HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-02-2002 Regular Meeting
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBERS
July 2, 2002
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:03 p.m., Tuesday, July 2,
2002, the Honorable Bob Young, Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Boyles, Mays, Kuhlke, Colclough, Shepard, Beard, Cheek,
Williams and Bridges, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
ABSENT: Hon. Hankerson, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
Also Present: Jim Wall, Attorney; George Kolb, Administrator; and Lena
Bonner, Clerk of Commission.
The Invocation was given by Dr. Mark E. Harris.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
The Clerk:
ADDENDUM AGENDA:
1. Discuss department responses to citizens’ request. (Requested by
Commissioners Shepard and Boyles)
Mr. Mayor: Is there any objection to adding this item? None is heard, so that
item will be added to our agenda. First item is an update.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
UPDATE:
Mr. Ken Kramer, Executive Director
Augusta Regional Airport at Bush Field
RE: U.S. Dept. of Transportation Grant Award
The Small Community Air Service Development Pilot Program Improve Air
Services to Small Community
The Clerk: Along with Chairman Marci Wilhelmi.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Ken, welcome.
Mr. Kramer: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of the County Commission. It
is my pleasure to introduce to the chamber our Aviation Commission Chairwoman, Ms.
Marcie Wilhelmi. We’re passing out a quick document to give you an update on some of
the items that are going on of interest and concern at the airport, and in particular the
[inaudible] federal grants and designations from the U. S. Department of Transportation.
I’ll turn it over to Ms. Wilhelmi.
1
Ms. Wilhelmi: Thank you for your kind invitation to address this body. Mr. Kolb
has assured that I will be a head on a stake if I don’t confine my comments to five
minutes or less. Along those lines, I’d like to quickly run you through the handout.
There are an inordinate number of things going on at the airport, all positive, all coming
together. In response to a number of citizens’ concerns and complaints about problems
with Concourse C in Atlanta, Ken Kraemer and Kathryn Solee both traveled to meet with
the Delta folks last week and constructed a plan to begin to ameliorate some of these
problems. We have reason to believe that the Comair service will be reinstated here in
Augusta on or about September 15. We also have reason to believe that we will be having
a successful announcement from Continental Airlines with two flights a day to New York
and one a day to Houston, about the same time frame. From there, we would also expect
that their [inaudible] sharing partner, Northwest Airlines, will become involved and very
interested. And a long story short, air service is well on its way toward heading in the
right direction. Further down the line, the mast plan, which has consumed the better part
of the last two years of this community’s attention, is coming to a close and its
evaluation. We expect comments any day, if not today. Five comments were listed;
three in technical nature make the lines a little bit thicker on this part of the map. But
they, among other things, endorsed the concurrence of four other consultants for a mid-
field terminal and proceeded to list a number of tasks that we are to proceed with
immediately. Therefore, this weekend at a business retreat that was attended by Mr.
Kolb, Mr. Persaud, and Lee Beard, we set a tentative opening date for our anticipated
terminal of January 5, 2005. That is 912 days from now. It’s important. You will be
shortly receiving a calendar that will allow you to stay focused on those dates, because
this community has got to stay together as a unit and march as a region. This is a long-
held dream that we’re finally going to realize. We are extremely excited about it.
Another thing we’re extremely excited about is the number of grants that we have been
receiving. I think you can attribute that to the skill and temperament of the good Mr.
Kraemer over here, who certainly deserves a bow. He has managed in about five
months’ time to bring 11 times the dollars to this city that we had realized in the previous
19 years put together. And it’s remarkable. We expect it to continue. We have enjoyed
strong support in Washington from both sides of the river, from both the Senate and the
House. 100% unanimous endorsement of where we are trying to go, and we expect that
and state support to be covering the terminal project. We will be recovering tax dollars
that Augusta has sent off to other cities and states that we’ve just not ever asked for. And
our time has now come. Perhaps the biggest and most exciting news, because it directly
impacts your efforts in the area of economic development, are last week’s announcement
from the Department of Transportation where we had successfully competed against 179
other communities for part of the Air 21 Small Communities Air Service Grants. That,
Ms. Solee, you may stand and take a bow. Much needed.
