HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-18-2002 Regular Meeting
REGULAR MEETING COURTROOM AND
COMMISSION CHAMBER
June 18, 2002
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m. Tuesday, June 18,
2002, the Honorable Bob Young, Mayor, presiding.
Present: Hons. Hankerson, Boyles, Mays, Kuhlke, Colclough, Shepard, Beard,
Cheek, Williams and Bridges, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission
Also present: Jim Wall, Attorney; George Kolb, Administrator; Lena Bonner,
Clerk of Commission
The Invocation was given by the Rev. Kennedy.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Please be seated. We’re meeting down here for the
purpose of taking up one item, but we are going to add a second item to our business here
because Dr. Cook of the local Medical Society is here. Dr. Cook, if he will come
forward, he left his patients to come over here and receive a check to kick off Project
Access. And I’ll ask Mr. Shepard, if you would come up for the presentation, and
Commissioner Boyles.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In 2000, Commissioner Boyles’
predecessor and I and other members of the Commission at that time who were active in
NACO attending the national convention of the National Association of Counties in
Charlotte, North Carolina. And we were scattering about, attending seminars that day. I
remember Commissioner Mays was there and we said to him we were going to a seminar
on indigent care. And he smiled at us and wished us well, and so we went over there.
The National Association of Counties, for the benefit of the audience, is one of the
organizations that we Commissioners are active in, and it’s an organization which comes
together annually, and as part of that organization they chair what we call best practices
throughout the country about various public policy issues. And on this issue,
Commissioner Brigham and I were sufficiently impressed that we brought the idea from
Asheville, North Carolina back to Augusta called Project Access. And Asheville, North
Carolina has pioneered the concept of Project Access. It is basically matching of
physicians who volunteer their office visits to persons who need those type office visits.
And we are proud to say that that concept was introduced to Dr. Cook and other members
of the medical community, including representatives from University Hospital in the fall
of 2000, and Dr. Cook was sufficiently impressed to take this up and has shown
leadership in this area in the local community and has seen that the local Augusta Project
st
Access has been incorporated and has gotten off to a start, which I think is July 1. Dr.
Cook, from that beginning at the National Association of Counties, and through your
leadership the last two years, we want to recognize the commitment of the Augusta
1
Commission to your project by giving you this ceremonial check recognizing the
$400,000 obligation that we have in this budget to the people of Augusta Richmond
County who will benefit from your program. Most of this will go to some of your
expenses and to buying what they calls the drugs, the formulary drugs, which I didn’t
understand. The authorized drugs.
Dr. Cook: Medications.
Mr. Shepard: Authorized medications.
(Laughter)
Mr. Shepard: I tend to misspeak from time to time. I see the District Attorney
there. Medications.
(Laughter)
Mr. Shepard: But thank you, Doctor. And they help keep people out of the
emergency room where the visits are the most expensive. So this way our public dollars
for the indigent care goes the farthest that I know of in the country, because Asheville
really does have it right, and Augusta will soon have it right. And so also, I’m going to
give you a series of checks, Doctors. And you can’t negotiate what I’ve given you so far.
This is a $200,000 initial check, which is represented by the real check in the envelope
that I am going to present to you here, and so I wish you every success in Project Access.
Godspeed. We thank you for your leadership today. We know we expect great things.
Be very proud of Project Access Augusta and our representative there, Commissioner
Boyles.
Dr. Cook: Thank you very much.
(A round of applause is given.)
Dr. Cook: Let me introduce our executive director, Mr. Peloquin. Jerry Peloquin
here will be running the office on a day-to-day basis. I do want to say thank you to the
Augusta Commission, the Mayor, to all who participated in this project. We begin July
st
1 to enlist patients who will then be seen by our physicians, will be cared for at our local
hospitals. I also wish to thank all of the physicians of this community who have
volunteered to see patients at no charge under this program, the pharmacists who will be
filling the prescriptions are volunteering their services, also to all of the hospitals
involved. And I’m proud to say that every hospital in Richmond County is participating
fully. So thank you all for making this possible.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor?
2
Mr. Mayor: Yes, Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: For the record, I’d like to mention that Dr. Cook also serves as
chairman of our local Board of Health, in addition to Project Access. He contributes
th
many hours to the betterment of the city of Augusta, and on behalf of the people of the 6
District, we thank you for all your dedication in making Augusta a better city. Thank
you.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: The next item on the agenda is item number 47. Madame Clerk, if
you’ll read the caption.
The Clerk:
47. Z-02-75 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Angie Harrygin, on behalf of ASP.
Inc., requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of establishing an adult book
and video store, per Section 22-2 (b) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for
Augusta-Richmond County, affecting property located at 1367 Gordon Highway
and containing 1.56 acres. (Tax Map 73 Parcel 39.1)
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk, as I explained to the people who are gathered about
ten minutes before the hour, what we’re going to do is limit debate on this item to a
reasonable amount of time. The petitioner has said 15 minutes was adequate for him to
state his case to the Commissioners, and we’ll give the opponents an equal amount of
time, 15 minutes. They have gotten together and decided among themselves who is gong
to speak and take that amount of time. I’m going to ask our Attorney, Mr. Wall, if you
would keep track of the time. But before we get into those presentations, I asked the
Sheriff, who is here, and the District Attorney, if they have any recommendations with
respect to this, either collectively or individually. If you would come over to the
podium to speak with respect to that.
Mr. Strength: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. When I came through the door, I didn’t
know we’d have this big a crowd. The lady said, Sheriff, you want one of those green
stickers? And I looked in here and 99% were wearing them, and I said absolutely, I want
one, too.
(Laughter)
Mr. Strength: But thank you folks for being here today. Mr. Mayor, Mr.
Commissioners, I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak just a few minutes today
on behalf of the Sheriff’s office, as well as on behalf of a lot of citizens that have made
contact with me in opposition to the adult video and book store. Our community is no
place for this type of business. It will contribute nothing, but will cause problems for
everyone. Check with North Augusta and see how proud they are to have that one over
3
there. You won’t hear anything positive from those folks in North Augusta. Why did
they choose Augusta? Because we don’t have any business like that in Richmond
County. Our citizens have not allowed it and we don’t want to start today. If we approve
this business to locate now, it will be followed by two, three, four or many other
businesses just like it in the future. Will you Commissioners be criticized if you don’t
vote for this business? Yes. By about five percent of the population. 95 percent of the
population is going to be in support of you for this. The type of patrons this business will
draw is something like you folks have never seen. There is case after case after case in
this country linked to pornography. A good example – everybody’s heard the name Ted
Bundy. Once Ted Bundy was arrested, he confessed that pornography played a major
role in his criminal activities. And this type of establishment will certainly attract an
element that we do not need. It won’t take but one child or one female to be abducted,
raped, killed, and our investigation links this business to that offense to know that we
made a mistake in allowing it in our community. I’ve got a few things here that I do want
to read that we can back up these stats. I know stats are cheap, but these things are
accurate and can be backed up. The United States Department of Justice reports that
organized crime controls approximately 85 percent to 90 percent of the pornography
industry. It is estimated to be their third-largest money-maker. The Federal Bureau of
Investigation found that pornography is found at 80 percent of the sex crimes or in homes
of perpetrators. This is one that is very disturbing to me and I know parents.
Approximately 70 percent of pornographic magazines ends up in the hands of children.
A Federal Bureau of Investigation survey of serial killers found that 81 percent of
suspects said that hardcore pornography was their highest form of sexual interest. A
study by the Michigan State Police found that in 41 percent of sexual assaults cases,
pornography was viewed by the suspect prior to the crime. There is a strong link
between child molestation and pornography. A study of convicted child molesters found
that 77 percent of those that molested boys and 87 percent of those who molested females
admitted to being regular users of pornography. I’ve never read or heard anything good
coming from establishments like this. Do us all a favor, Mr. Commissioners, and vote no
today. It will pay dividends tomorrow. And if we get sued, so be it. That’s why we have
lawyers.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Craig?
Mr. Craig: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good afternoon, Mr. Commissioners. I have
spoken to some of you since we had the Committee meeting, or the board meeting of the
Planning and Zoning board, and where certain presentations were made by Richmond
County Sheriff’s Sgt. Greg Smith, and also the director of the Airport Commission, Mr.
Ernie Smith, and also presentations being made by representatives of the Alleluia
Community, which is a faith-based community which is interdenominational and
probably makes up a population of over 5,000 people in your community now. We won’t
get into the fact that they all vote, cause I don’t think that’s important to you.. I think
you’re here to do the right thing this afternoon and hope that you are. My research that I
provided to you pursuant to the request of some of you was to provide some authority so
4
that you could make the right decision based in law. Because we are certainly a
community of laws, a nation of laws, and we’re not asking you to do anything other than
that which the law condones. And we would also like to, in the event that we can, ensure
that you’re making the right decision so that if it is ever challenged in Court, that you
could back it up. And so we have provided to you a memorandum which each of you
have received earlier today, and which will help you to make the right decision, that is to
deny this petition and also to back it up under the law. As you can tell from the
memorandum, the law says that you are not able to make a determination, you’re not
allowed to pass an ordinances that attacks the freedom of expression in and of itself, so
you’re not allowed to make a decision in this case that is based upon your desire to
squelch the freedom of expression. We know that the United States Supreme Court, for
better or for worse, right or wrong, has said that to us. They have said to us in order for
you to make this determination with regard to matters that might actually have the
secondary effect of affecting freedom of expression, you have to make the determination
based upon pernicious and secondary impacts of this type of business in the community.
And you have presentations which were made that indicated, from Greg Smith, that the
adult video and book store over in North Augusta, where he had policed, had resulted in a
tremendous increase in crime in the way of prostitution and other sexual offenses that had
occurred in the immediately vicinity of that adult video and book store and especially
th
around the area on the other side of the 5 Street bridge and in areas that they had to
constantly patrol and respond to calls, including robbery increases in that area. So you
have the data, the [inaudible] data which [inaudible] that there this type of business in our
immediate area, even closer to us over in North Augusta than would be this particular
bookstore out on the Gordon Highway, that there has been a negative impact by the
increased cost to law enforcement in the area. And in addition that, we have found from
the presentation made by Mr. Jimmy Smith, who is the chairman of Pride & Progress,
and is the owner of two businesses in this area, that the efforts are to try and increase the
tax base there, the efforts are there to try and enhance the base of that community
developing businesses that are contributing to our attempt to increase the tax digest, to
increase the caliber and type of businesses that we can attract into that area. And he has
told you that he has found that there is just no way that when you put and adult video and
book store there, along with the sewer treatment plant, that we’re going to be able to
enhance the character of that neighborhood to the extent that we can attract greater and a
higher quality of investment there. The presentation made by the members of the
Alleluia community were more, I think, poignant than any, though. And that is because
these are tax-paying citizens who have established single-family homes, hundred in the
area very, very close to this, but more importantly, they’ve established businesses from
the Alleluia community in what we know as the Fleming Heights area, coming all the
way in the corridor of Highway 25 and into the Gordon Highway, and they are asking
you, begging you to do a couple of things for them. One is they are asking you to protect
their children. They have a school which is in this corridor, and which is directly
impacted by this type of business, and they have asked you as citizens to vote in this case
in a way that would not put their children at greater risk of the type of violent criminal
activity that comes, as the Sheriff has already spoken, from this type of business. And
you can do that. You are entitled to do that. You have the right to do that. No one
should ever tell you or suggest to you that your hands are tied in this matter. You have
5
discretion. The question is, how will you exercise your legal discretion that you have.
They also asked me to protect their investments, because their businesses are important to
them, just as your businesses are important to you. And they would like for you to vote
in such a way that they can expect that tomorrow, their investment, their sweat and blood
they poured into their businesses, will be just as valuable as they were today and after
you’ve taken your particular vote. The Airport Authority has told you, they cannot
expect to develop, again, the kind of perception among visitors to our community when
they get off the plane, the first thing they see is a sewer treatment plant and then a big
adult video bookstore. Now, it’s a real problem that was made at the Planning and
Zoning Board, because we asked the lawyer representing the petitioners in this matter to
provide a plan to the Board which could address these issues that were presented to them
by the citizens, and they indicated that they had no intention whatsoever of doing that.
Well, it just so happens that that lack of any intention whatsoever to address the
pernicious secondary impact is what entitles you to vote against their petition. It’s what
denies them the right to go forward because it’s the -- the burden is on them to show how
they will address the pernicious secondary impact to the point that it is negated entirely.
And if it’s not negated entirely, then you’re entitled, as I say, to vote to deny this petition.
So, based upon the data as it’s already been presented, and it’s been established in this
matter before the Board, and I assume you’re privy, and based upon the law in this
matter, I would ask you as the District Attorney, to deny this petition. Thank you.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: Let me make an announcement. We have a rule, when the
Commission meets, that all pagers and cell phones must be inaudible. And if anybody’s
pager or cell phone goes off, they have to buy the Commissioners lunch. So check your
purses and your pockets and make sure your pagers and your cell phones are in the
vibrate or the off position, please.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I had occasion several years ago on a call from my
pastor, to minister to a young man that was a victim of behavior in one of these
establishments across the river. It turned my stomach. Based on that and the information
I received now from our Sheriff and our District Attorney, I’d like to make a motion to
deny this petition --
Mr. Mayor: Let me ask you if you would, to hold your motion. Let’s hear from
the petitioner, in all fairness. We need to get things on the record, and let people be
heard. And then I’ll recognize you for the purpose of your motion.
Mr. Cheek: Yes, sir.
6
Mr. Mayor: We’re going to ask the petitioner to speak, and I just want to remind
you all that we’re going to show courtesy to people today. You may hear some things
that you don’t like, but you’re going to show proper respect for the speaker and allow
him to speak, just as the petitioner has allowed the Sheriff and the DA to speak. At this
point, I will allow your spokesman to speak, so come up, give us your name and address
for the records. You represent the petitioner, do you not?
Mr. Maddox: Yes, sir [inaudible]. Yes. I suspect the Mayor will not have to
gavel you down from your applause at the end of my presentation. My name is Tom
Maddox. I’m a lawyer out of Tucker. I live in Stone Mountain. I grew up in LaGrange.
That’s Troop County, down near Columbus. In spite of what you think, I am not a
Godless Atlanta lawyer. I grew up in the Baptist Church. My mom and dad -- my daddy
was what we called in those days, the song leader, what would be called today the
minister of music. And my mother and I sang in the choir until I graduated from college
and moved away. I say all that to say that my, at least, my mother would certainly be out
there among you all on this issue. And I have some understanding of why you’re here
and you certainly should be admired for your activity, for coming out and taking the time
out to let your feelings be known. I suspect that most of you are here, not really
understanding what this particular vote is supposed to be about. Mayor Young and the
Commissioners, and I would urge the Commission as the governmental body to keep in
mind what it is that is before them today. I suspect that all of the folks that have come
want to come down here as the District Attorney has told you, Mr. Craig, and the Sheriff,
to say, we don’t want any business such as this, meaning an adult bookstore where there
are videos and books available that are sexually explicit in nature. Probably most of the
folks here will make absolutely no distinction between sexually explicit pornography and
obscenity. But it makes all the difference as far as the United States Constitution and the
Constitution of the State of Georgia goes. It is illegal to sell things that are obscene in
Georgia. My clients do not purport to sell anything that is obscene. It is illegal, under
certain circumstances, to sell things that are described as pornographic. We have as a
society gotten to where we use the word pornographic to mean anything that involves
nudity or sexuality. That’s not what pornography means. It is not illegal in the State of
Georgia to sell or to view or to rent videos and books which display nudity and depictions
of sexual conduct. And that’s what my client would have for sale. Mr. Craig clearly is
asking the Commission to use your discretion to say, as the Sheriff said, we don’t want
any bookstore like this proposed bookstore in our County. Commissioners, Mayor, I’m
here, I guess one of those unpopular things that you said that I would say -- that
statement’s already been made. I don’t know if you folks didn’t know about it, but this
body, maybe not these particular individuals, but in 1997, in March, passed an adult
entertainment ordinance that said in its preamble, we understand we can’t keep these
kinds of businesses out because they are lawfully protected by the laws of the United
States and the laws of the State of Georgia. It says specifically that it is a protected form
of speech. That’s not the Constitution talking. That’s this body. And that the regulations
of a business cannot become so great that it’s actually a prohibition. Of course, that’s
actually what the Sheriff and the District Attorney are asking you to do, a de facto
prohibition. They’re saying, let’s don’t let any of these businesses in our community.
The issue came up again in September, 1997, and this body voted in its Business Tax
7
Ordinance to issue licenses for adult entertainment, and defines an adult bookstore such
as the one my client’s proposing to operate, the scheduled fees to be paid to the City and
County for that. The kinds of concerns that you have may have been appropriate, would
have been appropriate, in either of those situations, to come and say, we want to say as a
community, no, but, in fact, we’re asking you to abide by the laws in your community.
You went further. This body has already decided, we’ve got -- the law says that we
cannot completely ban this type of business from our County, so you satisfy a provision
for locations for adult entertainment at Section 619 of the ordinance. And, according to
that section, these kinds of businesses, like my client proposes to operate, are lawful in
Richmond County, under certain zoning circumstances. This body said in its zoning
ordinance that you could put an adult bookstore in a neighborhood business district.
Well, this is not a neighborhood business district. It even said that you could put an adult
bookstore in a light industrial area. This is not a light industrial area. This is a heavy
industrial area. My clients didn’t make that decision. This body made that decision
when you passed your zoning ordinance that, if you have to have these types of business,
the law says we have to, this is where we say they’re going to be lawful. And, based on
what is already been enacted in the law in Richmond County, Augusta Richmond
County, my client chose this site in a heavy industrial area that met all of the additional
qualifications for the special-use purpose of distances from schools, houses, and homes,
churches and that kind of thing. It was this body, and not my clients, that designated
1367 Gordon Highway as heavy industry, a place that a bookstore would be allowed.
This body has already made the hard political choice, trying to weigh what most
members of your community feel against the guarantees of the Constitution of the United
States. And you made that decision, and my clients are simply here to take advantage of
the decision that you have already made. Now, except for the proximity to Doug Barnard
Parkway and the airport, everybody here is objecting to the content of what is being sold
in an adult bookstore. Mr. Craig brought up a couple of things that come up over and
over in these circumstances, this pernicious secondary effect. That also is a consideration
-- that is to say, we are not opposed to adult bookstores. We are opposed to what happens
when you put an adult bookstore in. Those kinds of considerations would have been
appropriate when this body met to consider those other ordinance, but not appropriate
here. The only thing before this board, this Board of Commissioners today is, does this
petitioner meet the technical qualifications for acquiring the Special Use permit. Your
Zoning and Planning Commission said they did. What you’re being asked to do is say
they were wrong or right when they said that. Again, the last time I had this opportunity
to speak to this many people, I was in a courtroom in Rome, and the comments that I had
there ended up on Pat Robertson’s religious channel. It was sort of a dubious distinction
because he really hit me over the head with some of the things I said. But
Commissioners, please understand that, while these folks are here, and their hearts are in
the right place, they believe in what they’re doing, your -- you have to make the hard
decisions of law, and, the fact is, that my clients have met the requirements that you
yourself set out. Please keep that in mind. I was a little disturbed this morning in the
paper to read that somebody suggested that for you to vote to allow this lawful business
to exist would turn you all into wimps. And that really is harsh because they don’t
understand the difficulty of the decision you have to make. And, finally, I would agree
with Mr. Craig and the Sheriff, when the Sheriff said, well, you’ve got a lawsuit. Let’s
8
have a lawsuit. No public official should make a decision based on fear of being sued,
not individually, but as a city. But I think you would be wimps if you did that, if you
said, oh, they might sue us, and we just don’t want a lawsuit. But I think public officials
do have an obligation to their community to make decisions if a lawsuit is possible.
Because if a lawsuit has merit, that means they must be doing something that a court
would recognize as illegal. And in this circumstance, the ordinance that you have in
1997 was a pretty good ordinance at the time. But there have been two Supreme Court
cases, United States Supreme Court cases, since that time. Several Georgia Supreme
Court cases that have found parts of the ordinance that exist now unconstitutional. The
end result is, we have to go directly into a fight over the constitutionality is [inaudible]
lawsuit. That’s not a threat. It’s just the reality, and the Sheriff and Mr. Craig understand
that. The Commission does that. But we’re really not there yet. We’re only at -- we’re
not here asking for a permit to go into business. That’s the next step, as you all know.
I’m sure most of you folks don’t know. This is just the first step in getting, in saying, this
is the right place. This is the place that we said this could operate. The next step is
actually applying, and some of the concerns that you have can come up in that application
process. And may be appropriate, where they’re not, where they’re just absolutely
irrelevant at this point. So I would encourage you to do the right thing, which may not be
the popular things, which may not, even in your own heart, feel like affording your own
morals. It’s just the right thing to do. It’s a matter of law. The right thing to do is say,
yes, these folks have chosen a location for a business that we recognize in our own laws,
have a right to exist, and then we’ll deal with their application and application to go into
business, and if we have questions about how they run their business, that’s where it’ll
come up. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you very much. Let’s get a show of hands, if we can --
those here, those who are here in favor of the rezoning can you -- raise your hand so we
can record the presence in the minutes? I don’t see any. The Sheriff doesn’t see any.
Those who are opposed to the rezoning, if you would raise your hands. Okay, Mr. Wall,
you can either try to count them or just say a generous number --
Mr. Wall: A generous number. Let me just get -- I would estimate 2, 4, 6, 8, 10,
12 per row -- 8 rows? 225.
(Approximately 225 objectors noted)
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Wall. Now, the [inaudible] wanted to speak.
Is there someone who has organized [inaudible]?
Mr. Wall: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: Jim, you have? Okay, if y’all would come over here to the podium
with Mr. Wall so that [inaudible]. Please, each speaker, as you come up, if you would
give your name and address for the record. Okay? Thank you.
9
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, for allowing us to come. I’m
Jimmy Smith, from the [inaudible], and for the last 11 years, we have been a group to
support economic development, for code enforcement, for planning, and all of these
things. And, going back to a small boy, my daddy told me, son, if you have made a sale,
shut up. So I believe that Mr. DA and Mr. Sheriff have made a sale. So I’m not going to
say anything else. And turn it over to my brothers here.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you.
Mr. Garrett: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, I’m Bob Garrett. I live at 2343
Franklin Street. I’m an elder of the Alleluia Community. Lived in Augusta since 1976.
Enjoyed my time here, it’s a great city. Our friend from Rome over here says this is the
right thing to do, and I would like to submit to you that’s not in fact the case. If I had to
tell you the thing that I thought made the most difference to the City of Augusta, and
that’s that Augusta, apart from being a city of character, is also a city of conscience.
