Mr. Handy,
which is in our book at page two, is a sufficient encumbrance
of this money?
I think Mr. McDill has agreed with that,
MR. OLIVER:
that we have encumbered the money. What this would require is
before any work authorizations it would contractually obligate
us, and then the work authorizations would be done. And as
Mr. Kuhlke previously said, it would then be a matter of
deciding what the bite of the apple would be. But I totally
agree that the two issues that are before us are what Mr.
Skinner alluded to, and I just think that should be dealt with
now.
And, Mr. Shepard, I'm in agreement with that.
MR. WALL:
And if I understand Mr. Kuhlke's comments--and this is
something that Mr. McDill and Mr. Harrell and I had a lengthy
discussion this morning. If this passes in the form that it's
in, then I think it's incumbent upon us to come forward with a
schedule of work that can be done under the LPA contract that
would parallel the negotiations with the airlines so that, you
know, we get the information--have the information available
that is needed by the airlines. Mr. McDill points out and Mr.
Harrell has made the point that their belief is the airlines
are going to need all of the information in order to reach the
airline agreements, and that may be the case. But obviously
there are a number of issues that have got to be resolved, not
the least of which is the transfer of money and the payment in
lieu of taxes, and, you know, before we--I mean, I hear some
of you saying before we spend five or six hundred thousand
dollars designing something that may not be built, let's cross
that bridge first. Let's reach a decision, either we're going
to have a transfer of funds or we're not going to have a
transfer of funds or going to limit the transfer of funds or
what we're going to do. And I think that that's something
that hopefully can be met head on in the initial discussions
with the airlines and resolve it one way or the other.
Page 27
Well, let's move along here. Does anyone
MAYOR YOUNG:
have any questions or any new information to present?
Yes, Mr. Mayor. If we can set the two
MR. MAYS:
airport situations aside for just a moment--
Well, that is not part of the motion, Mr.
MAYOR YOUNG:
Mays.
It came up in the discussion, I'm not fixing
MR. MAYS:
to delve into that. What I was going to ask Mr. Wall--and I
want to say publicly that I think doing this administration
relationship with agencies, even ones that our authorities and
boards meet with periodically, you know, or even in some cases
on a daily basis, I think that under your administration we
probably will have a more visible operation in doing that, and
I think that's good. But in the absence of that type
situation--I'm going to say this in defense of the Airport
Commission, and that may sound somewhat surprising, but I'm
going to say it. The fact that you've had a commission to
basically deal with some entities, whether it's FAA, whether
it's Delta Airlines or anybody else, you're basically in some
cases a trust factor situation. Maybe I'm making a wrong
comparison, but [inaudible] building a jail and dealing with
COPS operation situation of getting that money. We went
through a zillion hoops, changed locations, and the final
results were it came out a heck of a lot better. We ended up
on free property owned by the state, we got it done two
million dollars cheaper, and we moved in five months ahead of
time.
I brought that back to say this in reference to the fear
of the bond money: If we're not doing direct negotiations
with the airlines, we've got to depend at some point on people
that you do trust. Now, if we're going to change that
formula--and I don't think we've ever been restricted from
having a relationship with Delta or calling upon them. But
Commission, former mayor, whatever, we've not done that. I
think if they're telling us that that hampers where we're
going with the project, I don't think we're going to get so
far out in front with any public monies that they're going to
be spent to a point that--let's say they don't come. You're
going to have to make changes in that airport. You're going
to have to make improvements in it. And I think if we want to
do some other outside talking or if we want to go with Al and
we want to go with Mr. Skinner and deal with Delta on a
different basis, that's fine. But I think in some parts of
negotiation the other side has certain parameters that it
wants you to do as a city. And if your commission is telling
you that won't work, if somebody else has got a better
argument and saying that the money is going to disappear if
Page 28
you get out on a bond option--it didn't disappear when we got
our COPS. It sat there until we were ready to move in a new
jail, in a new location, $20 million cheaper, that the
Commission at that time for the most part didn't want to
change. But we did it, and we got it done, and for the most
part, in spite of all the criticism that we took doing it, the
end result was we did what was best. But we still moved on
monies at that time on how we were going to build it. The
funds were there and we proceeded in that manner, they were
just held until we decided to move on.
But if I'm understanding my Airport Commission Chairman
and our Director to say that you are going to run into a major
problem in dealing with that, I think the major decision we're
going to have to make is do we want to take that risk. Are we
going to move forward progressively and trust them or are we
going to go in and say, well, we don't trust you, we want to
do the negotiation with Delta at this point? And then I think
that sends a bad message. I don't think you need to have it
where you don't have a relationship with them, but I think at
this stage in this game you need to decide whether you're
going to go ahead and move forward or whether or not you're
going to go ahead on and you're going to run the darn airport
and you're going to drop the commission. And I think you need
to move forward with it. I think there are ways of protecting
that money, being able to secure the grant monies and still be
able to move forward with the project, and I hope that we put
a different motion on the floor.