(A round of applause is given.)
Ms. Wilhelmi: We’re very blessed to have both of these people. They have
managed to take the Commission’s dream and convert it into action and results, which is
what all want. Just as important, if not more important, Augusta was named the only
community out of 450 airports, commercial airports, in the country to receive the
2
Department of Transportation’s designation as an air service development zone. And
what that means is that the Department of Commerce, the Department of Transportation,
the FAA, any other ancillary branches that we can manage to suck in, have joined forces
with our city to make that airport a blazing success. The spotlight is on us. They aren’t
going to let us fail. We are meeting with Garrett Aviation officials this afternoon to find
out what is their dream wish list, how do we double and triple the size of Garrett
Aviation, high, head-of-household paying jobs here in Augusta. The other -- just going
on about this -- it’s a tremendous honor. And it has been understated in the media, but
the flat fact of the matter is they could have given that grant to anybody. And they gave
it to us. And we all owe ourselves a bow. Andy, did you have a question?
Mr. Cheek: Yes, ma’am, I‘ve got a couple of questions. I was recently privileges
to speak at one of the local civic clubs and one of the questions asked me was -- I’ll have
to paraphrase -- if current plans are continued the way the Aviation board wants to,
they’re going to bankrupt the city. And I corrected that by saying (1) that there’s money,
gasoline tax money and FAA money that had never been collected --
Ms. Wilhelmi: Absolutely correct.
Mr. Cheek: -- by this city, and that (2) we had never prepared a master plan
which qualified us for those funding, and (3) that by securing these fundings through the
coming years, that we will be able to pay for most of the work without going into the
taxpayers’ pockets. Are those correct statements?
Ms. Wilhelmi: Those are absolutely correct statements, and the other salient facts
are this: every time you buy an airline ticket departing from Augusta, Georgia, there is
$14 per ticket banked. These are the monies we have not ever requested back. We have
pre-paid for this master plan. And the fact of the matter is we expect to fully pay for this.
Our goal is to not even have to extend a revenue bond of any sort. Not airport secured
and certainly not secured by this body. We have reasons and indications to believe that
will be quite an accomplishable goal.
Mr. Cheek: I would just like to say for the record that anybody reporting contrary
to what has been reported here today, is lying to the public.
Ms. Wilhelmi: They certainly are. And I have to say that our newest media folks
that tried very, very hard -- it’s predominantly the editorial boards that are quite out of
line and continue even as recent as day before yesterday in putting incorrect figures out
there. They can do what they have to do, but it isn’t going to slow this effort down. They
just have to do what they have to do. You’ll be happy to know that our largest tenant,
Garrett Aviation, recently opened their $2.6 million test engine cell, and that is a very
big, big, big event. They now can test any kind of an aircraft from a 737 on down. Now
what does that mean to the rest of us? You, I’m sure, have been reading that most
communities are employing regional jets for point-to-point service. This is the shift in
aviation that is really positioning Augusta, Georgia, very well to be on the receiving end
of the growth in the coming years. Garrett, who you may recall several years ago, this
3
body had to become active in in keeping for Augusta, thankfully, is positioned to
establish itself as a one-stop maintenance facility, and that is why we’re building this
aircraft power plant and maintenance school at Augusta Technical College. It means to
you folks that you will have more tax dollars on the tax digest, that we are growing the
business out there, as we should. Similarly, they have the possibility of drawing a paint
and upholstery shop that would double the employment base there. So Garrett, anytime
you run into somebody from Garrett, please thank them for having remained in Augusta,
and we want their business. We want their national headquarters in Augusta, Georgia, if
we can drag them here. Similarly, the Richmond County Development Authority has a
good bit of land straight out, across the street from where the new Water Treatment Plant
will be, and the goal is to partner with the Richmond County Development Authority to
start developing that land. The overriding goal from the airport standpoint is to establish
it firmly as an activity center. It will be a place that people come to get on planes, but it
will also be a place to have lunch, meetings, teleconferencing, many, many functions not