Now conscience is kind of a funny thing. You know, a lot of people think that
conscience is the devil on one shoulder and the angel on the other shoulder, and, you
know, the devil’s always trying to tell you to do one thing, and the angel something else.
Your conscience is what informs you about what should be done. What you should.
Also it’ll tell you what you shouldn’t do. But it also tells you what actions you ought to
take. Augusta has a gateway. The District Attorney referred to that gateway. I travel
that gateway all the time. In fact, it’s the city gates that determine the future of a city. I
don’t know if you know that, but if a city has good gates, it’s going to last. If it has bad
gates, it’s not going to last. And I think what we’re dealing with is the gateway to our
city. Also, if you say yes here, where are you ever going to be able to say no? Is there
any line that can ever be drawn anywhere about the morality, the virtue, the lifestyle, the
impact on women, on children, on schools, on all of us? Can you ever say no to anything
that would influence us negatively? I think not. I think this is a time to take the risk, if
necessary, to be able to let your conscience guide you in this decision. Okay, maybe
some of the laws passed earlier don’t exactly do like they should. Well, I think you guys
are the ones that change laws, right? Well, let’s change some laws. Let’s make this a
place where we can enforce the laws necessary for people like me who are parents, who
work, who own property, who have a desire for this city to be really a fine place to live. I
moved from Texas to Augusta, Georgia because this was the right place for me to be. I
would like for other people to be able to say the same thing. Not just the opposite, which
is, Augusta is not the right place because of what they permit to happen in their city
gates. I tell you, if pornography sets the context for the city, or could, then I’d say, let’s
change that context and make the context a city of goodness, morality, virtue, for the sake
of future generations who would come here. Thank you.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Green: My name is Bishop Elliott Green. I’m pastor of the Light of the
World Evangelistic Upreach Ministry in [inaudible] Park, not too far from this adult
store. And I can tell you right now that I myself, the church members, and the
community members, are not satisfied with this adult video store being there. At first, we
10
didn’t even know it was going to be that type of store, but when we found out, the
number one thing was to fight it until the last one stands. We feel that it’s wrong for our
community, it’s wrong for the area. We believe that we have enough young girls
pregnant and having babies, without having these types of stores in our community. We
feel now that we have been struggling with 12-year-old girls and 13-year-old girls now
have to be moms because of these sexual stores that they’re putting up all over the place
now. These types of stores bring all kind of people to our community. All kinds of
people, people that we don’t even know exist in our city. Just imagine waking up one
morning and begin to hear this young girl is missing. And the next morning, this young
girl is missing. And the next week, this young -- we don’t need that type of story in our
community. It attracts too much evil. And when I say evil, it’s not talking about black or
white. It’s just an evil-minded person. And when you have that type of stuff in your
community, it brings the community down. [inaudible] been fighting for years, along
with Hyde Park. Reverend Utley will tell you. He’s standing over there right now.
We’ve been fighting for years to clean up our community. [inaudible], and along with
the task force, it is the key strength has given them, and they have been fighting drugs in
our community now, and have almost brought it to a screeching halt. And you mean to
tell me that we now are going to allow some sick-minded person to come into our
community and start looking at our young girls because we’ve committed to do so. I
heard what the lawyer said about the law. But let me take this right here. We have voted
in 10 Commissioners. We have got a City Administrator. We have gotten a City, praise
the Lord, Attorney. And we have gotten a Mayor. With these men that sit and govern,
the rules and regulations for our city and the CSRA, I’m quite sure that they can find
somewhere some rule or regulation to protect our little girls and boys and our citizens and
our God-fearing people.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Lowry: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, my name is Melvin Lowry. I live at
3619 Bermuda Circle. I am the pastor of [inaudible] Presbyterian Church in 30906 and
also the president of the Neighborhood Improvement Project. I have appeared before you
on various occasions and numerous occasions for the citizenry of that area, and today I
stand with the citizens again. The 30906 Neighborhood Improvement Project is a group
of churches and organizations and individuals who have committed themselves to the
growth and development of Augusta physically and spiritually and morally and
economically. We’ve come to have our voices heard, and I’m like Jimmy Smith. I think
we have a sale already. But I think that there are two things that I want to bring up today
that I want you to consider. The first thing is, I got some material when I walked in the
door. And it says that pornography is just harmless fun. Well, I want you to know that
many of the ills in this society started because they were just supposed to be harmless
fun. Cigarettes and alcoholism are rampant now, but many years ago, it was just
harmless fun. Many of us were in the military, and it wasn’t anything for us to smoke
and drink and then go home and do who-knows-what because of the effects of these ills
of our society. Well, I also read where it says that pornography, although it’s supposed to
be harmless fun, is a negative influence, affecting the attitude and behavior of the
citizens. I think you ought to be proud today that the citizens have come to have their
11
voices heard. And what they’re trying to say is that what may be good to you is not
necessarily good for you. They’re trying to say to you that an ounce of prevention is
worth a pound of cure. They’re trying to say to you that there is a serious disease
affecting the land, and it’s the disease of relativity and nonchalance and just do not care.
Well, they’re telling you that they care. And they want you to care. For all the things
that they have tried to accomplish in this community and say no to this store going up in
our area. Thank you very much.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Harris: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, my name is Mark Harris, and I’m senior
pastor at Curtis Baptist Church at 1326 Broad Street in downtown Augusta. And I just
join with others that are here today to share with you our opposition and our great
concern about the issue that is before you this afternoon. I’ve got to be honest with you.
I got up this morning, and, with my family on vacation down at the beach, drove all the
way back here today, and I sit in that chair and listen to the petitioner make his plea of
what he was trying to get across. For one fleeting moment, I sat there, and I thought, if I
believe this man, why am I here. And if I believe what I’ve been told here today already,
why are you here as Commissioners? You’ve been told the decision has already been
made. But I submit to you, gentlemen, the decision must not have been made, or he
wouldn’t be here asking you for an exception [inaudible].
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Harris: Today you and I have an opportunity as we deal with this whole
issue. We know why we’re here today. We’re here today because we understand that
you’re about to make a decision that could very well lead to the degradation of our
community. I was absolutely amazed when I did a study of all this material, and my staff
and others gathered, or study after study all across this country, that have told us about
the increase in crime in areas where these places have gone. The petitioner has said to
you, you’re here today to determine if this is the right place, and the answer is no. It’s
not the right place. You can look at L.A. You can look at Whittier, California. You can
look at Islip, New York. You can look at Phoenix, Arizona. You can look at Austin,
Texas. All of these are in these reports that I have with me today. And in every case,
including Phoenix, Arizona, sex crimes were committed six times more often in these
areas with these adult bookstores and video centers. The New York City Planning
Commission, and I quote from their report, the increases in felonious criminal activity
was characterized as overwhelming in areas where there were concentrations of adult
usage. Assault complaints were 142.3% higher where police were posted, with one or
more of these adult businesses. You and I are here today because we know that you’re
about to make a decision that could lead to the degradation of our community. But I also
know we’re here because of a decision that could lead to the decline of property values.
You expect all of these Christians and these pastors to be here because of the spiritual
concern, but we’re here because we’re wise business people who also understand what
this does to the property values of our homes, what it will do to the property value of our
businesses. In Islip, New York, where these places have gone in, have been determined
12
to be dead zones, where economic development can no longer move forward. High
turnover rate of property in Whittier, California. They reported neighborhood
deterioration. Statistically significant correlation in Minnesota, they said, to where these
adult places have been placed. Indianapolis, in fact, concluded no other type of facility,
including a drug rehab center, had as significant negative impact on estimated real estate
values. And then I’ll say to you finally, cause I’m almost out of time -- I hope that phone
wasn’t my time limit. But I’m almost out of time. We are here today, and I’m here
today, because we understand that the decision you’re about to make could lead to the
destruction of innocent lives. All of these reports are the same, gentlemen. They all say
that clientele, in fact, the American Center for Law and Justice reports, and I quote, if an
historical record, whether you look at boomtowns, cow towns, frontier towns, or seaports,
the clientele, for the most part, has been young, single, transient, mobile males. And you
and I know that we hold a responsibility. Right down from Fort Gordon, our U.S.
military base. Why in the world would we set up a place such as this right at the
fingertips of our young military servicemen? I’m here today to tell you that your District
Attorney has already shared the report. And I thank God for a Sheriff and a District
Attorney that will have the guts to stand [inaudible] and you have the decision. Thank
you.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Dodson: Steve Dodson. I’m the senior pastor at Trinity-on-the-Hill United
Methodist Church, and Brother Harris is a hard act to follow. Almost set a world record,
he had the shortest sermon in history right here. Gentlemen, you face today a zoning
request for a special exception. The answer to the special exception is no. And I would
encourage you to prevent pernicious secondary acts by making a righteous primary act in
opposing this special exception. Thank you.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: The chair will recognize Commissioner Cheek for the purpose of the
motion.
Mr. Cheek:
Mr. Mayor, I hold in my hand Item 59 from today’s agenda. It’s a
hundred -- it’s at least an 80-year-old ordinance that this city has seen fit to change
because it is inappropriate. I challenge this Commission to look at these laws that we’ve
heard about today that may need changing and addressing them in the future, in the near
. I’d like a motion to
future, and change them as we’re about to do this and many others
deny the request for a special exception for the establishment of an adult book and
video store based upon the evidence, one, of increasing crime associated with such
businesses, two, the negative impact such a business would have on the economic
development of this area, three, the negative impact upon the gateway corridor, and
four, the negative impact on the airport’s development.
And there’s one from the area
of that side of town that this would affect the most, and, in working with Commissioner
Williams and many others to reclaim our neighborhoods, the people of Augusta have said
to me, stand up and fight, and on this, I plan to fight, and I encourage the rest of the
13
Commission to stand up and fight. This is a worthy cause, and I hope this will be passed
today.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. We have a second. Commissioner Williams, let me say
before we continue with the debate, I was out of town this morning, too. I got up at 3:30
this morning to catch a flight back here from Madison, Wisconsin to be here at this
meeting today. It’s that important to me. I’ve been with mayors from cities all around
this country, many of the cities cited by Harris in his presentation today. And we’ve been
talking about things, about housing and moving nuclear waste, transportation, and air
service, and things like that. But today, here in Augusta, Georgia, there’s no more
important issue than the issue before this board today. This is not an issue about
[inaudible]. It’s not an issue about religion. It’s not an issue about free speech. It’s not
an issue about economic development. It’s an issue of how we define this community.
How do we want people to view Augusta, Georgia? I say, I don’t get a vote in this unless
these guys tie it up, and we’ll see what happens. But I say not here, and in Richmond
County, Georgia, not anywhere. [inaudible]
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: Anybody else want to be heard? Reverend Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think that, if we allow this to pass
today, this is not just the beginning. I think that this would continue to spread throughout
our community. We’ve heard enough statistics about it. We know, I’m convinced, that
this is not the right thing for our community. I do like to say that today it’s going to see
all the citizens here today. It’s good to see everyone here that oppose this. But one thing
that I want everybody to know that it didn’t take the Sheriff to come to make me vote the
way I’m going to vote. It didn’t take the DA to come. It didn’t take the citizens to come.
Nor the bishop, nor the pastors. But I have, too, what you call a conscience, and that’s
with the knowledge of what God says. So I just want to say that and to know that I don’t
think this is the right place and I think that we should do all we can not just today to keep
this kind of activity out, but we should have this kind of audience all the time when
things come up that we do not need in this community.
Mr. Mayor: Anybody else like to be heard? Yes, Mr. Boyles?
Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor, I had the honor of serving this community for 32 years
as Recreation and Parks Director. And I left in 1996. Some of those children I worked
with were 15 years old, and they’re old enough to frequent a place such as this. In good
conscience, there’s no way that I could vote for something like this. My vote will be no,
and I request a roll call vote.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Anybody else like to be heard? Mr. Shepard?
14
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Always in this room I rise when I have
something to say. And I wanted to echo what Rev. Green said. I signed on to this job to
bring this community up, not to bring it down. And last year, we had some very difficult
votes on a budget. We’re going to have some difficult votes this year on a budget. We
passed the budget that includes a tax increase for Public Safety, [inaudible]. I had an
occasion to meet with the District Attorney, not in court, but a pleasant occasion, in
which he indicated to a friend who came in from out of town, that the crime rate was
down in Augusta Richmond County this year. Murder rate, specifically, was down. And
I want to say that we have invested through your tax dollars more law enforcement. And
I’m not going to sit here and vote for something that will compromise that investment,
cause we already have sacrificed [inaudible].
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Shepard: Just for sheer budgetary reasons, we should stand behind our
District Attorney and our Sheriff and protect investments that we’re making in the public
safety of this community. I plan to vote against it, as well. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, I guess since Steve and I are the oldest ones in tenure, we
have to stand, but also we have to take exercise, too. (Laughter) Let me say this where
it’s clear. First of all I’m in support of my colleague’s motion that’s on the floor. But the
Sheriff and I had a conversation privately, and I don’t mind sharing this publicly, and in
particular, with the District Attorney. I think that, and let me say this first, you got to be
careful with your opinion [inaudible], but the last -- I do this because he was next-to-last,
but my good friend Pastor Harris over there, and that is a hard gentleman to follow. And
I tease him all the time. I say, you know, he may have blond hair, but he preaches like a
brother all the time.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mays: But let me say this, we were here last year, and I mentioned that I was
going to vote for the motion, so that you wouldn’t get confused about what I’m getting
ready to say. I mentioned this to the Sheriff because I think that we going to have to be,
quite frankly, proactive in what we may want to do in this community as it relates to
zoning and to other issues. We cannot continue to react on a case-by-case basis every
time that this is an issue. Sometimes you may cry, and there will be [inaudible].
Sometimes you may cry, and nobody responds. And sometimes silence gives consent to
what may happen. I think that’s the first thing. I think the second thing is that when you,
when you look at what we’re dealing with here today, and looking strictly at the
ordinance, last year, even though that’s a different issue, many of us took sides with the
church body that was here on a similar issue. Not based on a total case of morality, but
on a case of where we thought they had an issue. I say that to the group here -- if you’re
serious about us being here, obviously this will not be the final chapter in what you’re
15
dealing with here. Now don’t think that you leave with a vote, and that that’s going to be
the end of that particular issue. Pastor Harris, we know that quite well, now, don’t we?
Mr. Harris: Exactly.
Mr. Mays: Court cases happen. And they may not always rule in your favor. If
you’re talking about what you’re interested in, then you have to maintain a certain
vigilance. You have to understand that you have to articulate that throughout the
community and to use the legal means that are necessary to get that message out. And
also to get that message across to the judiciary, not so much on where you stand with it
morally, but what are the legal issues that are [inaudible], and I think the next step for us
to do, is that, if we’re going to deal with this on a serious manner, then we deal with it in
its [inaudible], and, quite frankly, [inaudible], I think you’re going to be divided into two
issues. One is whether or not you’re going to deal with this on a permanent ban and you
deal with the law and the ordinance according to it. Or are you going to deal with from
the standpoint of you place certain items in certain places and make them totally
restricted. But I think, in fairness, if there is an ordinance that’s there, then we’re going
to have to fine-tune and deal with that, so that you deal with the preventive issues.
Because you can get an application after application after application, and, at some point
in time, it’s not necessarily certain that you’re going to prevail in every court case that’s
out there. But I’m going to support that because the cross-section of this community and
how they feel, but I do think it’s something that we have to keep our eyes totally on, and
in many times in the community, I think what we may not like personally, I think that we
may have to end up tolerating. But if we’re going to fight it, and Mr. Mayor, you’ve
heard me say that many times, I’m going to go in court cases, and I think Mr. Wall knows
that, cause we’ve all had our share of agreements and disagreements. But then I believe
in going in if you’re going to fight, don’t send me into battle with a BB gun against a
nuclear weapon. If you’re going to fight, make that fight for real. Use the armor that’s
necessary. And put the facts in place so that you attack them according to where the
legalities are, and not necessarily with the heart-felt decisions. Cause often-times, a
heart-felt decision does not necessarily prevail in a court of law, and I think that’s where
we going to have to deal with that next year.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion on the floor to deny the petition for the special
exception. It’s been seconded. I have a request for a roll call vote. Madame Clerk, if
you’ll call the roll.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Mr. Beard - Yes
Mr. Boyles - Yes
Mr. Bridges -Yes
Mr. Cheek - Yes
Mr. Colclough - Yes
Mr. Hankerson - Yes
16
Mr. Kuhlke - Yes
Mr. Mays - Yes
Mr. Shepard - Yes
Mr. Williams - Yes
Motion carries 10-0.
(Mr. Beard made the following comments during the roll call vote.)
Mr. Beard: I’m going to vote to support Commissioner Cheek’s motion, and I do
it with mixed emotions because the point is that we have an ordinance, and sometimes
you have to follow that procedure, when it’s there, and, as Commissioner Mays just said,
you know, we really need to look into this because we had it last year with the church,
and we’re going to have it again, and it’s going to come up again, and it’s difficult for us
to have the Planning Commission tell us that these people meet the required conditions to
have this, and then we have to vote to say that they can’t have it, so I do think that there
is more to this than just this vote today. But I think from the cross-section of the people
that we have here, and this is what you want, and we were elected to represent you, and
I’m going to vote with Commissioner Cheek on this motion today to deny it.
Mr. Mayor: Let the record show that the Mayor would vote yes if he had a vote.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, perhaps it’s time to institute something I’ve talked about
for three years now. It’s a community impact review on these dormant places that have
been zoned and allowed to sit for a period of time to stop these types of problems and
give us a weapon to stop things that are inappropriate for the community of Augusta, and
I hope this Commission will consider that.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. That concludes the business we were going to conduct
th
in the courtroom. Each one of you with a green sticker is invited to come up to the 8
floor and join us for the rest of the meeting. There will be a recess.
RECOGNITION:
Mr. Roman A. Bing
Dept of Juvenile Justice “State of Georgia Juvenile Officer of the Year”
The Clerk: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, we would like to recognize
Mr. Roman A. Bing, who has received the Department of Juvenile Justice “State of
Georgia Juvenile Officer of the Year” award. Mr. Bing, would you please join the Mayor
here at the podium, along with Ms. Jewelia Williams.
17
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bing, it is indeed a pleasure for us to add our recognition to that
that you have already received from Ms. Williams. [inaudible] It’s really tremendous
when we have local people who really shine at what they do and get recognition beyond
that, that of your peers where they work, [inaudible] bring this to our attention.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: The chair will recognize Commissioner Kuhlke for a [inaudible]
personal privilege.
Mr. Kuhlke: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Let me wait till these folks get out. Mr.
Mayor and fellow colleagues, I want to take this opportunity to tell you something that
I’m going to try to do this summer, and I want first you to know that it was not my
initiative to start this. But I want to introduce to you Azuri Collier, and Azuri is -- stand
up Azuri. Azuri graduated from Davidson Fine Arts School. She was an excellent
student. She participated in a lot of community services. She’s going to attend the
Emory University this coming fall. She is at Augusta State University, taking two
courses in chemistry and one course in history. But about a month ago, I got a letter from
Azuri, indicating that when she goes to Emory, her minor’s going to be political science.
And that she would like to work with me this summer and become acquainted with
county government and the functions that take place, and so I wrote her back and asked
her to come see me, and we talked. I was very impressed with her, and so I asked her to
come on as my student assistant this summer. This is the first Commission meeting that
she’s been to. She’s going to attend some Committee meetings when she has time. I’m
going to move her around the county government a little bit to get familiar with some of
the things that we do. This is something that I hope, maybe next year, my colleagues,
maybe even through the Administrator, might initiate something like a student intern
program during the summer to expose some of our young people to what takes place in
county government, and some of the workings of it. These are the folks that are going to
take our place not too long down the road. And I think to have the interest in this
community, to have the energy to want to get out and really learn something about it says
an awful lot for her. So the [inaudible] is, when I call you, I’m going to do some things
like this. We get complaints from constituents every day, and some of the small
complaints, I’m going to see how she does in handling some of these things, but I think
it’d be a good experience for her and give her some insight, and I hope, as we move
forward, that we’ll initiate some type of program like this, and I’m delighted to have her
with us, and I think she’ll be a big help to me. So welcome aboard.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Kuhlke. I might point out, we have college interns
working in the Mayor’s office this summer. I certainly echo what Mr. Kuhlke said about
taking advantage of some of the bright talent. The District Attorney needs to get back to
his pressing duty to keep that low crime rate we have here, and I wondered if we could
jump ahead to the consent agenda, to item number 22. If we could go ahead and dispose
of that, we can release the District Attorney.
18
22. Motion to approve a request from the District Attorney regarding the
reclassification of a position contingent upon a funding source. (Approved by
Administrative Services Committee June 10, 2002)
Mr. Mayor: Gentlemen, what’s your pleasure with respect to item 22 on the
consent agenda?
Mr. Cheek: I move to approve.
Mr. Bridges: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Discussion? All in favor, please vote aye.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. District Attorney.
Mr. Craig: Thank you all very much.
Mr. Mayor: Next item.
RESOLUTION:
Motion to approve adoption a Resolution Endorsing the Recommendations of the
Association of County Commissioners of Georgia/Georgia Municipal Association
Joint Task Force Quality Growth.
Mr. Mayor: Gentlemen, what’s your pleasure?
Mr. Cheek: A motion to approve.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Discussion? All in favor, please vote aye.
Motion carries 10-0.
DELEGATIONS:
A. Mr. Donald J. Robertson, Sr.
Re: Incident with Richmond County Sheriff’s Department
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Robertson, if you’ll come to the podium, and give us, again,
your name and address for the record, then you’ll have five minutes. Mr. Wall, you’ll
keep the time.
19
Mr. Robertson: My name is Donald Robertson, Donald J. Robertson, Sr. My
address is 3614 Goldfinch Drive, Augusta, Georgia. I’m here this evening on behalf of
my son, Donald Robertson, Jr., that been incarcerated with the Richmond County
Sheriff’s Department on May 24. Approximately 17:35 hours. To my understanding, or
my knowledge, because I work in Atlanta, Georgia, and I wasn’t home at the time this
incident happened, but I got a call in Ohio, tells me, Daddy, you need to come home. So
prior to coming home --
Mr. Mayor: Excuse me. If I could interrupt, Mr. Robertson, you’re talking about
your son that’s been incarcerated. The City Commission, the Mayor’s Commission, has
no jurisdiction over law enforcement with respect to the activities of the Sheriff’s Office.
We also have no authority over the housing the inmates in jail. What is the issue that you
[inaudible] that is relative to this body that you bring to us?
Mr. Robertson: Okay. I’m getting to the point.
Mr. Mayor: Please go ahead.
