Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-21-2000 Regular Meeting THE AUGUSTA COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING March 21 14, 2000 Commission Chambers The meeting convened at 2:02 p.m., with the Honorable Bob Young, Mayor, presiding. Present were Commissioners Beard, Bridges, H. Brigham, J. Brigham, Cheek, Colclough, Handy, Kuhlke, Mays, Shepard and Williams. Also present were Ms. Bonner, Clerk of Commission; Mr. Oliver, Administrator; and Mr. Wall, Attorney. Mayor Young: We have some youth visiting with us today during today. It's the Youth Leadership Augusta class. These young students sitting over here. Stand up so the Commissioners can see who you are. Thank you for being with us today. A ROUND OF APPLAUSE IS GIVEN. Mayor Young: We may find some future Commissioners or even a Mayor in this group. Who knows? We may find some in there before this meeting is over, depending on how it goes today. THE INVOCATION WAS GIVEN BY DR. CLARENCE W. JOYNER. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE WAS RECITED. Mayor Young: Madame Clerk, do we have any additions or deletions to the agenda? Clerk: Yes, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. Addendum Agenda: 1. Consider sponsorship of Oscar night America 2000 with the purchase of a corporate table at a cost of $400.00 and funded by Commission Other Account. (Requested by Commissioner Kuhlke) 2. Conceptually approve donation of 4.07 acres of land on Phinizy Road to the State of Georgia for construction of the Crime Lab subject to approved site plan by public Works and Engineering. 3. Accept contribution from the American Heart Association in the amount of $64,610.52 and authorize payment in the same amount to Survivalink for defibrillators for the Fire Department. 4. Approve $3,000 to Metro Augusta Clean & Beautiful, Inc. for March 25, 2000 Great American Cleanup. (Requested by Commissioner Mays) Mayor Young: Do we have a motion with respect to the addendum agenda? Mr. Kuhlke: I so move. Mr. Shepard: Second. And I move that the four items be added, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Bridges: Mr. Mayor, you don't have consent on number 4. Mayor Young: Number 4? Do not have unanimous consent? Is there any objection to items 1, 2 or 3? None heard. We'll add Items 1, 2 and 3 to the consent agenda. Rather, to the meeting agenda today. The first item we're going to take up today is Item 2 on the consent agenda, I'm sorry, on the addendum agenda, which relates to the property on Phinizy Road for the Crime Lab. We have some representatives from the GBI in Atlanta who came over for the meeting today. Mr. Oliver: And Mr. Hatfield is here to give a brief overview and Mr. Scott Cowan from the GBI is also here. As the Mayor and Commission will remember, we held a public hearing within that neighborhood. The public was receptive to this type of facility because of the things that were going to be done there, but I'll let Mr. Hatfield and Mr. Cowan speak if they'd like. Mayor Young: Mr. Hatfield, if you'll pull the microphone up and speak into it, please. Mr. Hatfield: Thank you, Mr. Oliver. Gentlemen, I will quickly indicate that our Sheriff, the Honorable Charlie Webster, is here, if you have any questions or any review necessary. I'm proud against to remind you of Mr. Scott Cowan, who stands next to me, and he is at this point available to respond or answer any questions on behalf of the GBI, and finally to remind you that a number of you were able to attend the public hearing that we had some weeks ago. You were present during the presentation and at this point, I would delight in introducing Sheriff Webster and Mr. Cowan for any questions you may have. Mr. Cowan: Thank you, Chief. Be glad to answer any question. Mayor Young: Why don't you, in 25 words or less, tell us what you'd like to do there and then we'll see if we have any questions. Mr. Cowan: What we're planning on doing, Mr. Mayor, is construct a new regional Crime Laboratory on property on Phinizy Road. We have had a regional forensics lab in Augusta for over 20 years. We love to be in the city of Augusta Richmond County and we look forward to continuing that. The city and county have been kind enough to offer 4.7 acres, I believe it is, to deed to us for a site for a new lab. That's what we are wanting to do. Mayor Young: And this would replace the existing lab that's located downtown then? Mr. Cowan: Yes, sir, that's correct. Mayor Young: Are there any questions? Mr. Oliver: It's 4.07, for the record. Mayor Young: If we have no questions– Mr. Bridges: A motion to approve, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and a second on the floor. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Cowan: Randy, I was trying to add a little acreage to that. Mr. Oliver: For expansion. Mr. Cowan: And you caught me. Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, especially Sheriff Webster and staff, on behalf of the GBI, we are very appreciative of this. The city of Augusta Richmond County and GBI, as we all know, has always had an excellent working relationship. We look forward to continuing that. This new laboratory will give us the type facility we need to provide the service to you and the other 14 counties that this lab serves. About all I can say again is thank you and we will look forward to the groundbreaking. Mayor Young: Thank you. And we appreciate the confidence the GBI has in Augusta Richmond County to relocate a new lab in this city, and please carry that message back to Director Nix if you would on behalf of the Commission. Mr. Cowan: I'll do it. Thank you, Mayor. Mayor Young: The next item we'll take up is Item B, which is a delegation. Clerk: Delegation: B. - Mr. Cory Green Re: Ordinance prohibiting the parking of trucks in residential areas. Mayor Young: Mr. Cory Green, if you would come up to the podium, please. Mr. Green: [inaudible] Mayor Young: Well, is Mr. Robinson your attorney or what? You're the one who asked to be on the agenda. Under the rules of the Commission, you have five minutes to do your presentation, so if you would come up to the podium and start by identifying yourself and give us your address and then you have the floor. Mr. Green: My name is Cory Green, I stay at 120 [inaudible] Court, Augusta, Georgia. I'm here to try to get you guys to modify the ordinance of no tractors on public property or private property. The tractor is like a home away from home. We have very valuable items in the truck, as much items as in the house we have in the truck. We need to keep those items safe. We're not tearing up the roads, as so they say. And if you actually look at it, a city bus or a school bus weighs more than the tractor itself that we're carrying. We park our trailers elsewhere. We only need to keep our tractors safe. We're not tearing up the streets. We're not an eyesore. We park them more than 10 feet away from the city roads. And we need to keep our tractors safe. We would like you to modify the ordinance to where we can park in front of our homes if possible. Mayor Young: All right. Do you have any specific suggestions for modification? Mr. Speaker: Mr. Mayor, if I could. Mayor Young: Please identify yourself and give us your address. Mr. Robinson: Curtis Robinson, Mayor Young. 2205 Albemarle Drive, Salem subdivision. Members of the Commission, we would like the ordinance modified. We don't want to destroy it. We don't want you to throw it away. We would like it modified. What we're asking for is to be able to park our tractors on our own personal, private property. Nothing more. No trailers. With the exception as the ordinance already states. For the purpose of loading and unloading. Mr. Mayor, I asked you this question yourself in your office. If Mayflower came to your house to move your personal belongings, to move you across the city, across the state, or across the country, could they do it in one hour. You said no. That would be left up to the officer's discretion. Granted. He's there for a specific purpose. He's conducting a business requested by you. My tractor grosses somewhere in the neighborhood of 22,000 pounds. Gentlemen, by the time seven ordinary common vehicles pass in front of my house, they have the same amount of weight on the ground as I do, at one point in time, for approximately the 2- 1/2 to 3 minutes to come off of Rosier Road to come into my driveway and back out one time a week. As Mr. Green stated, I have personal belongings in that vehicle. Entering a vehicle in the state of Georgia is a felony. If I had to park it somewhere where it is unsafe and unsecure, Bi- Lo, K-Mart, Walmart, it's commercial property, true. Legally we can't park there. True. It's also privately owned. They don't have to pick up the phone and call Richmond County and say we're going to tow this truck. They simply call C&B Towing and it's gone. A deputy can't sit in the parking lots. Just from the number of people you see here today, a good many of us are truck drivers. What are you going to do when you've got Walmart with 65-70 tractors parked in it? You've created a picking field, gentleman. The thieves and the vandals in this county and this city are going to have a field day. Mr. Eskill, you suggested I strip my truck. Mr. Eskill– Mayor Young: If you'll please address your remarks to the chair. Thank you. Mr. Robinson: Yes, sir, I'm sorry. The seat I sit on is valued at more than $500. Therefore if they vandalize it or tear it up, another felony has been committed. What's that going to do to the city of Augusta's crime statistics? I'm not hurting anything by parking in my driveway. It's private property. It's my concrete driveway. If I crack it, it's my responsibility. It's not the city's, and it's not the county's. We want the ordinance to be modified to read no idling for more than five minutes. If I start my truck and I'm ready to leave and I look down and realize I've forgotten my coffee cup and I step back in the house, kiss my wife good-bye again, pick up my coffee cup and step back to my truck, it makes less noise if I just let it sit there and idle for the few seconds it takes me to step back in the house and step back out there, rather than if I shut it off and started it back up again. We don't want to perform any maintenance in our yards, gentlemen. That's no oil changes. No grease jobs. No fuel filter changes. All I want to do is wash my truck. I use less water to wash my truck than probably most of us do in this room to water our lawns. I use the same soap and detergent that any of you, all of you may buy at Advance Auto Parks. Turtle Wax. Armor All. I don't use harsh chemicals or detergents or anything else. Just simple, common, ordinary, every day soap. No idling. No trailers except for the specific purpose of loading and unloading. No trailers whatsoever at all. If I drag a trailer in there and I'm not there to unload or load up, load your house, write me a ticket. I deserve it. If I'm sitting there idling for two or three hours, over five minutes if one of my neighbors would care to time it, then write me a ticket. I deserve it. It's mine. I'm not trying, we're not trying to be argumentative. We're not trying to pick a fight. We just want to be treated like everybody else. That's my driveway. When you think about it, some of you in this room may own RV's. Mayor Young: All right, your five minutes has expired. Thank you very much. Mr. Robinson: Thank you. Mayor Young: How many people are here in support of the change that these gentlemen have recommended to the ordinance? Would you just raise your hands so the clerk can assess this for the record? Mr. Robinson: Mayor, we also have several petition and questionnaires we would like to give you. Mayor Young: If you would like to submit those to the clerk, we'll include those in the record. Mr. Robinson: Fine. Thank you. These signatures were derived, Mayor, from the people in our neighborhoods, not just general people, but people we live close to and in close proximity. (37 supporters noted) Mayor Young: Mr. Nathaniel Charles with one of the neighborhood groups has asked to speak to this issue today. Mr. Charles, where did you end up? Mr. Charles: Right here. Mayor Young: Mr. Charles, if you'll come to the podium, and I also see some other folks from the neighborhoods here today. Perhaps those who are here with Mr. Charles today, if you would raise your hands so we can get a sense of how many folks are here for the neighborhoods today. (14 objectors noted) Ms. Speaker: I would like to ask if Mr. Charles is in support of– Mayor Young: Well, let's listen to Mr. Charles. Ms. Speaker: I want to know– Mayor Young: We all find out together. He hasn't spoken yet. If you'll just wait one moment, we'll hear. Ms. Speaker: Right. Thank you. Mayor Young: Thank you. If you're from one of the neighborhoods, I think you'll be pleased with what Mr. Charles wants to say today. Let's not pre-empt his remarks. Okay. Mr. Charles, you have five minutes under the rules. Give us your name and address for the record, please. Mr. Charles: My name is Nathaniel Charles. And I live at 3826 [inaudible] Drive. I'd like to begin, Mayor, Commissioners, with first off, I sympathize with the truck drivers. I realize they have a problem. But like any other thing, any other job, when we bought the homes that we bought in the neighborhoods in which we live in, we accepted certain rules. The law was on the books. We knew that. We accepted that. I sympathize with the truckers and what I've heard here today as far as people breaking in, this type of thing here, we still have a home to be broken into and they're not trucks. The bottom line is, if we allow every vehicle into the neighborhoods, first off, we all know it's going to destroy the highways. Number one. It's going to put additional stress on the traffic inside of the neighborhood. And right now, as it stands, right now we do not have the ability to patrol the neighborhoods and keep these vehicles out. The one hour that is on the books right now, I totally disagree with it and many others disagree with it, because there is not reason for that truck to be there against the law except if you are loading or doing something. Loading does not mean taking your dirty clothes out or taking them in the house. If we modify this bill today, I will say that in the near future you're going to have to modify for the school buses, you're going to have to modify it for the garbage trucks, you're going to have to modify it for many other vehicles. The covenants state in most of your neighborhoods that we have here today what the private property is supposed to be used for. And the law about vehicles, tractor- trailers has been on the books for a long time. I don't see a problem with it. We have places out here on Gordon Highway and other places for trucks to be parked at. If we start allowing these vehicles into the neighborhood, if you've got something in a vehicle now that is going to cause a thief to come out and break into it, well, you've just invited him into the neighborhood. I think the ordinance as it stands should remain. Personally, I think we should go into the ordinance and take that one hour out. Because each time I've had to call a deputy in our neighborhood about a vehicle, if the truck was there for three or four hours, the deputy go there and he said, well, I've got to let it stay there for another hour to prove that he's violated that. So we've got a problem. We cannot supply the truckers what they want, their personal satisfaction of having a deputy out there. We don't have enough deputies right now to patrol this county, in this neighborhood, to keep just the regular traffic out. If we put these big vehicles in a neighborhood--for instance, in my neighborhood, I think there are approximately 14 school buses coming in and out every day. There are garbage trucks coming in and out every day. The streets in the neighborhood were not built to support this type of traffic. And if you let this ordinance be changed, as is being requested today, and allow these vehicles in our neighborhood, we're going to open up the door for a lot of other things and I think we should be able to live, we have lived, we should be able to continue to live with this ordinance the way it is, and if we all want to be law-abiding citizens, then I think we should look at that and go ahead and continue to abide by this ordinance that we have on the book, as is. There are places for the trucks. There are places for the cars. There are places for the residences. And I think the residences and these trucks inside the neighborhoods is not a good mixture, and I encourage each and every one of you gentlemen today to let the ordinance stand as is and do not go and tamper with what I think we have a good thing, and I'm pretty sure that I have the support of many people here today in this chamber, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: Thank you very much, Mr. Charles. I might note that this ordinance, for the benefit of the Commissioners, is currently in litigation in the Magistrate Court of Augusta Richmond County, in the case of the city versus O'Bannon, and the matter is pending before Judge Jennings for a decision on the Constitutionality of this ordinance. So we may just want to wait until the matter runs its course in municipal court. Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I move we accept this as information. Mr. Bridges: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and second to receive this as information. Any discussion? Any questions for any of the parties that are here today? All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. I'm sorry, Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: The only question I was going to ask, and this has been brought to my attention, not so much on the ordinance, but this is a discussion that a couple of the Commissioners, that we've talked about in reference to calls that we've had. Is the ordinance being enforced uniformly? Because that's one question we've had from various citizens. If it's an ordinance that's there on the books, and if it's being enforced in some places, and say not enforced in some other places, then that's an area that needs to be looked at as well, whether you are on the side for keeping it or whether you're on the side that's against it. And I agree that we've got to let it run its course in court, but I think that's something that needs to be looked at as well. Because in some neighborhoods, it may be a case whereby nobody knows that it's even against the law or that there is even a law as such. And whereas in some areas, then you're getting enforcements. I think you've got an application there as well that needs to be straightened out. Mayor Young: I see Chief Deputy Hatfield is still with us, and I'm sure he'll carry that question back to the sheriff's office for us. Mr. Mays: And to add to it, I even hear that in some places it's enforced at a certain time of the day, and then if it's at another time of the day then it's not enforced. If it's a law, then it's either a 24-hours law or it's a 0-hour law, so I think that needs to be looked at as well. A ROUND OF APPLAUSE IS GIVEN. Mayor Young: Thank you. Mr. Colclough? Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, can we have somebody from the Sheriff's Department to address this issue? Mayor Young: Sid, are you here by yourself or is the Sheriff still here? Mr. Hatfield: I'm by myself. Mayor Young: Would you like to come around and address this? Mr. Hatfield: Thank you. Gentlemen, I wish that I could assume the position at the moment to give you some figures to support what you're looking for. I really do. But I must be honest and tell you that as you would expect, I need to go back and look at figures as they relate to patrols and districts and see who made what cases, how many cases have been made, and what areas. I honestly don't know at this point and there's no way I would want to assume that. I don't think it would be fair to anybody. Mayor Young: Thank you. Any other questions? Ms. Speaker: I would like to have the people from the Turpin Hill area stand up. There's a lot of us here. Mayor Young: And y'all are here for what, ma'am? Here for what purpose? Ms. Speaker: Some have been there for 50 years or more. Mayor Young: Ma'am, you're here for what purpose? Ms. Speaker: We have had our wires broken down, our electricity– Mayor Young: Ma'am, are you here to speak--ma'am, excuse me. Ms. Speaker: [inaudible] stand. Mayor Young: Please, you may stand. Ma'am, please stand. Ms. Speaker: All from Turpin Hill, stand. Mayor Young: Turpin Hill people, please stand. All right, listen, this is a meeting of the Commission and we'll maintain order. Ma'am, please. Thank you very much. You may be seated. We have a motion on the floor. And we'll go ahead and call the question on the motion. All in favor of the motion to receive this as information, please vote aye. Motion carries 10-0. Mayor Young: That completes the discussion of this item. We'll take a recess for a moment if you'd like to clear the chamber. Certainly you're invited to stay for the rest of the meeting. (Brief recess) Mayor Young: Let's reconvene our meeting, if we will please. Madame Clerk, we never want to keep anyone waiting who brings a check to the Commission, so let's take Item 3 on the addendum agenda. Addendum Item 3: Accept contribution from the American Heart Association in the amount of $64,610.52 and authorize payment in the same amount for Survivalink for defibrillators for the Fire Department. Mr. Oliver: The Fire Chief, through his ingenuity, has gotten the American Heart Association to buy defibrillators for vehicles in the Fire Department, and they've donated $64,610.52 to purchase those, and we're asking that we acknowledge that gift and thank the Fire Chief, and in return, that we take that same money to pay it out to a company by the name of Survivalink for those defibrillators. Mayor Young: Chief Few, you have the floor. Mr. Few: First of all, let me introduce Mary with the American Heart, and she is here to present that check. And Mayor, I'd like for you to take this check because I want it off of me. It's $64,000. Mary, come up and talk about it and then I want to give it to the Mayor and let him handle it. Ms. Speaker: On behalf of the American Heart Association, the Augusta Richmond County Fire Rescue is receiving $64,610.52 for the purchase of 23 ADD's, and this is for the new health initiative called Operation Heartbeat, which we are trying to implement in Augusta. It's to help reduce death and disability due to heart attack and cardiac arrest. Mr. Few: Mr. Mayor, if you'd just come up and take a picture with us. I want to get some documentation that I gave you this check. Mayor Young: You think some people might thin, you kept the check? Mr. Few: Well, I don't want to say. But I do want to say, I want to thank the American Heart Association. We had three other cities that we went up against, and we're going to purchase 23 ADD's. They are automatic defibrillators. They will go on all of our engine companies. And what this will do is to make sure when someone in our community has a heart attack, that we can shock the heart very quickly and bring them back. This is a part of our EMS program. We are just so happy that we got the defibrillators because we were trying to figure out how we were going to be pay for defibrillators and put them on every engine company, and this grant came up and we are just so happy to have it. Ms. Speaker: [inaudible] grant from the [inaudible]. A ROUND OF APPLAUSE IS GIVEN. Mr. Oliver: And the real check has already been deposited. Mayor Young: Thank you very much, Chief. That's a tremendous grant to give the city, because lives will be saved as a result of that equipment. I was going to add the Chief knows a lot about shocking hearts. He does that when he brings in his budget request every year. Mr. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve that grant from the Heart Association to the Fire Department. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mays: I think Jerry has a question. Mr. J. Brigham: My only question was this is the best bid on the equipment? Mr. Oliver: As I understand it, that was one that was directed by the person providing the grant funds, so we're comfortable with it. Mr. J. Brigham: Okay. That's what I wanted to know. Mr. Mays: That was going to be my comment, Mr. Mayor, that the maker of the motion include that in there so that that discrepancy would be clear at this time in public meeting, that the stipulations of the grant, that the Heart Association had already worked with Survivalink and that it was not a purchase, that it was pre-done and that the money was to go to that particular company. They merely received it as part of a competition grant in which they were awarded it, for the place in which they finished. Make that part of the record so that that controversy gets cleared up once and for all. Mayor Young: Thank you. We already have six votes, but if the rest of you would like to vote. Motion carries 10-0. Mayor Young: Now we have a delegation here. What we're trying to do is take the items, the delegations, at the top of the agenda. We have a delegation here for Item 28 on the consent agenda. Mr. Oliver: We're in the process, because of the crowd and because there was a meeting in here this morning, setting up the GIS system, at Mr. Shepard's request. That's going to take a few minutes, if you'd like to go on to something else for the moment. Mayor Young: Let's go ahead with the consent agenda, then. Let's pull Item 28 out and then--let's go back to delegation A, then. Let's do that. Delegation A. Blacks Against Black Crimes, Inc. Re: National Crime Victim Rights Week Ms. Thurmond: Barbara Thurmond. 1713 [inaudible] Drive. Mayor Young, county thth Commissioners, I'm here on behalf of Blacks Against Black Crimes. April 7 through 14 is National Crime Victims Rights Week. In observance of National Crime Victims Rights Week, Blacks Against Black Crimes will hold our sixth annual victims rights dinner. On this night, we will remember all 1999 homicide victims of Richmond County. That means all victims, regardless of race, gender, socio-economic influence, doesn't matter. We will be remembering all victims. We ask the county purchase a table for $1,000. Your donation will help us provide dinner for the surviving family members of these homicide victims. It will also help us with our scholarship fund. On this night, we will award four scholarship to four Richmond County high school seniors in memory of homicide victims Willie Kelley and Valonda Howard. Your donation will also help us with our mentor and tutorial program at Gilbert Manor. We have a three-day program, after school on Tuesdays and Thursdays and programs on Saturdays. We are extending an invitation to this city government to be a part of this healing process. Thank you very much. Any questions? Mayor Young: Any questions for Ms. Thurmond? Thank you very much, Ms. Thurmond. Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Young: Mr. Mays? thth Mr. Mays: Those days, Ms. Thurmond, are the 7 through the 14? thth Ms. Thurmond: Yes, April 7 through 14. Mr. Mays: What are our times, Randy, on the next finance committee? th Mr. Oliver: The next finance committee meeting, Mr. Mays, will be the 27, and then the next meeting of the Commission will be the first Tuesday in April. th Mayor Young: The 4. thth Mr. Oliver: The 4. So that would be a couple of days before the 7. Mr. Mays: I'm not on finance, Mr. Mayor, but I'll make a motion that it be referred--she doesn't have to come back--but that the material be left with the Clerk and it be referred to finance for consideration, either out of Promotional Account or out of Commission Other. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and second to send this item to finance. Any discussion? All in favor, please vote aye. Motion carries 10-0. C. Augusta Richmond County's Animal Control Board Clerk: Mr. Mayor and Commission, the Augusta Richmond County Animal Control Board had asked that this item be deleted from the agenda. Item C. Mayor Young: Do we have unanimous consent to remove this item? Any objection? No objection heard. Okay, the item is ordered removed. Clerk: Under our consent agenda, Item 1 through 60: PLANNING: 1. Z-00-12 - Request for concurrence with the decision of the Planning Commission to approve a petition from Karen Atkinson requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of establishing a family day care home as provided for in Section 26-1, Subparagraph (f) of the Comprehensive Zoning ordinance for Augusta Richmond County, on property located on the southeast right-of-way line of Gordy Road, 20 feet, more or less, southwest of a point where the centerline of Spark Road extended intersects with the southeast right-of-way line of Gordy Road (2820 Gordy Road). DISTRICT 5 2. Z-00-13 - Request for concurrent with the decision of the Planning Commission to approve a petition from Brian & Kimberly Corley requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residence) to Zone R-MH (Manufactured Home Residential) on property located on the northwest right-of-way line of Nina Drive, 675 feet, more or less, southwest of a point where the northwest right-of-way line of Nina Drive intersects with the northwest right-of-way line of New McDuffie Road (2307 Nina Drive). DISTRICT 3 FINANCE: 3. Motion to approve refund of 1997 and 1998 taxes in the amount of $258.29 to Albert & Annah Thompson for overpayment of taxes on Map 121, Parcel 6.03. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 4. Motion to approve refund of 1997 and 1998 taxes in the amount of $346.92 to William Scott Jeans for over payment of taxes on Map 35-3, Parcel 36. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 5. Motion to approve refund of 1998 taxes in the amount of $144.34 to James J. Johnson for erroneous payment of taxes on Map 18, Parcel 365. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 6. Motion to approve refund of 1997 and 1998 taxes in the amount of $174.81 to Larry W. Stephens for overpayment of taxes on Map 87-3, Parcel 46. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 7. Motion to approve refund of 1997 and 1998 taxes in the amount of $258.59 to Newton L. Wilson, Jr. for overpayment of taxes on Map 123-4, Parcel 95. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 8. Motion to approve refund of 1998 taxes in the amount of $836.34 to Allied Bank of Georgia for erroneous payment of taxes on Map 272, Parcel 59. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 9. Motion to approve refund of 1997 and 1998 taxes in the amount of $258.58 to Joseph Cannon for overpayment of taxes on Map 290, Parcel 3. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 10. Motion to approve Visa/Master Car application for Clerk of Commission. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 11. Motion to authorize Finance Department to execute Engagement Letter with Cherry Bekaert & Holland, CPAs (CBH) to issue separate audit reports for Augusta Utilities and Bush Field. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 12. Motion to approve an Ordinance amendment to providing funding to the Augusta Museum of History in the amount of $300,000 for year 2000 only. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 13. Motion to authorize execution of Easy Pay ACH Origination Agreement with Georgia Bank & Trust Company. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 14. Motion to approve the purchase of a full-page ad from the Southeastern Association of Fire Chiefs in the amount of $500 from Commission Other Account. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 15. Pulled from consent agenda. 16. Motion to approve SPLOST Agreement for $1,003,000.00 with Springfield Village Park Foundation, Inc. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 17. Motion to authorize execution of necessary documents with govWorks.com to process automated payments with the following stipulations: (1) no out of pocket expense to Augusta Richmond County; (2) posting of fidelity bond or insurance to cover amount of anticipated funds to be collected; (3) the agreement is cancelable for convenience at any time. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 18. Pulled from consent agenda. 19. Motion to approve request for Fire Department to change the purchase of four midsize automobiles to four compact pickup trucks. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) 20. Motion to approve authorizing to disburse $4,350 to match Georgia Lottery funds for Computer based technology equipment with match funding made from General Fund Contingency. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) ADMINISTRATIVE: 21. Motion to approve the Year 2000-2004 Proposed Consolidated Plan and Year 2000 Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant, Emergency Shelter Grand and HOME Investment Partnership Funds. (Approved by Administrative Services March 15, 2000) 22. Motion to approve the petition for retirement on Jack Murphy. (Approved by Administrative Services March 15, 2000) 23. Pulled from consent agenda. ENGINEERING: 24. Motion to approve reorganization chart of the Traffic Engineering Section of the Public Works and engineering Department. This reorganization includes the elimination of a Maintenance Worker I position (38), a Maintenance Laborer I position (35) and a Signal Technician (43). Also create an Engineering Technician I position (44) and a Design Engineer IV position (51). Also upgrade the position of Civil Engineer I (52) to Traffic Engineer (53). The net annual salary savings will be $796.00. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) 25. Motion to authorize executing of Lighting Agreement with Georgia Department of Transportation for S.R. 56 at Bobby Jones Expressway. The estimated annual cost of $12,000.00 to cover operations and maintenance will be funded from Street Light Account 101041610/5312310. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) 26. Motion to approve Change Order with Specialize Services, Incorporated for $3,300.00 reduction in construction contract for Deans Bridge Road Subtitle “D” MSW Landfill, Phase IIC-Cell 2. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) 27. Motion to approve Gas Main and Pipe Line Relocation Agreement with Atlanta Gas Light in the amount of $10,666.00 on the Willis Foreman Road Drainage Improvements Project and grant permission to let. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) 28. Pulled from consent agenda. 29. Motion to approve the adoption of the Utility Relocation Policy for Public Works Projects. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) 30. Pulled from consent agenda. 31. Motion to approve proposal for inspection of 10 elevated tanks and 8 ground water storage tanks and 2 clearwells by Utility Service Co., Inc. At a cost of $44,850.00 Funded by Account No. 56043410-5223211. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) 32. Motion to condemn 3044 sq. ft. of permanent utility easement and 1,969 sq. ft. of temporary construction easement (Tax Map 128, parcel 27) which is owned by Hazel Singleton in connection with the U.S. Highway 1/Tobacco Road/Morgan Road Project. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) 33. Motion to approve the change of penalty date on water bills. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) 34. Motion to approve renaming Hollywood Subdivision Improvements Project as Rocky Creek Hazard Mitigation Project. Approve engineering services contract with James G. Swift & Associates in the amount of $204,140.00 for project engineering. Also approve CPB# 322-04-299822563 in the amount of $204,140. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) PUBLIC SAFETY: 35. Motion to approve appointment Mr. Don Dudley to the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) to fulfill the unexpired term of Mr. Art Rider. (Approved by Public Safety Committee March 15, 2000. 36. Motion to approve appointment Mr. David Dlugolenski to the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) to fulfill the unexpired term of Mrs. Pam Tucker. (Approved by Public Safety Committee March 15, 2000) 37. Motion to approve appointment Mr. Art Rider as a Citizen member to the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) to fulfill the added position of citizen Member voted on by the LEPC. (Approved by Public Safety Committee March 15, 2000) 38. Motion to approve appointment Andy Cheek to the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) to fulfill the u unexpired term of Freddie Handy. (Approved by Public Safety Committee March 15, 2000) 39. Motion to approve the 911 Policies and Procedures Manual. (Approved by Public Safety Committee March 15, 2000) 40. Pulled from consent agenda. 41. Motion to approve payment to 911 employees for accumulated compensatory time. (Approved by Public Safety Committee March 15, 2000) 42. Motion to approve E-911 Advisory Board to consist of the following or their designee. (Approved by Public Safety Committee March 15, 2000) ?? Sheriff ?? County Administrator ?? Assistant County Administrator ?? Director of Emergency Management ?? Ernie Doss, as representative of Rural Metro Ambulance Service ?? Chief of the Augusta Richmond County Fire Department ?? Police Chief, City of Blythe ?? Police Chief, City of Hephzibah ?? Marshal of Civil and Magistrate Court ?? Ex-officio (non-voting) members - County Attorney and ?? Representative from Risk Management Department. 44. Motion to approve and sign Maintenance Renewal Agreement with BI-Tech Software, Inc. For the period covering January 1, 2000 - December 31, 2000 at an annual cost of $35,274.49. (Approved by Public Safety Committee March 15, 2000) 45. Motion to approve contract award for design of our new Animal Control Facility to TSDG Architects, LLC in the amount of $43,000. (Approved by Public Safety Committee March 15, 2000) PUBLIC SERVICE: 46. Motion to approve the implementation of criminal background checks for volunteers providing youth services in the Recreation and Parks Department. (Approved by public Services Committee March 15, 2000) 47. Motion to approve low bid award in the amount of $117,260.00 submitted by T.C.A. Electrical Contractors, Inc. to install runway lights on runway 11-29. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 15, 200) 48. Motion to approve the promotion of ten (10) Bus Operator I to Bus Operator I with 5% increase. Funds are budgeted. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 15, 2000) 49. Motion to accept a Georgia DOT grant of $250,000.00 to overlay runway 11-29. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 15, 2000) 50. Motion to approve Fruit N’Juicy, Inc. as the contractor for Food and Beverage Concession for the Recreation and Parks Department for the year 2000. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 15, 2000. 51. Motion to approve a request by Byung H. Kwon for a retail package beer & wine license to be used in connection with Comet Gas & Service located at 2320 Peach Orchard Road. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 15, 2000) 52. Motion to approve a request by Lauri B. Hudson for a consumption on premise liquor license to be used in connection with the Boll Weevil Café and Sweetery located at #10 Ninth Street. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 15, 2000) 53. Motion to approve a request by David E. Greenfield to transfer the consumption on premise liquor, beer & wine license used in connection with Limelite Café located at 1325 Augusta West Parkway to 1143 Agerton Lane. There will be Sunday sales. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 15, 2000) 54. Motion to approve a request by Mike Smith Catering d.b.a. Plantation House for a special event license for seven days at The Windsor Building located at 2701 Washington Road for consumption on premise liquor, beer & wine for April 3rd through April 9th, 2000. There will be Sunday sales. District 7. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 15, 2000) 54A. Motion to approve Lease Agreement with McAir Aviation for office and tie down space at Bush Field. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 15, 2000) PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: 55. Motion to approve minutes of the Special Called meeting of the Commission held February 20, 2000 and regular meeting held March 7, 2000. APPOINTMENTS: 56. Motion to approve the following District 2 appointments. ? Ms. Mattie Mitchell, Housing & Neighborhood Development ? Ms. Velma Curtis, Personnel Board (reappointment) 57. Motion to approve the following District 6 appointments. ? Mr. Trent Mercer - Augusta Port Authority ? Nathaniel D. Charles, Housing & Neighborhood Development ? Mr. Roger Giles, Augusta Regional Airport at Bush Field ATTORNEY: 59. Motion to approve an ordinance to amend Augusta Richmond County Code Section 6-2-105, providing for the appropriation of beer excise tax revenue to the Augusta Richmond County Coliseum Authority, so as to limit the appropriation to 30% of the proceeds from the beer excise tax. (Approved by Commission March 7, 2000 - second reading) 60. Motion to approve an ordinance to amend Augusta Richmond County Code Section 1-9-17 so as to prohibit motorized vehicles on the public property within the Augusta Canal national Heritage Area without a written permit from the director of the Augusta Canal Authority. (Approved by Commission March 7, 2000 - second reading) Mayor Young: Thank you. Gentlemen, what is your pleasure? We are going to go ahead and pull Item 28 because of the presentation. Anyone else want to pull anything else? Mr. Williams: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I'd like to pull Item 40. Mayor Young: Number 40. Okay. Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Item 23, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: Item 23. All right. Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: In addition to 28, number 30. Mayor Young: Number 30, okay. Anyone else? Is there anyone in the audience today who is here to speak to any item that is on the consent agenda? Okay. Mr. Mays: Item 18, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: Item 18. Mr. J. Brigham: Can you run those numbers down again, please? Mayor Young: The items that are pulled are Items 18, 23, 28, 30 and 40. Did I leave any off? Would you like to add any others? Gentlemen, what's your pleasure with respect to the remaining items on the consent agenda? Mr. Beard: Move for approval. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and second. Any discussion? Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, let it be known that I vote No on Sunday sales. Mr. Bridges: Same here, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Cheek: Same here, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: Commissioner Williams? Same there, okay. Let's go ahead and vote on the consent agenda. Mr. J. Brigham: No on pull Item 15, also. Mayor Young: Okay. Mr. Jerry Brigham is voting No on Item 15. Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: Pull 15. Mayor Young: Pull 15? Okay. All right. We have a motion on the floor and we've additionally pulled Item 15. All in favor of the motion to approve the consent agenda, minus those six items, please vote aye. Mr. Colclough, Mr. Bridges, Mr. Cheek and Mr. Williams vote No on Sunday sales portion. [Items 53-54] Motion carries 10-0. [Items 1-14, 16-17, 19-22, 24-27, 29, 31-39, 41-60] Mr. Oliver: We are now ready whenever you gentlemen are as it relates to Item 28, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners. Mayor Young: All right. Since we have some people here for Item 28, let's go ahead and take that up. Can we have a show of hands of the people who are here with respect to the item on the water reservoirs and the potential closing of those? I presume you are here with your hands up because you'd like to keep them open for recreational use? Is that correct? All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Shepard, I'll turn the floor over to you. Item 28: Motion to approve the closing off public access to the Raw Water Reservoirs. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think Mr. Houston is here and wants to speak to this, and I'll speak first. I have asked that the GIS project a map, an aerial photograph of the reservoir. I don't know if I can hit it with my light pen from here, but I will try. Commissioner Cheek and I and others have been out to look at the reservoir, and there is a strip of public property outside the fence, which would be outside the reservoir or perimeter fence. I don't know if I can get it here right. It's basically in this area outside the fence and before you get over there. It comes all the way around, that would be further away from the pools of water. Right now, we've suggested putting a fence right along the lip of the pool, inside the perimeter fence. That would not give any separation between, really, except for the fence alone, there would be no separation between the present walking track and the fence, and the pool, excuse me, the lip of the pool. What I would like to see us do is to have Recreation and Engineering and Public Works look at putting the walking trail outside of the existing fence. I think that would give you a lot more security. I understand that years ago, that people actually ran around the exterior of the fence and not just around the exterior of the pools. So what I think we should do, Mr. Mayor and fellow Commissioners, to enhance the security, I think definitely we should close the vehicle access which comes in at Jake Ellis Lane, which is right in this area up to this point where I have the red dot. Close that immediately. And then within 90 days, within the 90 days period that would end June 30, direct Public Works, Recreation and Water Works to come up with a plan and implement that plan to put the walking track in the public property outside the fence, but yet not on the neighbor's property that's up there, and I put that in the form of a motion, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Cheek: Second that, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: We have a motion and a second. Gentlemen, any discussion? I know Mr. Tennent Houston wanted to speak. Let's hear from Mr. Houston first and then Mr. Cheek and then Mr. Beard. Tennent, if you'll just identify yourself for the record and your address, please. Mr. Houston: I'm Tennent Houston. I live at 2821 Hillcrest Avenue, which is in the vicinity of the reservoir. In fact, I grew up there and I have been visiting the reservoir since I was a little kid playing cowboys and Indians over 40 years ago. In the last 20 years, I've been up there on a regular basis jogging in the mornings, along with many other people who I see up there on a regular basis. It's a wonderful area for that because of the clay surface on that track. As you get older, your knees and ankles begin to hurt when you run on pavement, and up here is a nice cool place to get. A lot of people have found it to be a wonderful place to get away from the hustle and bustle. When I get up there first thing in the morning, there are already people leaving who have been up there before me, and as I leave other people are coming up and that continues all through the day. I suspect those people are some of the best security that can be provided for that reservoir. For those of you who have not seen it, I'd like to pass out some photos that I have taken of it recently just to show you what a wonderful resource it is for the city. The reservoir is one of the prettiest places in the city. As you know, there is a real movement these days towards opening up green areas in urban areas. Gov. Barnes has undertaken a major initiative to provide that in urban counties like Richmond County, and it would seem to me that what would make sense to consider would be opening the area up, securing of course the ponds, but making it more available to the citizens of Augusta Richmond County. I think it would be one of the jewels of the park system. I have talked to some of you Commissioners and pointed out that many other cities--I use New York City as an example--do have their reservoirs incorporated into parks. In fact, the reservoir for Manhattan, New York City, is in the middle of Central Park, which is probably one of the best-known parks in this country. In their case, there are chain link fences right up against the lip of the coping, right around the reservoir. And it would seem to me that would be a suitable use or suitable situation for this reservoir also. If not, then certainly some other solution, I think, should be considered. But it's a great resource and I would certainly hate to see it locked up and turned into nothing more than an industrial plant. I hope we can find a solution that will leave this open to the public. Thank you very much for your time and your consideration. Mayor Young: Thank you, Tennent. Commissioner Cheek? And then Commissioner Beard. Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, as Commissioner Shepard said, we walked the area and visited it several times since then. I have one concern with it. Again, after our discussion in committees, we found the gates open and I could drive my truck all the way up into the water if I so desired. We've got to maintain the security of this valuable water resource. What Commissioner Shepard has recommended is a reasonable step back. It secures our water resource, plus it provides a recreational resources within that area. There is fill dirt available from the canal. We talked with the director of the Canal Authority. There's other sources of materials to make this happen. A lot of the course, probably three-quarters of it, is already nearly prepared for this use, and I would like to see us move forward with it. Mayor Young: Thank you. Commissioner Beard? Mr. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I assume that the proposition that Commissioner Shepard has offered is a good one and I have to apologize to him because he talked to me about it yesterday. But the only thing, I really cannot either vote against this or vote for it today because I really haven't had a chance to get up there to look at this and see what's going on. And I'm sure what he is presenting to us is a good project to adopt, but I would just like to have some time to do this myself. I don't know how the other Commissioners, maybe there are enough of them here who have been up there and can visualize this, but right now I can't visualize it and it would be just hard for me to vote, so I think I will probably have to abstain on this one. Mayor Young: All right. Thank you, Mr. Beard. Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Commissioner Shepard and I have talked and we viewed the plat there, and it was to my understanding that there was some traffic during the night and day back in that area, that things have been, some activities not to the liking to the neighborhood have been going on in that area, and to kind of fence that off would give us some security and try to stop some of that traffic back into that area. I just think we should look at this and really look at it seriously and giving it some close consideration. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Williams. Anyone else? Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: Yes, Mr. Mayor. I guess as the maker of that motion in committee, to deal with the closing off. I have no problems, and I talked with Steve in reference to this yesterday. I'm familiar with the area, been up there. And my making of that motion was not being inconsiderate of using that as a recreational area. If we can work out a plan and those three departments work up whatever budget and find the money in there to deal with it, then I don't have a problem in terms of that leniency of doing it. But the maker of that motion, myself, my main concern in committee has been an age-old problem and I think the one thing residents should be concerned of, it was not in terms of wanting to shut down a recreational area. We also have another problem that is there. We've got a state regulatory agency, and I don't have to tell you the number of years everything from treatment plant, our water, that we pay fines on and that we constantly get letters from. We have an agency that's telling us you need a security access to put in place there because that water reservoir is your supply. And there was a question there, do you make a choice then, what come first, the recreational activity without security measures, or dealing with the security of your water reservoir? They have not just warned us in 2000 or '99. This is something that has gone on for several years. Now if there is a problem, then we have to take the attitude that as policy makers, have we ignored the agencies that have told us that we need to close is. So I don't have a problem with the way if we can put something in place that's workable and of dealing with the security, but I don't mind telling you, if that's not worked out in 90 days, I plan to remake the same motion that I made then, because we've got a water problem that exists in everything from supply, in terms of dealing with security, you name it. And it's at the top of that list and I think we have to be concerned about it when that regulatory agency says you need to secure this facility. Now whether that means cars, whether it means animals, or whether it means people. And I think that the people that are using it, that are residents there, as you said, they are the safest people that you could have there. Good monitors. But everybody may not be classified in that category. So I think to ignore a state agency in terms of what it has asked us repeatedly to do as a city, we cannot ignore that. It's just like the ordinance we had on the book a few minutes ago, with people saying it's a law. It's voted in. Until it's repealed. And if you're going to ignore it, then I think you've got to put something in place to deal with it. So I don't mind yielding to my colleague in terms of trying to work something there, with that department, and work along with him in trying to get that done, but I don't think we can take that lightly when we've been told that repeatedly that we need to deal with security at that reservoir. Mayor Young: Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to re-emphasize one more time that we need to eliminate vehicle traffic to the reservoir. That means the gates need to be locked, whenever there is not a Water Works vehicle in there, to eliminate that traffic. That will cut down on the ability for anybody to get close with anything, plus it will be the first step, I think, towards getting this place secured. Mayor Young: I believe that's part of the motion, to immediately close that. Mr. Shepard: That's correct, Mr. Mayor. That concern is in the motion. I want to speak to that immediately. I think we need to do that immediately. Here again, if we can relocate the track, we can then close the fence. That will close it to human and canine traffic and any other kind of feline or whatever might be up there. But I think this would be a good compromise. I think it would indicate we would separate the reservoir from the use, the recreational use, but keep the use in that area and I'd ask all of you to support the motion. Mayor Young: Thank you. Mr. Hicks, did you want to be heard on this? Mr. Hicks: Yes, sir. What I would like to speak to is the fact that Commissioner Shepard and I had spoken before the meeting, and probably for most of the way around the raw water reservoirs, what is being proposed would be workable. There is one area, though, where you get between the raw water reservoir and the settling basins where there would perhaps need to be a turnaround or perhaps walking track diverted down to another area, because that would then expose the settling basins to vandalism. But by and large, there is enough area on the back side of those reservoirs and on the west side, and there is one other item that is going to come into play. There is a piece of property on the back side that has been used for years by one of the residents. The city owns the property but that's going to become a little bit of a situation, too. I am sure they will complain. But by and large, I find no problem with this proposal with the limits that we don't let people get between the raw water reservoir and the settling basins. Perhaps there would need to be a turnaround in there. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Hicks. Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion as offered by Mr. Shepard, please vote aye. Mr. Beard abstains. Motion carries 9-1. Mayor Young: All right, the next item is Item 15. Clerk: Item 15: Motion to approve restoration of funding in the Tax Commissioner's budget in the amount of $45,500. (Approved by Finance Committee March 15, 2000) Mayor Young: Mr. Mays, you asked that this item be pulled. Do you want to speak to this? Mr. Mays: Yes, Mr. Mayor. What I was trying to get was a point of clarification. I didn't get in until we started the committee I was on the other days, so I wasn't here for the first two Administrative Services and for Finance. Is this to keep in place the existing positions currently that we've got within that department? Mr. Saul: Correct. Mr. Mays: Okay. That was what I was trying to get clarification on, because I wasn't here and really didn't know. Mayor Young: Mr. Jerry Brigham, did you want to speak to this? Mr. J. Brigham: Mr. Saul, are these positions filled now or do you have unfilled positions? Mr. Saul: They are filled. Mr. J. Brigham: I thought when we eliminated them in the budget process the first time they were unfilled. Mr. Saul: No, sir, they were filled. Mr. J. Brigham: Okay. Mayor Young: Any further question? Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, I think they are going to be eliminated July 1. Isn't that right, Jerry? Mr. Saul: They were scheduled to be eliminated July 1. They are filled now. Mr. Shepard: That was the way the budgetary savings were worked in for the last half of this year. Mr. Saul: Correct. Mr. J. Brigham: Are they still going to be eliminated July 1? Mr. Saul: According to the folks from Finance Committee, they were to be reinstated as of July 1. Mr. J. Brigham: What are these positions and what do they do? Mr. Saul: First of all, let me just mention--introduce myself. I'm Jerry Saul and I'm the Tax Commissioner for Richmond County and I have been for the past 24 years. And I want to mention to you, just preface that we try to run a very efficient office. We can't run an efficient office without personnel. The office is efficient as far as collecting taxes for you, for the Board of Education. You have to sell license tags, but again, you need personnel to do this. And also before I answer your question, let me preface by saying that three years ago, the county commission, the old county commission, asked the Tax Commissioner's office to take over the collection of city taxes. We did. They also asked us to take on additional city employees. We didn't. We didn't take on five additional city employees and we had a net savings by not taking on these employees of $100,000 per year. Not one year. Per year. So we are cost efficient, cost conservative, but yet we need personnel to run the office. The items, the positions that were targeted were a delinquent tax bankruptcy clerk, and this particular job is important because you have numbers of bankruptcies, and unless it's identified, you can't levy on bankruptcy property. The other is a supervisor, and it didn't identify which supervisor, but there are two supervisors in this office, and both of them have 20-year tenure. The other are two positions in the tag office. And I can't tell you how much time it takes to train people in a tag office, and if we eliminate two positions in the tag office, they are going to come from south Augusta because the main tag office on Laney-Walker does the accounting, does the mail room, does the bookkeeping, and the only other place it can come from would be south Augusta, and to eliminate two positions from the south Augusta office would be disastrous. Right now we have a 5-45 minute wait, and it would be unfair to the service of Richmond County taxpayers to cause them any more inconvenience by eliminating positions that are really not needed. We've only got seven tax title clerks in our whole office. South Augusta and main office. Take away two of them leaves five. If somebody is sick or on vacation, you have no alternative other than to close an office or keep the taxpayers waiting. So I elaborate on what question you asked me, but I hope that answers your question. Mr. J. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, my main concern about reinstating this money is we have just found by amending our arrangement with University Hospital, this money. I do not think it is appropriate. It's not that I don't understand Mr. Saul's problem. But I do not think it is appropriate to be spending reserve monies this early, at this point in the year. I do not think--if this would be a budget item that we would have eliminated when we did not have the money, it should be a budget item that we should eliminate while we have the money that we have now will not necessarily carry us through this year. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Brigham. Mr. Beard and then Mr. Williams? Mr. Beard: I guess this would be directed to Randy more so than anyone else. I guess my question would be, in the first place, where is the money coming from, the $45,500? Mr. Oliver: The $45,500 is coming from General Fund Contingency. The annual impact is $91,000. So it would be $91,000 next year. It's $45,500 this year. Mr. Beard: Why did we cut this in the first place? Mr. Oliver: This was cut, if you recall, it was contained both in the Powell version and in the Shepard version of the budget, to balance the budget these were recommendations that were made as part of the management study. Mr. Beard: Maybe I lost you somewhere along the way, but are you saying that if you don't receive this money that you are going to have to cut? Mr. Saul: Going to have to reduce services. Mr. Beard: Are these, that's with the employees, right? Mr. Saul: I'm sorry? Mr. Beard: You're talking about reduce the employees there? Mr. Saul: The employees would obviously have to be reduced, but in order to collect taxes efficiently, we need those two people in the office in the municipal building in order to serve the taxpayers, in south Augusta and Richmond County we need the people in the tag office. Mr. Beard: You're going to reduce personnel? That's my question. Mr. Saul: We would have no alternative but to do that. Mr. Beard: How many would you have to reduce? Mr. Saul: There's four designated to be reduced, and I want to tell you that's a pretty big hit to reduce four people out of a staff of a little over 30. And it will affect our collections in our municipal collection office and it will affect the services to the taxpayers of Richmond County in the tag office. We have not added any employees. We're just asking to keep what we have. Mayor Young: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I was on Finance when this came through and I voted for it and I make a motion now that we accept this and go ahead and give Mr. Saul the additional time to keep the employees he's got. Nobody wants to pay taxes but somebody has got to collect them, and I make a motion to go ahead and approve this. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and second. Any further discussion on this motion? All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Young: Yes, Mr. Kuhlke? Mr. Kuhlke: I've just got a question. When we took the action on indigent care and we're taking this action here, is it a requirement that we are going back and amending the budget? Mr. Oliver: You are automatically amending the budget through the action. Mr. Kuhlke: All right. Mr. Oliver: It will come from General Fund Contingency. Mr. J. Brigham votes No. Motion carries 9-1. Mr. Saul: Thank you for you time. Mayor Young: The next item is Item 18. Clerk: Item 18: Motion to authorize Mayor, upon approval of Attorney and Administrator, to enter into an agreement with Buck Consultants to Perform a Post- Retirement Medical Benefit Valuation for AUGUSTA RICHMOND COUNTY at a not-to- exceed cost of $9,000. Mr. Kuhlke: So move. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and second. Any discussion on this item? Mr. Mays: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: I am very much in favor of them re-entering this process, because I think we've had some questions, particularly in terms of retirees, particularly in terms of where they stand medically and on some other things. I looked through part of the data that they are supposed to do, and I guess my question is, I don't really have a problem with voting for it, but I'm going to be real honest about it. Will they be as exact, gentlemen, as they were with the salary study in terms of with this medical plan? Because if not, I guess it's one of those speak now or forever hold your peace deals. Are they included in this process as they look back whether or not this medical will give an alternative as to whether or not we need to deal with supplemental in some cases for retirees and offering them that? Because one of the complaints has been where you get into a situation with medical and they reach a certain age that actually benefits are being reduced, particularly where you have situations of prescription medicines and other things that are there that are better under the old plan than they are now. I just wanted to make sure, if we are going to spend some money to do a study, that we are covering every aspect of it, and that we are looking into those things that are actually going to benefit them and not have a gap when we bring it back and it's not a part of the study that they are doing. I want to make sure they are covering that aspect in their study, because one of the faults about these studies is when you give them a direction and they come back and you've got to approve it as is, if it is not covered with what they are going to study, then it still leaves those folk there with a gap. I am just seeking information. Mayor Young: Mr. Oliver, can you address the question from the Mayor Pro Tem? Mr. Oliver: Mr. Mays, in this particular study that are not going to look back on history and do any kind of analysis as it is currently structured, as it relates to what benefits people have. What they are going to look at is this point forward. They are going to do a valuation to try to tell us from an actuarial prospective what our financial liabilities are in health care, what alternatives we have got as it relates to dealing with both from the employee prospective and from the government's prospective. Deal with those health care costs and also look at the possibility of buying certain people who are currently not in Medicare/Medicaid into Medicare/Medicaid programs. But they are going to bring back those numbers and bring back some alternatives, because one of the issues that is looming for most employers is the cost of health care coverage for retirees. Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, I agree with Mr. Oliver that we've got to deal with what we've got because there is a question as to where we are going in the cost of health care. But there is an unanswered question, whether it's an answer some folk want or not, there is still an unanswered question as to the status of a lot of folk that have retired, particularly those where you have in the medical part of it, whether or not it's beneficial even with the portability clause, which I support it because I felt that in many cases, you needed to have situation where folk were retiring, they were able to walk away and take those benefits with them and not having to do like some of our employees that have spent 25 and 30 years, and they have to take a job in a grocery store that maybe used to be reserved for teenagers in order to get on some grocery store chain's group policy plan in order to support them or their spouse. But I'm not necessarily in favor of going back into a study that's not going to be comprehensive enough to answer some of the questions that we still had on board. And I'm wondering why we are entering into this realm and not going back and dealing with that, too, when it's still going to be a problem that is going to come up. Now we're going to spend $9,000 to deal with Buck and those again, and we've had enough from our work force with the number of complaints that we had, just in dealing with the other work they did. Are we going to come back now and still leave this situation unanswered? I think we ought to know what we are getting, but I think there are still unanswered questions and I guess this Commissioner wants to know when are we going to get to those, as to whether or not those employees' questions will be addressed in terms of those benefits that have been or alleged to have been reduced under the new plans? Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Mays. Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, thank you. I'm in agreement with Mr. Mays, but also I'd like to know why this study didn't go out for bids. It says not to exceed the cost of $9,000. Should we not have a bid, Mr. Oliver, that we know what the study is going to cost us before we done this? I mean that's like giving me, you know, you can go up to this much, but don't go under that. Mr. Oliver: We can do that, if you would like to go out for bid. We'd be glad to do that. However, I would caution that since this is a professional service, that the bid is not necessarily a good price and might not necessarily give you the best information. Mr. Williams: There ain't no sense in us doing no bid, then, if we are going to deal with folks who are not going to give us the best service for our bid. I mean, in my little thinking, it don't give me the liberty to say, if I've got a person who is going to give me a bid, but their quality of work is not going to be there, then I don't need to be bidding with them. So what you are telling me is we don't need the bidding process? Is that right? Mr. Oliver: You can go out for request for qualifications, if that makes you feel more comfortable, but I think price, I don't think the price component should be the only criteria for selecting a person to perform this work. Mr. Williams: I didn't think the price would be the only thing, but my observation is saying not to exceed an amount of $9,000. I think they should have bid on it and give the price as to what it was going to be, whether it was $9,000 or $5,000. We should--does that leave a door open? Would you not think that's saying– Mr. Oliver: No, sir, not really, because most A&E contracts are work not to exceed, and the reason is because depending upon certain things that occur, the price could be less than that. All this does is guarantee a maximum not to exceed price, and I think under the circumstances of what's being considered here, I think that that is a good way to handle it. But as I say, if you would like, we will be happy to issue requests for qualification from firms to do this. The market in this particular area is quite limited, but there are several firms who can do it. Mr. Williams: I think it goes back to what Commissioner Mays said earlier about the trucks. It works sometimes and sometimes it don't. We need to be uniform. If we're going to do this, we need to do it all the time. If we've got a company that's not reputable or have a bad record, we need to kind of eliminate them from the list, but I think we ought to put this to bid, it's just my thinking. Mayor Young: Any further discussion? Mr. Kuhlke? Mr. Kuhlke: I am not on that committee, but I was sitting in there and it was my understanding that there was contact made with two firms and that one of the firms indicated that they were not qualified or would not do it on a timely manner? Mr. Oliver: That's correct, Mr. Kuhlke. There were two firms contacted. One of them you would think would be in ideal position to do it because they have a lot of the raw data. That was Pension Services, who does the annual actuarial analysis. And it would seem they would be ideally situated to do that. They indicated they did not feel that was an area they were comfortable in doing this kind of analysis because of having to make certain assumptions as it relates to what is going to happen in health care costs, and so they declined to even provide any cost information because they were unwilling to go forward. We also contacted Buck Consultants, who has been providing the county's--they've been the county's technical resource on renegotiating our PPO and our HMO contracts over the last couple of years, so they do have the knowledge as it relates to the way our various plans work. Mayor Young: Anything else? Mr. Kuhlke? Mr. Kuhlke: No. Mayor Young: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: I just wanted to ask another questions about the bids. Mr. Kuhlke brought it to our attention about two. Is there only two services that was able to do this, Mr. Oliver? Mr. Oliver: No, sir. Mr. Williams: But you only contacted two? Mr. Oliver: That's all we contacted. As I say, one of the principal reasons was the fact that we had dealt with those two firms and that this particular firm, as I say, had been instrumental in renegotiating our PPO contract and our HMO contracts last year and determining what the medical inflation rates were and what changes in plan design should be made. Because to do this, you've got to understand plan design changes and ramifications of an organization. Mr. Williams: One other question, Mr. Mayor, and I'm going to quieten down over here. But this Buck, have we not had problems with them before? If I hear Mr. Mays right, have we not had their reputation or their background has not been as good as we would like for it to have been? Mr. Oliver: Well, I think there are two areas that this company has done work for Augusta Richmond County. One has been in the health care area– Mr. Williams: But I'm talking about their record, Mr. Oliver. I'm talking about whether or not you know of as the Administrator, whether or not there have been a difference between what we should have got and what we received. That's all I want to know. Trouble of not? Yes or no. Mr. Oliver: My answer to you, sir, is no. Mr. Williams: No trouble? No trouble? Mr. Oliver: When you deal with salaries you are not going to make everyone happy. Mr. Williams: I understand, but we're talking about a medical thing. Mr. Mays had mentioned something earlier about--and you know I'm fairly new. That's why I keep asking all these questions. I don't want you to think I'm just doing something, but I'm trying to get familiar, trying to get an understanding. And if we had trouble with this company before, and Mr. Mays may be able to address that, if we had trouble with this company before and we are going back with them again, you said that the best price may not be– Mayor Young: Mr. Oliver just stated that in his opinion we did not have trouble with the company. Mr. Williams: Can I get Commissioner Mays to clarify that for me? Mayor Young: If Commissioner Mays so desires to do that. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mays, could you help me? Mr. Mays: I'm going to kind of do like Bill did last week. We take turns figuring out who got on a winning and a losing tie. I got my winning tie on, but I can count numbers. I am going to lose this one. But I'm going to say this and I'm going to say it like old folk used to say. If a horse throw you the first time, it might be the horse's fault. If he throw you the second time, it's your fault. And I'm going to disagree with the Administrator. I think with the number of complaints that we had on Buck, and even when they were called by members of the media, and their absence of knowledge about things that they were providing in doing this study to the point that they were about ready to throw their hands up and say hey, we wish we had never done it, you know, and I think there is plenty of folk here out of a 2600 work force that can attest to that. So it doesn't have to be taken a poll between me and Mr. Oliver. But I'm going to lose that battle. But I do think with the scope of what they are going to deal with, still limited and still having John Ethridge down in Human Resources having to get his door rattled by those employees that are elderly, that feel we are not in a position of dealing with them, but yet going out with another study to deal with a benefit proposal that doesn't address this, and with the discrepancies that were dealt with before, and any of us that go to the National League of Cities, that go to NACO, any national convention, you see enough booths there that fill up, Mr. Mayor, a convention hall. And I say that nationwide you have got enough folk other than the one that you end up getting bit by before and come back. If I'm going to get bit, at least let me get bit differently. I don't have to get bit the same way. Like Mohammed Ali says, by the same dog. I don't want to get the same feeling twice. I do have a problem with that and it's going to pass, and this Commissioner is going to vote no. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Mays. We've got a motion on the floor to approve this item, and it's been duly seconded. All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Mr. Mays, Mr. Colclough, Mr. Beard, Mr. Cheek and Mr. Williams vote No. Motion carries 6-5. Mr. Oliver: We will issue an RFQ. I will assure you, however. Clerk: The Mayor voting yes. Mayor Young: I don't get to do that very often, Mr. Oliver, so don't pre-empt me. Mr. Mays: I thought we'd let you know how it feels to get bit. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Mays. We have some people who are waiting for Item 40, if we can move ahead with that. We have some representatives from Hephzibah and Blythe and we don't want to keep them off the streets long, because they are law enforcement officers. So if we could skip ahead to Item 40, Madame Clerk, and take that item up. Clerk: Item 40: Motion to approve job descriptions for 911 Director, Assistant Director and Training Coordinator with waiver of educational requirements for the initial appointment of the Director and the educational requirements as follows for the Director, Assistant Director and Training Coordinator's positions: BA/BS degree in Business, Public Administration or Associate Degree in Criminal Justice or Fire Science. Mr. Beard: I move for approval. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: We have a motion to approve it and second. Mr. Colclough? Mr. Colclough: This is for my own understanding. Could someone explain to me why we are waiving the educational requirements for the Director, then coming back and saying that the Director needs a BA/BS degree? Mr. Beard: As the chairman of the Public Safety Committee, I can answer that for you, Mr. Colclough. At the beginning, when we consolidated, we gave everybody the opportunity in the interim position of a director to apply for the job, and this is what we are doing here. This is the only exception we're making in this motion, that the person who is presently interim director can apply for that particular job regardless of the educational qualifications. Mr. Colclough: So it just opens up the application process? Mr. Beard: Well, anybody that is applying for that job, other than the interim director, would have to have the requirements that are stated in the job description. Mr. Colclough: Okay. Mayor Young: Any other questions? Any further discussion? Mr. Kuhlke? Mr. Kuhlke: Did anybody else apply for the job that have the requirements? Mr. Beard: That have the requirements? Mr. Oliver: You all just did an interim appointment. Mr. Beard: He hasn't been hired yet. Mr. Speaker: Haven't advertised for it yet. Mr. Beard: We haven't hired for that position yet. It's an interim director. Mr. Colclough: That answers my question. Mayor Young: Any further discussion? We have a motion on the floor. It's been seconded. All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Motion carries 10-0. Mayor Young: The next item on my list is Item 23, Madame Clerk. Clerk: Item 23: Motion to approve Employee Handbook and related changes to the Augusta Richmond County Code (with a simple majority vote of a Quorum for action by the Personnel Board). Mayor Young: Mr. Cheek, you have your hand up. Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I asked to have this one pulled. Having more time to read over this again, I have a couple of concerns that make me feel like this warrants going back to committee and being further refined. One is the 5-1 disparity between vacation allotments between our normal employees and our fire fighting personnel. And secondly, something, a term I find very consistent as well as typos throughout this document is--an example would be under section 1.5, refusal to submit for drug testing. Confirmation of tampering, contamination or alteration or substitution may--I say that again--may result in immediate termination for employees. May is the term that gets us into trouble when it comes to personnel. If we don't have a defined path of action, some employees may be terminated and others may not for the same offense. I would like for us to go back and come up with some better language that would better define a more consistent course of action that takes away the subjectiveness of the person doing the review. Also I would like to see a section that includes career development for our employees that would involve training and other things to help our employees become more marketable in the future. Thank you. Mayor Young: Are you--do you have a motion to go with that? Mr. Cheek: I make a motion that we send this back to committee. It's not ready. Mr. Williams: Second. Mayor Young: There's a second to that motion. Mr. Beard: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Young: Mr. Beard? Mr. Beard: I would just like to ask one things from the maker of the motion, you just want to include those items that you--to look at those items, or are you talking about looking at the entire--because there were certain items in there that I thought was necessary to be in there. And I would just like a clarification on that. If you just want those items that you pulled within the handbook to be reviewed, I can concur with you on that. Mr. Cheek: Mr. Beard, I'd just like to see the whole thing reviewed. And where we have may in there, these grays areas for interpretation, that those things be refined, where we shall terminate or not terminate. Mr. Beard: Okay. Mayor Young: Gentlemen, any other questions or any other comments? We have a motion to send this back to committee. All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Motion carries 10-0. Mayor Young: That takes us up to Item 30. Clerk: Item 30: Motion to approve a request to change the signs on Westbound I- 20 at milepost 7 (seven) from "Augusta at 3 Exits" to "Augusta Next 5 Exits." (Approved by Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) Mayor Young: Mr. Shepard, you asked this item be pulled. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, having recently been by that sign, I would submit that the correct number of exits is seven, and I respectfully submit Highway 25, Martintown Road, Riverwatch, Washington Road, Bobby Jones, Wheeler Road, and Belair Road. You just happened to leave off two exits in my district. I don't know if that was important or not, but it's important to me. So I'd ask that we make that Augusta Next 7 Exits, not 5. Mayor Young: Mr. Bridges? Mr. Bridges: Mr. Mayor, in regard to that, Steve, that sign was supposed to be put just the other side of the river in South Carolina so the next five exits--I mean this may be a misprint as what the intent of the committee was, but the next five exits were to be leading them to Augusta and not to North Augusta. If we go out, the argument was if we go out and put it out and say next seven exits, two of them are going to lead to North Augusta, not Augusta. And we were kind of being selfish and just wanted it all for ourselves. So the purpose in it was to lead them our way and put the sign closer to the river. Mr. Oliver: If you look at the back up on Item 30, there are eight exits listed there. I assume those are correct. Mayor Young: Yes, Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Bridges, can we--the sign is currently east of the US 25 intersection with I-20. Can we have them relocate it just east of the river westbound? Mr. Bridges: That was the desire of the committee and that was the motion. Mr. Shepard: I can support that, but the sign is where it is now. I don't know if you can get them to move it. Mr. Oliver: It was to be Riverwatch, Washington Road, 520, Wheeler Road, and Belair Road. Mr. Bridges: We were aware that may be a little more difficult but we thought we'd try it before we sent somebody else business. Mr. Shepard: You can make a substitute motion. Mr. Bridges: I make a substitute motion that we approve it as the committee approved it. Mr. Shepard: With the stipulation that the sign be relocated. Mr. Bridges: Relocated, yes sir. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mayor Young: Any further discussion on the placement of the sign on the intersection? All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Mr. J. Brigham votes No. Motion carries 9-1. Mayor Young: That brings us over to our agenda. Clerk: Item 61: Z-00-14 - Request for concurrence with the decision of the Planning Commission to deny a petition from Charles H. Cooper requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residence) to Zone B-2 (General Business) on property located on the southwest right-of-way line of Tubman Home Road, 580 feet, more or less, southeast of the southeast corner of the intersection of Gordon Highway and Tubman Home Road (2207 Tubman Home Road). DISTRICT 2 Mayor Young: Is the petitioner here? Are there any objectors here? Mr. J. Brigham: I move we deny. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mayor Young: Motion to deny has been seconded. Any discussion? All in favor, please vote aye. Motion carries 10-0. Mayor Young: Next item? Clerk: Item 62: S-564-I - DOGWOOD ESTATES - SECTION I - FINAL PLAT - A petition from George L. Godman & Associates, on behalf of The Lifsey Group, requesting Final Plat Approval of Dogwood Estates, Section I. This section is an extension of Blossom Drive, adjacent to Dogwood, Section I and contains 28 lots. (This Final Plat was approved subject to it being placed on the Commission agenda only upon approval of the City Engineer.) Mayor Young: Is the petitioner here? Mr. Findlay, you represent the petitioner? Mr. Findlay: I do, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: Are there any objectors here to this item? No objectors are noted. Mr. Findlay? Mr. Findlay: I don't know what the Commission would want to hear from me, as in fact, Planning and Zoning approved it. I'll be glad to address anything. Mayor Young: Be available for questions. Mr. Kuhlke: I move for approval. Mr. Bridges: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and second to approve it. Any questions or any discussion? Mr. Colclough: Yes, sir. Mayor Young: Mr. Colclough? Mr. Colclough: This item, and I don't know how it got on the agenda, but I would like to hear from--is Mr. Cheek here? Mr. Oliver: Yes, Mr. Cheek is here and he can speak to that. We recommend that if we're going to do that, that we want a $50,000 bond to cover work that is not acceptable our standards and that that be part of the acceptance. There are some issues relating to this property as it relates to drainage. One of the adjacent property owners and this property owner are in litigation currently as it relates to water that came off of that property during the development process prior to the construction of some retention basins and things like that. Currently it's Mr. Cheek and I'm going to ask Mr. Cheek to speak to that opinion that the drainage from this project is at the pre-development rate, which is one of the criteria. We do, however, believe that if we could get a right-of-way from the adjacent property, we could tie this into an upcoming drainage project that would make everybody's situation better out there. With that, Mr. Cheek, I'd like to ask you to add anything you'd like them to know. Mr. Cheek: My name is Doug Cheek. I'm the County Engineer. Mr. Colclough, I would have to agree with that that the damage claim I think that you're addressing is actually something that occurred prior to the completion of the retention pond, and that has been completed and is in the really post-developed stage, which actually releases water at a pre-developed rate. And if that is confusing, I can explain it again. Mr. Colclough: Try it one more time. Mr. Cheek: Okay. Basically the land with trees and grass and basically before any development is done is called the pre-developed state, and it's a requirement of us to only release rate equal to or less than the pre-developed rate, for the 2 to 5, the 25 to 50 year storm. And that is the pond's design. This pond's design actually detains a 100 year storm, which exceeds our actual requirements. I guess it's my, based on the calculations that I've received, the calculations indicate that it is releasing at the pre-developed rate. Of course I haven't done any measurements. That's just a theoretical calculation. But I want to say that it's my opinion that it should be in a better shape and in better condition than it was before the development as far as water release. Mr. Colclough: Has this cleared up prior to our prior conversation in terms of this water damaging, coming off that piece of property into that store at the bottom of the hill? Have they done work to correct that? Mr. Cheek: Basically, the construction of the detention pond would have corrected the actual source of the problem, but the actual damage that is alleged by the complaints, I'm not privy to that, but to my understanding nothing has been done and that has not been settled. Mr. Colclough: One of the issues that we discussed that water be dumped around that piece of property; is that correct? Mr. Cheek: That is correct. Mr. Colclough: Has that been completed? Mr. Cheek: No sir. If you want me to elaborate a little bit more on that, the developer, Mr. Findlay's client, is actually, at our direction--we requested that he obtain an easement from the property owners and at this time, there has been no agreement the downstream property owners and Mr. Lifsey. Mayor Young: Mr. Wall? Mr. Wall: There were a couple of other conditions that I think need to be imposed, and I think the developer has agreed to it. One is that the developer, the Lifsey Group, Inc. would agree to hold the county harmless as to any future damage on the property that is immediately joining to the south and to the west. And further, that although we are approving the final plat, we would not accept the streets and the utilities until such time that the piping around the down hill property is taken care of. And I think those conditions are acceptable to the Lifsey Group. Mr. Cheek: If I may, Mr. Wall, there is one other stipulation that we recommended, that no certificate of occupancy be given to the owners until this is settled also. Mr. Wall: Well, that is what you and I had talked about, but I think that the deed of dedication should take care of it. Mr. Cheek: That should take care of it, yes, sir. Mayor Young: Mr. Beard? Mr. Beard: I need to ask Mr. Cheek some questions. I was kind of asleep when he started this discussion here. I don't understand you saying something that the two of you can settle later, and the second thing would be, Mr. Cheek, what is your true opinion as County Engineer, what is your true opinion of this we're beginning to approve? Mr. Cheek: I'm in compliance, it is customary to allow bonds to be done to handle smaller issues. The main issues that need to be taken care of, there's pipe that needs to be replaced. In fact, Mr. Lifsey has already purchased the pipe and it is on site, which is an indication he is going to replace the pipe. That is the largest money item that we have out there. Without the approval of the dedication and the maintenance agreement, it would still be basically private property and it would totally be in Mr. Lifsey's interest to get all these items addressed so that we would address them, and we will not accept it until they are and are to our satisfaction. Basically we don't have a problem with the way that it's being proceeded. It is– Mr. Beard: So you can stand there and guarantee us that we will not have problems in the future like we've had with others here? Mr. Cheek: No, sir. Mr. Beard: You're going to personally guarantee that? Mr. Cheek: No, sir. (Tape changed here) Mr. Oliver: ...before the development occurred. The pre-development rate. Mr. Beard: But we're sitting here talking about approving a subdivision for someone who has built a subdivision above a piece of property where water has been dumped in it. And here we've haggled back two or three months, and all of a sudden we come forth and we're going to approve this with all these stipulations on this. Why hasn't something been done between the developer and the property owner prior to now? Mr. Findlay: May I speak and answer that? Mayor Young: Yes, Mr. Findlay. Mr. Findlay: I think I need to go back a little further. I find myself probably being somewhat removed as being my client's attorney and almost wanting to jump into the middle of a fist fight. My client hired Southern Partners. Southern Partners designed a good subdivision for him. The county approved the plans. The plans find themselves being the bottom ten acres of a 138-acre flood line, so to speak, taking all the waters which flow from the Walmart above, Breeze Hill above, and they find themselves coming down through this corridor. My client, through his good efforts, employed a company, a contracting company, to come onto his 15 acres or thereabouts, no more than 1/7 of the total water is engineered or is created by my client's property, and he had them put in the roads. Talking to my good friend, the engineer, that is Doug Cheek. Doug Cheek said in the best of scenarios, anybody that is in this line of work would know that the first thing you would do on a piece of property is go put in your detention pond. Regrettably, my client's a retired military man and he's not an engineer and he hired, at the cost of $300,000 this company. They didn't put in that detention pond. In July of last year, there came a flood second to none, that is five to seven inches of water in three to five hours, and the water, not only from this 15 acres of land, but everything above it came down upon this piece of property, flowed onto the Chows' property. Now the Chows found themselves having bought this piece of property themselves and they had another engineering company do the plans. The engineering company that did the Chows' plans allowed their finished floor level to be approximately two feet from the asphalt from outside. The Southern Building Code in Richmond County says that it should be at least six feet, six inches. If in fact, and I don't blame the Chows for finding themselves in harm's way, but if in fact their property, their finished floor level was up six feet, six inches, we may not be addressing this today. Now the Chows' detention pond that they've got on their property is not sufficient to handle the water in their own parking lot. I think Mr. Cheek will testify, if need be, that in fact they were supposed to at one time put in a 36" pipe, but a lesser pipe was put in. Now I am just trying to bring us up to speed. Mr. Beard: The Chows is not the issue here. The water was dumped on their property and it doesn't matter where it is, what the flow level it is--which piece of property was completed first? The subdivision or the Chows' piece of property? Which was it? Mr. Findlay: With six inches of rain, I don't think it would have mattered, sir. The Chows' property was finished first. Now that's a matter--now, if I may go forward, sir. Now the Chows, when this happened, of course rightfully so, they hired a law firm. They hired the Paine law firm and they brought suit against the Lifseys. They said everything you've done causes this problem. The Lifseys, in turn, were represented by Cincinnati Insurance Company and Cincinnati Insurance Company is defending them. Wrote the Chows a letter and said we'd like to procure an easement from you. They said we don't want to talk to you about it. Gentlemen, you approved our subdivision. You approved it. That is, your predecessor in position approved our subdivision. We built it according to the plans and the waters now leading to the detention pond are less than they were before we start and we only think we've made it a better situation. The seven inches of rain is something that nobody could have anticipated. Now having said that, we think we want you to take us and treat us as fairly as we want to treat the Chows. We have gone to the Chows and said we would like to procure an easement from you to take this water from an approved subdivision out to the Barton Chapel Road. The county is putting in a drainage system on Barton Chapel Road and we will no longer be a problem to you. If the Chows shut their doors on us and say we don't think we want to talk to you, then this is the need of a public taking, that is we need the county to take us an easement which we will be glad to pay for at a reasonable price, to take the water not only from the Lifseys' 15 acres or thereabouts, but from the 138-plus acres above this and take all that water out and put it into that Doug's office is designing. Mayor Young: That's not the issue here