previously designed. Many people don’t comprehend just yet what a positive it is, and
perhaps you’re not even aware, our city is blessed to have all seven -- out of the seven
trunk lines for high-speed, fiber-optic internet capability -- running through it. Four of
those seven run right down the railroad right-of-way on the western perimeter of the
airport. What does that mean? That means again we have many, many exciting
opportunities to exploit for employment possibilities there, further establishing the airport
as an activities center. I could go on for the next three weeks, as George well knows,
and I’m going to accommodate his request, but I do feel compelled, if you would, to the
last page. What do we need from this body? We’ve enjoyed over the last 2-1/2 years
phenomenal support from our department heads, from our Administrator, from our
Mayor, and certainly from all of you. But the time has now come that we have jumped
through enough of these hoops and we are now getting reinforcement from all quadrants
that we are on the right path. 912 days to build the biggest construction project ever
attempted in this county is now long. It scares, and should scare, the fool out of
everybody. The point is this: that this airport has to operate more like the business it is,
competing with other cities around us, than it does the municipal body we’ve treated it as
for many years. And while we’re still working with all of you, what does that mean? I
think it’s becoming very apparent to our staff members that we are going to have to find
ways to streamline how it is we work with this body. Things like shortening the process
of, you know, for instance Ken Kraemer gets paid a whole lot of money, but if he has to
come downtown every two weeks -- and we will be coming downtown every two weeks
under the current scenario -- we could very well dominate your docket. I don’t have an
answer, but we’re certainly asking a question that we need an answer to fairly shortly,
and that is how do we streamline to your comfort level and to ours also the process of
getting approvals for things? It is extremely important. Mr. Persaud came from
Savannah. We have begun discussions with him to explore these very questions. We
don’t have answers. We’re certainly looking to find out what it is you want from us in
the future to maintain the comfort level you currently have or to even make it a greater
comfort level. One possibility might be this: that once we know what this terminal
facility is going to cost, that we pre-approve the lump sum and allow us to receive on
behalf of the city the grant monies to support that. It’s not likely we’re going to turn
down grant monies on a platter. Another possibility, Richard, we talked about this real
4
briefly several weeks ago, might be to establish an executive committee who would
provide input. Don’t have the answers, but in the coming weeks we very much would
like to engage in conversations with you about this topic to figure out how it is we chew
this elephant. The elephant is huge. Lots of decisions coming down. We want you to
feel like you have the opportunity to ask any and all questions, but again, we’re going to
have to cross that bridge. Are there any questions? We are just thrilled with our staff.
The staff is unbelievable.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: I don’t have a question, but I do have a comment. You just
confirmed what we been talking about over the years, that candy scenario. If you build
an airport, people will come. If you put candy down, ants going come. That’s the same
thing. And what I been hearing from Ken and from your staff, I applaud y’all. I know
it’s a hard job. I know you try to make change. People don’t like that. But we’re the
second-largest city in this state and now our airport is getting on that radar screen to be
that, and I think we going to see overwhelmingly growth coming through Augusta in the
next few years. But we’ve got to get aggressive. We can’t sit back and do it like we been
doing it.
Ms. Wilhelmi: We can’t wait for it to come to us.
Mr. Williams: I just want to thank all y’all, Ken, you and your staff and the
Airport Commission board for doing a good job and staying with it.
Ms. Wilhelmi: Thank you on their behalf.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: I would just like to say to the leadership out there at the airport,
which is a fantastic group of folks who are very aggressive, Commissioner Williams,
especially Chairman, Vice Chairman, and the Director over there, and the marketing
people. They do a fantastic job out there, and I can assure you with the leadership that
we have out there, we will have an airport, and we will have carriers coming in here, and
we will have business people come in who can come in, do their business, and get out
and get home for dinner. Thank you for being our there. I’m proud to be a part of it.