Mr. Robertson: Okay. The point is, it was police brutality. The way they
arrested him, and the way they beated him, I would not beat a dog that way.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. I can appreciate why you’re here and what you’re telling us.
What I would do is refer you to the Augusta Richmond County Human Relations
Commission. That is the agency in this community that was set up by this government,
funded by this government, to investigate allegations such as the one that you’re bringing
before us today.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Maybe I can intervene and speak a word here. Mr. Robertson
contacted me, and I had him to contact the Assistant Administrator, Mr. Fred Russell.
And I think he’s on this agenda because Mr. Russell had it put on this agenda. I did not
put him, Mr. Robertson did not put it. Is Fred in here?
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. The only thing I did was for the Commissioner was to --
Mr. Williams: Come to the mike so that we can hear you.
Mr. Russell: I’m Fred Russell, Deputy Administrator for Public Safety. I talked
to Mr. Robertson on two occasions. On the first time, he called, and then I called him
back. The only thing I did, and I think it’s appropriate, to investigate this type of
complaint, is refer him to the Internal Affairs Office of the Sheriff’s Department, which
would investigate the complaint, open the case, and investigate that and report back. I
20
did call him back and gave him the number and the name of a deputy there that would be
in charge of that. I did not place this on the agenda. I was surprised to see it here myself.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, who placed this on the agenda then? Ms. Bonner, how
did this --
The Clerk: Mr. Robertson submitted a letter requesting that he appear before the
Commission regarding this issue, Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Okay.
The Clerk: It’s in the book.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Robertson, we are not trying to short-circuit your inquiry at all.
[inaudible]. I would ask you to please contact Mr. Frank Thomas, Human Relations
Commission. That’s the hard part about getting investigative complaints like this, and
you can get contact information from the HRC office.
Mr. Robertson: All right, sir.
Mr. Mayor: That would be the appropriate Commission to see this. Don’t you
think the Sheriff would agree with that?
Mr. Wall: Absolutely.
Mr. Mayor: That’s an independent agency outside the Sheriff’s Department.
Mr. Robertson: Okay. But, during the time I came that Tuesday, I spoke also
with Mr. Strength. And we could not get to a rapid understanding. So I think, as a
citizen of Richmond County, and as a -- standing in this city for 45 years, we not going to
allow this to happen. And come to you, Bob Young, Mayor Young, I think this incident
need to be looked into.
Mr. Mayor: Well, and that’s why I think that it’s right for the HRC to get
involved. If there is a disagreement between the Sheriff and the citizen, then the HRC --
that’s their role. And, Madame Clerk, if we could get the information for him, contact
Mr. Thomas --
Mr. Robertson: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you very much for appearing.
B. Mr. B.T. Burton, Jr.
Re: ARC Solid Waste Collection Program
21
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Burton, if you’ll give us your name and address for the record,
please?
Mr. Burton: Yes. B.T. Burton, Jr. I live at 2354 Helsinki Drive here in Augusta.
And my reason for being here is I’m an open-road truck driver. And I came home to find
this big new can in my yard from BFI. And I called to find what it was about, and they
said it was a mandatory garbage collection, that we had to pay $200 a year through our
taxes. I’m home maybe once, twice a month, one or two days at a time. And I don’t
accumulate that much trash, and I don’t see why I should have to pay $200 a year to pick
up trash that I don’t even have. I was told to come to the Commission. I’ve been about
four or five phone calls, and all this happened.
Mr. Wall: Mr. Burton, the Commission has adopted special service districts, and
has instituted mandatory garbage pickup in those. While we understand your situation, in
order to contract and do it on the district-wide basis, the garbage district I’m speaking of,
by Commission district, it was necessary to identify all the housing units and to assess the
cost equally among everyone. You happen to be one of the individuals that perhaps right
now, because of your job, do not use it that much. However, it is a charge that’s uniform
within the district and has to be uniform within the district, and there are others that are in
a similar situation. It’s a decision that the Commission has made, that we need to have a
mandatory garbage pickup, and, whereas right now you may not be getting the benefit of
it, hopefully, over the long term, you will receive the benefit of it. And it’s for the
community as a whole.
Mr. Burton: Sounds like you want me to be fired. You know, what I’m saying is,
I’m not using it at all. I mean, you never see that new can in my front yard. So I’m not
using it at all. And I’m never home. I’m paying $200 a year, which is not a lot of
money, but I’m paying $200 a year for something I’ll never use.
Mr. Mayor: Well, it’s like, there might be a streetlight on your street but not in
front of your house, so you’ll never benefit from it. You may never call the Sheriff
Department to come to your house. You may never call the Fire Department to come to
your house, but these are services that need to be supported, and we support those
through tax levy in the city, and garbage service is one of those services that’s been
added to that tax levy [inaudible] decision of this Commission.
Mr. Burton: Thank you very much.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. The chair recognizes Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, this is relative to the solid waste collection, which we
initiated as Phase 2 at the beginning of the month, I think. I see Ms. Smith back there.
District 5 and District 3 have been caught in a situation where a lot of the haulers who
were maybe not mapped out in the expansion were just abandoning the areas that are not
in the expanded district, but they are abandoning areas contiguous to those areas. Ms.
Smith, and through [inaudible] has prepared a memorandum of additional units, and I
22
hadn’t had a chance to talk to the attorney, but we need to get service to these individuals.
Can we study this, Jim? Or can we act on it? I would like to expand it. I’m getting calls
from various places, saying that we’re not serving the areas, and I would like to serve
them. I think, so would Commissioner Hankerson, I believe, but I’ll let him speak for
himself.
Mr. Wall: It would take unanimous consent to add this to the agenda, first of all,
and secondly, I would ask that you defer this to the committee and run it through its
process. Two of the sections, in particular, one has apparently 208 units. One has 340
units. It’s the same problem that I voiced with Phase 1. I think those units, or sections,
are large enough that they need to be bid. And I don’t think that a change order is the
proper way to proceed. I’m not familiar with, you know, the size of the units, of the
sections, under Phase 2. Teresa mentioned it to me just shortly before the meeting, but
I’d like an opportunity to look at this before we act.
Mr. Beard: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes?
Mr. Beard: Is this on the agenda?
Mr. Mayor: No.
Mr. Beard: It appears we’re discussing something that’s not on the agenda, and
either we need to put it on the agenda for discussion, not backdoor it, as we seem to be
doing here.
Mr. Wall: I was just consulting with Mr. Shepard about putting it into committee
[inaudible].
Mr. Shepard: And I was just going to suggest -- I thought there’s a special called
meeting of the Commission on Friday? Did I not see that?
Mr. Wall: There is.
Mr. Shepard: In the middle of the -- so, and that being the case, what I’d like to
do is place it, and I’d need unanimous consent, but if we could place it on Friday’s
agenda, if there’s some concern that there’s some effort to circumvent the agenda
process. I think Ms. Smith and the Administrator have been working under extreme time
deadlines, trying to cope with the situation we had foreseen with people abandoning
service, which we had anticipated they would abandon areas outside the service district.
So if we could just put it on Friday’s -- could we do it on Friday’s agenda? Just bring it
up then, but we have a situation where people are needing service in these areas.
Principally, is where they are, and I’m not trying to backdoor anything. I’m just trying to
get service to the people.
23
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: I also agree that it need to be addressed as soon as possible
because I’m receiving many, many calls about the people’s service being discontinued.
The most important thing about this is, the crucial thing about it is, that the service that
they had, the previous service has been discontinued. Individual, independent haulers are
not coming back to these people. We created this monster, so I think that, I agree that if
we can get it on the agenda for Friday, we need -- because people garbage are piling up,
and they have nowhere to go and nowhere to turn to.
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor, I have the same concern and I’d like to -- there’s an
area, Ms. Smith, off of Barton Chapel Road, Old Barton Chapel Road, that the carrier has
just backed off in that community and not doing anything. I’d like to see that on the
agenda for Friday to discuss also.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Let’s move along.
The Clerk: The consent agenda consists of items 1 through 46. For the
benefit of any objectors to our planning petitions, I will read the petition request
and the location. If there are any objectors, would you please signify your objection
by raising your hand once the petition is called.
PLANNING:
1. Z-02-65 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-
1A (One-family Residential) on properties located adjacent to or including
Brookfield West and Mayo subdivisions at the following addresses; 727 Gentlewind
Ln., 704, 706, 708, 710, and 713 Stillwater Dr. and 839 Brookfield Parkway (Tax
Map 6, Parcels 11.10, 12.12, 12.18, 12.19, 12.20, 12.21 and 268) DISTRICT 7
2. Z-02-66 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond
County Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission
requesting a change of the current zoning classification from Zone A (Agriculture)
to Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) for properties located in Clairmont
subdivision located off Old Trail Road at 249 Deerfield Ln., 3926, 3928, 3920, and
3932 Willowood Rd. (Tax Map 22, Parcels 72, 87, 88, 89, and 90). DSITRICT 3
3. Z-02-67 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-
1A (One-family Residential) on property near the Camilla Road/Davis Road
intersection.
a) Change from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-1A (One-family
Residential) (Tax Map 16, Parcel 4) DISTRICT 7
b) Change from Zone A (Agricultural) to Zone B-2 (General Business) Tax
Map 16 to a portion of Parcel 24. DISTRICT 7
24
4. Z-02-68 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone LI (Light Industry) to Zone
R-1C (One-family Residential) on property in Eastview and Hornsby subdivisions
off Laney-Walker Boulevard Extension located at 537 Aiken Street and a portion of
a parcel on Sand Bar Ferry Rd. (Tax Map 61-4 Parcel 96 and a portion of Parcel
179) DISTRICT 1
5. Z-02-69A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-
1A (One-family Residential) on the western portion of a parcel located near the
North Leg and Gordon Highway intersection. (Tax Map 69 Parcel 25) DISTICT 3
6. Z-02-70 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone R-1A (One-family
Residential) to Zone R-3B (Multiple-family Residential) on property located near
the intersection of North Leg and Gordon Highway. (Tax Map 69 Parcel 25)
DISTRICT 3
7. Z-02-71 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-
1A (One-family Residential) on property located near the intersection of North Leg
and Gordon Highway. (Tax Map 69 Parcel 4) DISTRICT 3
8. Z-02-72 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone B-1 (Neighborhood
Business) to Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) on property located in Turpin Hill
subdivision northwest of Old Savannah Road located at 2001 Old Savannah Road.
(Tax Map 72-4 Parcel 238.1) DISTRICT 2
9. Z-02-73 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Broadway Baptist Church
requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of expanding an existing church,
including day care services, per Section 26-1(a) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta Richmond County affecting property located at 2323 Barton
Chapel Road and containing 10.94 acres. (Tax Map 83 Parcel 2) DISTRICT 4
10. Z-02-77 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Reverend Otis B. Moss III, on behalf
of Tabernacle Baptist Church requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of
brining an existing church into zoning conformance, per Section 26-1(a) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta Richmond County, affecting
property located at 1223 Laney-Walker Boulevard and containing 1.1 acres. (Tax
Map 46-3 Parcel 125 & 127) DISTIRCT 1
11. Z-02-78 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the following conditions: 1) that there will be
no vehicle access to Asbury Hill subdivision; 2) that no lot will have less than 70’ of
frontage and 9.000 square feet of area; a petition by Nathan Youngblood, on behalf
25
of Nordahl & Company, requesting a change of zone from Zone A (Agriculture) and
Zone R-1B (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1C (One-family Residential)
effecting property known as Breckenridge Subdivision, Phase I and II, containing
approximately 85 acres. (Tax Map 66 Parcel 56-03 and Tax Map 66-2 Parcel 1)
DISTRICT 3
12. Z-02-79 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Mary Ann Gaskill, on behalf of Jack
Lefler, requesting a change of zone from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to
Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) affecting property located at 3350 Old Louisville
Road and containing .45 acres. (Tax Map 111-4 Parcel 39.01) DISTRICT 8.
13. Z-02-80 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by American Signage, Inc., on behalf of
Kimco Augusta, requesting a change of zone from Zone B-1 (Neighborhood
Business) to Zone B-2 (General business) affecting property located at 3412
Wrightsboro Road and containing 1.33 acres. (Tax Map 41-4 Parcel 70)
DISTRICT 3
14. Z-02-81 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the following condition that a 20’ natural
buffer be maintained between the neighboring residences to the south (Hidden hills
subdivision) a petition by Aubrey Chavous, Sr. requesting a change of zone from
Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property located at
3630 Morgan Road and containing .86 acres. (Tax Map 129 Parcel 12.07)
DISTRICT 4
15. Z-02-82 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Bill Franke, on behalf of Henry and
Mary Steinberg, requesting a change of zone from Zone R-1A (One-family
Residential) to Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property located at 2322
Peach Orchard Road and containing 2.29 acres. (Tax Map 87-3 Parcel 56)
DISTRICT 2.
The Clerk: Under our Public Services agenda, alcohol petitions:
PUBLIC SERVICES:
19. Motion to approve a request by David R. Wilson for a retail packing Liquor,
th
Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with 12 Street spirits located at 1441
th
12 Street. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee
June 10, 2002)
20. Motion to approve a request by Gregory Tennin for a 60 day extension to
purchase the retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection
with Mr. K’s Party Center located on 1061 Stevens Creek Road subject to the
payment of delinquent property taxes before 60-day extension begins. District 7.
Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee June 10, 2002)
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to the planning or alcohol petitions?
26
Mr. Mayor: None are noted. Gentlemen, with your consent, if we could add to
the consent agenda Item 52, which was [inaudible].
Mr. Kuhlke: So moved.
Mr. Colclough: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second to approve the consent agenda, to
include item number 52. Are there any items you’d like to pull from the consent agenda?
Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull item 12, please.
Mr. Mayor: Item 12.
Mr. Williams: I’d like to pull item 27, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: 27 for Mr. Williams.
The Clerk: What was your item, Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: 27.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I’d like to pull 32 to designate a funding, a capital funding source.
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. Shepard: And could we add item 2 to the additions to the agenda, number 2.
That’s reappointments of Mr. Padgett and Mr. Johnson to the Board of Health.
Mr. Mayor: And add number 2 to the consent agenda. Is there any objection to
that? None heard.
The Clerk: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: We’re adding and deleting from the consent agenda.
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. We’ve had items number 12, 27 and 32 pulled.
Any other items to be pulled?
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor?
27
Mr. Mayor: Yes, Mr. Kolb?
Mr. Kolb: If I can, for clarification, pull items number 29 and 30.
Mr. Mayor: 29 and 30. Yes, sir. Anything further?
Consent agenda:
PLANNING:
1. Z-02-65 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-
1A (One-family Residential) on properties located adjacent to or including
Brookfield West and Mayo subdivisions at the following addresses: 727 Gentlewind
Ln., 704, 706, 708, 710 and 713 Stillwater Dr. and 839 Brookfield Parkway. (Tax
Map 6, Parcels 11.10, 12.12, 12.18, 12.19, 12.20, 12.21 and 268) DISTRICT 7
2. Z-02-66 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-
1A (One-family Residential) for properties located in Clairmont subdivision located
off Old Trail Road at 249 Deerfield Ln., 3926, 3928, 3920 and 3932 Willowood Rd.
(Tax Map 22 Parcels 72, 87, 88, 89 and 90). DISTRICT 3
3. Z-02-67 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-
1A (One-family Residential) on property near the Camilla Road/Davis Road
intersection:
a) Change from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-1A (One-family
Residential). (Tax Map 16 Parcel 4) DISTRICT 7
b) Change from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-2 (General Business).
(Tax Map 16 a portion of Parcel 24) DISTRICT 7
4. Z-02-68 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone LI (Light Industry) to Zone
R-1C (One-family Residential) on property in Eastview and Hornsby subdivisions
off Laney-Walker Boulevard Extension located at 537 Aiken Street and a portion of
a parcel on Sand Bar Ferry Rd. (Tax Map 61-4 Parcel 96 and a portion of Parcel
179) DISTRICT 1
5. Z-02-69 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-
1A (One-family Residential) on the western portion of a parcel located near the
North Leg and Gordon Highway intersection. (Tax Map 69 Parcel 25) DISTICT 3
6. Z-02-70 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone R-1A (One-family
28
Residential) to Zone R-3B (Multiple-family Residential) on property located near
the intersection of North Leg and Gordon Highway. (Tax Map 55 Parcel 4)
DISTRICT 3
7. Z-02-71 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting a change
of the current zoning classification from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-1A (One-
family Residential) on property located near the intersection of North Leg and
Gordon Highway. (Tax Map 69 Parcel 4) DISTRICT 3
8. Z-02-72 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by the Augusta Commission requesting
a change of the current zoning classification from Zone B-1 (Neighborhood
Business) to Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) on property located in Turpin Hill
subdivision northwest of Old Savannah Road located at 2001 Old Savannah Road.
(Tax Map 72-4 Parcels 238.2) DISTRICT 2
9. Z-02-73 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Broadway Baptist Church
requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of expanding an existing church,
including day care services, per Section 26-1(a) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta Richmond County affecting property located at 2323 Barton
Chapel road and containing 10.94 acres. (Tax Map Parcel 2) DISTRICT 4
10. Z-02-74 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Reverend Otis B. Moss III, on behalf
of Tabernacle Baptist Church requesting a special Exception for the purpose of
bringing an existing church into zoning conformance, per Section 26-1(a) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta Richmond County, affecting
property located at 1223 Laney-Walker Boulevard and containing 1.1 acres. (Tax
Map 46-3 Parcel 125 & 127) DISTRICT 1
11. Z-02-78 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the following conditions: 1) that there will be
no vehicle access to Asbury Hill subdivision; 2) that no lot will have less than 70’ of
frontage and 9,000 square feet of area; a petition by Nathan Youngblood, on behalf
of Nordahl & Company, requesting a change of zone from Zone A (Agriculture) and
Zone R-1B (one-family Residential) to Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) affecting
property known as Breckenridge subdivision, Phase I and II, containing
approximately 85 acres. (Tax Map 66 Parcel 5-03 and Tax map 66-2 Parcel 1)
DISTRICT 3
12. Deleted from the consent agenda.
13. Z-02-80 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by American Signage, Inc., on behalf of
Kimco Augusta, requesting a change of zone from B-1 (Neighborhood Business) to
Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property located at 3412 Wrightsboro Road
and containing 1.33 acres. (Tax Map 41-4 Parcel 70) DISTRICT 3
14. Z-02-81 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the following condition that a 20’ natural
buffer be maintained between the neighboring residences to the south (Hidden Hills
subdivision) a petition by Aubrey Chavous, Sr. requesting a change of zone from
29
Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property located at
3630 Morgan Road and containing .86 acres. (Tax Map 129 Parcel 12.07)
DISTRICT 4
15. Z-02-82 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Bill Franke, on behalf of Henry and
Mary Steinberg, requesting a change of zone from Zone R-1A (One-family
Residential) to Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property located at 2322
Peach Orchard Road and containing 2.29 acres. (Tax map 87-3 Parcel 56)
DISTRICT 2
16. FINAL PLAT – PEPPERIDGE SECTION 16 – S-622 A request for
concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County Planning Commission to approve
a petition by Southern Partners, Inc., on behalf of Nordahl & Co., Inc., requesting
final plat approval for Pepperidge. This property is located on Danvers Ave.,
adjacent to Pepperidge, Section 13.
17. FINAL PLAT – PINEHURST, SECTION 1-A – S-585 A request for
concurrent with the Augusta Richmond County Planning Commission to approve a
petition by Southern Partners, Inc., on behalf of Nordahl & Co., Inc., requesting
final plat approval for Pinehurst, Section 1-A. This property is located off Windsor
Spring Road and Willis Foreman Road, adjacent to Willis Foreman Elementary.
PUBLIC SERVICES:
18. Motion to approve and award Bid Item #02-122, the color coating of tennis
courts at Newman Tennis Center, to Talbot Tennis Ltd. in the amount of
$11,948.00. (Approved by Public Services Committee June 10, 2002)
19. Motion to approve a request by David R. Wilson for a retail package Liquor,
th
Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with 12 Street Spirits located at 1441
th
12 Street. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee
June 10, 2002)
20. Motion to approve a request by Gregory Tannin for a 60 day extension to
purchase the retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection
with Mr. K’s Party Center located at 1061 Stevens Creek road subject to the
payment of delinquent property taxes before 60-day extension begins. District 7.
Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee June 10, 2002)
21. Motion to approve an operational agreement between Augusta Recreation
and Parks and MACH Academy, Inc. for operation of Fleming Tennis Center
subject to the approval of the Attorney. (Approved by Public Services Committee
June 10, 2002)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
22. Deleted from the consent agenda.
23. Motion to approve retirement for John Bigelow under the 1977 Pension Plan.
(Approved by Administrative Services Committee June 10, 2002)
24. Motion to approve the upgrade of Jeannette Spencer from Senior Property
Appraiser IV, Salary Grade 47, to Senior Property Appraiser I, Salary Grade 50.
(Approved by Administrative Services Committee June 10, 2002)
30
25. Motion to authorize the upgrade of the Assistant Solid Waste Manager from
a Grade 49 to a Grade 52 and add the education requirement for a BA/BS degree.
Also reclassify the Code Enforcement Officer I position (Grade 44) to a Code
Enforcement Officer III position (Grade 42). (Approved by Administrative Services
Committee June 10, 2002)
26. Motion to authorize the Public Works and Engineering Department to
reclassify the Engineering Technician II position (Grade 44) and the Draftsman II
position (Grade 40) to a Mapping & Drafting Supervisor (Grade 46) and a
Draftsman I (Grade 41), respectively, in the County Engineer Section. Also allow
the reclassification of an Engineering Signal Technician II (Grade 44) to a
Draftsman I (Grade 41) in the Traffic Engineering Section. (Approved by
Administrative Services Committee June 10, 2002)
27. Deleted from consent agenda.
PUBLIC SAFETY:
28. Motion to approve the subcontract between Augusta Richmond County and
Caffee Wright to provide counseling services through Purchase of Services grant.