Gentlemen, you know, we're pushing Augusta
MR. POWELL:
forward and we're trying to--the Mayor has got a plan that he
wants to clean up Augusta, we've got many plans out there that
we want to open Augusta's gateways and make them more
beautiful. What attracts more people or what do more people
come through a gateway than at that airport? And I support
the airport 100 percent and the Airport Authority on this
project. I think that we need to move Augusta forward, and
that airport is one place that we need to do it. Look, I
haven't agreed with everything that the airport has done. I
didn't agree with the way the name was changed. But I'm
willing to compromise and move forward for the good of the
people, and I think that's what we need to do. And I call for
the question, Mr. Mayor.
The question has been called. Is there
MAYOR YOUNG:
any objection?
Mr. Mayor, do I understand that there's
MR. BRIDGES:
only one motion on the floor?
I think it's the alternate in the book.
MR. OLIVER:
Page 29
Mr. Powell, thank you for calling the
MAYOR YOUNG:
question, because we need to move ahead with a vote on the
main motion. And we'll restate that motion for you, Mr.
Bridges. Is there any objection? Would you restate the
motion, please, for Mr. Bridges?
Yes, sir.
CLERK:The motion is to approve the FAA
grant in the amount of $683,074 and associated work
authorization #6 with LPA for design development of terminal
renovations at Bush Field Airport in the amount of $1,166,905,
with no authorization for any phase until airline agreements
are executed or a formal agreement is reached on any fund
.
transfers and payments in lieu of taxes
All in favor of the motion, please vote
MAYOR YOUNG:
aye.
MR. BEARD, MR. J. BRIGHAM & MR. MAYS VOTE NO.
MR. POWELL ABSTAINS.
MOTION CARRIES 6-3-1.
CLERK:Item 42: Discuss methodology in granting salary
increases and other related matters.
The floor is open for discussion, I guess.
MAYOR YOUNG:
Mr. Mayor, I guess I'm the villain in this
MR. MAYS:
deal. Let me say publicly I am not--I know my Mayor doesn't
like surprises, but we haven't put our heads together on any
type of cahoots campaign or [inaudible]. This is strictly
something that I placed on there. I'm not asking for a motion
today on reversals of anything. I wouldn't do that. But I
want to say that I'm a little bit disturbed with a pattern
that I see possibly developing in reference to what and how we
are doing with positions and jobs period. Now, I realize
you've got to look at some things on an individual basis and
handle each case accordingly. I'm going to be a little
critical, and I want folk to know I'm going to be direct in my
criticism and I'm still going to be friends with them. I've
supported both of them and still do. But I made a joke while
I was laying in the bed in Minnesota that some folk on this
Commission must have thought I was going to die and wasn't
coming back here by the vote that was taken while I was in the
hospital.
Now, I don't see anywhere in the minutes I've researched
from that particular meeting that y'all had--and we talk about
budgets, we talked about the prudency of them, we've talked
about where we didn't have money, how $12,000 here was going
to make or break us or a few thousand dollars was going to
help break us. And I come back--well, before I got back I'm
Page 30
hearing that you all--and I'm going to say this in a friendly
way to both Mr. Wall and to Mr. Oliver, that the way in which
that salary was raised in terms of that hourly rate, I don't
think--and it may have been proper and it may have been legal,
but I don't think in the course of a budget year that we've
been through--for you all to get the type of vote of
confidence that you got--and I voted for you, ain't taking
that vote back. I like both of you and I like the job you're
doing. But we approved the Administrator's budget prior--his
contract prior to the budget being voted on. We had given Mr.
Wall a vote of confidence unanimously. And then we come back
and raise the salary. Basically presented it in a legal
session, y'all come back out on the floor, y'all vote on it,
and I don't see any objections. I don't see where anybody
raised one iota about how we're going to deal with that with
the money.
Now, I realize we have to pay legal claims. I've worked
with more governmental lawyers than anybody sitting in this
room. We've never refused to pay a case. They've always been
paid whether it's from Sam Sibley--or Sam Maguire, Bob Daniel,
or anybody else we've had, Stan Jackson, Ken Daniel, and Jim
Wall. But yet we've had salaries that have been pending.