Ms. Wilhelmi: Thank you. Thank you for all your support. We’re proud of that
as well.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: If the aviation administration will develop a list of elements within
this road map that we need to go, I know with the staff that we have in place with our
Administrator and our staff, we will find ways to streamline and improve the process to
enable us to spend less time shuffling papers and making transits and more time in
5
productive work. And I also wanted to go on record as saying that if it were easy,
everybody would do it. You guys have demonstrated more courage, more fortitude, and
more determination on behalf of this city, than anybody I know. And especially you have
taken a great deal of heat, unreasonable heat. Thank you for your courage and your
determination to make this a great city.
Ms. Wilhelmi: Thank you, Andy. Appreciate it very much. We’ll let y’all get on
to your real business.
Mr. Mayor: Marci, I want to thank you and Ken and Kathryn and Ernie.
Anybody else from the airport out there? Just wanted to thank y’all for this report today.
Ms. Wilhelmi: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor:
It’s good news and it looks like some of the best days are yet ahead
Gentlemen,I’ve just been conferring with the
for Augusta Regional Airport.
Attorney and I’ve been advised so that they can go ahead and do the paperwork and
receive the $759,004, we need a motion today to accept that grant.
Mr. Williams: I so move.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Discussion? All in favor, please
vote aye.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: We have previously approved the other two grants, so you guys are
ready to go to work. Thank you. That brings us to our consent agenda. Madame Clerk,
you want to take care of the alcohol licenses and any others you need to read out at this
point?
The Clerk
: Yes, sir. For a matter of record, sir, Commissioner Bobby
Hankerson will not be in attendance at today’s meeting. He’s attending training classes
Our consent agenda consists of items 1 through 13. And for the benefit of
in Athens.
any objectors to the alcohol petitions, once I read the petition request and the
location, if there are any objectors, would you please signify your objection by
raising your hand?
PUBLIC SERVICES:
1. Motion to approve a request by Edna Allen for an on premise consumption
Liquor license to be used in connection with County Line 2000 located at 3379
Gordon Hwy. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee
June 21, 2002)
6
2. Motion to approve a request by Earnie L. Bentley for an on premise
consumption Beer license to be used in connection with The Hideaway Lounge
located at 3165 Gordon Hwy. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public
Services Committee June 21, 2002)
The Clerk: Are there any objectors?
Mr. Mayor: None are noted, Madame Clerk. Gentlemen, what’s your pleasure
with respect to the consent agenda?
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion to approve and it’s been seconded. Would you like to pull
any items?
Mr. Mays: Item number 5, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Number 5. Mr. Mays, thank you.
Mr. Cheek: Item 12, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Number 12 for Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Williams: Number 3, Mr. Mayor, I need some clarification on item number
3.
Mr. Mayor: Number 3 for Mr. Williams. Any others?
PUBLIC SERVICES:
1. Motion to approve a request by Edna Allen for an on premise consumption
Liquor license to be used in connection with County Line 2000 located at 3379
Gordon Hwy. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee
June 21, 2002)
2. Motion to approve a request by Earnie L. Bentley for an on premise
consumption Beer license to be used in connection with The Hideaway Lounge
located at 3165 Gordon Hwy. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public
Services Committee June 21, 2002)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
3. Deleted from the consent agenda.
PUBLIC SAFETY:
7
4. Motion to approve the purchase of licenses for Microsoft desktop
applications and server products. (Approved by Public Safety Committee June 21,
2002)
5.Deleted from the consent agenda.
FINANCE:
6. Motion to approve refund to Oree M. Taylor of 2000 taxes paid in error in
the amount of $712.35 on Map 59-1, Parcel 385. (Approved by Finance Committee
June 21, 2002)
7. Motion to approve refund to Eddie J. Robinson of 1999 and 2000 taxes paid
in error in the amount of $500.53 on Map 71-2, Parcel 208. (Approved by Finance
Committee June 21, 2002)
8. Motion to approve the acquisition of Four (4) Pumper Fire Trucks for the
Augusta Fire Department from Harless Fire Equipment Company of Bessemer,
Alabama for the amount of $1,179,000.00 (lowest bid offer on Bid 02-048).