Also, for approval of contract renewal for Augusta Youth Center to provide a Day
reporting Center under our Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant (JAIBG)
for Richmond County Juvenile Court and The Children and Youth Coordinating
Council (CYCC). (Approved by Public Safety Committee June 10, 2002)
FINANCE:
29. Deleted from the consent agenda.
30. Deleted from the consent agenda.
31. Motion to approve division of Local Option Sales Tax in the following
percentages, to wit: (Approved by Finance Committee June 10, 2002)
Augusta Richmond County Urban Services District 23.53%
City of Hephzibah 1.94%
Town of Blythe 0.36%
Augusta Richmond County Suburban Services District 74.17%
32. Deleted from the consent agenda.
ENGINEERING SERVICES:
33. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 98-2, Parcel 292,
which is owned by Henry R. Coleman and Raymond D. Brown, for a right-of-way in
connection with the Bungalow Road Improvement Project, more particularly
described as 946.01 square feet, more or less, of right-of-way and 307.51 square feet,
more or less, of temporary construction easement. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee June 10, 2002)
34. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 86-4, Parcel 6.05,
which is owned by Henry R. Coleman and Raymond D. Brown, for a right-of-way in
connection with the Bungalow Road Improvement Project, more particularly
described as 653.18 square feet, more or less, of right-of way and 1,341.36 square
feet, more or less, of temporary construction easement. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee June 10, 2002)
31
35. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 86-4, Parcel 6.04,
which is owned by Henry R. Coleman and Raymond D. Brown, for an easement in
connection with the Bungalow Road Improvement Project, more particularly
described as 1,979.51 square feet, more or less, of permanent drainage and utility
easement. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee June 10, 2002)
36. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 86-4, Parcel 6.02,
which is owned by C & C Construction Co., Inc., for a right-of-way in connection
with the Bungalow Road Improvement Project, more particularly described as
444.92 square feet, more or less, of right-of-way and 802.84 square feet, more or less,
of temporary construction easement. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee June 10, 2002)
37. Motion to approve Change Order No. 2 to the National Hills Sanitary Sewer
Project’s construction contract in the amount of a deduction of $19,689.98.
(Approved by Engineering Services Committee June 10, 2002)
38. Motion to approve a proposal from Zimmerman, Evans and Leopold, Inc. to
provide design services for a ground storage tank and pump station on Dennis
Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee June 10, 2002)
39. Motion to approve Change Order #1 to Hebbard Electric Company in the
amount of $86,243 to rehabilitate and load test all generators included in the
Emergency Groundwater Standby Generator Project. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee June 10, 2002)
40. Motion to approve conservation easements over certain city owned
canal/riverfront properties. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee June
10, 2002)
41. Motion to approve the upgrade of the Assistant Solid Waste Manager from a
Grade 49 to a Grade 52 and add the education requirement for a BA/BS degree.
Also reclassify the Code Enforcement Officer I position (Grade 44) to a Code
Enforcement Officer III position (Grade 42). (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee June 10, 2002)
42.Motion to approve authorizing the Public Works and Engineering Department to
reclassify the Engineering Technician II position (Grade 44) and the Draftsman II
position (Grade 40) to a Mapping & Drafting Supervisor (Grade 46) and a
Draftsman I (Grade 41), respectively, in the County Engineering Section. Also
allow the reclassification of an Engineering Signal Technician II (Grade 44) to a
Draftsman I (Grade 41) in the Traffic Engineering Section. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee June 10, 2002)
43. Motion to approve the refund of $202.50 to Ms. Florine Taylor relating to the
matter of street lighting along Deans Bridge Road. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee June 10, 2002
44. Consider a request from property owners in the area of Woodstone Place
and Ravenel Road regarding a problem with standing water.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
45. Motion to approve the minutes of the Special Called meeting held May 30
and the regular meeting of the Commission held June 4, 2002.
32
APPOINTMENT:
46. Motion to approve the re-appointment of Mr. Sizemore to the Housing &
Neighborhood Department Citizen Advisory Board representing District 7.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
52. Motion to approve the pass-through Governor’s Emergency Fund Grant
Award in the amount of $10,000 for the National Hills Club, Inc. for pool repairs.
Addendum Item 1. Approve reappointments of Jack Padgett, Jr. and Harvey
Johnson to the Board of Health for a second term (2/10/02 – 2/09/06).
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to approve the consent agenda. Included in the
consent agenda would be item number 52 on the regular agenda and item number 2 on
the addendum agenda. Items 12, 27, 32, 29 and 30 have been pulled. All in favor of the
consent agenda please vote aye.
Motion carries 10-0. [Items 1-11, 13-26, 28, 31, 33-46, 52, Addendum Item 2]
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible]
(Laughter)
Mr. Mayor: Now we’ll take up those items off the consent agenda. I see our
Elections Director is with us, so if we could go ahead and take up item 32 first.
The Clerk:
32. Motion to approve subject to the Administrator’s review of the proposal to
purchase additional voting equipment and poll worker salary increase. (Approved
by the Finance Committee June 10, 2002)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, I had conversed with the Administrator earlier, and he
said that we should find a capital funding source for some of these capital items, so,
George, I think we’re ready -- I mean, I’m in support with the Election Director’s request,
but I thought you wanted to designate a capital funding source for the capital items
included in that, so if you designate that, I’ll put it in the form of a motion.
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, after reviewing the
proposal from the Board of Elections, the Elections Director, it’s my
recommendation that the voting machines, the cost for those, be taken out of the
capital outlay account. And there are some unexpended funds that we can put
together for that. The balance of the funds for the temporary employees and poll
workers, et cetera, should come from contingency.
33
Mr. Shepard: I so move Mr. Mayor, to put it in the form of a motion, Mr.
Kolb’s recommendation.
Mr. Bridges: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Discussion? All in favor of the motion, entered in by Mr. Shepard,
please vote aye.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk: She’s here for another item, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Which is the other item?
The Clerk: It’s on our regular agenda item 54.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s go ahead and do that while she’s here. She’s got to get back
and order some elections equipment.
54. Update from the Elections Director regarding the proposed new districts.
(Requested by Commissioner Bobby Hankerson)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hankerson, we’re on item 54. [Inaudible]. Would you like to
say something?
Mr. Hankerson: I think I’ve already spoken. She go ahead and speak. She know
the reason I called her.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Ms. Bailey: I first of all -- my name is Lynn Bailey. I’m Elections Director for
Richmond County, and let me publicly thank the Commission on behalf of the Board of
Elections for your support in the purchase of the additional voting equipment. I think it
will, hopefully, make our voters’ experience on Election Day a little better at the polls, in
terms of the amount of time that they have to spend in line. So that’s a very good thing,
and we’re very pleased to have that funded. I have been asked to give a report to the
Commission regarding redistricting. When the new districts will take effect, when you
will begin representing your new constituents, and further, what plan the Board of
Elections has for letting the voters know about these changes. Is that what I understand?
Mr. Hankerson: That’s correct.
Ms. Bailey: Okay. So I will tell you then what I know to be true, at this point.
Understand that this is all in the works as we go. We are working diligently on it every
day. Pursuant to the legislation that created these new district lines, beginning May 1, the
members of the Commission and the Board of Education would begin representing their
34
new constituents based on your new district lines. And you should all be in receipt of a
copy of the map of your new districts. I sent it out maybe two or three weeks out to you.
That legislation was signed into law by the Governor on April 8 and was sent off to
Washington, D.C., to the Justice Department, for pre-clearance on May 6 by the County
Attorney. The Justice Department had 60 days to pre-clear that plan from the date of
receipt. So we, of course, have no idea what the status of it is at this point. Did you want
to add anything to that, Jim?
Mr. Wall: No, other than they are working on it because we are aware of the fact
that some individuals in the community have been contacted, and I’ve been contacted to
supply some information, which they have, but they wanted an additional form, so we
submitted that to them.
Ms. Bailey: Okay. The changes that will go into effect as a result of this
redistricting will be, in effect, for the first time, with the August 20 statewide primary.
We are in the process right now of moving voters, giving them their new district
assignments. We have secured all the necessary polling locations and have identified
changes that need to be made there. We will, once all that data is entered into the
computer, we will be sending each voter in Richmond County a first-class notice through
the mail, telling them of any changes that have affected them, whether it’s just a simple
change in the numbering of their district, or more complex change involving polling
place reassignment. And we’ll be sending those out approximately 30 days prior to the
August primary. Any polling locations that we vacate as a result of this redistricting will
have notices placed on them prior to Election Day and through Election Day, advising
voter that that facility is no longer open and advising them where they need to report to
vote. We will have on our Web page a polling place lookup chart, where voters can go in
and enter in their name and their county, their personal name, their county name, and
their date of birth, and their polling place information will be supplied to them through
that Website. Not only their polling place, but their district assignments, Congressional
on down to Commission and School Board. There’s also a mapping feature associated
with that, that will tell them exactly how to get to these polling places from where they
live. We plan to put an insert in all utility bills of the Augusta Utility Department, going
out to voters, telling them not what their new district assignment is, but that there could
be changes. They need to be aware that mail is coming to them, giving them the Web
page address, giving them, if they want to go out there and look, and inviting them to
contact our office if they have any questions about that. In addition to those items, we
will be taking every opportunity, both the Board of Elections staff and members, in
public speaking engagements, in demonstrations of the new voting equipment, in any
type of media source that we have, to remind people that this is a redistricting year, and
they need to be aware that these notices are coming out to them. That’s really all I have
to say, other than just to remind this body, and these are not things that you don’t already
know, but in a year where there is redistricting, and thank goodness it only happens every
ten years, it’s a very confusing time for everybody involved. But most particularly for
the constituents, because they don’t understand things they way that you do and they way
that we do. We will be constantly educating the voters through the means that I just said,
through the Web page, through the mail outs, and through other media outlets as
35
opportunities present themselves, but for you all, it’s probably going to be an ongoing
education process through personal contacts, phone calls, public meetings, and so forth,
where voters will be asking you questions. Just know that we’ll try to have the most up-
to-date information possible in our office. Feel free to give us a call and we’re glad to
answer any questions, and we’re trying to do everything we can to make these transitions
as painless as possible.
Mr. Mayor: Are there any questions? Mr. Kuhlke?
Mr. Kuhlke: Lynn, I don’t remember getting the map, but is each Commissioner -
- can they secure an individual map on their district, their new district?
Ms. Bailey: Yes, sir. In fact, anyone who’s not in receipt of that map, and,
obviously, you were not, Mr. Kuhlke, I’ll be glad to get another one to you. I sent one to
all the Commissioners and the School Board members some weeks ago, showing the
areas in your new district. Now, the map was somewhat incomplete because we’re, at
that time, still uncertain about some of our precinct boundary lines. But as far as the
geographical area of the district, it was all indicated on those maps, so I will be glad to
get another one to you.
Mr. Kuhlke: Well, I may have it. I just don’t remember getting it. I was curious
that they didn’t get it, if they were available.
Ms. Bailey: Yes, sir, they are.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. One reason that I had Ms. Bailey to
come and speak to us, because I have some concerns about the many calls that I am
receiving, the complaints, and all the projects that will involve the changing of the district
line. Some projects that I’ve been involved in will now be in the new district, and I want
to make sure that we start at the same time. Apparently, someone is giving the numbers
for the new district, and someone is giving just the current, or previous district, I should
say. Also, Augusta Care [inaudible] says she is now giving the previous district, or she’s
calling the Commissioner that representing the previous district before the redrawing of
the district. So when are we going to decide, according to Lynn, if we should have
started May1, then we have a new district. I know I have and Mr. Williams have a great
part of my district is now in Mr. Williams’ district, and mine extend to Mr. Colclough
and also into Steve’s area. That’s one of the reasons, too, I mentioned about the garbage
situation, because a lot of the areas that are in Steve’s district are, well, in part of Steve’s
district that connects with District 5, are not receiving the garbage. And I know that I had
meetings with everyone in my district, and they had the opportunity to get the service. So
I can’t answer for someone else’s district, but that’s a major problem now, so are we
going to start when they call in with these complaints -- are we going to now say, give
them the new district? Are we going to continue giving the old district? But according to
36
what she’s saying, that we should be working in the new district. Is that what I’m
hearing?
Mr. Wall: Yes. You’re correct, and Lynn and I talked about the fact that, you
know, the various departments, such as Zoning, such as Licensing and Inspections, where
they identify the district, we have furnished to them, I believe, now --
Ms. Bailey: We are in the process of furnishing that information.
Mr. Wall: All right. In the process of furnishing that information to them, so that
they are to be sure to identify, but the legislation that we submitted to them did not have
that May 1 change date in there. However, the Legislative Council, which was done
uniform throughout the State, inserted that in the legislation, and so I think we have to
live with it. And we’re trying to get up to speed in notifying all the various departments
that need to know which district is affected by it, so that they can keep you advised.
Ms. Bailey: What Jim was referring to is through the GIS mapping system, we
are converting files over, so the various outlying departments will have access to the
same data that we do in our office, so that they can correctly identify the new district
lines. That information is not quite converted yet. It is a manual process that is going to
take another week or two to get finished, but we’re really close. In the meantime, we are
having to manually look up voters and place them in their correct, in their new district,
because the information in the computer is still now the old information. So in this
transition time, you know, as I said earlier, it’s confusing for all of us, but just know that
we are working just as diligently as we can to get that information converted over, but it
is a long process.
Mr. Hankerson: I guess the key thing that I want to know, is this Commission
going to start working with the district as of May 1? Are we going to continue working
with the old one? That would solve my problem.
Mr. Bridges: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: All right. Mr. Bridges?
Mr. Bridges: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I think Commissioner Hankerson’s
bringing up a legitimate point. I sat on, as a Commissioner, on the subcommittee that
drew up the boundary lines, and this very issue came up. Who did we really represent?
The old lines or the new ones? We thought initially, we represented the old lines, but I
think, legally, we represent the new ones. But my understanding was that this came up
before the full Commission earlier this year, and we sort of had a gentleman’s agreement
that we were going to continue to represent our old districts which we were familiar with,
and who the voters were familiar with their Commissioner, until we actually we had an
election in that district. And that’s the assumption I’ve been going on and operating on.
And it’s really the one I would prefer to do, because it’s the area that I’m familiar with at
this point. And, like I say, you know, like each Commissioner here, I’ve got some what I
37
call regulars that, you know, call frequently about different issues and different problems.
And they’re used to calling their Commissioner, and I would like to continue that
relationship, even though now they’re actually out -- they’re in the new district and out
of, you know, my newly created district. But my understanding was that we had reached
a gentleman’s agreement that we would continue to respond to the needs of our districts
before January1, until such time as we had an election, which would be next year.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I guess three points. One, I wanted to invite you to our
Saturday breakfast, Commissioner Colclough have, second Saturday at nine o’clock at
Gracewood Community Center every month, if you’ll let us know. There’s 50 or 60
citizens there that this would be very timely information. Two, I got the small map, but it
would be useful to have a poster-size map, maybe two of them on backing, that we can
display at meetings like this for people to see. We go to several community meetings,
and it’s additional information. And, three, Mr. Mayor, I’m getting calls from the new
District 6 now. I’ve gotten calls from all over South Augusta, from 468, for a while now.
I think this is a real good opportunity for us to start working for all the people of Augusta,
not just our little geographic areas. I plan, for one, to not only represent the old District
6, but the new District 6, and anybody else that calls to help. You know, there are a lot of
concerns about projects continuing under the new Commissioner that has jurisdiction
over that, but that should be something that we all hold to heart, that we all work together
to make sure those things that we started are seen through, not only this year but next
year, even after the district lines become permanent. I just think it’s counterproductive
for us to try to start drawing lines in the sand in this time of transition. As Ms. Bailey has
said, the people that are the most confused during this time are the people that are
experiencing the change, and it’s going to take all of us working together, not only taking
care of our old districts, but our new districts, to make sure that that confusion is kept to a
minimum, and that we give assistance where assistance is needed. And I for one plan to
continue to represent all the people of my side of town, and anybody else that calls for
help, and I’m not going to partition that by lines, by districts, old, new, or otherwise.
Mr. Mayor: Well, I would just suggest that if someone has a question about
whether an issue is in one district or another, just call me. I’ve got them all, and I’ll try to
pick up some of the slack. Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. What Commissioner Cheek said is so
true, but at the same time, there is an election for those of us who intend on running again
in 2003. And, if I’m going to do this, I don’t want to wait until 2003, then decide, well,
this is my new line, and these are people got to vote for me. When those lines were
drawn, and people started to calling, and I knew where those lines was, immediately I
went to those people to let them know that I am going to be the one that they have to vote
for. Time is passing by rapidly, and here it is now the sixth month. If we going to have
the people to vote and not be confused as to who they going to vote for, I think now is the
time to be active with those people and let them know that we are their Commissioner,
and they will be going to the poll this year again, well, next year again, even though they
38
went maybe a year ago. So some of those people got to go back to the poll to cast their
ballot for the person they wish to support. But I think now is the time to interact with
those people, and to let them know where the lines are. Not just those lines, but any line.
There’s issues all over this county that we have all tried to address and tried to make this
city the great city that it should be. But I have already started. I got those lines from
Lynn. I went to her office. I had people to call me. I met with several people, several
groups who’s interested in knowing what they can do or what they can do to help, and I
think we need to be interactive so they’ll know who their Commissioners are and where
those lines are.
Mr. Mayor: Well, it doesn’t seem that we’re going to have something definitive
come out of here today. Perhaps, maybe the appropriate committee ought to take a look
at this and come back with a recommendation. Mr. Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: One final comment on that. I just want to make it clear, it’s not
because I just want to just serve District 5 alone. I’m a Commissioner for the City of
Augusta. Also, keep in mind that I’m a new Commissioner, too. I’m not used to
handling 40 calls a day. Those 40 calls come in a day about trash. I’d like to direct some
of those trash calls and handle the rest of it. Excuse me?
Mr. Mays: That’s just on trash? That’s not the rest of them? You’re getting 40
on trash?
Mr. Hankerson: No, I’m just addressing -- excuse me, Mr. Commissioner. I’m
just addressing, the reason I brought her in here is because I got so many complicated
trash calls. And I don’t need to take care of other people’s trash business. I can get down
to the real business, but all this trash calls and complaints about trash, I can just go ahead
a forward them to whoever they supposed to be forwarded to. Or whoever giving them
my number, make sure that they forward them to the right Commissioner. That would
help eliminate some of that, because that’s my purpose, and I agree with Mr. Williams,
too, about being -- time to be elected. You need to be working in your new district. My
area, the new lines, I’m taking in, according to the number stats, about almost 10,000 new
voters, and it’s a large district. I’m taking in another side of Gordon Highway from
Georgetown almost to Fort Gordon, over to Windsor Spring Road. And I’m losing from
Gordon Highway down to Paine College, so it affects me a whole lot, so I need to know.
The Bible tell me to take care of the household of faith first.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beard?
Mr. Beard: I move we accept this as information.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Discussion on the motion? Mr. Mays?
39
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, the question that I was asking the Attorney, and I think
this may serve to help clear up some of this. It won’t do it a hundred percent, but steering
clear of giving into anybody’s political campaign, would it not be prudent with this type
of massive change, and Bill and I’ve been just sitting back observing this a little bit,
because it affects us the least, having two super districts, but we may have to assist Ms.
Bailey at times with dealing with this. But I know, Lynn, they’ve been given the new
numbers, in terms of what precinct in particular, if it’s a change there, and where a person
will be voting at. But what I was discussing, Mr. Mayor, with the Attorney, would it not
be possible for us to deal with also naming that particular Commissioner who now
represents that particular area and those people who will be going to a particular polling
place, who their actual Commissioner is. Some people understand that, some people
don’t understand that. And I think, rather than just the clarity of the number, where the
precinct is, and what that relates to, of identifying the elected official by name, and
particularly in those single-member districts, would go a long way, since we redistricted
that many people, to just clear up that particular issue. It won’t get -- you going to have
some people that fall through the cracks in that process, that may not look at the material,
but I think that’s going to be your best effort if you’ve got that many people that have
been interchanged in some way, would be to name the actual Commissioner that’s on
there, and to do it prior to getting into the heat of a campaign season. We have no
Commissioners that are running this year, so it would not be deemed political. And I
think that that may be our easiest method of doing that, and put that to rest. And that way
it doesn’t become a complicated issue that we have to bring back. That’s just a
suggestion in terms of something we may want to look at and what the cost of dealing
with that would be. And I think that does need to be done, because a lot of people, they
may know, they may say I’m in such-a-such precinct, but then who actually represents
me. We know there are people that are interested in political activities know it, but
sometimes the average citizen does not know that when there’s been a change made, and
I think that would go a long way if we assist you in terms of doing that, because I know
that’s going to take a different level of money in order to do that, but I think it’ll be
money well-spent in an educational process, because it does good to have the machines, it
does good to do this, but if folk don’t know who represent them, that’s just as confusing.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Thank you, Mr. Mays. That’s a good point. We have a
motion on the floor to receive this as information. All in favor of that motion, please vote
aye.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s go item number 12, Madame Clerk.
12. Z-02-79 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Mary Ann Gaskill, on behalf of Jack
Lefler, requesting a change of Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone B-1
(Neighborhood Business) affecting property located at 3350 Old Louisville Road
and containing .45 acres. (Tax Map 122-4 Parcel 39.01) DISTRICT 8
40
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, in light of our previous conversation, I’ve been driving
th
parts of the new 6 District, and found some pretty disgusting sites over in this area. One
home, in particular, there were ten cars in partial states of disassembly in an auto repair
shop in the middle of neighborhood, complete with grease and oil slicks. My question on
item 12 is, what kind of business are we planning here for this predominantly residential
neighborhood, and what are the consequences to the surrounding homeowners?
Mr. Patty: The proposed business is a daycare business, and, while it appears to
be a residential neighborhood, all of the properties from Bobby Jones Expressway down
to the last house before you enter the State property, are zoned commercial, with the
exception of this property and one other one.
Mr. Cheek: How old is that zoning?
Mr. Patty: I see one that dates ’98, one that dates ’85. Most of them are
commercial uses.
Mr. Cheek: Most of the homes on Old Louisville Road are?
Mr. Patty: Most of those properties are commercial uses.
Mr. Cheek: They conceal it well, cause most of them -- a lot of them look like --
Mr. Patty: You got two commercial buildings, and the rest of them are basically
home-commercial businesses.
Mr. Cheek: Homes with businesses in them?
Mr. Patty: Yes.
Mr. Cheek: And they’ve been zoned, I guess, a long time ago?
Mr. Patty: They’ve been zoned for some time, but they are zoned.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem?
Mr. Colclough: Mr. [inaudible], which side of Old Louisville Road --
Mr. Patty: This would be the east side. Side toward 56.
Mr. Colclough: The side of Old Louisville Road, the property backs up
[inaudible] school [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: All right. Any further questions? The chair will entertain a motion.
41
Mr. Cheek: Motion to approve, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Any discussion? All in favor, please vote aye.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: That takes us to item number 27, Madame Clerk.
27. Motion to approve the 2002 Employee Pay Schedule dated August 1 to
include longevity component. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee
June 10, 2002)
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Williams? You asked that this pulled?
Mr. Williams: Yes, and thank you, Mr. Mayor. I really need some clarification
here as to what we’re voting on. In the backup, it did show some figures here, present
salaries and what the new proposed salary’s going to be. But we did, we have [inaudible]
supposed to be coming in, looking at our grade studies, and changing our grades or not
changing our grades, to see where we are with that. What effect would that have on
salaries, and what effect would that have if we do pass this today?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb, could you respond to that?