today, and I think what you're talking about-- Mr. Wall, correct me if I'm wrong, is a dispute between two private property owners. It's not relevant to our issue before us today of approving a final plat. We're not a party to that. Mr. Beard: And you're standing here trying to get us to believe that all of this, with this long presentation, all of this fault, if the Chows had built their property six inches above. Mr. Findlay: I didn't say that, I don't believe. That's one of many factors that have gone into it. Mayor Young: I've addressed a question to the attorney. I'd like to hear from him. Mr. Wall: Mr. Mayor, I agree with you. However, the two have sort of become intertwined insofar as getting access to the property by the developer to plan an easement, and the easement is something that we're requiring in order to--the drainage from this proposed development will go on to Barton Chapel Road. So one has sort of spilled over into the other, but you're correct, the other is a private property dispute as far as the damage. And as Mr. Cheek pointed out, the retention pond should have been put in first. It was not. The failure to have the retention pond in place at the time of the seven inch rain, or however much it was, resulted in damage to the Chows, and the Chows have filed a lawsuit against the Lifsey group that is being defended by an insurance company. That's in litigation. Mayor Young: And you and Mr. Cheek are satisfied with the stipulations that you would put on the Commission's approval of final plat today as resolving any issues that might affect the county? Mr. Wall: That's correct. Mayor Young: Any discussion? Mr. Colclough: Yes. I'm hearing that the county is going to be protected, but how about the folks out there? Who is going to protect them? We're protecting ourselves. We're protecting ourselves, but who is going to protect them out there? I direct that to the County Attorney. Mr. Wall: Mr. Colclough, I'll be glad to try to answer that. Accepting the information that has been furnished to the County Engineer that they are releasing at a pre-developed rate, then there should be no damage to the Chows. Also, looking at some prior plans, the Chows may or may not have put in the detention facilities that they should have. The third thing is that I have had conversations trying to get onto the property to secure the easement, and I think the Chows have an obligation to try to help themselves as far as solving the problem so that we can pipe that water to Barton Chapel Road. And so I think that the pre-development rate is there to protect the Chows, but again, our primary responsibility is to protect the county and I think we've done that. Mr. Colclough: There's only two people in that whole family that speaks English. That's two young girls, both in school. We're talking about people who really don't understand what's going on other than two young girls who speak English out there. Mr. Wall: And I agree with that and that is the reason I tried to go through their attorneys. Their attorneys initially indicated that they would assist. They have now sought to distance from the easement issue, saying that they're only involved to represent them insofar as the damage claim in concerned. I have made efforts, Doug has made efforts, others have made efforts to try to get onto that property. This is something that has been going on for, well to get on the property for weeks and been trying to deal with this for months. Mr. Colclough: Let me make an effort. Mr. Attorney, let me make an effort. Mr. Wall: I understand that. And if y'all want to postpone it for two weeks, that perhaps will give everybody an opportunity. I don't know if Mr. Findlay is agreeable to that, but we are sort of on dead center in trying to represent the county in this process. Mayor Young: Mr. Findlay, can you speak on behalf of your client for a two-week delay in this? Mr. Findlay: I heard my clients moaning in the background. I probably have done them little good with my argument today. Gentlemen, I understand what you're saying about these people who own the property below. But I don't think that in two weeks my client would have caused them any harm. And my client is willing to do whatever is necessary to acquire an easement from them, so as to take not only this water, but all of the water from Breeze Hill and make sure it doesn't find itself coming towards them. Mayor Young: Well, I think we just heard from Commissioner Colclough that he would like to make an attempt to assist in obtaining that easement, make inquiries, so that might work to your advantage to wait two weeks. Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I heard the storm referred to by Mr. Findlay earlier, tropical depression Earl was what it was. A mild to moderate tropical depression that came through out area. We're going to see these types of rainfalls. We had two majors ones in 1990 and several minor ones. I've seen many pages of addresses in this last couple of weeks of houses that we are attempting to mitigate from flooding areas at the expense of the taxpayers. The city was protected them from the mistakes of development in these areas where it shouldn't have been. Are we making that same mistake here by allowing this development? Mr. Cheek, give us your opinion on that, please. Mr. Cheek: Yes, sir, I'm holding the actual calculations that were provided to us through the process, and the actual pre-developed rate that was calculated for 50 year storm. That's the maximum requirement. 56 at best, cubic feet per second. The [inaudible] with all the trees taken down and just plain dirt is 67 cubic feet per second. And the actual discharge through the detention pond through the outlet structure is 35 cfs. Mr. Cheek: Are we building in a floor plain? Mr. Cheek: No, sir. Mr. Cheek: Not a designated flood plain, but is this going to be an area prone to flooding in the future? Mr. Cheek: No, sir. Mayor Young: Any further discussion? Any further questions? Mr. Mays: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: I guess my question, I'm trying to help, I don't think your argument has gone on deaf ears. I think in terms of Mr. Lifsey's reputation and ability to build and to want to put out a good produce. But I'm searching for a was that we can help you and help get that whole thing resolved in there. One thing in there, and it's not small. I don't want light of it, Mr. Mayor, if there is a language barrier problem and I think Commissioner Colclough has had some contact, but I guess it gets back to part of my diversity argument yesterday about some things that we may be doing or not doing. Are there not people, whether they are in the legal profession or not, we've got three colleges here, Mr. Mayor, Augusta State, Paine, Medical College of Georgia, in terms of somebody that could deal with, that does speak the language of the people that are there that could come in and communicate with these folk to serve in an arbitrary capacity, because we're in a world now where everybody does not speak English or speak one language. We have a multi-cultural society, multi-lingual. Not even just bi-lingual anymore. And I'm wondering if in terms of getting to that point, because obviously we need some way to get through there. You need it. Because what I'm worried about is not necessarily what they may have at this point and you may have at this point, but when you put all of it together, if there's a block up, it's not only going to affect where they are, it's going to affect some places in there if water can't flow freely with other development, if you add to it then you're going to see clogged places that you haven't seen before. That's just a natural deal of water. And maybe we need to pursue that. If we're going to deal with a two-week process, in all due respect to Richard, you deal with the introduction, but I'm saying we may need to take somebody there that those folk can have some confidence in and that they can interpret their feelings through that person, Mr. Mayor, so that if it is simply a language barrier problem, it may be we're saying they don't understand, but they in turn could be communicating something that we don't understand or that Mr. Findlay doesn't understand. And it's obvious that somebody who speaks that language needs to be in the process of doing it. And that's the only thing I want to throw in. If we're going to do that, let's incorporate that into it. Maybe on a fast track of trying to get that done. And maybe getting into that easement process might be a lot easier than we think it is if they fully know and they can have a trust factor of what's in there and that somebody can communicate that to them. That's the only thing I was going to add to it. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Mays. We have a motion on the floor to approve. Mr. Colclough, if you'd like to put it off for two weeks, we'll need a motion to that effect. Mr. Colclough: I make a substitute motion that we put this project on hold for two weeks until I can go out there and talk to these folks and get back with Mr. Findlay and Mr. Lifsey. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion on this item? Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Young: Yes, Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: I said it in a friendly situation, but I'm serious about it. Will the maker of that substitute motion, if we can incorporate that somewhere, Richard, of directing Jim or Randy in terms of if there is a language barrier, of us securing somebody, to interpret, to deal with that. I know you are trying to get this solved, but if they're not speaking what y'all are saying and y'all are not speaking what they're saying, all the sincerity in the world is not going to resolve that unless somebody in there can speak the language of everybody in the room. Mr. Colclough: I'll incorporate it into my motion. We can get somebody to do that. I'll incorporate that in the motion that we have an interpreter. Mayor Young: Any further discussion on the motion? On the substitute motion, we call the question. All in favor of the substitute motion, please vote aye. Mr. Kuhlke votes No. Motion carries 9-1. Mayor Young: Gentlemen, we have been here for two hours, so the chair will declare a five minute recess so we can all get up and stretch and replenish your water bottle or whatever, and we'll be back here in five minutes. (Recess) Mayor Young: Ladies and gentlemen, we have a quorum of Commissioners present in the chamber so we will reconvene our meeting. We'll move along. Call the order of the day, please. Clerk: Item 63: Consider sponsorship of Red Carpet Tour in the amount of $5,000. Possible funding sources: Downtown Development Account, Promotional Account, Commission Other Account and Lobbyist Account. (No recommendation Finance Committee March 15, 2000) Mayor Young: Let me make just one comment for the record. In the budget discussions for this year, Mr. Oliver and I had conversations with representatives of the Chamber of Commerce and we made it clear that we would fund them to the tune of $100,000 and that money would include all expenditures for the barbecue in Atlanta, the Red Carpet and everything else and they wouldn't come back and ask for additional funding this year. In spite of that agreement, they've come back and asked for $5,000 for this project and I just wanted to put that on the record. Mr. Brigham? Mr. J. Brigham: I appreciate you putting that on the record, but I'm going to make a motion to fund this item and that funding to come $2,500 from the Lobbyist Account and $2,5000 from the Downtown Development Authority Account. Mr. Kuhlke: Second. Mr. Oliver: The Downtown Development Authority Account doesn't have the money. Mr. J. Brigham: It's got $60,000 in it, Mr. Oliver. Mr. Oliver: I don't have those numbers here but we established a budget for the Downtown Development Authority and I'd have to verify that. I do not have those numbers but I'm assuming that what was budgeted, they are going to spend. We have $8,555 in Commission Other. We have in the Legislative Account $13,797. And we have $14,214.14 in the Promotional Account. The Development Authority I don't have in front of me. Mayor Young: Mr. Oliver, let me suggest, since the promotion for the golf ball project downtown is not going to happen, and that was for $2,500, you may want to redesignate that money for this use, Mr. Brigham. It might be a source of that funding. Mr. J. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I was going to try to return that $2,500 to the Promotional Account, is what I had in mind, seeing as how it's getting very low. But I'm not opposed to taking it out of the Promotional Account. Clerk: Is that total funding out of the Promotional Account, Mr. Brigham? Mr. J. Brigham: No. I'm willing to take $2,500 from the Lobbyist and $2,500 from the Promotional Account. Mr. Oliver: Put the $2,500 from the golf ball back in the account then? Mr. J. Brigham: Right. It's a wash. Mayor Young: Any discussion on this item? All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Motion carries 10-0. Mayor Young: Next item? Clerk: Item 64: Consider restoration of funding to Augusta Richmond County Clean and Beautiful. (No recommendation from Finance Committee March 15, 2000) Mayor Young: Gentlemen, what's your pleasure on this? Mr. Williams: I second it to get it on the floor for discussion. Mayor Young: There's no motion to second. You want to make a motion? Mr. Shepard: I'll make the motion to get it on the floor. Mayor Young: Mr. Williams seconded the motion. Mr. Oliver: It's $10,000 funded out of the Solid Waste Account, for the record. Mayor Young: Discussion, Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, we had this in finance committee and we commend the Clean and Beautiful for all they have done and all they're doing, but as a city government, we've got agencies and we've got equipment and the departments to do this same type work. What we may need to do is maybe see about giving some of our equipment or lending them some of our personnel in lieu of this $10,000 we're talking about. We are always talking about money. We're always trying to figure out where the money goes and I think we're double paying. Our taxpayers are paying twice for services that we already have. Now I know in the inner city and District 2, we have garbage pickup and we also have once a week that the county will come around and pick up heavy material. But I just don't see funding this extra $10,000 to the Clean and Beautiful program, no disrespect to this person who is doing this. But as a city government, if we buy equipment, and we've got dumpsters and we've got crews and even have access to prisoners to come out and help, which I remember a day when that was a known thing and it's getting back now and I think it's something we ought to be utilizing them for. But equipment, with the people we've already got, we're trying to cut costs, we're trying to do what is right for our citizens naturally, and I commend them for what they have done, but as far as trash bags and dumpsters, we've got people to do this kind of work, Mr. Mayor, and we need to use those people that we have already got on staff to do it. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Williams. Mr. Jerry Brigham and then Mr. Mays. Mr. J. Brigham: I may have to end up yielding to Mr. Mays. I gave him my line, but I'm going to use it until he gets an opportunity. Mr. Williams, my district doesn't have garbage pickup and there are very seldom, if every, do we get the opportunity to have anything. But we do get Clean and Beautiful from time to time to put a dumpster in the neighborhood, which is mighty helpful, and maybe once a year people can get to clean up stuff that don't overflow onto the public streets hopefully. My line I was going to use, that I was going to let Mr. Mays use, but I decided I am going to take it myself is, if I remember correctly, this money that we saved, we saved in the Landfill Account, which is an enterprise fund. It stays in enterprise fund. So we are going to give you $10,000 out of this enterprise fund and turn and spend to put this money, this value back into the landfill, if I'm basically understanding this. Is this correct? Mr. Oliver: They have not been taking their landfill fees and we built it into the budget as if they would not be paying the landfill fees. Mr. J. Brigham: So this money is for the dumpsters? Mr. Oliver: It's for dumpsters and for support of operations of Clean and Beautiful, salaries, you know, out of pocket expenses, cost of the dumpsters and the hauling of those dumpsters. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can? Mayor Young: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: In all due respect to Mr. Brigham, being the Commissioner, I said that twice today. But since I've been a Commissioner, I've made it my business to get in my district and try to line up some areas and some things to be done in my district, Mr. Brigham, cause in the inner city and District 2, which we have garbage pickup but we had the majority of our trash on our streets in the inner city. So since I became a Commissioner, I made it my duties to get with the people that are charge of picked up. I went to my neighborhoods, I talked to different communities, and we had them to set stuff on the streets. And not only just stuff, but anything they had on the streets, and we didn't sit a dumpster at one end when you've got a lady that is 75 years old who can't get it to her front door. She certainly can't get it down the street to get it in a dumpster. But my thing is that since I've been a Commissioner, I got out there into the districts, talked to these people, lined up some things, passed out some fliers, got with the crews, and assigned a date for them to go into the inner city and District 2 and I have not stopped because there are other places we have not gotten to as of yet. But I don't think this Clean and Beautiful, that we're double paying. I think we're double paying, taxing our citizens, when we're spending money we really should not be spending. I think that if we are going to be Commissioners, we ought to do what a Commissioner jobs calls for us to do. It's an elected job and there's a lot on our plates, but we have to find time to do it. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Williams. Mr. J. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I've got one small problem. If we are doing clean up and we're not taxing for it, then we need to tax for it. Because your district should not have any clean up that my district don't have. Mr. Williams: Same thing go for your district, Mr. Brigham, if you get out– Mayor Young: Let's maintain order. Mr. Mays, you're next. Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, I think we've got two situations here. One that's immediate and one that's long term. I don't think we can deal with the long term one here today. When we went through the budget a few months ago, all of us dealt with some things, where we needed to take some things from and make some other things work. But I think the bottom line in this whole situation on this clean up that we should all be interested in, and I hope we can move off the path of finger pointing and dealing with any blame on anybody's part today. The thing where we need to be moving to is getting access to what's needed in those areas in order to do it and that the level of service does not stop. Now I applaud Commissioner Colclough, because there is a plan on board and I have said this in several neighborhoods that I have been in, in terms of wanting to even expand some things to be done and go into those areas out of existing city work forces. However, if we're not ready to implement that and to deal with that on a full scale, full running force, then I think we need to deal with what we have and not leave us in a gap situation to where we cut on one side, but then we're not ready to move in a parallel situation with the other one. And I think the summer time--we're going into the end of the third month. We will soon be to the end of this summer and we'll be ready to deal with budget hearings again. If we want to deal with a different formula mix of who does what, what we fund to Clean and Beautiful, what we deal with in terms of government expanded work crews and those things, then I think that will be the time for us to more intensely do that. But right now, we're embarking upon a very serious, even though clean up should be year round. But we're in one right now to a point like people do house spring cleaning, Mr. Mayor. We've got neighborhoods that want to move. And we're hearing in a lot of neighborhoods, particularly where you may have dense populations, where you have houses that are very close together and where you have a lot of elderly people that are used to doing those things in a certain way. If we could fill this gap by going back in terms of the budget process and doing this right now, then if we want to move into another stage of doing that on an expanded basis, I have no problem with us combining the two. But I think we need to be able to provide access. I don't have a dog in this hunt. I don't care who does it. But I think the bottom line is, as I've said to the neighborhoods, I would fight to make sure that it got done. Where it comes from, I don't have a problem with that. I think Bro. Thomas and I have probably worked longer than any other folks and with each other. But we want to make sure that it's done, and I think this is a step in the short run of where we can get this done. They work also with housing and development. This is one of the reasons why it put on to the agenda, Mr. Mayor, which it didn't get unanimous consent, but I was hoping that with the $10,000 we could go on and deal with the $3,000, be able to get this thing back on track and move it, and then if we want to go to the expanded program, which I do support, and I think we need to move into, I think it's a good program and I think they can co-exist together. I don't think one has to go out of business because you expand the other. But I think we need to go ahead out the neighborhoods, advisory committee has approved the other $3,000 for them, I don't really see any need of holding that up. That's not a part of the motion but I would hope that somewhere that could be included. Give them the $13,000. Let's get the thing back to dealing with it and let's move on with what we want to do with Commissioner Colclough's program of getting that implemented. But right now, we've got to do something. One on a bigger scale, getting ready to go, like right now, today and I heard yesterday, and Mr. Oliver was telling me about the deal of moving some other money in order to make that move full scale. Well, that's too much red tape turning. We need to get back to where we were, and I think the way to do that is to restore what we've got, deal with the $3,000 that housing board approved last week, and give them the $13,000 and get rolling. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Mays. We have some other Commissioners who would like to speak. Mr. Shepard, then Mr. Beard, and then Mr. Bridges. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, I make the substitute motion that we restore the $10,000 and we give them $3,000 for the American Clean Up on March 25. This is something we've always done right before The Masters and I don't think we have the time to fiddle while our community remains dirty. So I think we need to go ahead and act on both of those. I put your suggestion in the form of a motion, Mr. Mays. Mr. Mays: I second it. Mayor Young: There's a second. Mr. Beard? Mr. Beard: I have no problem with the motion being made. I was just going to ask that we had several people standing there, maybe they could tell us what they are going to do with the $10,000 and that may clear up some things. Because I think some of the people wanted dumpsters in that neighborhood so they could clean up. So I think if that is made known to the Commission, we could all get an idea of what it's going to cost and that kind of thing. Mayor Young: We'll get to that in a moment. Mr. Bridges? Mr. Bridges: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think in regards to this discussion, Mr. Mayor, we need to keep in mind we're not restoring anything. This money that Clean and Beautiful got was their budget. They might have gotten more the previous year, but the amount that we've given is their budget. Now if Clean and Beautiful, its original intent was not intended to be continually subsidized by the county government. The purpose in it was to raise funds, private, public, whatever themselves and let the county initially help them out, but not to be a continued source of funds that they come back to year after year after year. We have too many groups that do that, have done that in the past. We have slowly cut some of those groups out over the last four years. I think the move to move Clean and Beautiful from $3,500 down to $2,500 this year was a good and prudent move. It's in the interest of the taxpayers, as Mr. Williams said we have programs of our own for trash pickup. There may be people out there that want more, and I'm sure Clean and Beautiful is a good organization that assists the public. But it should not be a continued sources of our funding from the taxpayers. It needs to get to the point where it does what it originally intended to do, and that was to exist on its own without taxpayer funding. So I think the move that we did at budget time was prudent, and I hope we'll maintain that amount. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Bridges. Mr. Oliver: I would note that the $3,000 would come from housing and neighborhood development if this is approved. Mayor Young: There was a question from Mr. Beard about what the $13,000 would be used for. Can you respond to that, Ms. Blanos? Ms. Blanos: The $3,000 as mentioned earlier, was approved by [inaudible] Mayor Young: Right. And the money would be used for what purpose? Ms. Blanos: For the April clean up. Mayor Young: And it would provide what? Ms. Blanos: It would provide dumpsters, fliers, bags, whatever the neighborhoods need to continue with their clean up efforts. Mayor Young: And then the $10,000 would be used for– Ms. Blanos: The $10,000 would be used for--part of that would go to dumpsters. We don't charge everybody full price. Mayor Young: But what part of it would go to dumpsters? Ms. Blanos: Well, I haven't figured it out yet because I don't how much we're going to get. Mayor Young: Well, if you got $10,000--that's the question on the table today--how much of that would be used for dumpsters and what would the rest of it be used for? Ms. Blanos: Probably about $4,000, and the remainder would go to other services. Not only do we have just a dumpster service. We do much more. We are the recycling people of Augusta, Georgia. We send so many people to the landfill. Newcomers who are looking for a place to dump their garbage. People who are looking for garbage service when they first move to the city. We do all of the environmental education within the school system. Mayor Young: And that's what the remainder of the $10,000 would be used for? Ms. Blanos: Absolutely. Mayor Young: Has your agency already received or requested any additional funding from Housing and Neighborhood Development? Ms. Blanos: Yes, we have. Mayor Young: And how much is that? Ms. Blanos: At the first of the year. $31,000. Mayor Young: $31,000? Ms. Blanos: Right. Mayor Young: And so this $3,000 would be in addition to that? Ms. Blanos: We didn't discuss that yesterday because I understand they are not going to have $31,000. They're going to look for what they can to provide to us to continue this program. Mayor Young: And that money is strictly limited to these targeted neighborhoods that are funded by community development block grant monies? Ms. Blanos: Absolutely. Let me say that we have touched every district represented in this room. Whether it is somebody's house being burned down and they couldn't afford a trip to the landfill or if they don't have even transportation to the landfill. We provide volunteers to other neighborhoods so that they can keep their neighborhoods together. Mayor Young: Is it not true also that in the state budget, you received appropriate, too? Ms. Blanos: In the state budget? Mayor Young: In the state budget. Did you not receive an appropriation of $40,000? Ms. Blanos: I have not yet. Mayor Young: But is it not a line item in that budget, Augusta Clean and Beautiful for $40,000? Ms. Blanos: For three different counties. Mayor Young: But it's still $40,000 for your agency. Ms. Blanos: We haven't been approved as far as I know. Mayor Young: Well, you have been because I have a copy of the budget. Mr. Beard, does that answer your question? Mr. Beard: I just wanted to throw out one more thing. It does answer my question and my comment would be I am in favor of the dumpsters being placed throughout the county, but I'm not in favor of restoring the additional money, and I wish in some way that if it's going to cost $3,000 or $4,000 then that is what I would be in favor of for those dumpsters, but the others I would not be in favor because I go back to the point that we are in the process of trying to implement a plan where we can do some things for the entire county, and this just wouldn't be on a one-time basis or a couple of times a year, but this would be throughout the year. If we're going to refer all of our monies, restore money, and I'm not in favor of restoring monies, because I think once we look at the budget and cut that budget, I think we ought to stick to it. But I do empathize with the people in the neighborhoods who need the dumpsters. And if this is one shot, if it's going to cost $3,000 I can go along with it. But I'm not in favor of restoring $13,000. Mayor Young: Mr. Williams? Anybody else? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I've heard the talk about the dumpsters and the bags and I'd like to know two things. I'd like to know the salaries of the employees or who or what salaries have been paid and who gets those salaries, and along with what else is being served besides dumpsters and bags. Now I heard you mention volunteers. I'm sure there's a staff and I'd like to know what that staff consists of and what their salaries are. Ms. Blanos: The staff consists of myself and I make $36,000 a year and my secretary, who makes $16,000 a year. Mr. Williams: Your staff consists of yourself for $36,000? Ms. Blanos: Right. Mr. Williams: And your secretary at $16,000? Ms. Blanos: Right. Mr. Williams: So the two of you. Ms. Blanos: Two. Mr. Williams: And the rest is volunteers? Ms. Blanos: Everybody else is volunteer. Mr. Williams: Everybody else is volunteer. Ms. Blanos: We do the adopt-a-road and the adopt-a-highway program. Mr. Williams: But you furnish the dumpsters and the trash bags? Ms. Blanos: Trash bags, fliers, educational materials. Mr. Williams: We're talking about cleaning up now. Ms. Blanos: It all goes together. Mr. Williams: The education part is a little bit different. I'm talking about one the job, doing the work. Mr. Mayor, I still hold to what I said before. I give all praises to her for what she has done and her association, her group. I don't think we need to extend anything. Mr. Bridges had just stated that we are trying to wean away, we are trying to step down from these type of funding. We've got city equipment, we have got city employees, we have got city machinery to do all this kind of work, and we merged these two cities together, we merged the city and the county together for one government. We need to go to work and do what we are supposed to do and put a government in place to do those type things. With that money we are spending on that, I just don't agree with it. Mayor Young: Mr. Kuhlke will have the last word and then we'll take up the substitute motion. Mr. Kuhlke: We've got two things on here about cleaning up the city. One is coming from Mr. Colclough and before I vote on anything like this, I want to know what his plans are. Mayor Young: We'll have an opportunity to address that. Let's go ahead and let's vote on the substitute motion, which is to restore the $10,000 in funding plus to add to that the $3,000 that was recommended by Housing and Neighborhood Development Citizens Board. All in favor of the substitute motion, please vote aye. (Vote on substitute motion) Mr. Beard abstains. Mr. Williams, Mr. Bridges, Mr. Kuhlke, Mr. Cheek and Mr. Colclough vote No. Motion fails 4-5-1. Mayor Young: Now that takes us back to the original motion to restore the $10,000. Mr. Beard: I would like to make a substitute motion to that. Mayor Young: Mr. Wall, does that take us back to the original or does it take another substitute? Mr. Beard: To the original motion. Mayor Young: I ask the parliamentarian. Mr. Wall: You can make a substitute motion. Mayor Young: Okay. All right. Mr. Beard, go ahead. Mr. Beard: I move that we allot them for the clean up. I think $3,000 for the dumpsters to be placed in the communities that are affected. Mayor Young: The Citizens Advisory Board of Housing and Neighborhood Development recommended the $3,000 for the clean up this weekend. Mr. Beard: Okay. It can come from Housing and Neighborhood Development. Mayor Young: So we have a substitute motion. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: And second. All in favor– Mr. Oliver: It would just be the $3,000 in Housing and Neighborhood Development, Mr. Beard? Mr. Beard: For the dumpsters. I want to get the dumpster. Mr. Oliver: To be used for the dumpsters. Mr. Beard: Yeah. This is what I want. The dumpsters in the community. This is--and I think this is what you've been asking for. Dumpsters in the communities. That was the number one thing that you wanted. Mayor Young: Just one moment. Commissioners Bridges would like to speak. Mr. Bridges: Point of information, Mr. Mayor. Jim, this is a question. Since that item did not receive consent to be added to the agenda, can it be taken up at this time? Mr. Wall: Not as a stand-alone item. Before you had it made as part of a motion that was a part of the agenda. Mr. Shepard's motion. And I thought that was in order. But to vote simply on $3,000 that, as you say, you objected to that. Mr. Bridges: So the substitute motion is out of order? Mr. Wall: I think it is. Cause it essence, it's doing what the addendum item was. Mr. J. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, can I make a substitute motion? Mayor Young: Mr. Jerry Brigham. Mr. J. Brigham: I want to restore funding out of Landfill monies for $3,000 for the dumpster program. Mayor Young: How is that, Mr. Wall? Are you rolling your eyes with that, or is that okay? Mr. Wall: Basically that would be restoring funding of $3,000 but designating its purpose. Is that the motion? Mr. J. Brigham: Yes, sir. Mr. Wall: I think that's proper. Mayor Young: Do we have a second for that motion? Mr. Beard: I'll second it. Mayor Young: Any further discussion on it? Mr. Mays: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: All right. Mr. Mays: Let me just ask right now, cause it seems we're playing a jockeying with numbers game, and we need to be honest with the general public. If we're going to $3,000, where is the $3,000 going to take us with relationship to the dumpsters versus the amount of time before we either institute a program of our own? And I– Mayor Young: Mr. Mays, if I can interrupt you. This is money to pay for the dumpsters to clean up that's coming up this weekend. It's for specific clean up this weekend. Mr. Mays: Well, Mr. Mays, as the representative of four districts and you are a representative of eight, I kind of would like to know where we are going past this weekend. We still going to have a city past The Masters. And I think if we're going to put a program in place, we either need to ask the Administrator when are we either going to deal with the cold car program and bring it up and deal with an amount of money attached to it or what are we going to deal with about putting in these dumpsters? Because this is not going to just be this week. And there's no sense in coming back two to three weeks from now, dealing with the calls that you and I are going to get from various neighborhoods everywhere from The Hill to south Richmond County and places and come back and remake this whole wheel while we are dealing with millions of dollars, when we're down here, quite frankly, elementary dealing with $3,000 this week, $3,000 another week. I think we need to have some direction as to where we are going with life after the Masters. Because they are going to be dealing with more than just that clean up of this week and I mean all the parties and participants in the room. You've got folk representing the coalition here, you've got the coalition president over there in the corner. Those are questions that neighborhoods are asking legitimately. Masters is fine. What do we do after Masters? We are the policymakers and we need to be setting the tone as to whether or not we are going to deal with something on Clean Up America week. Hell, we could keep cleaning till Christmas and it wouldn't clean this city up. But I mean we need to at least have a way we're going to pay for something other than that. And if the Administrator has got a time frame that he say we're going to pay this back and we're going to compare the two, then I'm all for that. But I think we need to give some direction other than when folk call us on what we going to do past next week. Mayor Young: Thank you. We've got some neighborhood representatives who are here. Did you want to speak to the issue of dumpsters? That's the issue that's in the motion. Dumpsters. Mr. Thomas: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: Please identify yourself and give us your address for the record. Mr. Thomas: Walter Thomas. 603 Wallace Street. And I am president of East Augusta Neighborhood Association. However, today I am here to speak on behalf of communities at large. Now we're talking about these dumpsters. I hear Commissioner Williams saying about there is a program in place now in his district that goes around and picks up trash. That may be in his district. But I want to tell you these dumpsters are so essential. You're going to need periodic pickups. Not this once-a-week thing when somebody puts out a tire here. These dumpsters are so essential to our community that if they are not restored to the community as we have been using them for the past many years, you will have trash, Mr. Mayor, from here to the landfill. Now as far as these little old ladies cannot get out of their house and take stuff to the dumpsters, most neighborhoods have programs in place and plans that assist these little old ladies in getting their trash to the dumpsters. There's on problem there. But these dumpsters will take the place of, I don't know where you are going to get all these man hours from that is going to clean up the city. Because if I went down, I have 1873 homes in my neighborhood. 1873. If I was to tell these people that the Mayor and Commissioners said to put your trash out on your lawn and they'll come and get it, that place would look like living you-know-what. So I'm really informing you that we need these dumpsters because it's more than just going around and picking up. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Thomas. I think we ought to clarify for the record here that the Commission has not cut out any dumpsters or any dumpster program. Those are decisions made by the Clean and Beautiful Committee, to make those decisions whether the dumpsters are available or not based on the funding you have. And that this Commission, in the budget process, did not cut specifically any dumpster program out. I need to make that comment for the record. All right, we have a motion on the floor that would restore $3,000 in funding to pay for the dumpsters for the clean up. All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Mr. Bridges, Mr. Williams, Mr. Kuhlke, Mr. Cheek and Mr. Colclough vote No. Motion carries 6-5. Mayor Young: Next item? Clerk: Item 65: Motion to approve a request by Clarence L. Richardson for a retail package beer & wine license used in connection with Stop N' Shop located at 3020 Tobacco Road. District 4. Super District 9. (No recommendation from Public Services Committee March 15, 2000) Mayor Young: Mr. Walker, you want to tell us about this, please? Mr. Walker: As we stated in the committee meeting, this meets all the requirements in the License and Inspection Department and the Sheriff's Department and we recommend for approval. Mr. Beard: I move for approval. Mr. H. Brigham: Second. Mayor Young: We have a motion and a second to approve. Are there any objectors this item? If you'll just raise your hand so we can get a count, please. [7 objectors noted0 Mayor Young: Mr. Hunter, you're here representing the petitioner here today? Mr. Hunter: Yes, sir. Mayor Young: If you'll come up and identify yourself and give us your address for the record and state your case. Mr. Hunter: Thank you. My name is Robert W. Hunter, III. Also known as Bo. I live at 2915 Bransford Road in Augusta, Georgia. I represent the corporation that is putting in this facility. The Stop 'N Shop, Inc. It's basically similar to a Smile gas station. They operate in three states. They've been in business for 17 years. It's almost an identical concept of a Smile gas station. They'll have a deli, they'll have eight pumps, they are going to have a food area and it's very similar to that. I think it's good for competition in the Richmond County area, to have other convenience store facilities coming into this area like this. They are looking now at three more locations in Richmond County, in addition to this one, depending probably on the outcome of this. They'll have 14 employees and they'll have a salary of $11,000 a month they'll be paying their employees, is their planned budget. They'll also be paying the taxes on the property and the utilities and they project an impact projecting into the community between $300,000 and $400,000 into this community. I have the manager and the assistant manager who live in the neighborhood and have been hired to manage this store. I'd like to ask Robbie Collier, who is going to be the deli manager, the assistant manager. He did collect signatures in the neighborhood and he'd like to present those to the Commissioners and pass that out so y'all can look at the addresses. Mayor Young: Mr. Collier, if you'd submit those to the clerk, please. Did you have something you wanted to say or to just submit these? Mr. Collier: I wanted to submit these and just let you know that I also live in the neighborhood and it would be a great convenience for everyone in the neighborhood. Mayor Young: Thank you. Mr. Colclough? Mr. Colclough: Do you have representatives from Sand Ridge Neighborhood Association? Mayor Young: Yes, sir, we're going to hear from them. Mr. Colclough: And we have the president out here. Mayor Young: Do you have anything else you wanted to add, Mr. Hunter? Mr. Hunter: I just wanted to say that they had used local companies in the grading and construction of this company, and I think it's very important for the Commission to consider this very seriously. I think it is a good economic opportunity that is coming into this community, and I know that it's a very, very nice facility, as are the Smile gas stations, Hess gas stations, those type of things. I think we're all aware of the rise in gas prices and I think that we can serve all the citizens of Richmond County, not just this particular area. We encourage the competition of more convenience stores that sell gas so that the prices may not rise as rapidly if possible. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Hunter. We do have some people in opposition who would like to speak to this. I ask that you come to the podium and please give your name and your address for the record. And let's do it one at a time and try not to be redundant. Mr. Speaker: Good afternoon, Mayor and Commission. My name is Sammy [inaudible]. 3839 Crest Drive in Sand Ridge. I just want to say to the Commission that for over ten years, the citizens of Sand Ridge and the surrounding area have worked very hard to maintain our general area and the standard of living that we bought into when we bought out houses and work in our neighborhoods out there. And we have brought many issues before this Commission. We have fought battles about bars, additional alcohol installations, and that is our issue here today, that this installation, this business wants to sell additional alcohol. We have enough alcohol on Tobacco Road and in our immediate area. We have no objection to this business operating, they want to sell gas, they want to sell these things, we think that's a vital income for that particular business. We have an objection to the addition of alcohol. If you look at this particular installation, it's right on the corner. That's a large area of the county that goes down into a subdivision. A good hangout at night for kids to come up from the various neighborhoods and hang out right there. There is no particular security fence or anything like that. So if the business wants to be competitive, we strongly encourage the business to go as a deli, as gasoline, the selling of all other items that's possible. But Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, we strongly implore you to not, not put any more alcohol installation out in our immediate area. We are the ones that live there. We pay our taxes. We got a fantastic neighborhood. We want to keep it that way. Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, that's what we ask you to do for us. Thank you. Mayor Young: Thank you very much. Yes, please identify yourself and give us your address for the record. Mr. Conway: My name is Tom Conway. I reside at 317 Church Street, Blythe. I am the pastor of Friendship United Methodist Church, located on Tobacco Road, almost adjacent across the street from the proposed beer and wine facility. Your Honor and distinguished Commissioners, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had a dream that the children of slave owners and the sons of former slaves could meet together and not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their heart. And in our area, we're building that type of community. Sand Ridge, the Jamestown Community Center, with the church, my church is a multi-racial congregation. Sand Ridge is multi-racial. Jamestown Community is multi-racial. Mr. Richardson, I'm sure is a fine fellow. But he would not want to put a beer and whiskey or wine store adjacent to his house of worship, nor would he want this type of business next to his home or where he lives. The only reason he's built this place where he has is for profit. To make money. We live in that community. Our church has been there overa hundred years. The homeowners, we put down roots. We're trying to build a dream that Dr. King had. We're coming together. We don't mind a service station, something that would benefit the community. They're building a new school about a mile away toward Fort Gordon. We're going to have a lot of traffic on that road.There's already a lot of traffic. So we come begging you, we know he has a right to make a living, but these are our homes. This is our community. And we're just asking you. You're our last resort. If he can't make a living without selling beer and wine, he can't make a living. I beg you, don't let this spoil our dream. Thank you. Mayor Young: Thank you, pastor. Were there any other people who desired to speak? Mr. Bridges? Mr. Bridges: I had to questions, Mr. Mayor, of the pastor. How close will this business be from your church? Is it directly across Tobacco Road? Mr. Conway: Almost diagonally. We have a power line that separates our property line from being right in front of him. And the problem with the restrictions, it's measured from the front door of the establishment to the front door of the church. We sit back from the road. If it was from the property line, they could not have the legitimate business. Mr. Walker: From the way Mr. Harris and I measured it off from the front door of the establishment to the fence of the property line was 484 or 485 feet. That was not to the front door. That was to the fence from the corner of the property line. Mr. Bridges: Is George Patty here? Can he address that this--is this in a commercial zone, that 400 feet? Is George here? Mr. Walker: He's not here, but it's commercial. Mr. Bridges: Commercial? Mr. Walker: Yes, sir. Mr. Bridges: Is that 400 foot from the center line of the four lane road rule? Is that commercial all the way down Tobacco Road like that? Mr. Walker: I don't know. Mayor Young: Any further discussions? Any questions? Any comments? We need a motion or do we already have one, Madame Clerk? Clerk: Yes, sir, we have one. Mayor Young: Motion to approve. Motion to approve is on the floor. Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Young: Yes, Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: The gentleman, the first gentleman from the neighborhood raised a question in reference to the area that is behind the service station and I went back today, and I've got my glasses today, Mr. Mayor. When we got in committee the other day, I didn't have them back there in the room. And we were hitting some stuff in here so fast the other day and I saw package down here. I see package, I think about package store. And I went back and I asked Stewart in reference to whether it had beer wine cause I had left my book and we were talking about beer and wine as opposed to wholesale liquor. Retail liquor. But has there been any contact with--I realize where the zoning sits and I think from the standpoint that I left it open the other day when we made the motion to bring it so that the full Commission could have a decision on it and we could at least legitimately look at it up or down. But has there been any correspondence between that particular neighborhood and ownership there in reference to what we might do, Bo, in reference to that gray area that's back there? Because we've had some convenience store areas where they've been behind some subdivisions where we've been able to do some things, whether it's on fencing, whether it's on lighting, some things that would give a degree of protection in there if folk have got to end up co-existing together. And that's what I'm looking at in there. Mayor Young: Mr. Hunter, did you want to address that? Come up to the podium. Mr. Hunter: Yes. They, Mr. Johnson from that corporation has attempted to contact them. The manager lives in the area and Mr. Collier. This is Greg [inaudible] over here. Both live in that area and had not realized that there was any major problem in their neighborhood that was to be addressed. And they obviously, and as I said they have gotten 175 members and none of them mentioned this. They went door-to-door in their own neighborhood of Sand Ridge, mentioning their concern about this area behind the store. I'm sure that– Mr. Mays: And one of my reasons for bringing that up was the fact that it may not be in the legal framework of this, but I threw this out last week in the motion because I guess one of the things that kind of adds a little fuel to the fire in this, I asked whether or not there had been some correspondence, is that through naturally no fault at all in that neighborhood and with that neighborhood association, funding cuts and things that we did as far as the Commission that left basically a large unsupervised recreational area out there in Sand Ridge. And the neighborhood association took it upon themselves to come forward, like we do adopting parks or adopting roads, and now basically serve as the management for that neighborhood association in the place of Recreation. And I see where you could possibly have a wholesome medium in there of these folk working together on something possibly. But when you ask a neighborhood to take on some services that the county was previously providing and then you add other traffic to that same neighborhood, in the absence of that, you get some feeling in there that's kind of like you've got a little bit of a trail. You asked them to take this rec center that you won't provide for, we take it over and provide you a plan, we take it and we manage it and we keep it open for you, and now all of a sudden we've got a difference of commercialism. And that's not necessarily the legal argument. That's why I asked had there been some understanding with the gentleman lives there, with these folk live here. But I asked had there been some communication with them and might be some medium that the store could serve in terms of working with that neighborhood and of working with that rec center that might turn out to be a happy one. Mr. Hunter: We'll make a commitment for that. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Hunter. Mr. Colclough? Mr. Colclough: We have sitting here the president and the ex-president of Sand Ridge. They say they've tried to make contact with the presidents of the neighborhood. There are two people sitting right here that maybe they can respond to that. Mr. [inaudible] and Mr. Charles. Mr. Speaker: If I may, I've been following this project myself. Mr. [inaudible] was elected president this year in January, but from the day that this property was surveyed I talked with the gentlemen who was supposed to have been the builder. I don't have his name right now. From Macon, Georgia. I advised him that we would fight this issue and I told him it was a church across the street and he told me he didn't know it was there. Well, as you just heard, that church been sitting there for a hundred years. I find it hard to believe that somebody can go out and buy and survey land and not see that big old church across the street. And I've called them on several occasions and tried to communicate to them to let them know a little bit about the demographics of that particular area up there, as it's been stated. We're not against the store, gas and this, that, and the other. But I will continue to come down here and keep telling you that our Sheriff's Department is just not big enough to patrol all the fires that is built right here. It's just not big enough. We've got enough alcohol on Tobacco Road that if we had every elephant out of Africa, he would be drunk before he got to Windsor Spring if we gave him a shot. There's no way nobody can convince me. I realize what the law says and all this. There's no way anybody can convince me that you're going to go broke if you don't sell beer and alcohol, when you are in as close proximity as you to that subdivision back there. You've got a perhaps situation there. You've got kids already coming up. It's private owned property back there now because there's no fence and nothing else back there, and as has already been stated, we are going to have a problem. Mayor Young: All right. Mr. Speaker: Neither one of these gentlemen right here live in that area and neither one of the gentlemen– Mayor Young: All right. We've got a couple of Commissioners who would like to speak and we need to move ahead. We have to be at a public hearing at 6 tonight. Mr. Bridges? Mr. Bridges: I'll try and be brief, Mr. Mayor. I've got a question. Mr. Charles, can you tell me, how close to this area they want to build? There's alcohol available. Is there some a block or two down or half a mile or what general proximity? Mr. Charles: If you take into consideration the federal installation, 400 yards inside of Gate 5. Mr. Bridges: What about the other way? Mr. Charles: The other way, you are probably 400 yards from the previous Smile gas station. Mr. Bridges: Normally, I don't have any trouble with somebody on a commercial zone having an alcohol license because that's what it's built for but here you've got opposition from the neighborhood, you've got a church that is in close proximity, you've got the concern from the neighborhood that's behind it, the congregation of minors, and there is alcohol available just a few hundred yards down the road that is available. So nobody is going to be denied a drink by not having this. So I think those facts need to be considered in the vote. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Bridges. Mr. Kuhlke? Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Hunter, the license and the inspection department says they approve you. The Sheriff's Department does. Going through the planning process, you went through the Planning Commission, I'm assuming, to get approval on your site plan. Am I correct? Mr. Hunter: Yes, sir. Mr. Kuhlke: In that process, did you go through the Tree Commission as far as any buffers that might be required where commercial property abuts residential property? Mr. Hunter: I do not know the answer to that. Mr. Kuhlke: But from the standpoint of going through all the approval processes, you did that? Mr. Hunter: Yes. Mr. Kuhlke: And what stage is the station in right now? Mr. Hunter: It's ready to begin operations fairly shortly. The second thing is, my client did call and will be glad to provide the Commission phone records where they called this gentlemen here and he refused to return their phone calls. Mayor Young: The Commission will note the arguments made by both sides and reach their own conclusions on that. Mr. Kuhlke: I'd like to say one other thing. I think that--I don't know what my colleagues are going to do, but I'll just say this publicly. If you don't get what you're asking for today, I think you have some recourse. Mayor Young: Mr. Cheek and then we'll move ahead with the vote. Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, the neighbors of Sand Ridge and Pinnacle Place are the anchor of that end of Tobacco Road and the improvements made into Fairington and other areas are a direct result of their input into the community. Their concerns certainly are my concerns, and I would like to see us pay attention to those people who will be living there long after gas stations come and gas stations go and owners come and owners go. These are the people left with the diminishing property values as a result of poor locations of business establishments, and they stand the most to lose in all of this, regardless of whether this place is allowed to sell beer or not. Mayor Young: Thank you very much. We have a motion on the floor to approve the granting of this license for retail package beer and wine. All in favor of the motion to approve, please vote aye. Mr. Bridges, Mr. H. Brigham, Mr. Williams, Mr. Mays, Mr. Cheek and Mr. Colclough vote No. Motion fails 4-6. Mr. J. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, do we need to call for a liquor referendum in this county so we can get the public's input on it? I think we've already had this discussion for months. Mayor Young: Be that as it may, this item was defeated, 4-6. Clerk: 4-6, with Mr. Beard voting yes, Mr. J. Brigham, Mr. Kuhlke, and Mr. Shepard. Voting no are Mr. Bridges, Mr. Henry Brigham, Mr. Marion Williams, Mr. Mays, Mr. Cheek and Mr. Colclough. Mayor Young: Next item? Clerk: Item 66: Motion to approve a request by Terry L. Wick for consumption on premise liquor, beer & wine license to be used in connection with The Clubhouse located at 2567 Washington Road. There will be Sunday sales. District 7. Super District 10. (No recommendation from Public Services Committee March 15, 2000) Mayor Young: Mr. Walker? Mr. Walker: This was held over to the meeting from Public Service Committee because there were some questions unanswered. The Sheriff's Department has been made available the information they need and it's been approved by Mr. Wall, the Sheriff's Department, and the License Department. We recommend approval. Mayor Young: Are there any objections? None noted. Mr. Kuhlke: I so move. Mr. J. Brigham: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor, please vote aye. Mr. Bridges and Mr. Williams vote No. Mr. Colclough votes No on Sunday sales portion. Motion carries 8-2. Clerk: Item 67: Consider request for reconsideration of Commission action taken in the March 7 meeting regarding the residency requirement of the Homebuilders Association's appointment to the Subdivision Regulation Committee. Mr. Oliver: I believe, Mr. Mayor, there is a member of the Homebuilders Association here. Mayor Young: We'll here from you in just a moment. Let me relay the Commission a conversation I had today with Mr. Bowles from the Subdivision Regulation Committee, and we discussed the issue of residency. I restated to him the policy of this Commission, the preference of this Commission to appoint people who live in Richmond County to boards and agencies that function in Richmond County. And I suggested to Mr. Bowles there might be some additional options available that the Homebuilders may want to consider, including appointing a liaison from the Homebuilders Association to the committee, someone who could dialog on a regular basis, be on the mailing list for minutes and get agendas and things like that. He said he thought that might be acceptable and he was going to take that up with the Homebuilders. So that's the way that conversation went today, and having said that, we'll recognize a representative from the Homebuilders and if you'll give your name and address for the record. Mr. Youngblood: Nathan Youngblood. I'm vice president of the Homebuilders Association and chairman of the Codes Committee. And Mr. Mayor, that's exactly what we were asking for originally. We would like that liaison member so we can send our best member forward to be there with that committee as they make the decisions for a forward Augusta. We do not seek a vote on the committee. Mr. Oliver: So would 67, I gather, be to make this a non-voting member? Mayor Young: They would just appoint a liaison, like we have a liaison to the school board. Mr. Bridges: I so move, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Kuhlke: I second it. Mayor Young: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor– Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Young: Yes, Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: I don't have any problem with that. I think you can tell a professional association from amongst their ranks of the person they think in that manner. But I don't think-- my hangup is not with whether the board has a person that votes or not votes. I think we get back to again of why we make rules and why we make laws. We went through a lot of hoopla about folks serving on two different board. That was a big hassle. We made a distinction in reference to where some folks were moved off of boards that didn't live in Augusta and Richmond County, and I'd just like to say sarcastically that maybe we need to move some money out of the Promotional Account and buy some big billboards, Mr. Mayor, and say we welcome some builders to live in Augusta Richmond County. We are a good place to live. We've had citizens that we have had to turn down that moved out, that got off boards, and I think there is something in there that maybe we should ask in terms of Mr. Youngblood who makes money, who is selling homes, and the people who turn around, who live and work here and come into our city, to a point to where you want to make decisions on it but nobody feels comfortable enough about living here? Mr. Mayor, I've got a personal insult about that. It may pass, but I'm not going to vote for it. I think we voted that, and if we exclude our citizens from serving on boards, then we ought not have folk living somewhere else who did. It gets us back to the subdivision ordinance that you and I fought for, then we turned around and we got standards that were set in there by folk who didn't even reside here, but who wanted to set standards for folk who live over here. So maybe we need to put that sign out, and a few of them. Golf ball on it and everything else and say we welcome you to come live. We sell here, we want to drive away from here, but we don't want to live here. And I have a problem with that. Mayor Young: All right. Thank you, Mr. Mays. Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Mr. Beard out. Mr. Mays and Mr. Williams vote No. Motion carries 7-2. Mayor Young: Next item? Clerk: Item 68: Consider approval of table sponsorship at the Annual Media Phoenix Awards gala at a cost of $500 from Commission Other Account or Promotional. (Requested by Mayor Pro Tem Mays) Mr. Shepard: I so move. Mr. Oliver: $8,555 in the Commission Other Account. There is $14,214.24 in the Promotional Account. Mayor Young: Okay, need to designate in your motion, Mr. Shepard, where to take this from. Mr. Shepard: Promotional. Mayor Young: Okay. And a second? Do we have a second to that? Mr. Cheek: I second it for purposes of discussion. Mayor Young: Okay. Mr. Shepard: I'm sorry, I meant to make that Commission Other. I'd like to amend my motion, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: Commission Other Account? Mr. Shepard: Yes. Mayor Young: Any objection to that? Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, I make a substitution motion that– Mayor Young: Mr. Mays, just a moment, Mr. Cheek asked for the floor. Let him and speak and we'll come down to you. Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: For the purposes of enlightening one of the newer Commissioners here, could someone tell me what the Annual Media Phoneix Awards gala is? Mayor Young: What the Fire Department does is give awards to local news media for their coverage of Fire Department activities and so forth. It's a competitive process. And each year they have this program where they pass out the awards and it's a very well-done evening and it includes dinner. Mr. Cheek: Thank you. Mayor Young: Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: I just make a substitute motion that it come from Promotional. Mayor Young: All right. Do we have a second to that? Mr. Colclough: Second. Mayor Young: Any discussion on the substitute motion? Mr. Bridges: And the original motion is Commission Other? Mayor Young: Commission Other. All in favor of the substitute motion to pay for the table for $500 at the Annual Media Phoenix Awards program to pay it out of the promotional account, please vote aye. (Vote on substitute motion) Mr. Beard out. Mr. J. Brigham, Mr. Kuhlke, Mr. Bridges and Mr. Shepard vote No. Motion fails 5-4. Mayor Young: That takes us back to the original motion. All in favor of paying for this out of the Commission Other account, please vote aye. (Vote on original motion) Mr. H. Brigham abstains. Motion carries 9-1. Mayor Young: Next item? Clerk: Item 69: Consider approval up to $2,000 to cover expenses relating to the April 11-12 Georgia Department of Community Affairs Board meeting, which will be held in Augusta. Funded from the promotional account. (Requested by Mayor Young) Mr. Oliver: There's $14,214.24. I'm consistent. Mr. Colclough: I so move. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: Let me just state that when we were in Atlanta last fall with Jim Higgins from the Department of Community Affairs, we invited his board to come meet in Augusta. They are meeting the week after Masters and we have a couple of sponsorships that we are obligated to. We have a motion and second. All in favor of the motion– Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, can we have discussion on that? Mayor Young: Yes, sir, we sure may. Mr. Mays: Do we have any definition as it goes from meeting to meeting, and I'm going to vote for the motion cause I was there with you and I think that's a good idea. But I'm just wondering, is there a definition of promotional versus otherwise? I mean there are some things we promote and some that we procrastinate on. I mean I'm just wondering. It's good, we invite folk. But I'm just wondering. We showcase the city, we get a department in, and the reason I did it out of Promotional is that earlier we've had out of that department, that has hosted more events than any department in this city in terms of bringing in conventioneers combined. Other than the Georgia Games, and that was a united effort, out of the fire department. Just walked away with $64,000 today in dealing with it. That was my reason for taking it out of Promotional. I'm glad you passed it somewhere. But I'm just wondering how we get to the definition of what does come out of Promotional and what comes out of Commission Other. And that's the only thing I just raise. I'm going to vote for your motion. Mayor Young: For the answer to your question, I'll defer back to the budget discussions of late last year and each Commissioner in his own mind and his own heart will have to interpret what Promotional means. We have a motion on the floor. All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Motion carries 10-0. Clerk: Item 70: Discuss solicitation and submittal of applications for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). Eight projects (residences) are being proposed for solicitation and submittal in the Raes Creek Area and the Hollywood Development area. This approval includes solicitation to voluntarily participate in the HMGP and the execution of a maintenance agreement subject to receipt of Federal funds. The property owner has to agree to participate in the program. (No Recommendation from Engineering Services Committee March 15, 2000) Mayor Young: Mr. Oliver, do you want to speak to this? Mr. Oliver: Yes, I'll start the ball rolling and we'll call on the EMA Director as necessary. There was a grant opportunity that was identified, as was discussed in committee. The grant opportunity provides for funding from the federal government to up to 3/4 of the appraised value of the property plus relocation and appraisal expenses. To purchase that property, it's based on a formula. The properties are ranked based on flood insurance payouts compared to the value. In your backup you have a listing of the properties as we received it from the federal government from FEMA. Four properties, as you can see on that list, the first five properties more has been paid out in flood insurance claims than the value of the property, at least according to the property records. We also believe, but at this point we cannot give any assurance to this effect, there is a possibility some other grant funds may be available to cover our 25% of the cost of this. We are suggesting that you consider to take up to $250,000 from the Jackson Road project, which has been closed out or is in the process of being closed out. There was discussion about doing some things with the Racquet Club which, if you do this action, you will not be able to do at this point until and unless additional funds are identified, because with this $250,000 we can leverage it to a million dollars. On this particular program, what will happen is it will be sent into FEMA, it has to be in by the end of the March, by March 31. We expect to have some action by them within 60 days. At that point, someone will go to the property owner, an appraisal will be made, there will be an offer made, and they can either accept it or reject it. If they reject it, it's over. We go down to the next particular person and essentially what we have to say is we follow the rules and we follow the guidelines, and if they decline the offer, then we tried. We think that this is a way to deal with these. We would not on an item dealt with earlier, we dealt with another grant in the Hollywood area, as it relates to a grant opportunity that we have there. So we are trying to leverage federal funds with local funding, try to address the areas, the needs of the community, and we submit this to you for your consideration. Mr. Kuhlke: I move approval. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and second. Discussion? Mr. Bridges? Mr. Bridges: Mr. Mayor, yes. Randy, I know that during the committee meeting, this kind of got hung up in discussion. Maybe there is confusion. Is there any danger in an existing project like the south end of Windsor Spring Road being not complete or not funded as a result of funding this? In other words, will monies be transferred to fund this that might be utilized in other areas in regards to– Mr. Oliver: Ms. Smith is looking for money to fund something on Windsor Spring Road. We have– Mr. Bridges: That's approved, though. Mr. Oliver: Well, we've tentatively identified other money that can be moved. I am just not in a position today to address that. We believe that there is other money that can be identified through closed-out things and recaptured to address the $300,000 that Ms. Smith has identified that is needed in that area. We are working on that cause we are trying to close certain things out to be able to address those needs, but again, you all have to decide how the priorities of the community are best met. Mr. Bridges: So you can't tell me today that Windsor Spring Road project will complete if we fund this, is that right? Mr. Oliver: Teresa may be able to. I cannot today. I believe that it will be and I'm relatively confident but it's going to take me a little more time to give you 100% assurance. Mr. Bridges: This has to be passed today in order to meet the guidelines? st Mr. Oliver: It has to be submitted by the 31 of March. Mr. Bridges: Okay. Mayor Young: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: I've got a question, Mr. Mayor. No. 21, No. 33 says Laney-Walker Boulevard, Building B, and it's the same thing on 21 and 23. Why is that? Mr. Speaker: Those are typo areas. Mr. Williams: [inaudible] Mayor Young: Mr. Jerry Brigham? Mr. J. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, while Mr. Oliver is looking for those funds, I want to remind him that we transferred a heck of a lot of money out of Crane Creek flooding to other projects and this is part of the basin that Crane Creek is in, as most of these properties. And I would be very interested in seeing that money restored to that project to fund this. It's a flooding issue. It's a flooding issue and we have trouble and I think we ought to approve it immediately. Mayor Young: All right. Any other discussion? All in favor of the motion to approve this, please vote aye. Mr. Bridges votes No. Motion carries 9-1. Clerk: Item 71: Motion to approve an Ordinance to add section 4-1-6 so as to provide duties and responsibilities of the Animal Control Board; to provide an effective date; to repeal conflicting Ordinances; and for other purposes. Mayor Young: Mr. Wall? Mr. Wall: Hopefully each of you received a fax from the Clerk's office with one modification from what was in the agenda book, and that is to add a paragraph (A) which reads to work actively in educating the public as to the need for sterilization of dogs and cats. And I was asked by some of the Commissioners to draw this up to define their Board's role and I submit it to you for consideration. Mr. Bridges: I move for approval. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mayor Young: Motion and second. Discussion? Mr. Shepard, you seconded the motion. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Bridges, is that also to waive the second reading or you just want to go through the normal process? Mr. Bridges: Yes, we can waive the second reading if the Commission is agreeable. Mayor Young: Is there any objection to waiving the second reading? None heard. Mr. Shepard: I just want to point out I think we're giving the board the duties that they've had and they've been exercising faithfully and I just wanted to say that the question was raised were we muzzling the board and I think the answer is, to follow through, is we're asking them to be pointers and hopefully these issues, we won't be setters, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Young: Thank you. Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Young: Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: Does it take unanimous consent to waive a second reading? Mayor Young: Yes, sir, it does. Mr. Mays: We don't have it. And the discussion of it, and my reason for it, is out of protest, I may probably go ahead and vote for it, but I guess I brought up the muzzle statement during committee in reference to this situation. We advertised for the position of director out there and are working along with the transition period where Mr. Larmer will be on board and we be advertising for another person. But I think in fairness to him, in reference to things that have been called for in reference to some needs that he has right now, while I agree that maybe we need to be moving ahead and if we want to get to the point of defining folks' role. All of that is well and good. But Mr. Mayor, I ask the Administrator or ask anybody that wants to answer it, have we taken a step to deal with putting in the administrative people there, at least if nothing else, temporary? Somebody to go on and start to get in and deal with record keeping, to deal with computer update, to put it in, that type of thing? I think posturing with an ordinance is good, but I think to just advertise for something and just leave it cold turkey to somebody that comes in, that ought to be our first priority in terms of where we are dealing with strengthening the department right now, as opposed to trying to just basically keep some folk in check. And that's my reason for not voting against it and that's my reason for wanting to delay it and hold it for a second reading on the same ordinance. Cause I think we need to be doing both of them hand in hand. Other than just dealing with the ordinance, we need to be making the improvements, too, because while there may be some things that are critical, I think in all fairness to the person that is leaving, there are some things that we need to be doing right now other than the fact of building a building and of hiring somebody else that may come in. There are some things in the interim that we need to be about doing and some changes that the administrator needs to be recommended that we need to do over there in Animal Control. Mayor Young: All right. Thank you, Mr. Mays. Your point is well taken. Your question, though, is not germane to the motion with the Animal Control Board, but I'll give Mr. Oliver a moment to respond to you. Mr. Oliver: As you're aware you approved today an A&E contract for the building. Mr. Acree will be supervising that. In addition to that, Mr. Mays, the computer equipment is in process of being installed at Animal Control. The software is being worked on. With all the Y2K issues that we had to address last year, this was not high on our priority list. Because of that, in addition to that we are currently, the internal auditor is currently working out there to reconcile the books, records, make recommendations on how that can be done better, so that information can be put into that particular aspect of it. We also talked with the state about using a state resource to make recommendations on changes in policies and procedures as recommended by the Mayor. And we're looking to see what other resources may be available on a consulting type basis to provide those interim suggestions or recommendations that may serve for long-term improvement. Mayor Young: Any further discussion? Mr. Mays: Satisfied with the answer, Mr. Mayor. I think it two weeks when we read it again, maybe the changes that he's read out will be in place so we can approve all of them at the same time. Mr. Oliver: They won't be in place in two weeks. The computer– Mayor Young: Mr. Oliver, why don't you bring us a progress report in two weeks? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I wanted to bring something to the Commission's attention and maybe Mr. Oliver has a solution. Mayor Young: Well, the motion is with respect to the Animal Control Board, so let's keep our discussion focused on the motion on the floor. Mr. Williams: Along with the motion on the floor, we talked about, and Mr. Mays just go through discussing about, doing some things, trying to bring the entire Animal Control system out there up to day. Mr. Hornsby is a good man, I think, to help us out with the expertise of going out there and doing some things without a computer system. I think we need somebody with that kind of knowledge to help us do that, and I thought Mr. Oliver may be able to work something out with him and have him to help us out in that area. We've got somebody on board. Mayor Young: Mr. Hornsby and Mr. Oliver are both working out there right now on a fairly regular basis. Any other discussion? Any other questions? We have a motion on the floor. Call the question. All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Mr. Mays abstains. Motion carries 9-1. Clerk: Item 72: Discuss RCCI/Public Works Community Cleanup Initiative. (Requested by Commissioner Colclough) Mayor Young: Mr. Colclough, you have the floor. Mr. Colclough: Yes, sir, I brought this item the floor. We have used the crews out in south Augusta to do a massive cleanup and it worked very well. What I'm proposing to do is have work crews in each of the districts. What we're planning on doing is combining two districts together and having work crews assigned permanently to each district to be able to provide cleanup services. [inaudible] and I worked on this project together and I'd like for him to come forward and give an overview of what the project is all about, along with Mr. Green here. Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Commissioner Colclough. Gentlemen, this is a plan to reorganize the deployment of the work crews from RCCI going to public work. Presently the way the crews are assigned, the crews come from RCCI and they're assigned to Roads and Bridges Department of Public Works. The crews are sent out to the districts or the sites based upon who hollers the loudest or who has the most work orders in their area. Our proposal is to assign crews to each district, and it will be those crews' responsibility to keep up with what is to be done in that district. And I believe Mr. Colclough has given each of you a copy that will show the number of crews that will be assigned to the districts. If you haven't received one, the proposal, and this came from Public Works, we have eight districts. District 1 receive two crews. Districts 2 and 4 receiving three crews. Districts 3 and 7 receiving three crews. District 5 receiving two crews. Districts 6 and 8 receiving three crews. Making it a total of 13 crews. The crews, the number of crews was determined by Public Works and that was determined by the amount of work that's done in each district. Mr. Oliver: We are in agreement with the proposal. We think it provides better accountability. I want to make a couple of notes, however. This will pull one crew from Trees and Parks, or Trees and Landscaping. I should say one of the RCCI inmate crews, this will require $33,541 from the General Fund Contingency and $18,000 from the Capital Contingency and with the caveat that as it relates to these engineering technicians, that Mr. Leverett is responsible with them supervising the correctional officers. Mayor Young: Mr. Oliver, is there some way that if we do this that we can measure the performance of this system to see whether indeed it is working or now so that we're getting more bang for our buck? Mr. Oliver: We have a work order system that's been installed. One of the things that we will then go forward with is to make it so that the code enforcement officer covers the same areas as these particular work crews so there is a one-to-one correlation, if you will. The problem is that there is some disparity in the work between the various districts. The benefit I see to having the code enforcement officers and the work crew having the same geographic area is if you go into that area, you know who is responsible. And I seem some tremendous benefit to that. Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, I think Mr. Green can kind of respond to that for you. Mr. Green: Last October, we instituted a new work order program, work order log.. All calls presently come in now to our office. We issue the work orders. To give you an example, for the past four or five years, we have been averaging about 6,000 work orders per year. I just did a work order report this morning before I came here to see how we are standing. From January 1 to March 21, we issued 2,102 work orders. That's in less than three months. That's the volume of work that we have. We can't keep up. We did the research to come up with these numbers on the districts, it may appear that one district is favored over another, but this is where the complaints are coming. This is where the actual work orders are generated, not just where the work is being done, but this is where the crews are needed right now. I might add one other thing to Mr. Mays' questions, and I don't hesitate to say this at all. We will be coming through the budget process next year to expand this somewhat, based on our research, on what the needs are, and also when this determines what else is needed for the area. We have four crews right now that are assigned primarily in the old inner city. They're handling vacant lots, as well as trying to do some vacant lots in the old suburban district, as well as the bulky trash, that is items that are placed out that the city formerly picked up, but the contractor will not pick up because it's not in the contract. That's going to be addressed in the contract as far as bulky trash. We have that many vacant lots that we don't just need to work in the downtown. We need to work everywhere. Also we want crews downtown not only doing that, let the crews in that district do anything in that district that needs to be done, whether it be evictions, be litter pickup, ditch cleaning, right-of-way cleanup, vacant lots, whatever, that particular crew that's assigned to that district will do the work in that district. Mayor Young: One other question. This will in no way affect the crews that are currently assigned by the Sheriff to clean up the cemeteries, is that correct? Mr. Green: No, sir. Mr. Oliver: This will not impact that. Mr. Green: We do not interact with those crews. The crew that has come up to Trees and Landscape, that slot was approved for Trees and Landscape in January when the Board of Education crews were cut down. Mr. Smith has not hired that person yet, so it would not be like he would be losing any crew that he already has. We're saying we need that additional crew right now, so we're just asking that be transferred to us. Mayor Young: Questions, gentlemen? Mr. Beard? Mr. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I would like to just publicly endorse this project. I thank you, Mr. Colclough, and the staff there for coming up with this project. Right at the beginning of consolidation, I don't think anyone fought any harder than I did. I fought the Sheriff's Department, my fellow Commissioners, and everybody to get some crews downtown to do some work and do a cleanup. And I want to applaud those people who, after we finally got a couple of them down here in the inner city to clean up, it does look better down here and I think that is something that we should give to the people who are supervising out there, because y'all did do a good job down here and I think this, and I'm going to ask the Commissioners to really support this because this will give everybody an opportunity throughout out city, not only the inner city but the whole city, will be advantage of our crews and they're working. Those crews can do a wonderful job. They exercise that at a point and we've seen them do it, and I think now that if we do extend it to the entire county, I think we will have a better place and I'm going to urge you to support that. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Beard. Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I too want to go on record as endorsing this. This is a great step forward and it's going to help us to clean up and do preventative maintenance in areas that we now neglect. I do see one thing, however, and I would just like to make a brief comment on it. It looks like we are budgeting to buy a vehicle here. I think we've identified that there are several potential vehicles that are sitting at park when other people are attempting to work within this county, and I hope that we can revisit or delay the purchase of the vehicle until our fleet manager can come back with his recommendations which may enable us to put an existing vehicle back into work, rather than have it parked in a parking lot, and save us that money Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Cheek. Mr. Oliver: That is fine. Obviously before vehicles are ever purchased, it would come back to you. I mean that isn't going to happen. One clarification, Warden Leverett. You are comfortable with the organizational chart? Mr. Leverett: Yes. Mr. Speaker: [inaudible] Mr. Colclough: I think the organizational chart is fine and I think what it will do is it will spread the crews out evenly throughout the county where we can pick up all the garbage that we need to clean in all districts, rather than just a few. And it works, gentlemen. It worked in District 4 completely and part of District 8 and 6. Mayor Young: Thank you, Mr. Colclough. Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is the first that I've seen the official recommendation and I appreciate all the hard work you've done, Commissioner Colclough, on this item and I just didn't know why it bypassed the committee having jurisdiction of RCCI. What was the purpose of bringing it directly to the floor? Shouldn't this have kind of come up? There's nothing in our backup materials. I'm not that quick a study. I appreciate it working somewhere else but I'd like a little bit more time to look at it, check this vehicle issue out. Is there any problem that we couldn't do it through the committee channels and pass it next time? What's needed? Mayor Young: Let's go to Mr. Colclough and let his respond. Mr. Colclough: Let me respond. I apologize for not bringing it through committee, but the fact is we have some crews together, we have them out there working, and if we can go ahead and get this thing on board, we can get our city cleaned up. It's a fairly simple process. We can delay the vehicle until our fleet manager get on board and bring us back a recommendation, but I think if we go ahead and approve it, we can get our crews together and get some of this stuff picked up. We can be in conjunction. I apologize for not bringing it through committee. Mayor Young: Mr. Mays? Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, I won't leave my good friend out there on the limb to take the blame on that. This has been a good project of his and to put it on. The timing of where it got on, Steve, I'll accept the blame for that one. I did call him in reference to it. And the reason why it was done on the speedy process was because we were going to have to deal with the situation with Clean and Beautiful. There was a gap there that I did not know how we were going to bridge, whether we would get anything on the dumpsters, whether we would get anything, the money that was approved in HUD, I didn't know where that was going, I knew Richard's program was still on the wing, and I wanted to make sure everything at least had a shot out here today at being able to be answered. And that was the reason why it jumped over there. Those of us that are on Engineering Services from the standpoint of knowing that the project in terms of the crews, maybe not the question on the vehicle and all the fine tuning, but we have gone about it and gone about it being in the works. So at least those four people on that committee did know about it from the standpoint of it being in motion. But I called him at work, with it being his project, and I wanted to respect him of it, but I thought with that controversy pending, we needed to have everything about cleanup out here the same day, so that nothing would be lacking, and I think we solved part of that today and I hope we're going to support this, and I also hope that in that gap of what we did with the dumpsters, that we've found a way to deal with that, too. The only other question I was going to ask was in follow up to what you had, in reference to monitoring in here as we go along. Are you all looking at six months or a year thing in there to a point where--I know you're basing that on calls that you've got and the complaints where you are--to kind of see where that balance may be so if you just happen to get a drop in it you have to float a crew to deal with that, whether it comes out of one person from one district over to another one, you've got a ration there, you've got an internal means of doing that? Mr. Green: Commissioner, there is nothing that would keep--if you have an urgency that comes up in a district and it's more than that district can handle, sometimes we get low lying storms and occasions where we may have to concentrate on certain areas for a day or two or three days. But basically what we're saying is these crews primarily work in this district. Emergencies, sure they will be drawn into other district. There's nothing to keep them from going to other districts, but ideally under normal circumstances, they'll be in that same district every day. Mayor Young: Mr. Brigham? Mr. J. Brigham: Mr. Mays, I also support it. My question is very much along the same line as yours. There is going to be a review process. These crews are not permanently assigned to just these districts and never going to be looked at again. I'm assume there is going to be some kind of review process as time goes on? I don't, I can live with it right now but I don't– Mr. Green: This is based on where the actual work is needed right now. The requests that we get. Mr. J. Brigham: I understand. Mayor Young: Let me suggest this. Mike, why don't you furnish the Commission with a quarterly activity report on each one of these crews and that will feed back to the board and they can see whether they want to change what they did. Mr. J. Brigham: The other question I have. Mr. Oliver, how much have we got left in Contingency? Mr. Oliver: I have that number right here. Mayor Young: While Mr. Oliver is looking that up– Mr. Oliver: $1,129,850.39. Mayor Young: Yes, sir? Mr. Speaker: I would just like to say to Commissioner Colclough on behalf of the community and I'm a community leader, I really support this type of plan. I only have one question. What is the limitations of these prisoners, these inmates of going on private property? Do you understand what I'm saying? On private property to do what these residents were doing with the dumpsters. Because this is going to take the place of the dumpsters, and now what we do here. And second, is there going to be a schedule for them to come into a community or do we have to make a blanket call and say everybody put your trash out on your lawn? Mr. Colclough: Can I respond to that? Mayor Young: All right, Mr. Colclough, yes. Mr. Colclough: The way we did it, the way we cleaned up District 4 is we sent out fliers, like Rev. Williams did, and we told the people to drag the stuff the street, leave it on the street, and what we did, we went through there, the crews went through there and picked up everything. I took a ride out to Fairington one Saturday morning just to see what it was like, and it was like somebody had dropped a bomb out in Fairington. I mean it was, they had old fences and everything, and two days later, you went through that community, it was as clean as a whistle. They had went through with big trucks, big machinery, picked up old stoves, broken fences, everything. All it says it bring it to the street and they pick it up. Mr. Speaker: We'll take responsibility for putting our fliers out on a certain day or days and then we'll know. Mr. Speaker: Mr. Thomas, we do community cleanup now, and the process is a community wants to clean up they come to the Administrator or Commission who approves a huge cleanup and gives us authorization to go out and pick it up and that's the way the huge cleanups are done. It comes through the Commission. Mr. Colclough: But we will have two people in charge, one person in charge of inner city and one person in charge of the southern part and all of your work orders will come through them and it will be passed on to the work crews. And all you have to do is call. We'll publicize that. Mr. Speaker: I also want to thank you, Commissioner Williams. That wasn't meant to be an argument. Mr. Williams: I understand. Mayor Young: Thank you very much. Madame Clerk, you're going to have to refresh my memory. Do we have a motion on the floor? We need a motion to move forward. Mr. Bridges: A motion to approve. Mayor Young: A motion to approve. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mayor Young: And a second. Any further discussion? None heard. All in favor of the motion, please vote aye. Motion carries 10-0. Mayor Young: Let's go ahead and take up that one item on the addendum agenda and then we'll move into our legal session and then we'll rush out of here. Clerk: Addendum Item 1: Consider sponsorship of Oscar Night America 2000 with the purchase of a corporate table at a cost of $400.00 and funded by Commission Other Account. Mr. Kuhlke: I move approval. Mr. Shepard: Second. Mr. Oliver: There is $8,055 now in Commission Other. Mayor Young: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor, please vote aye. Motion carries 10-0. Mayor Young: Mr. Wall? Mr. Wall: I asked for a legal meeting to discuss personnel, as well as to discuss pending and potential litigation. Mayor Young: Do we have a motion? Mr. Shepard: I so move as stated by the Attorney to go into legal session. Mr. H. Brigham: Second. Mayor Young: Any objection? Unanimous. Motion carries 10-0. [LEGAL MEETING 5:40- 6:10 p.m.] Item 73: Motion to approve authorization for Mayor to execute affidavit of compliance with Georgia's Open Meetings Act. Mr. Colclough: I so move. Mr. Beard: Second. Motion carries 10-0. [MEETING ADJOURNED] Lena J. Bonner Clerk of Commission