(Approved by Finance Committee June 21, 2002)
9. Motion to approve letter of intent between Richmond County Public
Facilities, Inc., Richmond County Board of Health and Beacon Blue, LLC, incident
to the purchase and lease of property located at 1914 North Leg Road. (Approved
by Finance Committee June 21, 2002)
ENGINEERING SERVICES:
10. Motion to approve award of low bid from Consolidated Electrical
Distributors in the amount of $59,597.00 for the replacement equipment of the
Motor Control Center (MCC) at Water Treatment Plant 2. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee June 21, 2002)
11. Motion to approve award of contract to APAC, Inc in the amount of
$679,985.00 subject to the receipt of signed contracts and proper bonds for the
Resurfacing Various Roads, Phase II Project (CPB#324-04-201824044). (Approved
by Engineering Services Committee June 21, 2002)
12. Deleted from the consent agenda.
PETITIONS & COMMUNICATIONS:
13. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission
held June 18 and Special Called meeting held June 21, 2002
Mr. Mayor: Okay, requested to pull items 3, 5 and 12. We have a motion to
approve the consent agenda minus those items. All in favor of that motion, please vote
aye.
Motion carries 9-0. [Items 1-2, 4, 6-11, 13]
Mr. Mayor: Let’s take up item 3, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
8
3. Motion to enter a contract with Paper Handling Solutions, Inc. to
update/replace obsolete printing equipment in the Print Shop on Government
Lease-Purchase Assignment of $3,117/month for 60 months at a total cost of
$159,000 with $10,000 funded from Contingency Fund. (Approved by
Administrative Services Committee June 21, 2002)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. [inaudible] once bid, twice shy. I’ve got
a problem with entering any contract, Jim, we talked about that, my not really knowing
what I’m entering into or what I’m voting on. Can somebody tell me a little bit about this
contract other than the lease and purchase stuff? What’s new, what’s different, what’s
not in here? A flag flew up. I just want to get some clarification, that’s all.
Mr. Wall: I assume the question is related to the fact that the actual contract itself
is not in the agenda book. It is a lease/purchase contract which is a financing document.
It’s a bank-prepared document for the most part. We do review it and we do make
certain modifications insofar as some indemnities and penalties are concerned, but it is a
financing document that we often use, depending upon the lending institution insofar as
equipment purchases of this magnitude.
Mr. Williams: But, Jim, why wasn’t that in the agenda so we could -- now we
probably wouldn’t have understood it, I probably had to come to you anyway to get it
explained, but at least I would have -- it would have been something that was in there, but
is there any reason we don’t show that in here, for legal reasons? Somebody going to --
Mr. Wall: No, there’s no reason that it was not included. We just -- typically I
don’t know that they generally put those contracts in the agenda book.
Mr. Williams: Well, when you talking about approving a contract and this just
my own little pet peeve, Jim, but when you talking about approving a contact and you
don’t know what’s there, I mean I can’t sit here and vote for a contract and I don’t know
what -- you know what I’m saying? That ain’t just with this, that’s with anything, any
other contract coming through I’m going to have the same question. I’m not going to
approve a contract that I have not seen, that, you know, I don’t know what the contract
consists of.
Mr. Wall: Mr. Williams, I understand your concern. However, I would point out
that with -- it apparently was included in some copies. I did not see it in mine.
Mr. Williams: Well, okay, so -- so what you’re saying is even if it was in there --
Mr. Wall: I’m sorry. It is in there.
Mr. Williams: If it’s in here and signed, then --
9
Mr. Wall: It’s not signed.
Mr. Mayor: It’s not signed.
Mr. Williams: Okay. Then if you approve a contract which is not signed, and the
contract is voted on --
Mr. Wall: Then it’s handled, as far as execution, we route it through the process.