Mr. Kolb: I’ll attempt to. Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, your first
question is, what are you voting on. You are adopting the new salary schedule that you
have been considering for the past few meetings. That’s number one. Number two, the
second method or item that you’re considering, is implementing the longevity pay of .5%
for the first five years and then .5% for the next ten years, depending on longevity. Those
are the only two items that you are addressing now. With respect to the Benson Institute,
we don’t believe that there will be an impact on this particular document. I think they are
preparing their recommendation now, and our preliminary discussions with them, I think
that they’re recommendation may even be a little bit higher than this, and we’ll be
prepared to talk about that hopefully, your first committee meeting in July.
Mr. Williams: So you’re saying that you don’t believe, but you don’t know
whether or not this is going to impact this or not. In other words, it could.
Mr. Kolb: If it impacts it, it would be -- what you would pass today would be on
the low side, based on our discussions with them. So anything, any impact would mean
that this would be a higher, it would be higher approved, rather than what we’re
recommending today.
42
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, we done bought a lot of suits without going to the
table, and most of the time, they don’t when you get back home with them because we
didn’t try them on, we didn’t do that. I’m in support of trying to do what we need to do
for our employees, to give raises, but I feel uncomfortable with this. 3%, 8% of nothing
is still nothing. When you got the upper level in this, from what I see, is still getting the
bulk of the money, and I know that’s the way it goes. The longevity probably at the top,
still, where people been here a long time, and this salary raise do not seem to be fair in
my mind. And I just want to express that. I’m just a lone voice out in the wilderness this
afternoon, trying to get somebody to hear me.
Mr. Mayor: All right, Mr. Bridges?
Mr. Bridges: Thank you. George, my understanding of this is that this is not
giving the senior level people an increase or anything. In other words, your
administrative assistants, deputy administrators, that type of thing, but it’s designed to
give the salary increases that were given to the Sheriff’s Department back in March, I
think, that this is basically the raise that we budgeted for and they were promised.
Mr. Kolb: If I’m understanding question, there are no reclassifications within this
particular recommendation. What is included would be, for example, as the
compensation schedule changes, if someone, for instance, was in minimum step in, well,
let’s say Class Grade 50. If someone is in Class Grade 50 now, and their current salary
falls below the minimum of what is being proposed, then they would be brought up to the
minimum. And then the longevity would apply. If they are already within that range in
their current salary when it’s moved, then only the longevity would apply. So that’s the
only thing that the impact would be. But I think what you’re asking is if there are any
reclassifications in this recommendation, and there are none.
Mr. Bridges: Okay. Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve.
Mr. Kuhlke: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Further discussion? Mr. Beard?
Mr. Beard: Where I guess most of us need a little clarity on this, I think I voted in
the committee, I’m the only one that voted against this because I was not clear on it. I
think I am a little more clear on it at this time because, as I see it now, when we talk
about reclassification, we also have to talk about grade level, also, and that nobody would
be moved out. Say I’m a 52, whatever is given to me would be based on that grade level
of 52 --
Mr. Kolb: That is correct.
Mr. Beard: Including the longevity. I would just wonder then if that is true, and I
seem to have some understanding of this now. I just want to make sure that we’re saying
what we say we’re saying. And I wonder if the maker of the motion would include that
43
in this motion that reclassification is not included in this motion and we will revisit the
reclassification at a later date.
Mr. Bridges: I’d be happy to accept that as part of the motion.
Mr. Beard: And my rationale for this is I just want it on record as to what we’re
doing, because I don’t think it’s spelled out in this, cause at the backup we only have just
the figures.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Further discussion? Mr. Hankerson, you wanted to ask a
question?
Mr. Hankerson: Right. Before I proceed, Mr. Beard, what was the last statement
you made, and the backup what?
Mr. Mayor: Just have the figures.
Mr. Beard: I just said, the reason I was asking this, because the backup only had
the figures, and this is what we’re talking about, figures. And this is why I included the
other in there.
Mr. Hankerson: Right. That’s the clarification I wanted to get on the motion, too,
because when Mr. Boyles brought this to the committee and I motioned for this, and we
was questioned about what was I really motioning, and this backup that’s in the book,
this first pay scale, nothing changes, no reclassifications, no numbers, or anything
change, as far as grade numbers. Are we just voting on this particular scale that’s here in
this book, so that was the motion to bring to the Commission today. So I just wanted to
make sure -- I agree with Mr. Beard.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, this schedule rewards somebody for long-term service
if that person wanted to advance through additional education or whatever, they could
compete for higher level grades. They would go up on their career ladder, so to speak, I
mean, if they’re at a Grade 50, they were able to, you know, increase their education
during the time, couldn’t they compete for different positions, make moves within the
schedule? But if they didn’t do that, then they would just be rewarded for doing
whatever classification they were over time? They would get longevity benefits. We’re
really doing longevity benefits here, correct?
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Shepard, if I can understand your question. You’re asking if
anyone would be eligible to compete for promotion?
Mr. Shepard: Well, I’m just saying, you know, if you were in Grade 50 and
wanted to compete for a higher -- that’s not today, but this would not preclude that,
either, would it?
44
Mr. Kolb: If any employee who is eligible and who has prepared themselves for
promotion, even if you don’t approve it, they still have the right to make the application
for promotion. However, one of our proposals that will be considered at a later date,
would give some for increasing their skill level or going to school to get a license, or
whatever. They would be available to climb the ladder, but that’s not available today,
and you’re not voting on that today.
Mr. Shepard: Right. That’s what I wanted to make clear, as Mr. Beard says, for
the record. But that’s something we’re going to consider later. Personal advancement
through the schedule. I look right over you, and I remember that Mr. Reese, for example,
was not always the chief tax appraiser. When I first started practicing law, he was in the
Tax Office and went out and came back, but he was able to personally advance.
Mr. Kolb: In Mr. Reese’s case, he applied for promotions at another, higher, class
grade, in a higher position. That is available to any employee who was qualified, and
who has prepared themselves for that.
Mr. Shepard: Even today?
Mr. Kolb: Even today. That is correct.
Mr. Shepard: But you’re thinking of grading that more specifically and tying it to
education, and you’re going to have further clarification on advancement policy for the
future?
Mr. Kolb: Yes, sir.
Mr. Shepard: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, just a quick question, and possibly a
substitute motion on this. At what level -- I’ve heard a lot of concern about this being a
top, the top groups are getting the most money, and so forth and so on. At what level are
we seeing our deputies at? Is that 65 or 64?
Mr. Kolb: I believe it’s 63.
Mr. Cheek: 63? I would make a substitute motion that we approve this with the
exclusion of changes to levels 63, 64, and 65.
Mr. Williams: I’ll second that.
Mr. Mayor: All right. We have a substitute motion. Mr. Kolb, do you want to
comment on that before we take a vote on it? Make a recommendation?
45
Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor, we’re going to need a lot of clarification for that one.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s try to give the Administrator an opportunity to do just that.
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, if I may?
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Kolb: I’m not sure what you’re trying to accomplish. We are adjusting the
pay schedule, and in those three particular class grades, if you keep them the same, you
are -- it’s going to be really hard to calculate in the future how to fairly put that
compensation schedule together. I’m not sure what you’re trying to accomplish by doing
that. But I -- it’s going to gum up the works and really put in place a salary schedule
that’s not consistent, not competitive for what you’re trying to accomplish.
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead, Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It’s my understanding that these are fixed
positions. We’re not expecting to hire anybody in. What I’m hearing from a lot of
people, though, is that the top is getting the money, their some $20,000 a year pay raises,
potentially, and so forth. I think it would be a tremendous show of faith if we waited
until we got our reclassification information back from the Carl Vinson Institute with our
top positions, froze them and then gave everybody else the adjustment, as slated in this
document, but hold off on those top positions as is until we get the study back. That’s all
I’m simply trying to achieve, and that seems to be a pretty small amount of gum
compared to the bulk of the body of adjustments that we’d be making. But these are
people in leadership, and I think it’d be an opportunity for us to show that we’re going to
take care of the little guys first, and then we’ll adjust the leaders’ salary as the study
comes back.
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, if I may?
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Kolb: First of all, I think what you’re referring to are reclassifications. These
are not being considered. The bulk of those 20,000’s that you’re talking about is in the
reclassification, and that is not in this recommendation.
Mr. Cheek: So we don’t see any $20,000 a year pay raises in this group as a
result of this?
Mr. Kolb: Not that I’m aware of.
Ms. Pelaez: No, sir. And, effectively, what you’re asking us to do, when we
implement this new salary scale, the individuals that are in this 63 through 65, they are
46
already over the minimum of that range, so, effectively, not implementing it would not
accomplish anything because their salaries are already over the minimum of the range.
Mr. Kolb: And that’s what I was trying to formulate in my mind. In fact, what
you want to see happen, I think, is going to happen. Those individuals who are lower in
the organization, who are close to the minimum, will probably see a more significant
increase than the three-and-a-half.
Mr. Cheek: My concern, though, is that here the people that need it the most, that
we take care of, which would be our lower end employees, and that we see a little bit of, I
guess, well, sacrificial leadership on the part of these upper folks to perhaps stand pat
until we get our study back. And you’re telling me, then, there will not be any $20,000 a
year pay raises or anything out of this?
Mr. Kolb: I can’t see that, no. The other -- again, I want to reemphasize that
where you saw those numbers were in the reclassification, not in the normal adjustment
of the compensation schedule.
Mr. Cheek: You know, Mr. Administrator, I look at numbers all the time, and I
can understand that certainly there’s got to be some confusion to all of this, and I think
you’ve cleared that up for us, but this is -- there’s a lot of numbers being thrown at us,
and reclassifications and adjustments and different things, and I just wanted to make sure
that we’re not venturing off into those realms unless we have full information.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Boyles, and then Mr. Williams.
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess I opened this up back in our last
committee meeting. But I just simply asked for what had happened back in May, we had
been asked to adopt a salary scale for all employees, including the longevity, and number
two, from our books, we were asked to approve an executive salary scale, and number
three, we were asked to look at reclassifications. All we wanted to do was to adopt the
salary scale as it was presented, along with the longevity increases. That was very simply
all that we asked to do. Reclassification, the executive salaries, whatever else could be
handled by the Vinson Institute, whenever they decide, or whenever they do come in
here, and that is where I thought we were in committee, and I just simply think we’ve
taken a very simple issue and made it extremely complicated.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. [inaudible] said something a few minutes
ago to the fact that there are three positions that Commissioner Cheek asked about was
over the midpoint, or would not be considered. And if they’re already there, I can’t see
why Commissioner Cheek motion would not be able to stand, or be able to be valid, if
it’s not going to affect them, because they at that point anyway. It’s so much have been
thrown together here, Commissioner Boyles, it’s like the Ragu sauce. It’s all in there.
And what make it so bad, we can’t see it or taste it in there, so I’m a little unclear myself.
47
I just think that Commissioner Cheek had a good point with that substitute motion, and
that’s why I seconded it, but --
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb, you wanted to respond?
Mr. Kolb: Yes. I do have to make a correction. It’s been brought to my attention
that there is one person that would be impacted, that would receive a $20,000 increase.
Mr. Cheek: I rest my case.
Mr. Mayor: Under the substitute motion, would that person get the $20,000
increase? Or just under the original motion?
Mr. Kolb: No, under the substitute motion, that person would not receive that.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Further discussion? We have a substitute motion on the
floor. Does anyone need the substitute motion read back? Mr. Beard?
Mr. Beard: Mr. Mayor, you know, in the substitute motion, I’m not clear on it. I
do think maybe there’s some merit to it, and I don’t know. It’s just kind of difficult when
these things are thrown at us, as I said, in the meeting, in committee meeting. When they
are thrown at us when we get on the floor, it’s very difficult to digest, and, while I
thought I was able to support the motion in the book with the amendment to it, if
someone’s getting a $20,000 raise, then I mean, you really kind of have to look at that.
Mr. Mayor: Well, if there’s some uncertainty, do you want to table this and return
to it later in the meeting? Give it some more thought? Mr. Mays?
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, a motion to table.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to table. It’s not debatable, is it Mr. Wall? Okay.
All in favor of the motion to table this item, please vote aye.
(Vote on motion to table)
Mr. Boyles and Mr. Kuhlke vote No.
Motion carries 8-2.
Mr. Mayor: All right. If the staff is available, while we continue our meeting, if
you could get that information we need to clarify this. Let’s see, Mr. Kolb, you asked
now for item number 29 to be pulled. Madame Clerk, if you’ll read the caption?
29. Motion to approve the proposal from Municipal Code Corporation
regarding the codification of the Augusta Municipal Code in the amount of
$13,000.00. (Approved by Finance Committee June 10, 2002)
48
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, I’m just safeguarding
the motion. In number 29, we had asked for a budget amendment to transfer
$10,000.00 from Augusta Tomorrow to the County Attorney’s budget in order to
accomplish this, and I wanted to make sure that was a part of the motion.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard
: I thought that was part of the motion in the Finance Committee. I
I make that motion,
move it, well, I wasn’t able to move it in the Finance Committee.
now, Mr. Kolb.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Discussion?
Mr. Mays: Clarification, Mr. Mayor. Let me hear that one more time, please, sir.
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. Kolb: I’m just safeguarding the motion. It also included a budget
amendment which would have taken $10,000.00 out of Augusta Tomorrow, which were
funds left over, and transferring it to the County Attorney’s budget.
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the motion, please vote aye.
Mr. Kuhlke votes No.
Motion carries 9-1.
Mr. Mayor: Item number 30, Madame Clerk?
30. Motion to approve the Administrator’s recommendation to appropriate up
to $100,000 from the New Hope Community Center Project to the Savannah Place
Park Project to cover projected overrun for the construction of Savannah Place
Multi Purpose Building. (Approved by the Finance Committee June 10, 2002)
Mr. Cheek: Move to approve.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, I have the same
concern here. This also included transferring $105,000 in the SPLOST funds for the
Savannah Place parks from the years 2004 and 2005 to 2003. Also to transfer from
2003 Elliott Park to year 2004, $55,000 and $50,000 from year 2003 from the boat
ramp to the 2005. That should be included as a budget amendment to the motion.
49
Mr. Mayor: All right. Is this all the money we’re going to need to finish this.
Will this take care of all the shortfall, George?
Mr. Mays: You’re talking about Savannah Place? That’s fine, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: This will finish it? We don’t need to revisit the funding, then?
You’ll have everything you need?
Mr. Kolb: That’s right.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir?
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Kolb, how much money are we going to have in Savannah
Place? You moved -- didn’t you get money from Housing and [inaudible] Development,
also?
Mr. Kolb: No. This all came from SPLOST funding. I think the original was
$355,000, originally?
Mr. Mays: 455, originally. We broke up the last two years, I think. $55,000 and
$50,000, and we need that money moved forward to go ahead and get started with the
project. This money’s already been set aside, just the years were split, where we need
that extra money, we’re kind of moving it forward.
Mr. Kolb: I think, number one, we’re taking an additional $100,000 out of New
Hope to make up for the shortfall, and I think you’re thinking of Apple Valley, where we
used the Housing and Urban Development fund.
Mr. Mayor: Anything further? We have a motion on the floor to approve. All in
favor, please vote aye.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Before we move into the regular agenda, the chair will
declare a five-minute recess.
(A recess is taken.)
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk, let’s move along with item number 48, then, on the
regular agenda.
PLANNING
50
48. Z-02-76 A request for concurrence with the Augusta Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the following conditions 1) that the Special
Exemption for a Personal Care Home be removed from the property; 2) that the
tutoring service will be limited to 6 children and will not become a day care
operation; 3) the tutoring service must end no later than 7:00 P.M.; a petition by
Pamela Sanders requesting a Special Exemption for the purpose of establishing a
family day care home, per Section 26-1 (f) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
for Augusta Richmond County, affecting property located at 3701 Woodcock Drive
and containing .27 acres. (Tax Map 129 Parcel 177) DISTRICT 4
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Patty, you want to tell us about this?
Mr. Patty: Yes, sir. The petitioner in this case was granted a Special Exception in
1993 to operate a personal care home, and I don’t know if it ever operated, but it hasn’t
operated in some time. She’s now applied for a Special Exception, and these Special
Exceptions are specific to the use they’re granted for. So she had to apply again. Now
she wants to conduct basically a tutoring service in her home after school for a limited
period of time, and the Planning Commission’s decision was to recommend that to you
with stipulations, one, that the Special Exception that was granted for a personal care
home be removed from the property. That would no longer exist if this is approved.
Two, that tutoring services be limited to six children. It would not become a day care
operation. And, three, that the tutoring service would end no later than 7:00 P.M. With
those conditions, we recommend for you to approve it. There were objectors, and that’s
the reason it’s on the regular agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Is this Ms. Sanders? Are you the petitioner?
Ms. Sanders: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Do you agree with these stipulations?
Ms. Sanders: Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Mayor: Are there any objectors here today? All right, if you would raise
your hands, the objectors, so we can get a count. All right.
(7 objectors noted)
Mr. Mayor: Okay, let me ask you this. You heard the stipulations as outlined by
the Planning Commission. Are you agreeable to those, or do you all still have
objections? Okay, then let’s hear from the petitioner, and then we’ll hear from the
objectors. Where’s the marshal? Could we check out in the hallway to see if any of them
are here for this day care zoning? Tell them to come on in. We’re addressing the item
right now. Thank you. Yes, ma’am. Go ahead.
51
Ms. Sanders: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, what I was trying to do was have
tutors come to my home after school hours, from about 3:30 till about 7:00 and we were
going to have maybe six kids there. And they’re basically neighborhood kids. We live in
the area of Morgan Road and Jamestown, which is experiencing a very high number of
kids failing in school. I have a daughter that’s experiencing that right now, and their
problems have developed from second grade. They’ve never been able to quite overcome
it. I have had them in other surrounding areas, like the prime times, and paid for all of
that. They still have not done well. So what we’re trying to do is design our own special
program where we have a ratio of six kids or less to two tutors that will go over basic
literacy subjects. And the kids would get supper. I work as a nurse fulltime at the VA
Medical Center. I get off work at 4:30 or 5:00, depending on what’s happening with out
patients there. By the time I get home to help them, it’s 9:00 o’clock, 10:00 o’clock by
the time we go home. Some of the other kids that my kids with, they’re having the same
problems. And so instead of trying to just complain and say, you know, this is a problem,
I tried to come up with a solution. And that’s all I was trying to do, was have the tutors
come to the home. And I didn’t realize until I started exploring that, that I couldn’t
automatically have people come into my home that way. And when I went to the
Planning & Zoning, they said that this fit under the family day care, and that I would
have to apply and pay the fee to get zoning for this. So this is how this has come about,
and at our last hearing I’m the one that kind of brought up to the others that there was no
one opposing when we requested to have a personal care home. And because there are
lots of children in the area, that was one of the reasons that we never developed the
personal care home, cause you could have different type clients in those homes. So that’s
what I’m trying to do with that. We also are, well, collaborating with the community
literacy, community programs, in getting these tutors and getting support for these things.
We realize we’re starting on a very small scale and we’re trying to work with the students
that have a little more of a problem academically.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you very much. We had some additional people come in.
Are you all here for the Woodcock Drive zoning? Would you raise your hand so we can
get a head count of those who are opposed to it? Thank you. Is there a spokesman for
the group? Are there a number of you who would like to speak? If you’d come to the
mike and give us your name and address for the record.
Ms. Bain: My name is Juanita Bain. I live at 2627 Portsmouth Place. The reason
we’re here asking that you all do not allow this day care center to come into the
neighborhood is because, partly because of the location. This -- there is a hill there and a
curve. We have our children coming home from school. There are lots of cars. I think
this will increase the traffic there. I think it’s a high potential for an accident to happen.
And we would not like for another Divine Monroe incident in our neighborhood. I think
businesses should be located in commercial districts and families should live in
neighborhoods. So we respectfully ask that you all deny this petition.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Are there any others who would like to speak? Okay,
gentlemen, any questions or comments? What’s your pleasure? Mr. Mays?
52
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, let me ask this of Mr. Patty. George, if the zoning is
turned down, then does the existing right to operate a personal care home still remain in
effect?
Mr. Patty: Yes. It does.
Mr. Mays: So one might not be able to operate, but then the other one could
operate under what’s already there in existence then?
Mr. Patty: That’s correct. That’s correct.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: So you are saying they already have a license to operate a
personal care home?
Mr. Patty: They got -- this is not rezoning. It’s not a license. It’s a special
exception. They got a special exception to operate a personal care home in 1993. And
the way the ordinance is written now, and frankly I think we ought to change it, that --
there’s no statute of limitations on that. My understanding is they never began a personal
care home, but as of right now they’ve got the right to start one at any time. They
retained that right. She’s willing to relinquish that right in exchange for the right to have
kids, six kids in there for a couple of hours after school every night.
Mr. Colclough: Is this free service? Tutorial service?
Ms. Sanders: Part of it and part of it is not, because we have to pay to have the
tutors come in, and we’re also providing snacks and supper. And in defense of her saying
that there’s a lot of traffic, there’s a school bus that drops kids off anyway. We are right
around the corner from the school. The kids can walk. I mean we’re that close. It’s just
-- and not too far from where, about five houses up, a lady has a day care business where
she only baby-sits babies. And she doesn’t want to baby-sit anyone else. I’m not trying
to baby-sit. All I want is to be able to have the tutors or people come to my home and I
know of some other neighbors who my kids play with, their kids are in the same
academic situation, and we just want to have a central place for them to come, have the
tutors come there, and teach the kids. We’ve tried paying for services and it has not
helped them through the years. And there is a problem. There is a serious problem, and I
don’t know another way to help my children. And I’m not trying to complain, I’m not
trying to put it off on anybody else or blame anyone. I’m just trying to be helpful. And I
thought since the kids play with my kids anyway and they’re usually over there after
school hours, we could have more supervision when we all get home from work, instead
of having to go home, rush and do the homework, stay up late, we could have tutors to
help them, help us as well, and they could eat supper. So I don’t see how the traffic
would really increase since the kids are either walkers, and some of them live maybe six,
seven houses down, and they could take a bus. The bus is going to stop there anyway.
53
Mr. Colclough: So you wouldn’t have an advertisement out in the neighborhood
saying tutorial services?
Ms. Sanders: No. No, sir. No.
Mr. Colclough: Be no signs?
Ms. Sanders: Pardon?
Mr. Colclough: No signs?
Ms. Sanders: No signs.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beard?