We've had folk that have had to go through the hot fire of
HR's Personnel Board to raise holy hell about getting them
equalized or what they needed to do. The Administrator has
had strong opinions, as he should. I also thought my
Administrator ought to have had strong opinions in reference
to your bringing this in, Jim, in the manner in which it was
done. Now, if I missed something, I stand to apologize to
everybody. But I've been searching these records, and I guess
this is one reason I'm going to give strong support of keeping
verbatim minutes, because if we didn't have them I'd have to
go get somebody to pull a tape for me and tell me what it had
on it. But I don't think that that was the spirit. If one
person is handling legal, one person handling finance, to turn
around and do that and then nobody has any discussion on it
whatsoever.
Now, you may say going from $85 to $100--and it might
have been justified. Might have been thoroughly justified.
But it ought to have been put out in the same type of rate of
a request of where everybody knows what ever other department
person's salary is going to be out there. They're going to
have to come up on an agenda, it's going to have to be acted
on, and I just don't think that was the proper way that that
should have been done. Now, I'm not going to put no vote out
here to reverse anything. I don't even think that the way
we've been doing some things at the--I won't use the word for
it--
Mr. Mays, I don't mean to be rude and
MAYOR YOUNG:
interrupt you, but the rules of the Commission give you two
Page 31
minutes to discuss an issue and you've gone five, and if you
could wrap up your comments.
I'm going to wrap it up without a motion, Mr.
MR. MAYS:
Mayor. I'm going to say it real frankly: I don't think the
testosterone level of this Commission is that high that it
would even jump on the Attorney about it, if I can wrap it up
in that manner to say that. But I just want it on the record,
on a verbatim record, that I hope this Commission will have
that level not to switch, that we do the things--that we
handle every employee, including the Attorney and including
the Administrator, to the same level of scrutiny basically at
the end of a day. And you have preached, Mr. Mayor, about
having the open government, of bringing these things to the
people and of doing it. I think this involves us with
everything from the circulation of how we do letters--there
are a lot of things--and I can put it on again next week for
two more minutes. But I think at some point--if we're going
to be above-board, let's be above-board with everybody's
business. It shouldn't be dealt with back there and come out
in here and then nobody have anything to say about it,
including the person who hands me my budget.
And that was a wrong way of doing that. Both of you are
still my friends, you've still got my vote. I'm not going to
put one down here to reverse it, but that was as wrong as two
left shoes to handle that business of the city in that manner
and to do a raise like you did it. And we've still got folks
out here hustling--that have to go through hell to be
recognized. And that was one of the reasons, Mr. Mayor, that
I objected to what we did with the midpoint level of what we
had to deal with today. We've got folk that have made
contributions to this city, who show us how we save money, how
they improve their departments, and yet we give more to
recruits than we do to people that are proving their worth.
This is not the NBA nor the NFL. I don't think we ought to
get into signing bonuses. Negotiate a little bit and get
somebody that will take the job that may come in for less.
And if we're going to start midpoint with everybody we take
in, then let's go back to the people who have proven their
worth and deal with some of their midpoints and the way that
they produce. And I'm sorry for taking up so much time, but I
wanted that as a part of this record because it was wrong that
day y'all did it and it's still wrong.
Mr. Mayor, I call for the question. And
MR. HANDY:
then if Mr. Mays wants to add it next week, let him get two
minutes then.
Well, I've already yielded your two
MAYOR YOUNG:
minutes to Mr. Mays and Mr. Powell's two minutes. We have no
motion on the floor for any discussion.
Page 32
No motion.
MR. MAYS:
While we're in discussion, we had an
MR. J. BRIGHAM:
ordinance brought forward at the end of December about the
salary ranges for the airport officials. We want to have a
discussion with the airport people. They've been here twice
and it's never took place. I would either like that
discussion brought forward or either I would like to have that
ordinance put back on the agenda.
You may so request it for the agenda of
MAYOR YOUNG:
the next Commission meeting. Any other comments or
discussion? Mr. Wall, you're next on the agenda.
Yes, sir.
MR. WALL:I've got one workers'
compensation, one condemnation matter, and another legal
matter that I need to take up with you in legal session.
MR. HANDY:So move.
Second.
MR. SHEPARD:
All in favor--I'm sorry, you had some
MAYOR YOUNG:
discussion, Mr. Beard?
Didn't we have an addition to--
MR. BEARD:
Yes, you did have some addendums.
MR. WALL:
Don't we need to take care of those? Some
MR. BEARD:
of these people are waiting on them.
All right, let's go ahead and do the
MAYOR YOUNG:
addendums.
CLERK:Item Number 3 on the addendum agenda is a motion
to approve Underground Right-of-Way Permit to Qwest
Communications Corporation for installation of 5,950 feet of
.
fiber optic cable on public right-of-way
.