Mr. Williams: How will I know what I voted on?
Mr. Kuhlke: It’s in the book.
Mr. Williams: But it ain’t signed. I mean that’s a piece of paper. That’s telling
me to sign a blank check.
Mr. Wall: We’re not authorized to sign it until y’all approve it.
Mr. Mayor: I can only sign what you’ve approved.
Mr. Williams: I understand, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: You don’t make any changes after you approve it.
Mr. Williams: I understand, Mr. Mayor. But I’m saying that if, if, if the contract
is what it saying here on item 3, the amount of money, it may not go over that, change
that, but I’m leery of these contracts and I just wanted to get a clarification on what the
contract was.
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, if I may. Commissioner Williams, in the lease itself, it
does have the dollars amount as they are in the agenda. So once you approve it, those
dollar amounts cannot change, nor can the terms and conditions of the agreement change.
Mr. Wall: Let me address that. The current process is for the various department
heads and agencies to submit agenda items with proposed contracts. Now some
departments do route the contracts through my office in advance of putting it on the
agenda. But most of the time, the agenda item is presented, the proposed contract is
entered into, and then the contracts come to me to be initialed before they are signed by
the Mayor. Many times I make changes in those contracts, not insofar as the financial
terms are concerned, but insofar as protections for the county. For instance, this is one
that I am likely to make some changes and would initial. And specifically, if you look at
the indemnification paragraph and the tax indemnity paragraph, in particular, and also the
paragraph one, insofar as late payment penalties are concerned, and if you look at
paragraph number 20 where you waive a right to trial by a jury, I strike those paragraphs.
Strike some of the language in those paragraphs. Now that happens a lot with contracts.
And now I would hope that you would depend upon your staff and me as the Attorney to
10
go through that process and review them. The alternative is that it is going to slow the
process down for every contract to be routed through my office before it’s approved by
you. But those are the type changes that I look at and review and go through. And if you
want a copy of every contract, I mean the engineering contracts, by the time you get the
specifications, etc., I mean some of those are 1-1/2” to 2” thick. I don’t think you want
the Clerk’s office having to copy all of those documents to get to you for each and every
engineering contract. And so I would hope that y’all would -- we want to give y’all the
information that you need to be sure you’re comfortable in voting on what is before you,
but by the same token, to require that every contract, to include all of the specifications,
etc., be included in your agenda book, y’all are going to have a mountain of paperwork.
A mountain of paperwork comes through my office to be reviewed.
Mr. Williams: Jim, I was not recommending that, but I did want to question it
because I needed some clarification. And I been bit one time with this, and you heard me
say this.
Mr. Wall: All right. I think the one y’all have in mind as far as being bitten by, it
wasn’t that -- it was just simply for the fact that y’all didn’t get anything to look at, and it
was -- it was what I would call a rare occurrence, and it was not a contract. And I keep
pointing out that that was not a contract. And so I would hope that y’all would rely upon
your staff and me as your Attorney as being the one responsible for it, not to tie our
hands, to look at these contracts and make the necessary changes to protect the city.
Mr. Williams: That’s all I got, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Any further discussion? We’ll entertain a motion to approve item
number 3.
Mr. Shepard: I so move.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Further discussion? All in favor, please vote aye.
Mr. Williams abstains.
Motion carries 8-1.
Mr. Mayor: Next item is number 5, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
5. Motion to approve an amendment to existing current contract with Prison
Health Services, Inc. for expanded mental health services funded with current
allocation and a Notice not to extend contract beyond December 31, 2002. The
expansion will provide a full time (40 hours per week) social worker and eight hours
11
per week psychiatric physician services. (Approved by Public Safety Committee
June 21, 2002)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays?