Mr. Beard:I’m going to move that we
Mr. Mayor, so we can move forward,
approve the, we concur with the Planning Commission on this item.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to that motion?
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hankerson, you wanted to speak?
Mr. Hankerson: No.
Mr. Mayor: Further discussion?
Ms. Speaker: I have something else to say.
Mr. Mayor: Ma’am, just a minute.
Ms. Speaker: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Further discussion among the Commissioners? We gave y’all an
opportunity to speak. I asked if anybody wanted to speak, and no one had anything to
say, so we’re ready -- we’re ready to move ahead with the vote. All in favor of the
motion, please vote aye.
Mr. Colclough abstains.
Motion carries 9-1.
Ms. Sanders: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Next item is number 49.
54
The Clerk:
49. Consider recommendation of the Administrator, Utilities Director and Fire
Chief regarding the installation of a fire hydrant for the Piedmont Landscape
Project located in Bobby Jones Business Park. (Deferred from the June 4
Commission meeting)
Mr. Cheek: Move to approve.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Discussion? All in favor of the motion, please vote aye.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Next item?
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES:
50. Discuss response from the Health Department regarding a public nuisance
investigation of the pond located at 2721 Willis Foreman Road. (Deferred from the
Engineering Services June 10 Committee meeting)
Mr. Mayor: Whose item is this? Mr. Cheek, is this yours?
Mr. Wall: I was --
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Wall? Okay.
Mr. Wall: I was assigned the task. I met with Mr. Henry Gilmer and discussed
the situation, and then Mr. Gilmer and I went out to the property and looked at the
situation. And Mr. Gilmer was insistent that there was no way that he could declare that
a public nuisance. The pond had been weeded around it. It backs up to an area that is
wooded and is overgrown and is a swampy area. The pond is dug out and basically
you’re dealing with groundwater that rises into the pond. He looked for larvae or
mosquitoes. There were none. According to him, if there are tadpoles in the pond, then
there are not mosquitoes because they eat them. Whether that’s -- I mean there were lots
of tadpoles in the pond. In any event, I mean the area was well kept and, you know, with
the area that is behind that property, both houses -- there is wooded area, there is low-
lying area, that is wet area, I mean the mosquitoes, you’re talking about acres and acres
and acres that are an attraction to mosquitoes compared to one pond. And so they were
not in a position to be of assistance. There are issues between the neighbors that go back
through the years, and in my opinion, I mean there are two ponds along the road as you
approach at Willis Foreman. There are small ponds. But, you know, I don’t see that
there is any basis to proceed to declaring it a nuisance and take any action.
55
Mr. Mayor: All right. We’ll got to our pond expert, the Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Wall, number one, what we asked you to do in committee
meeting was to take it to the board, not to take it to the inspector who had no, has no
means of -- I rode by there, also, Mr. Wall. It’s a big dirt hole in somebody’s back yard.
What we asked you to do is take this back to the board because we had passed a
resolution on this committee to close that pond and to send recommendations not only to
us but to the state and the feds about this pond. This guy sat up on TV and said well, I
went out there and looked at it, [inaudible] Richmond County a mosquito breeding issue.
The pond you’re talking about at [inaudible] Creek is way down the road from this house.
If you look at the property out there, it’s a prime piece of land, you have somebody who
has dug a ugly hole in the backyard and y’all are calling it a pond. You have a pond on
your property, I guarantee you the pond is fed naturally. You don’t use a hose to fill up
your pond. And that’s what this gentleman does. You know, you have -- I’d have some
issues with my neighbor, too, if I had spent $150,000 for a house and he dig a hole in his
yard and the county and my Health Department is saying well, I have no reason to
declare this a health hazard when there is no spring fed coming into this pond, it’s
stagnated water, he takes a hose and fills up the dog-gone thing. We need some new
inspectors. Somebody can look for mosquitoes. You know, he can move next door to it,
you know, we suggest he buy that house and live next door. This is ludicrous. You got a
big, ugly -- I quit. I get excited. You know, it just is frustrating to sit here and tell people
that we can’t do nothing for them when somebody --
(Goes to new tape)
Mr. Cheek: -- for the Health Department to over and over again talk about
stagnant water in a dog bowl on your back porch as being a producer of mosquitoes, or in
the upturned plastic cup of something, to say that this particular locale is not a producer
of mosquitoes, that’s not consistent with science or anything else I know. But I guess at
this point, do we have a path forward to resolving this on behalf of the neighborhood? I
understand we have a good deal of neighbors that are also concerned with it. Or are we
at a dead end?
Mr. Wall: Mr. Cheek, honestly I don’t know of anything the county can do. I
mean it is not, in the opinion of the Health Department inspector, and while I understand
that the Commission wanted me to go to the Health Department, I knew the report of the
Health Department inspector. I did try to reach one of you Commissioners about that
issue, about going to the Health Department. Without the support of the inspector, I felt
like it would have been futile to go to the meeting with the Health Department, and so I
did not go after attempting to call one of you about that matter. However, I mean I think
you’re at a dead end. I mean I don’t know of any legal reasoning that we could utilize to
require this man to close it. Now I think you can monitor the situation. If he doesn’t
maintain the pond, you know, if there are conditions that change, then I think there is
something that you can do. But right now I know of no remedy that’s available to you.
56
Mr. Mayor: Might there not be a covenant or something where the neighbors
could force a private property issue with this?
Mr. Wall: There are covenants that are in existence, and one of the covenants is
that they will not maintain anything that is noxious to the neighbors, I think is the
language that is used. Any that’s something that the property owners could attempt.
Mr. Mayor: Would we be in a position to do that? We own property in the
neighborhood.
Mr. Wall: No. We’re not parties to the covenants. We have no standing. No
noxious or offensive -- we’re not parties to the covenants.
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Colclough: What do the covenants say about ponds in that neighborhood? I
mean there has to be some specification of nuisances to covenants.
Mr. Wall: What it says is that no noxious or offensive activities shall be carried
on upon any lot, not shall anything be done thereof which may be or may become an
annoyance or a nuisance to the neighborhood. Hobbies or other activities including, but
not limited to, the generality hereof, the assembly and the disassembly of motor vehicles
and other mechanical devices which might lead to disorderly or unsightly or unkempt
conditions. And it goes on. But basically the first sentence is -- if the property owner
came to me with the situation, that’s what I would focus upon. I mean quite frankly,
from what I saw, I would not encourage a land owner to file the lawsuit, because I don’t
think she can prevail.
Mr. Colclough: So you mean to tell me that if I go home today and hire a
backhoe, I can take my backyard and turn it into a hole and fill it with water, pump some
fish in it, and nobody can anything about it?
Mr. Wall: Well, you’re talking about today. Mr. Patty, the Planning & Zoning
Commission, and subsequently this Commission did adopt an amendment to the zoning
ordinance which puts into place basically a ratio so that the size of the pond has to bear
some resemblance to the size of the lot. So to the extent that we now have modified the
zoning ordinance to take care of this situation, you probably could not. However, back
then, the Corp of Engineers, there’s no prohibition against disturbing wetlands, as long as
you get a Corps of Engineers permit, etc. They went through that process. We had
nothing in place that would have prohibited them from doing it. And we talk about -- I
didn’t obviously measure the depth of the pond, but the pond in the middle, I’m told by
the property owner, is some 12’ deep. So this is not a small hole. I mean it’s a big hole.
Mr. Colclough: A big, ugly hole.
(Laughter)
57
Mr. Mayor: Could there be some state DNR regulation of ponds that might apply
here?
Mr. Wall: No.
Mr. Colclough: So, [inaudible] today, I can bypass our Planning and Zoning
people and our License Inspection, go to court, and obtain a license to do the same thing?
Mr. Wall: Well, but for the fact that we’ve now amended --
Mr. Colclough: You’ve just said that. You just amended -- you just amended
your ordinance to change, but you just also said he followed, he went to court and got a
license. So that means that anybody in Richmond County, including me, can go to court
and say, I need a license to put a hole, a pond, in my backyard? He means that Richmond
County can’t do anything about it?
Mr. Wall: If the lot now meets the ratio requirement between the size of the hole
or the pond, however you want to characterize it, and the lot size, that’s correct.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bridges?
Mr. Bridges
: Mr. Mayor, whereas I know we have sympathy for the
neighborhood, it sounds like to me there’s really not a whole lot we can do and take
So I make the make the motion that we accept this
action, or have any legal standing.
as information
.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Further discussion? All in favor, then, please vote aye.
Mr. Colclough and Mr. Hankerson vote No.
Mr. Mays out.
Motion carries 7-2.
Mr. Mayor: Next item.
51. Discuss installation of sidewalk on one side of Glenn Hills Drive from Barton
Chapel Road to the Bobby Jones Expressway overpass. (Deferred from the May 7
Commission Meeting)
Mr. Mayor: All right. Mr. Hankerson, is this, this is your issue, I think?
Mr. Hankerson
: Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. As we recall that I had
stressed the need for safety on Glenn Hills Drive. It’s about almost a mile, I think it’s
about 8/10 of a mile of sidewalk. And it’s a need for safety for our children, for
58
pedestrians walking in the street. We’ve been on this project for quite a while now, and I
was hoping that we could get past it and get a sidewalk at least on one side of Glenn Hills
Drive by the time that school takes in this fall. One of the problems were that we were
lacking some funding source, so we’ve found funding source to supplement what we
already had. Is Ms. Smith here? Teresa? Well, we had $296,000, and we needed
I want to
$75,000 more to complete, to have the sufficient amount of funding, and what
do today is to move that we transfer the funding sources from another project that
I’ve already talked to that is in Mr. Boyles, a project that would not take place this
year, so that we could have the $75,000 to complete the project that we want to
complete on Glenn Hills Drive, so I want to do at this time, we move the $75,000
from Mr. Boyles’ area to the Glenn Hills Project and this project would begin as
soon as possible.
Mr. Colclough: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Discussion? Mr. Colclough
seconded the motion. Discussion, Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Do we know what project that we’re going to transfer the -- which
one are you transferring from?
Mr. Hankerson: Yes, I was expecting Ms. Smith to be here. It’s sidewalk project,
I think it’s on Washington Road Project, sidewalk. There’s not enough funding there at
this time. Ms. Smith is here, so she can address that also.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard asked specifically the source of funding. The money to
be transferred is the Washington Road sidewalk, I think?
Ms. Smith: That is correct.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you.
(Laughter)
Mr. Mayor: Anything further?
Mr. Boyles: Let me just add, Mr. Mayor -- I’m sorry. Let me just add that there
was some money put in the tax -- what do you call it, Bill -- in the SPLOST funds, sorry,
lost a train of thought. But some of that money was taken two years ago, and the
sidewalks were redirected in front of the Augusta National Golf Club, along that side on
Washington Road, so that does not leave enough money there to do the rest of the project
in its entirety, so we’ll need to come back later with that, but at this point, in the interest
of safety, it’s best that I help my colleague from Glenn Hills and help him with his
project.
59
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor, I think, too, since that’s my district, that with us doing
this for Commissioner Hankerson, that Tommy and I have the opportunity to direct more
calls to him.
(Laughter)
Mr. Hankerson: As long as they’re not trash calls -- safety calls, I’ll take care of.
Mr. Mayor: Anything further? All in favor --
Mr. Mays: Yes, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, Mr. Mays?
Mr. Mays: Let me say as the third member from that committee, these two young
fellows beat me up pretty good on that committee. And I want to thank particularly
Tommy in the spirit of cooperation of being very flexible on this and wanting to do this,
to help of get the money side of this moved. But from the three of us on this committee,
there is one thing that we still would like to see done. If this is answering the money part
of this, is the timing still the same timing? And I think we collectively want to ask that,
Ms. Smith, because we got those things on there where it says, you know, seven to eight
months, and you know, we just would like to see it, if the money is now in place to do
that, for such a short strip of sidewalk, are we still looking at the same length of time to
get this done?
Ms. Smith: The timeframe, as submitted in the materials in the Commission book
as backup, are the timeframes that we’re looking up to get this project completed.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: Is it possible that we can complete this before four months’ span
of time? It’s four months, what we’re looking at, under the contract out, right?
Ms. Smith: Correct.
Mr. Hankerson: And we’re concerned about trying to do most of this work this
fall while school is out, and since this is a safety issue that we could speed up the process
less than four months.
Ms. Smith: The only way you would possibly be able to speed up the process
would be -- I mean, you can put the time limits on the contractor to perform the work.
However, it’s going to drive the price up, and in putting in the sidewalk, it’s probably
going to mean that you have one crew starting on one end and the other crew starting on
the other end, and hope that when they get to the middle, they’re in the same place.
Mr. Mays: Let me ask you a question on the preparation bid process time.
60
Ms. Smith: Yes?
Mr. Mays: Has that already been done?
Ms. Smith: To go out for a private contractor, no, that has not been done.
Mr. Mayor: Has the engineering been done on this?
Ms. Smith: No, it has not.
Mr. Mayor: So nothing’s really been done up to this point except identifying the
funding?
Ms. Smith: And a concept for where the layout would go.
Mr. Mayor: School starts in what? Less than two months, doesn’t it?
Ms. Smith: Yes. We would have to -- in order to get this project done in that
four-month timeframe, it would have to be similar to what we defined as a design/build
contract. We’d get started, and we’d have someone on board to work with it as we go.
Mr. Mays: Well, you said four months.
Ms. Smith: Correct.
Mr. Mays: We’re not talking about longer than four months. We’re talking about
less than four months. But, I mean, four months, it would be completed. That’s under
this contract out, right?
Ms. Smith: Correct. And, like I said, there has been no design work done, so we
would have to be performing that activity at the same time that we have a contractor
underway in the field. But it’s sidewalk, I mean, it’s not --
Mr. Beard: I just thought some of this was already done. We’ve been working on
this project for --
Ms. Smith: No funds were allocated for engineering work to be done for the
project, so --
Mr. Hankerson: We get the design work before we give the funds, right? Is that -
-
Ms. Smith: No design work has been done on the project. We did a preliminary
layout so that we could take a look at where the sidewalk could go. However, no formal
design work has been done for the project.
61
Mr. Mayor: I see your hand, Mr. Mays. Go ahead.
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, let me shift from the four month column a minute just to
the seven month column. Is there no way, and I know we may just be getting to the
money part today, and I’m looking at seven months under county forces. And I know
you get into a lot of trouble when you start switching priorities and stuff that’s in place.
And I fully understand that. But on something of this magnitude [inaudible], although
it’s costly [inaudible], but it’s small in magnitude on what goes on in the scope of what
we do in terms of paving roads or a whole lot of other things. What I was kind of looking
for, Mr. Mayor, was maybe to a point, we’ve had some very talented folk that are in -- we
know where they addresses are going to be for a while that have done remarkable work
on the A. O. Williams park up there. I mean, we praised our people in Corrections for
doing that. We’ve had folk that’s gone over to Jones Pool. I mean, they got concrete
running all the way around the pool, a whole new ramp over there and a bunch of stuff.
I’m just wondering if there’s not some force of talented prisoners that we could consult
with to a point they could assist this department in getting this done to a point that if it’s
going to save $50,000 in here to a point that -- couldn’t we somehow maybe within the
next three months deal with that? And I’m saying, maybe I’m just underestimating the
scope of what needs to be done in lay terms. But we’re taking about from the school to
the corner there at Barton Chapel Road and Glenn Hills. And it’s not a lot of curvature.
It’s -- I know you got to have it professionally done right. But I’m just saying that if,
from your side, if you all can do the engineering scope and what needs to be done, do we
not have, could it, would it not be worthwhile to at least seek in-house prison crew,
couldn’t we get some of this done? Just on the sidewalk?
Ms. Smith: I can certainly make the request of Mr. Leveritt. I have no idea -- I
have no information on the crews or the potential labor force that he has in incarceration
at his facility.
Mr. Mays: Cause I know, and I’m not trying to be funny when I say this, but a lot
of times, the general public just does not know the different areas that do different things
for the city. And it’s good when we see work going on in these areas. That means
progress is being done. But we get the typical questions to a point that if we’re making
progress, and we’re paving roads [inaudible] to a point to maybe where nobody lives on,
and we’re trying to get a sidewalk just simply laid and built where you got the largest
middle school in the whole system on, and three schools on the same street, that it’s just
turned into a major obstacle. And that’s all I’m trying to do, is get it on square one, and
maybe it can’t be done, but I’m just saying, is it not in the best vein to try and approach
it, and at least see can’t we get a prison crew to speed it up someway faster here?
Mr. Mayor: Let me see if I can make a suggestion that might move this forward
on this. We’re being asked today to approve the funding for this, put the funding package
together. And if we could move ahead and approve that, and the Director of Public
Works come back to us by the end of this week with a scenario for getting the project
done in the most expeditious manner, and it’s going to need Commission action to
62
approve anything that she comes up with, we’ll put it on the agenda Friday and deal with
it at the Friday meeting. But it doesn’t look like we’re going to solve it right here, right
now, but at least we can approve the funding today, and get beyond that point. Mr.
Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, just a couple of quick questions. Ms. Smith, isn’t it true
that if we go to design/build now, that’s about the quickest way we can get this done?
Ms. Smith: That is correct.
Mr. Cheek: You know, we can talk about gathering different forces from
different areas, and that’s all fine and noble, but in the interest of time, the quickest way
we can do that is have the same guys who are building it, design it in the process, while
they’re building it. They can incorporate all the much-needed things, curve-cuts, ADA
requirements and everything else, and meet those requirements, but still begin the
construction quicker than if we go design and then build. So I’d like to make a motion in
addition to --
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to approve the funding. You want to make an
amendment to the motion?
Mr. Cheek: I’ll make an amendment to the motion or a substitute motion, it
just depends, an amendment to the motion that we go ahead and authorize a
design/build with this and approve the funding source that we already have.
Mr. Mayor: Is there any objection to the amendment?
(No objection to the amendment)
Mr. Mayor: None is heard, so the chair will declare the motion amended. Mr.
Kolb, you wanted to say something?
Mr. Kolb: Yes. I think we need a little -- if we can get authorization to go
forward with the project, I think we’ve got a sense from the Commission that they want
this done as quickly and expeditiously as possible. Let us go back and move in that
fashion. We may be able to cut the bid time down from four weeks to two weeks, or
even a week. If we can get that done, we may have to do design/build. We may have to
go find prisoners that can help us get this done. But if you just let us, I think we
understand it. Let us go, and we’ll get it done for you as quickly as we possibly can.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, along with what Mr. Kolb said, and what
Commissioner Mays has said, we do have some talented people that’s incarcerated that
done some work. I think Recreation got eight crews or some crews doing some work out
there. But the Warden Leveritt indicated that there are many men incarcerated who
63
would rather be working, be out working, than to be sitting there in jail behind those bars.
And I think that our taxpayers and our citizens would appreciate that kind of support.
It’d be a win-win situation for everybody. I just think that if we go out for a bid, and then
get the bid back, and we got to decide who bid it, I think that we can go in-house, look at
the situation. We got equipment in Public Works. We got men out on Tobacco Road. I
mean, I can’t build a doghouse, but I mean, I’m sure somebody out there that be able to
put those sidewalks in and get that done and save us some of that money that we just
shifted over. So I think we get the Administrator with Public Works, with Mr. Leveritt,
to see what it’s going to take. And if it going to take a security person to look at that,
then that’s what we ought to be looking at, rather than trying to figure out, you know,
about a bid and how long it’s going to take.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion on the floor to approve the funding, and to
move forward with the design/build on this. Any further discussion on the motion? For
the question, all in favor, please vote aye.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Let the concrete flow. We’ve already done 52. The next
item would be 53.
OTHER BUSINESS
53. Approve increasing the salary of the Finance Director by $3000.00 in lieu of
car allowance, which was included in employee’s employment agreement.
(Requested by Commissioner Bobby Hankerson)
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Kuhlke: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion is seconded. Mr. Hankerson, did you want to speak to this?
Mr. Hankerson: Yes, sir. This is just to follow up on the last time we discussed
about the agreement that was made between the City of Augusta, Georgia and the
Finance Director, and we -- I support this, and I think that we should go ahead and be a
city of integrity, and that our word counts and that we would go ahead and increase the
salary by $3000 to compensate for that.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I’m in disagreement, and not
so much disagreement as the Finance Director is concerned, but if we do this, we’re
talking about rolling $3000 into a salary which was I think approved at 95, and that
would bring it up to 98. But my question is, if we had advertised and put that figure out
there, we don’t know who we would have gotten and who we wouldn’t have gotten. I
just don’t think we could have, that we should roll a $3000 a year increase into a salary
64
that was not agreed upon. And I heard it was in the contract, and I voiced my opinion
that I’m not voting for anything else that I don’t see in a contract of that sort, and we
probably have fought in that respect. We vote for something we didn’t know what was
there. But I don’t think it’s right. I don’t think the taxpayer ought to do that. Had the
Finance Director had to travel, I could see him either having a car or a car allowance.
That’s not necessary when he come to this building. He’s here, and if he needs to move
from one point to another, that he use transportation set up for him here. I’m not going to
support that increase. That’s another way of rolling that, and if we roll that one in, what
about other people who had cars before that we pulled in, you know, that was supposed to
be included in part of their salary, but it’s not a part of their salary now? I think we going
to create a snowball effect, and I don’t blame those employees for not coming and
knocking on the door and not just doors, but come to the Commission and complain
about it. I think this is a $95,000 salary. If we lose a finance person for $3000, then that
person was not truly the person we need to be in this government. I don’t think it would
affect us in any way if we hold to what we said. With our raises coming, with the cost of
living raise, and stuff, I’m sure that the salary’s going to increase anyway, but I cannot sit
here and honestly vote for the taxpayers to pick up the tab for $3000 a year. Now, a one-
time thing may be something else, but I’m not going to sit here and vote for the taxpayers
to assume a $3000 annual a year, onto a salary of $95,000. In the city of Augusta, the
salary of $95,000 is almost like a $150,000 because of our tax base. Our cost of living
here is lower. Now, if you lived in another part of the country, you know, I may differ.
But in Augusta, Georgia, the tax base is really low. That’s a real good salary. I’m in
support of the Finance Director. This is not personal. This is all about business, it’s all
about how this government ought to operate efficient, and not be wasting the taxpayers’
money.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Anything further? We have a motion on the floor. Mr.
Bridges and then Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Bridges: I just wondered, was the motion seconded?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, the motion was seconded.
Mr. Bridges: Okay. All right.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard, you had a question?
Mr. Shepard: I was wondering, Mr. Mayor, who’s going to try to address the
issue of use cars versus drawing a car allowance. Some people have told me that some
people are getting the car allowance, and yet they’re using city cars.