MR. HANDY:So move
Second. And, Mr. Mayor, I'd like to
MR. SHEPARD:
discuss that item.
I would ask that the maker of the motion
entertain an amendment that the Administrator and the City
Attorney and the Public Works folks explore the opportunity
when this cable goes down Sixth Street to include signaling
It looks like the fiber optic
wire for the railroad tracks.
traffic will be about the only thing that moves down Sixth
Street without obstruction. So, Mr. Handy, I recommend that
Page 33
amendment to you.
You have it.
MR. HANDY:
Thank you.
MR. SHEPARD:
Any other discussion on this? All in
MAYOR YOUNG:
favor, please vote aye.
MOTION CARRIES 10-0.
CLERK:Item Number 4 is a motion to approve grant
application to the Children and Youth Coordinating Council to
be implemented by CSRA Transitional Center, Inc., with any
match to be made by CSRA Transitional Center, Inc.
And the audit would be performed by them
MR. OLIVER:
also and they would be responsible for paying for it.
MR. HANDY:So move.
Second.
MR. H. BRIGHAM:
All in favor?
MAYOR YOUNG:
MOTION CARRIES 10-0.
Mr. Mayor, a point of information. You
MR. POWELL:
know, I'm kind of slow and I wasn't keeping up very well, I
guess, but what happened to Item Number 37?
That was deferred until a future meeting.
MAYOR YOUNG:
The homeowners wanted some additional time to prepare their
comments.
It was postponed at the beginning of the
MR. WALL:
meeting.
Okay.
MAYOR YOUNG:We had a motion and a second to go
All in
into executive session that's still on the floor.
favor, please vote aye.
MOTION CARRIES 10-0.
[LEGAL MEETING]
MR. WALL:Mr. Mayor, I have three items I would like to
One is to approve the settlement of the
add to the agenda.
Page 34
claim of Kendrick Jordan in the amount of $350,000; the second
item is to approve a settlement of a condemnation case of
Donald J. Clay for $7,400; and the third item is a motion to
approve settlement of workers' compensation claim with Charles
Lord by the payment of a lump sum of $24,000.
MR. SHEPARD:So move.
Second.
MR. HANDY:
This is to add them to the agenda; right?
MAYOR YOUNG:
Yes, sir.
MR. SHEPARD:
All in favor, vote aye.
MAYOR YOUNG:
MOTION CARRIES 10-0.
CLERK:Approve the settlement of claim with Kendrick
Jordan in the amount of $350,000.
MR. SHEPARD:So move, Mr. Mayor.
Second.
MR. HANDY:
Motion and a second. Any discussion?
MAYOR YOUNG:
Yes, Mr. Mayor. I'll let my previous words
MR. MAYS:
of the previous vote, since this is the second vote on this
particular issue, stand from what I said the first time when
this was taking place. I would like to note also this time
for the record that the reason why I'm voting no the second
time is that we cannot guarantee the person the $200,000 that
we voted for the first time when we voted on it and that's why
we are voting on it this time. So my vote will be no. But I
do think an explanation needs to be made, because we are not
voting to give two settlements, we are giving one, and there
needs to be a public explanation as to why we're doing this
one, and we cannot guarantee what we voted on the first time.
Thank you, Mr. Mays. Any other
MAYOR YOUNG:
discussion? All in favor, please vote aye.
MR. MAYS VOTES NO.
MOTION CARRIES 9-1.
CLERK:Item number two is settlement of the
condemnation case against Donald J. Clay in the
Tanglewood/Kingston Subdivision Drainage Improvement Project
Page 35
for $7,400.
MR. HANDY:So move.
Second.
MR. SHEPARD:
All in favor, please vote aye.
MAYOR YOUNG:
MR. MAYS ABSTAINS.
MOTION CARRIES 9-1.
CLERK:And the third one is a motion to approve
settlement of workers' compensation claim of Charles Lord by
the payment of a lump sum of $24,000.
MR. SHEPARD:So move.
Second.
MR. HANDY:
All in favor?
MAYOR YOUNG:
MR. MAYS VOTES NO.
MOTION CARRIES 9-1.
Is there any other business to come before
MAYOR YOUNG:
this board?
MR. BEARD:Move we adjourn.
Second.
MR. H. BRIGHAM:
All in favor, leave the room.
MAYOR YOUNG:
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Nancy W. Morawski
Deputy Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Nancy W. Morawski, Deputy Clerk of Commission, hereby
certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the
minutes of the Regular Meeting of Augusta Richmond County
Commission held on February 16, 1999.
Deputy Clerk of Commission