Mr. Mayor: Well, the issue on the table today is a pay raise for the Finance
Director, not car allowances, so --
Mr. Mayor: This was in lieu of car -- I think this was generated by the fact this
was taken away from him as a car allowance.
65
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Beard?
Mr. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I think that hopefully, the situation has been rectified. I
think it’s necessary that we honor the commitment and I think we should go on and
approve item 53 here as listed. Hopefully, everything else has been rectified, and we
won’t have this problem again.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Thank you for calling --
Mr. Beard: I call the question.
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the motion, please vote -- we’re voting. Please vote
aye.
Mr. Mays: You got two -- you didn’t look this way. You’ve got hands up.
Mr. Mayor: I’m presiding, and I just called the vote. The question was called,
and I --
Mr. Mays: Yeah, but you didn’t look to your --
Mr. Mayor: And we’re voting.
Mr. Mays: You didn’t look to your left, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: I know. I know I didn’t.
Mr. Mays: I call on the action of parliamentarian. As part of discussion, I’m
going to vote for the motion, but I’m not going to be insulted. I think you’ve two
Commissioners who wish to be recognized on it. Both of us had our hands up.
Mr. Wall: Well, there’s an unreadiness to vote, then there has to be a motion, or
there has to be a vote on the call of the question. The call of the question is, in essence, a
motion, and --
Mr. Mayor: Well, there was no unreadiness to vote expressed. There was just a
comment made that I didn’t look in a certain direction.
Mr. Mays: We didn’t want to holler out, Mr. Mayor. We had our hands up.
Mr. Mayor: The Clerk will record the vote.
The Clerk: The motion carries with Mr. Williams and Mr. Mays and Mr. Shepard
not voting.
66
Mr. Mayor: Wait a minute.
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, point of order. The parliamentarian ruled that you take a
vote on a call of the question. That has not been done, and it would be simple, Bob, to
just ask what it was. I’m voting for the motion. I just wanted a clarification. And I think
that’s all Tommy wanted.
Mr. Mayor: All right. All right. Madame Clerk, if you’ll clear this. Clear the
voting board. All right. We’re going to take a vote on the call of the question. And
what’s the proper wording for that motion to me, Mr. Wall?
Mr. Wall: Basically, the call for the question is, are you ready to vote. Either yes
or no.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Are you ready to vote? Vote yes if you’re ready. No if
you’re not.
(Vote on the call for the question)
Mr. Beard, Mr. Williams, Mr. Mays, Mr. Cheek and Mr. Shepard vote No.
Motion ties 5-5.
The Mayor votes Yes.
Motion carries 6-5.
Mr. Mayor: So, Parliamentarian, we go back to the motion that’s on the floor?
Mr. Mays: What is the motion that’s on the floor, might I ask?
The Clerk: The motion is to approve increasing the salary of the Finance Director
by $3000 in lieu of car allowance, which was included in the employee’s employment
agreement.
Mr. Mayor: And all in favor of that motion, please vote aye.
Mr. Mays: Roll call vote, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Well, everybody’s already voted.
Mr. Mays: No, everybody hadn’t. I didn’t vote.
Mr. Mayor: Well, go ahead and publish the vote, Madame Clerk. He asked for it
after I had already started the voting, and it’s too late to ask for a roll call once we started
voting.
(Vote on motion)
Mr. Mays not voting.
Mr. Williams votes No.
67
Motion carries 8-1.
Mr. Mays: Let the Clerk note, Mr. Mayor, that I voted, but I simply wanted a
clarification cause I do, and the reason why I voted is in this matter, because in this
matter, I think, the only thing I was going to ask is that asking the maker of the motion,
would he simply amend it so that you would not have a carryover of salary, and that you
would change the compensation to $98,000, which simply could have been done without
your theatrics, Bob.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. All right. Let’s move along with the order of the day.
55. Discuss Administrator’s duties and reporting process.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, as you know, this previous week has gone
with the situation with the litter that was set out on the street. I had a conversation with
the Administrator, and we naturally differed about the process and what was taking place.
I understand that the Administrator is the Administrator who carry out the day to day
operation. But I also understand that I am an elected official, elected by the people of
Augusta Richmond County to be their voice and their eyes. Knowing, I think, yourself,
Commissioner Boyles and I was at that location and saw the confusion or the detriment,
the debris that was all over that property. I think our Administrator acted irresponsibly,
and I tend to question his ability, one thing, for doing the job that we elected him to do. I
am truly dissatisfied with the procedure and the way things was handled there. The
statement was made that I went over the Administrator’s head. I did no such thing. Had
I asked him to do something that would break the law or cause dangers to him or
someone else, I can understand him refusing. As an elected official, I made some calls to
get some process, some things in place, to do some things to remove the debris that was
so humongous that it didn’t look like an eviction. It really looked like the landfill. And I
just need to get some clarification. As and elected official, I called him and asked him
about doing something, and I think, Mr. Mayor, you had the same process. And you, and
you make some calls. But I’m not going to sit here and let the Administrator make those
decisions, do those things that he should be doing or not be doing, and not address it. I
address those issues, we tried to clear, rectify that situation, and it didn’t get done until
days later. That stuff sat out there entirely too long, and I just think that we need to get
some clarification. I know what his responsibilities are as far as the Administrator
running the day-to-day operation. Had I micromanaged, as I’ve been accused of many,
many times, that’s to tell somebody to do something that he told him not to do, I could
understand that. But to sit back and wait on the people who set that stuff out of there to
make a move on it, just show the irresponsibleness of the Administrator for this city.
This should never have went to that point. And I just need some clarification, Mr.
Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb?
68
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, I welcome this conversation
because this is just symptomatic of some of the things that have been going on in recent
times. I have no --
Mr. Mayor: Excuse me, Mr. Kolb. They can’t hear you back here. Try Mr.
Wall’s microphone. Maybe there’s something wrong with yours.
Mr. Kolb: Is this better?
Mr. Mayor: Yes.
Mr. Kolb: Okay. As I was saying, I welcome this conversation because this is
symptomatic of some of the things that have been going on lately. Had Mr. Williams
called me, I could have explained to him what we were attempting to do and why. When
we first learned about this particular situation, we knew that a bank was the landlord, and
we called them and advised them as to what had to happen, and they were in agreement
to clean it up. And so we wanted that process to work, rather than us having to spend, or
the municipality having to spend the funds. We were looking at an expenditure, just for
this one area, of $2000 to $5000, which included having to clean it up, the manpower, the
landfill fees, et cetera. I believed, and I still believe today, that it was the appropriate
thing to do. What my concern is, is that a direction was given by an individual
Commissioner to a particular department to carry out a certain function, which I believe
is the responsibility of the Administrator. I was willing to -- I had crews set up, in the
event the landlord did not follow through on what they were going to do, and we were
prepared to move the very next day to make things happen. I don’t regret what I did, and
if I was forced to do it again, I think I would have to make the same decision.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I understand that. I understand that, Mr. Mayor, and I
don’t regret what I did, either. Had I been there when that decision was made, I think it
would probably would have been a lot more difficult than it was then. All I’m saying is,
as an Administrator, he’s got a job to do. And as an elected official, I got a job to do, and
I was elected to do a job for the people of Richmond County, and, after calling on you,
Mr. Mayor, and I think we had lunch that day -- and, Mr. Boyles, I need you to jump in
this thing, because you was at the location, as well. So my hand isn’t the only one in the
cookie jar. And before I gave any direction, we talked about this at site. It was really
deplorable to look and to smell and to see, not knowing what chemicals, not knowing
who had been through there, what child had played in that filth, food that was spoiled --
any Administrator with any concern for this city would not have allowed that to sit there
that length of time. I can understand one day. Even two days. Three days is too long.
Two and a half, three and a half was entirely too long. This stuff should never been
allowed to be sitting out there in the beginning. Had they got a dumpster, had you
influenced, or had you told the bank to store it in something, to sit it beside there, may
have been a different situation. But to store that stuff out on the street, not on the
property, but out on the street -- Mr. Mayor, you need to jump in here, too, because your
eyes were there as well as Commissioner Boyles to witness this stuff, and you was just
amazed. And I just think that we need to let the Administrator know that we’re elected
69
by the people, and we are here to do what is right. And, had I asked him to violate some
law or violate some [inaudible], then I could understand his reluctance. But I disagree
with his actions, and I think that we need to give him that message, let him know that.
He operates the daily operation with the department heads. But he don’t operate the day-
to-day operation when it comes to the Commissioners.
Mr. Mayor: Well, I think you’ve already sent that message to him, and, as I
recall, it wasn’t that long ago when this Commission adopted what was an ordinance or
something, that set up the relationship between the Commissioners and the department
heads and the Administrator. It seems like we had quite an agonizing discussion over
that, too. Mr. Bridges, and then Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Bridges: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And, yeah, I think that ordinance does not
allow Commissioners to give directions to department heads, and, from what I’m hearing,
that was done in this case. We can enter in work orders like anybody else in that type of
thing. But, Mr. Mayor, I think what we’ve got to do here is follow the procedures and
ordinances that our city has established in regards to disposal of these goods that are
placed out on the streets during an eviction. And my understanding is that the owner of
the property has something like two or three days, 72 hours, something like that, to pick
the property up. And I think you’ve got to allow that process to work. In this case, it
sounds like to me that the Administrator had established things in motion to allow that
process to work, and did everything properly and in order. I can understand the
Commissioner’s concern here about the unsightliness and maybe even the debris being
out on the street. It is unsightly. It’s not something we like, but we’ve got to have the
process in place, and we’ve got to follow the process. The point I’d like to get at in all of
this, you know, I guess there could be a lot of finger pointing and that type of thing in all
of this. But I think it’s important that we get to the point that we established one person
in this government who gives the directions for departments and department heads to
perform their daily tasks, and I think that has to be the Administrator. I think if I or any
other Commissioner has a problem with any situation that may arise, it’s not our place to
give direction to a department head, but it’s our place to bring that to the attention of the
Administrator and let him provide the direction or the input or show us how we’re wrong
or how he can legally do what we want to do. So I think the central thing to me here is
that we have one established person that the department heads and the departments
answer to, and I just think that’s got to be the Administrator.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard, and then we had some hands up over here on the left.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I need to --
Mr. Mayor: We’ll come back to you, Mr. Williams. Let some other people speak
who haven’t spoken yet, please.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I share Commissioner Williams’
frustration with some of these conditions that exist on properties. One that I called to his
attention today and have tried to call to the marshal’s attention is 1429 Heard Avenue, if I
70
remember the memo right, and there’s a god awful mess in that yard right now, and it’s
alleged by the residents in that area that it’s persisted for three weeks, so I think we’ve
got a problem with responsiveness, and I also, and I don’t really have the answer today,
but I bring it up because I think we need to attune ourselves to how do we get those
citizens’ complaints addressed, because they come to the Commissioners with a high
level of frustration. The Commissioners then go back to the people that are actually
going to do the work, and we just, we’ve got to short circuit the time between action
requests and action, gentlemen. And I don’t really have the answer, but I’m searching for
it. By the same token, I know that many hours were put in by the DOR committee, which
was the acronym for Delineation of Responsibility Committee, that I believe that
Commissioner Williams and Commissioner Cheek and I served on, and after a lot of
debate, we came up with a codified policy, Section 1113 of the ordinances that was
rd
passed in March of 2001, on the 3 day of April, 2001. And it said clearly that no
Commissioner shall give any order or directions to any employee, either publicly or
privately, directly or indirectly. And then it said, that we shall only deal with the
employees of Augusta, Georgia who are below the level of assistant department director
through the Administrator, so I mean, we’ve got to play by our own rules here, and we’ve
got to improve the responsiveness of this government. Now I think there’s wrong all
round, but I think we’ve got to focus on how are we going to address the frustrations of
the citizens when they have these conditions that are darn near intolerable in their
neighborhoods, with stuff dumped in the yards, stuff dumped on the right-of-ways, and
we have got to come up with a process that’s very responsive. And I just, I question
where the operations, directions, are going in this government. And I wish I could say,
well, I have the answer, but I’ll tell you , I’m searching for it.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Boyles?
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think you’ve probably already pretty much
debated what’s to be debated. I just want to, for the record, say that I was with Mr.
Williams when that happened. My colleague and I were together. It was a public safety
issue, we thought. We went by to look at it, so, I really think that when we talk about
this, I think my name ought to be included, too, because I was with him when that when
on. I just wanted to say that for the record.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Cheek and Mr. Beard, and then Mr. Williams.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, there are some solutions. I think it’s been mentioned
before, but whether we follow through on it or not, we’ll see. To reduce the total time, I
understand that’s a local ordinance that things are placed on the curb. There is a process
problem in the reporting of and removal of materials. I’ve had several evictions of
trailers and other things on roadways that have gone for months and months because,
literally, months, because of, quote, we don’t have the resources. And that seems to be
the endpoint of the follow-through. We’ve got to come up with improvements, as
Commissioner Shepard has said, to improve the way we address these things. By the
time it gets to us through the citizens, there’s a great level of frustration. They’ve
generally tried the normal channels, and those are not responding quickly enough. Some
71
people do call at the drop of a hat with little tinky-dinky problems, but most people call --
when they call us, they’ve called everybody else, and there are generally serious health
and safety problems. I hope that we can go through this process and outline what
happens during these evictions and different things that we address, and hopefully come
up with a way to refine that, to have a quick response. And that may mean an emergency
fund that the Commission has to deal with emergency situations, because if we start
robbing Peter to pay Paul on these emergencies, then another project is going to go
lacking. So perhaps a line item for the next year budget would be $100,000 or so set
aside for us to address emergency, unforeseen, unfounded situations. That’s a process
improvement. Reduce the time that evictions are allowed to stay on the road from 72
hours to 24 hours. That’s plenty of time for people to gather their belongings if they need
them. These are things that we can do to improve this process, and I hope we will
implement those when we get beyond this discussion today.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beard?
Mr. Beard
: Mr. Mayor, I want to put another twist to this and possibly get away
from what has been discussed. I think Commissioner Shepard brought in a good point,
and I want to speak to that. We all know that we have a problem there, and I think it’s
not the point of -- our point at this point should be trying to find solutions to the problem.
And I think that -- I have discussed this several times that I think, and if it’s necessary for
I would make that motion that we form a committee to help us alleviate
a motion,
the problems that we have with evictions and other items being placed by
individuals on the right of ways of these private lots.
And we have a lot of that, and
they put it on the lot, on the items on the right of ways of these lots, and nobody’s
existing there. We find that we have a solution with the haulers, but a lot of times I’m
finding, in certain districts, that especially in the inner city area, that people have not been
educated to the point where they know that they can put the bulk waste in front of their
homes and it will be picked up. They carry it down the street and put it on a vacant lot.
That takes a little time and education. So I think the major solution to this is to let the
marshal, the warden, and also the Public Works people get together as a committee and
come up with some solutions as to what we going to do to this. I think we can sit here all
afternoon and discuss this and come up with carious ideas, but these people, and, really,
what they should do is look at forming crews and maybe finding some type of funding
source so that we can establish crews out there until we educate the public that they can
put the bulk waste in front of their homes. This is what is needed at this time, and I think
if we can just get [inaudible] what we’ve just discussed for the last 15 or 20 minutes, and
start looking at a solution, then I think we can move forward. It is a problem. We all
realize it’s a problem, and we got to find solution to that. And I hope we can establish
such a committee.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Is there a second?
Mr. Shepard: I second.
72
Mr. Mayor: We have a second. All right. Mr. Williams and then Mr. Kolb wants
to speak. Mr. Kuhlke wants to speak, and Mr. Mays wants to speak.
Mr. Williams: Just to get some clarification, Mr. Mayor, let me say this. I respect
the Administrator and his position and what he’s authorized to do. But after you had
notified him, and I didn’t go over his head as I was told -- if he don’t respond to what’s
necessary out there in this community, and I dare to say, had this been somewhere else,
on another side of town, it would not have stayed there this long. But when you ask the
Administrator yourself as the Mayor of this city and don’t get anything done, and why
would it take me to go back and ask the Administrator again to do something that he
didn’t do for you? My point is, he was notified. He knew of the seriousness of it. And,
as a Commissioner, as a concerned citizen, as a man who wants to do what is right for the
people, I’m not going to sit here this day -- not this day and no day, and let the
Administrator or the department head or anybody else, leave a situation like that for the
city to have to endure, to either children climb through and play on and cross over, for the
odor, for the neighbors who live in that area. There was two churches. There’s a
playground right across the street. All of the people was in place. Inmate crews in place
to move this stuff that could have been moved that day, but because of a power struggle
we got into, and somebody want to call the shots. It don’t make no difference who had
the move, Mr. Mayor, somebody should have enough initiative to move it. So I just want
to make it clear that I did not go past, I did not go over his head. He knew about it. He
had an opportunity to do it, and he didn’t do it.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Kuhlke?
Mr. Kuhlke: Thanks. Mr. Mayor, Mr. Kolb, first of all, George, didn’t you
present a revised organizational chart a few months ago, and am I correct in saying that
no action was taken on that organizational chart?
Mr. Kolb: There were minor -- I’m not sure --
Mr. Kuhlke: I’m saying that we have not actually formally adopted the revised
organizational chart that you presented.
Mr. Kolb: Not really, no.
Mr. Kuhlke: And so really, we don’t know what this organization’s all about, and
I think that action needs to take place from this Commission. And I think if we got a
well-laid out organizational chart, then it delineates the responsibilities that everybody
has to do. And as far as Mr. Williams’ action, and he’s talked a lot today, but -- and I’ve
accused him of this before, but I do think it’s micromanaging. I think it’s going above
the authority that we have as a Commission to direct departments to go out and do work
without going through the Administrator. But I can see how the confusion will come
about if we don’t have an organizational chart that points out who has certain
responsibilities. And I would request that the Administrator put that back on probably
73
the next committee agenda, at the appropriate committee, so that we could go ahead and
revisit that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Mays?
Mr. Mays: Yeah, Mr. Mayor, thanks. I think, if I could get a couple of things
answered from the maker of the motion, Mr. Beard, and he knows where I’m coming
from on this. It may make 58 a moot item. Because I think, as we’ve started into the
issue that’s on the floor, where we started in the discussion with the Administrator, 58
that I did have placed on, even though it says discuss Kolb enforcing that litter patrol. It
deals with basically the motion that’s on the floor now in trying to search for a creative
way to get some -- this doesn’t answer this question that’s there with reference to the
Administrator, but I think Lee has gotten over into 58, and I think it’s headed in the right
direction as far as a problem that we have going right now. It is a problem. It’s one that
everybody in this room connected with government is experiencing. And it’s at a point
where I think the public wants to see results from the government in getting it done.
Now, we’ve dressed this thing up about authority, and I think what took place, Mr.
Mayor, quite frankly, last week, I’m going to undress it a little bit. That simply right
there was nothing more than a grown man’s peeing contest. And it’s sad because the
whole city stunk from it, as an end result of it. Everybody start talking about blaming,
and, as a result of it, quite frankly, nothing got done. I’m hearing that the fact that you’re
on this end of the hall, and you tell the Administrator one thing that you wanted results,
and it doesn’t get done, his deputy whips out a plan to get it done, and then he undoes
that plan to get it done. To me, that’s childish. Because the point was, it’s still sat there.
That only dealt with the evictions. What I’m hoping Lee’s motion gets into is a point
right now where, quite frankly, Districts 1 and 2 are the worst of the lot. They are being
completely overrun. The contract people that we’ve got cannot catch up realistically this
summer with the stuff that’s out there. It goes from legitimate people, like Steve Gurley
over there on Laney-Walker, to just simply little old ladies on the Hill that have done
either putting out their stuff or paying somebody to do it. That’s stuff that just backed up
tremendously, and the city is getting filthier by the day in order to do it. And what I was
hoping for in my motion, and I hope this will get it done in the spirit of cooperation, that
through the Administrator’s office, these folk can work to coordinate, and we not just
have another planned plan. We got enough folk there, working with Steve some over a
decade, working with this, and I told him the other day, we were searching for some help.
I think you’re going to have to have some people that are going to be motivated, that are
in supervising capacities, that we may have to change a little bit of priorities for a short
period of time to help us supervise some inmate labor that we’ve got in terms of dealing
with crews, until we can bring back to this Commission to restore to a level of getting
operating crews that you need. One and two have to be tackled for this reason. It’s not in
the rest right now, it’s not in the Deep South. But if we don’t clean up what’s downhill
right now, if we pull crews from those areas in order to do it, West Augusta and South
Augusta are going to look like one and two in three to four weeks’ time. The storm stuff
is still out there. And we can sit there and decide about who’s in charge all we want to,
but that camera out there identifies everybody up here, and they’re looking for a plan.
And I said, this is the third time that I put this down. Two committee meetings, and now
74
to this Commission meeting. I’m not casting any blame, and Steve and I made good
private conversation. Robin Leveritt and I have had some. I think there’s some workable
people on there. Our Public Works director needs some help over in there, but it’s going
to have to be a creative type of Marshall plan that marches, quite frankly, from the River
right now out to Gordon Highway and beyond on getting this stuff up. We need to have a
master inventory of what equipment is available for those folk. If they don’t have it, then
we need to decide within our own crews what we have, identify it, and start to work. But
this thing about, I’ve been offended -- Mr. Mayor, at this point, I could really care less
who I might offend that’s in the courthouse, be it one of us or somebody that we hire.
The point is, it needs to get rectified, and I am willing to allow our folk who work for us
to do that, and I don’t have a problem. But I said this over and over. If you want me out
your business, then do your business. And I won’t be in your business. But if your
business doesn’t get done, I’ll help you take care of it. And I think you know exactly
where I’m coming from, and I applaud you for what you said privately, because I don’t
think everything that’s said privately need to be done publicly. But I know you were
frustrated in it. All of us were frustrated in it, and we just need to move beyond that, and
common sense can’t take the place, quite frankly, of that type of contest that I mentioned
earlier. And, young lady, I told her she was going to keep Bill over here, Mr. Mayor,
from chewing tobacco and stop me from cussing, but I got out of it mildly a minute ago,
to a point that that’s exactly what this is. And folk expect us to get some of this mess
done. I’m right now, and I said in committee meeting, I’m tired of grocery shopping at 2
A.M. I’m tired of ducking folk that’s got stuff that’s out there. It is some folk that
consider that micro or macro. It needs to get done. There’s legitimate stuff that’s been
out here four, five, six weeks now, that are on these right of ways. They in front of folks’
houses. God blessed me enough to be fortunate last week to haul my stuff to the landfill
and pay somebody to do it, cause I got tired of sitting around, watching it, and I know if I
had made a call, if I probably used personal experience, mine personally would have got
picked up. Which wouldn’t make any sense with all the other junk all round me. And
that’s where we need to get stuff done. And I think that committee that Lee’s pushing for
in that motion will get that done, and nobody’s trying to circumvent that Administrator’s
office with that. I think he’s got somebody over there -- he could do it himself, or he can
appoint somebody to be on there. But I think you got to have a different team that does
more right now than give us a report. This has to have folk out here on the street, and
whether or not they’ve got on a uniform, whatever they got on, they need to be working,
and we need to have a plan of action to get that done, and quit worrying about who gets it
done and who’s in charge of it.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb, I’ll recognize you in one second. Let me just remind
everyone that we had an avenue for us to get out of the eviction business, cleaning up
after evictions, with the request of the legislative delegation, and we got no action on that
legislation this past session. The City Attorney, in my request, did some research last
year, [inaudible] did it, on evictions and how we can streamline our ordinance to make it
work in our favor and try to expedite the cleanup process after an eviction. And I pulled
that stuff out of the file and shared it with Commissioner Williams earlier this week, and
I don’t know what he’s going to follow up on that or not. But that’s something the
committee can take a look at, that Mr. Beard has suggested. So what we’ve tried to do
75
without much success up to this point, is try to, number one, streamline and speed up the
process, and number two, essentially, get the government out of picking up after
evictions. So we’ve tried. It’s not something we’ve ignored. Let’s see, Mr. Kolb, you
wanted to speak, and then Mr. Beard wanted to clarify his motion. Let’s do that first.
Mr. Beard, you wanted to make a clarification, and then Mr. Kolb.
Mr. Beard: Yeah --
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, can I speak before he clarifies?
Mr. Mayor: No, let him go --
Mr. Kolb: I think it’ll help him to --
Mr. Beard: I’m just going to add one thing, Mr. Kolb, and that is that I think
Willie mentioned it that Administration, someone from Administration should -- I may
have overlooked that when I was calling out these people involved, but we’re putting all
the people at the table together. The only other thing, hopefully, that we have some
timeline of when can get back, because of the urgency of this, and I think we should have
something from that committee as soon as possible, ten days, or --
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Kolb, go ahead. You have the floor.
Mr. Kolb: Okay, a couple of points. First of all, let me assure you that there was
no power struggle from my perspective on this. This is a citywide problem, and there are
no resources to take care of it. We did our best to put together private resources to make
this happen, and it was successful. But you cannot have, where I’m giving one direction,
and then a Commissioner is coming in giving another direction. That never works. But I
just wanted to clarify that this was not some kind of a power struggle. Second thing, I
agree wholeheartedly with Commissioner Beard, in terms of dealing with resources, and
Commissioner Cheek, but I think we’re far ahead of the committee. We’re about to come
back to the Commission and ask for an appropriation so we can get some resources to
deal with this particular problem. At the same time, we have been meeting with the
marshal’s office. We’re prepared to meet with the County Attorney and some judges to
sit down and begin the process of trying to streamline the eviction process. We’ve gotten
the garbage haulers involved in the process, and I think that we have set up something
that, in the solid waste districts, we will be able to deal with eviction debris in a timely
manner. But I’m telling you, if we start picking up now with no resources, we are going
to be in trouble, because the problem is not just isolated to Watkins Street. There are
other areas, and Commissioner Shepard mentioned one, but I passed through the
neighborhood around Watkins, and there’s debris around those houses, also. So this is
not an isolated incident, and we need to be creative in the solutions that we come up to
deal with it.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Anything further? Mr. Cheek?
76
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, just -- we have got to come up with a path to follow on
dealing with situations that are extraordinary, as this one was. And to do that in a timely
fashion. And, again, whether that’s a funding source, whether we have to call in the
private sector or whatever, I don’t know any one of us sitting here that has as big a heart
towards the city in his district as I do Commissioner Williams. And, again by saying
that, too, I’d like to say that I don’t know anyone that has the tools and the talents to help
this city along where it needs to be more so than our Administrator, Mr. Kolb. Willie,
you mentioned something earlier about a grown man’s pissing contest, I’ll go on and put
it in plain terms. The problem with that is everybody gets wet. And we’re all through
this if we don’t come up with an improvement plan, then we’re all in trouble. We need to
look towards that old lady that we keep sometimes losing in this discussion, and that’s
Augusta. I hope that we’ll get beyond this, but we have got to come up with a way to
deal with this, cause I understand the frustrations that you get into, and I’ve been in
Commissioner Williams’ situation, where things weren’t handled, weren’t handled,
weren’t handled, and then a match got flicked and a pretty serious fire got started as a
result. Because it was put off. We’ve got to be able to adapt to changing situations in a
more timely manner. And I hope that we’ve learned from this and we can go forward.
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Mays: The only thing I just want to get clear before we leave it -- I just didn’t
want the emphasis to keep drifting towards total evictions, because evictions, yes, are a
problem. This conversation got started about one particular eviction situation. But what
I didn’t want to get lost in the mix, in the charge to the committee, and I realize the
Administrator is already having some talks with the person that the Commission has
named to make up the committee, but I think the overall scope of it should deal with
trash, debris, and filth, period. Because there are as many folk with -- Watkins Street
may have been the exception to the rule, but there are folk who have as much stuff out on
right of ways that are a legitimate concern that their stuff is going to get picked up. They
aren’t being evicted at all. They are living in the facility that the stuff is out in front of.
They are the ones who are cleaning yards and are putting out stuff. So I think, as we
move towards dealing with evictions, I hope that’s not the main thrust of where this
committee will go in terms of its examination of what has to be picked up. Because, yes,
that’s an eyesore to our city. But the stuff that’s there that folk are being taxed for and
those that are being indirectly taxed, who may rent and who pay a fee to rent or lease, or
maybe legitimate business owners who are calling us individually about what’s there. I
hope that that will be in the main thrust of this committee and not left out to a point of
where evictions just totally take this thing over and swamps it out. Cause evictions is just
a part of it. That’s something that we may have to deal with totally separate. And I think
we can get some help in terms of doing that. But I think this thing, we’re not going to
pick up until we start, no, I totally disagree with that. Because when we went to this deal
of going countywide with sanitation, we already made a commitment. We made a
commitment, and I remind each of us of that. We already have made that commitment.
We crossed that line of demarcation. Now, it’s how we’re going to get it resolved. Now,
if we have dealt with that on a budgetary manner, then I think the Administrator needs to
bring that back to us, and then it’s up to us to have the willpower to decide whether or not
77
we restore those folk and deal with what it’s going to take to do it. In the interim, I think
the committee can begin to work on that. But I just wanted to say that, Mr. Mayor, and I
hope that doesn’t get lost in this shuffle, as to whether we put the evictions up a hill and
forget about the legitimate folk who are out there, who are drowning in this sea of trash
already.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Is there anything further? We have a motion on the floor
from Commissioner Beard. Go ahead and call the question on that. All in favor of the
motion, please vote aye.
Mr. Bridges out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Next item?
56. Discuss Municipal Building Security Plan. (Requested by Commissioner
Marion Williams)
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We talked about this in Public Safety
with Marshal Smith about the security plan. I had a little observation when coming in
the building several times, Mr. Mayor, and I know that we’ve gotten a bunch of people
on the machine, to scan those machines, and I visitation to Atlanta, to the Capitol, and
there’s only one person that operate that machine, and I’m wondering why we’ve got so
many people, and I thought maybe we could use some of those people to defer to another
door, and if we could afford another machine -- Steve, can you help us out with that a
little bit? We got four or five people on the door, on the front entrance to come in, plus
someone on the back. Can we not use two people on that door and use the other people
somewhere else in another location?
Mr. Smith: As we discussed in committee, the problem we’ve got with moving
machines to the back door, it causes quite a problem from a safety perspective and a
convenience perspective, and also of course a cost perspective. If we try to funnel people
in the back door, it’s not unusual to have anywhere from 500 to 700 people coming in the
front door prior to 11:00 every morning, particularly on high traffic days when we’ve got
court, court calendar call. I feel like if we try to put those machines anywhere near that
back door, we’re just going to have a problem with confusion, as I said. I think it’s a
security and safety issue. The only time you’re going to see four or five people at that
front door on the machines is when a shift change, cause or -- cause what we’re doing,
we’re using part-time people to staff those machines. So a lot of times, you got
somebody coming in, and somebody’s leaving at the same time, so you might have a time
where you got more than what was normally there. I think, what do we got staffs on our
machines? What we got, three people? At peak time? There again, we try to make sure
that we’ve got adequate staff trained so if we have to bring somebody in, but, no, we’re
78
not, we don’t have anybody staffing that front machine, any more than three people at a
time.
Mr. Williams: At the State Capitol, Steve, though, we got only one person, and
you mentioned about how many people you got coming in now, you know, with
machines, but before we got that piece of equipment, before the Homeland Security got
to be such a great issue, we had the same amount of people coming in, and that was no,
no jam. And I understand they got to stop there to be screened, but with the employees
with a badge, and with the security type situation with that, we don’t have to look at those
people, I don’t think we’re looking at, right? Are we still screening, scanning, the
employees, as well?
Mr. Smith: Anybody that comes through the front door goes through the
screening devices.
Mr. Williams: But there’s somebody on the back that’ll let those in with a badge
and the handicapped people. Is that right?
Mr. Smith: Right. And the handicapped people, or the disabled visitors, we have
to the building, they are escorted from the back door, and they do go through the
screening equipment, as well. On the Capitol situation, the Capitol, the security at the
Capitol, they did not employ an X-ray machine. They simply have a screening device
that you walk through. So we have to have a monitor of the X-ray device at all times. He
has to sit there and screen every package that comes through.
Mr. Williams: So could we not have an X-ray machine and somebody to screen
packages for a person came in with an X-ray machine, with no packages. If they come
through the X-ray, but if they had a bag or package, have to go over to be screened? I
mean, I said this in committee, and you heard me before, I think we did a trial basis, but
we got more people walking around this courthouse to come to the front than necessarily
would be if we had a normal situation, we only have a few people that use this front door.
Because the bulk of the people always park in the back. I’m trying to find a way to
alleviate all of this walking that normally, people who come down to pay bills or to go to
court, is the only people here. A lot of us mail out our bills, when they come to the
utilities here. But a lot of people are still coming down to this building, walking around
this building in that extreme heat, and it not going to get cool. It’s going to get hotter
before the winter gets here. So I just think that if we could have a screen they could walk
through, rather than X-raying, and I think X-raying good, if somebody’s got a bag, they
ought to be carried through the X-ray machine. Is that something we can do?
Mr. Smith: Mr. Williams, as I said in committee, I would strongly recommend
against opening the back door, using it for a screening device area. We do have the
resources and could probably have the manpower to, with a couple of additions, to staff
this west door. I think we probably could do so. We already have the equipment. The
equipment is already in this building if we decided to open the other door. I don’t
79
remember the exact number as far as building renovations, additional manpower, I’m
thinking it’s somewhere around $60,000, if we wanted to open up the western door. 68.
Mr. Williams: Last question, Steve. When we going to do something on a trial
basis, though, I think you informed the public that we was doing this to see how we could
do something else? I mean, from what you’re telling me, it’s going to be this way from
now on. I mean, and I think that’s totally unfair to tell the general public they going to
have to walk around this building from now on. We need to do some construction work
and reconfigure the door or if that’s going to be less than $60,000, then put the front door
on the rear like it probably should be.
Mr. Smith: Okay. Let me clarify. As far as, if y’all want to change the structure
of the building, I’ve got no problem with that at all. But the way the building is
configured now, I’ve been looking at security of this building for at least 12 years.
We’ve had several experts come in. We’ve got different plans on what we could do in
this building. This was obviously the best plan that we had. Keep in mind, I realize
we’re probably two or three years away from the new Judicial Center, or something
changing in this building. But I think that is coming in the new future. Obviously, if we
could pick this building up and turn it around and put the door on the backside, it would
certainly be more beneficial to us. As far as our test period, the Administrator and I met,
the Assistant Administrator and I met. We looked at the various procedures. At that
point, we made the changes, as we talked about it committee, where we did staff the back
door full time. I think that has cut down on some of our complaints, because now,
instead of making the people, when they leave, walking all the way around the front, we
do allow them to exit in the back. So the walk around is only once instead of twice. But
those were the changes that we discussed, and we felt like would beneficial to us without
compromising security.
Mr. Speaker: Anybody been informed of that, though, Steve? Is there a sign
showing them that they can do that, they can go out the rear instead of going back that
way?
Mr. Smith: I don’t think we’ve put up a sign, but we have, we got -- our people in
the lobby do tell the people that they can exit out the back door.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Anything further?
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes?
Mr. Mays: This is a little different -- Marshal Smith had referenced to it, but I
guess since we’re on it -- but I brought this up in committee meeting the other day, and
it’s not so much about the exit and the entranceways at all. But, and I guess in tracking
the count of the number of requests that we might get, and I just merely made this as
something I thought we might want to look at and to see how many people were here,
80
maybe making requests in a given period of time. But one of the things I did observe,
and I used the Governor’s visit as an example, that, since the majority of the traffic is
now coming through, in terms of public access, from the front of the building, that we
collectively may just want to think about the fact that where we got the statue of Miss
Justice out there on the back, that we use the front of the building, which is also now the
main public entranceway, and if you got the Governor there making a main speech,
somebody’s coming in taking their lunch hour to come in, pay taxes, pay a water bill, or
just coming in taking care of their natural business, they are literally lumped in about,
say, walking through an official delegation that’s got the front steps of the Municipal
Building totally occupied, and I just think there’s something there that we may want to
think about from the standpoint that, since we have now put the public in terms of
coming through the front, that we may need to think about the fact that if we going to
allow the use of the grounds, where people will come in to make speeches, or to declare
for office, or to come in to sign a bill, that we might want to think about using that area
and so we wouldn’t have that same type of congestion there, and I know that had been
wondered, that you have had the control to say, okay, we’re going to, you know, who
request to come in. But it’s just something overall, and now that this is a security
element, we put the public there in that place, but then at times, even though it’s only
sparingly, that does provide a certain level of where people are uncomfortable, at putting
it best, because they don’t want to break through. And many people are not privileged to
make that second trip back to the courthouse to take care of particular business when they
come to the front. And I just wanted to throw that out there, that’s something we may
want to think about an alternative, and that way, we still can use that building for that
type of public gathering, and, at the same time, that would be at least one suitable
alternative that might be there, since we’re using the front of the building. I just wanted
to throw that out.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I move that we receive this as information and that it remain
an item for study by the Deputy Administrator for Public Safety and the Marshal.
Mr. Kuhlke: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Any further discussion? All in favor, then, please vote aye.
Mr. Bridges and Mr. Cheek out.
Motion carries 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: Item number 57.
57. Progress report on the Administrator’s Evaluation Process. (Requested by
Mayor Bob Young)
Mr. Mayor: I was going through my mail this morning that accumulated over my
absence, and I see the committee has a meeting scheduled. I appreciate that, and I would
81
certainly admonish the group that’s working on this to do so with due diligence. We’re
almost two months overdue for the annual evaluation of the Administrator, and some of
these issues that we’ve discussed about the Administrator and our relationship on the
Commission floor might not be here for discussion once we get the evaluation done, so I
appreciate the fact the committee’s meeting this week.
th
The Clerk: Mr. Cheek, he’s rescheduled that meeting for the 27 of June.
th
Mr. Mayor: 27?
The Clerk: Yes, sir. At 1:00.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, we will turn that around in short order. Due to
circumstances beyond my control, I’ve been unable to put that committee meeting
together, but we will take care of it at that point and get it turned around in short order.
Mr. Mayor: Appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. Cheek. Mr. Mays, I think with
respect to item 58, you said that had already been addressed?
Mr. Mays: I’m fine with that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. The next item is the ordinance on swimming.
ATTORNEY:
59. Approve AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE AUGUSTA RICHMOND
COUNTY CODE BY DELETING THE FORMER SECTION 1-9-4 IN ITS
ENTIRETY WHICH PROHIBITS SWIMMING IN THE CANAL AND
SAVANNAH RIVER AND REPLACING THE SAME; TO ALLOW SWIMMING
IN THE SAVANNAH RIVER EXCEPT IN DESIGNATED AREAS; TO BAN
SWIMMING OR BATHING IN THE CANAL
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek, I think you brought this forward.
Mr. CheekI want to make motion to approve with the
: Yes, Mr. Mayor.
following changes. Item B under the new code section, that needs to be 100 feet
above the City’s diversion dam and 50 feet on the downstream side.
That’s some of
the best hybrid fishing in the State, right there, and I would hate to put our deputies in a
With those changes, I’d like to
position of having to discern swimming versus wading.
make a motion that we approve this and also if possible waive the second reading on
this ordinance.
Mr. Kuhlke: I second.
82
Mr. Mayor: All right. We need unanimous consent to waive the second reading.
Is there any objection to waiving the second reading? So we can move the motion
forward with that in it? I don’t hear any objection, so we have a motion and second. Is
there any discussion? All in favor of the motion, then, please vote aye.
(No objection to the waiving of the second reading)
Mr. Bridges out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so, Mr. Wall, we can go swimming tonight? Is that right?
Effective immediately? All right. We had two items, before we got to Legal Meeting,
that we had requested to be added. We had on the addendum agenda, we had item
number 1. Madame Clerk, if you would read the caption, and see if we can get that
added.
Addendum Item 1. Ratify cost approval not to exceed $146,850 for a contract with
Beam’s Pavement Maintenance Company regarding the Deans Bridge Road MSW
Landfill II-B Perimeter Drainage System Emergency Repair.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Is there any objection to adding that item.
Mr. Cheek: No objection to adding, Mr. Mayor. I do have some questions,
though.
(No objection to adding this item)
Mr. Mayor: All right. We’ll go ahead and add that item. The second item is --
I’m sorry we don’t have this in the proper format, but again, this is something that came
Georgia Trend
in at the last minute, and we had a space reservation deadline of June 21.
is doing a special regional spotlight on Augusta in the August, 2002 issue. We’ve got
some information on doing some advertising in there. The last time Georgia Trend
did this we did a full-page black and white ad and we’d like to ask you to add it to
the agenda today so we can consider this and get it in by the deadline.
That’s what
we want to do. Is there any objection to adding this item. I’m sorry?
(No objection to adding this item)
Mr. Mayor: Okay, so both these items will be added. Let’s go ahead and take up
the first item on the addendum agenda, which is the emergency repair of the drain
system.
Addendum Item 1. Ratify cost approval not to exceed $146,850 for a contract with
Beam’s Pavement Maintenance Company regarding the Deans Bridge Road MSW
Landfill II-B Perimeter Drainage System Emergency Repair.
83
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I just smell Alexander Drive all over this one. I guess
my question is, were the people that we assigned to cut the grass and tell us when the
bridge was eroding, also assigned to cut the grass and tell us when this particular area
eroded? I’d like to know what’s different between this and Alexander Drive. I thought
we’d learned that preventative maintenance would keep us from having these costly
repairs. Is this something that just happened suddenly? Or was it something that
developed over time that we overlooked?
The Clerk: The difference between this and Alexander Drive is that there was
about a [inaudible] out at the landfill.
Mr. Cheek: Okay.
The Clerk: And this pipe, we believe, was damaged as a result of that fire.
Mr. CheekMotion to approve.
: Very good. Thank you.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Colclough: Motion to approve
Mr. Mayor: Motion to approve from Mr. Colclough --
The Clerk: We already have a motion and a second.
Mr. Mayor: Oh, I’m sorry. We have a motion and a second.
Mr. Cheek: Catch up, Mr. Mayor. Let’s go.
Mr. Mayor: No further discussion? All in favor, then, please vote aye. I was
checking with Mr. Mays about something we had left on the table.
Mr. Bridges out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: All right. And then the other item is the advertisement in Georgia
Trend.
Mr. Cheek: Motion to approve.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right. What are we approving? Do you want to do a full page
black and white again, or do you want to do a color?
84
Mr. Cheek: Color.
Mr. Mayor: Motion to approve?
Mr. Wall: Charged to the Promotion Account?
Mr. Mayor: Charged to the Promotion Account. Do you accept that amendment?
Mr. Cheek: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Do we -- Mr. Kuhlke?
Mr. Kuhlke: Yeah, I just, I wondered if it wouldn’t be a good idea for us to make
the Chamber aware that we’re going to do this, and either through email or whatever,
since it’s a short timeframe, to let their members know anybody that might want to take
an ad out in that issue.
Mr. Mayor: Excuse me. Mr. Kolb, go ahead.
Mr. Kolb: I believe that they’ve been notified. If you notice on the second page,
it says bonus copies of the Augusta issue will be distributed by the Metro Chamber of
Commerce. I am almost positive that they, since this is a regional issue, that they have
been notified and asked to participate. But I will make sure that they are aware of it.
Mr. Kuhlke: Okay.
Mr. Wall: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: And if we can’t get the Chamber to pick up some of the cost, if we
can, we’ll do that too, and that’ll reduce our share of that. All in favor of the motion,
then, please vote aye.
Mr. Bridges out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. And that takes us to the Legal Meeting. Mr. Wall?
Mr. Wall: Request a Legal Meeting for the three items listed. Real estate,
pending litigation, and personnel.
60. LEGAL MEETING
??
Discuss real estate matters.
??
Discuss pending litigation matters
??
Discuss personnel matters
85
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Shepard: Second. And I have an item to discuss. The motion was for the
three items there. I have an item, also.
Mr. Wall: That falls within those categories?
Mr. Shepard: Yes. It falls within pending, well, it’s not litigation. Pending
claim.
Mr. Mayor: Pending claim. All right. All in favor of moving into the legal
session, if you please vote?
Mr. Bridges out.
Mr. Kuhlke not voting.
Motion carries 8-0.
[LEGAL MEETING]
61. Motion to approve authorization for the Mayor to execute affidavit of
compliance with Georgia’s Open Meeting Act.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Wall?
Mr. Wall: Need a motion to approve the execution of the closed meeting
affidavit.
Mr. Shepard: I so move.
Mr. Beard: Second.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second to approve the signing of the
document.
Mr. Bridges out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any other items, Mr. Attorney?
Mr. Wall: You still have gone one, item number 27, I believe it is, that was
tabled earlier. Item number 27.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Item number 27.
Mr. Shepard: I move it be postponed until Friday.
86
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and second on the floor. Any discussion? Hearing
none, all in favor of the motion, please signify by the sign of voting.
Mr. Boyles and Mr. Hankerson vote No.
Mr. Williams and Mr. Bridges out.
Motion carries 6-2.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any other items to come before this Commission?
The Clerk: No, sir, that’s it.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion to adjourned. Do I get a second?
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Lena J. Bonner
Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and
correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of Augusta Richmond County
Commission held on June 18, 2002.
Clerk of Commission
87