Mr. Mays: Yes, Mr. Mayor. The reason why I had it pulled -- let me state first
I’m going to vote for the motion and I know that we’ve got to do it. I was out of the --
I’m not on Public Safety but I was out of the room when the committee was meeting at
that time, and I was noticing in the backup -- question first, and then a comment. The
question: did we make a decision on where the funding was going to come from in order
to do this? Because I noticed it was brought up that it might come out of contingency,
and then at one point it was saying it was going to come out of existing Sheriff’s
Department operations, and I was wondering if that’s clear yet. It’s going to have to be
done, but I’m wondering is it clear in terms of where it’s coming from. That’s my
question.
Mr. Mayor: The backup information assigns it to contingency, Mr. Mays. Is that
correct, Mr. Kolb?
The Clerk: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: The backup says contingency.
The Clerk: They pointed that out in committee. Mr. Shepard asked [inaudible].
Mr. Kolb: It can come out of your budget.
Mr. Mayor: The question is where is it coming from?
Mr. Williams: [inaudible]
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, it can come out of the
current allocation of the Sheriff’s budget, we’ll work to identify the funds.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays?
Mr. Mays: I just wanted the clarity of just where. I’m gong to have to vote for it,
but I want to know -- I don’t really want to know whether it can, I want to know whether
it is. Because I’m going crossed signals out here. I got my finance office over here of
where we loaded up in the Sheriff’s Department, I got Sheriff’s Department maybe
thinking it’s coming out of contingency, and I got the Administrator saying it’s coming
out of their existing budget. I just would like, before I vote one way or the other -- and
I’m going to vote for it because I think it’s too tough not to vote for it because part of
what we’ve gotten out of under federal court order depends on what we do in medical in
terms of Sheriff’s Department, so we’ve got to do it. But I think it ought to be clear in
terms of if you’re going to add on something to do something of that magnitude, even
12
though we know we’ve got to do it, it just ought to be a clear, traceable line of the paper
trail as to where it goes back to. Because when I read the minutes of the committee
meeting, it does state that it would have to come out of contingency, but then the bottom
line under that it says will come out of the existing Sheriff’s Department budget but it
ends there in terms of the discussion. So I’m just asking today where does it come from?
And I think before we can really take action to make it legal, you have to define a place
in terms of where the money is coming from. That’s the only thing I wanted to get, Mr.
Mayor, on the clarity of where the money is coming from. I’m ready to vote for it, but I
just want to know where it’s going to come from.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb?
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, if you would approve this
based on the fact that we’d take it out of contingency if necessary, we’ll be okay. But
we’ll try and identify the funds within the existing Sheriff’s account, if that’s okay with
the Commission.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays?
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Mays: I will vote, but I wanted Mr. Wall to get back in here for my other
comment. Mr. Cheek, if you could get him back in here one second, because I think this
is something, Mr. Mayor, that we need to -- Jim, the reason why I asked you to come
back in, I hadn’t raised the question yet. But I think in fairness to the Sheriff’s
Department, and this is not a blame thing on anybody, but I think it ought to be stated for
the record. When we change this contract and there were concerns, and obviously you
have to make amendments from time to time, but I cannot express to all of us the delicacy
of how quick, and particularly with overcrowding, we can get back under a federal court
order very quickly. And everything that is not spelled out, even though it’s not down to
the T and to the letter, Mr. Mayor, it is imperative that the medical portion of this be
followed, because it will trigger action from the federal court quicker than anything else,
even quicker than overcrowding. So we’ve got to do it. So I mean I don’t mind
supporting that in this type of action to do what the Administrator is saying, but I think in
every other action, from the time something leaves committee, to the time it gets to this
Commission floor, there should be a defined mechanism for where money is going to
come out of. Because it should be clear. I mean we’re not -- substitute motions are very
good, but I think once they reach this point, and you’re going to take them from
somewhere, then I think it ought to be settled by the time it gets out here to this body as
to where money is going to come from. Because it’s not a game of Monopoly. It’s real
money. And when you authorize Finance to take it out of a category, this one will either
come out of the city’s contingency, or it will go back into the Sheriff’s Department and
you will ask them to deal with something, and then they’ll have to decide whether or not
they can deal with it or whether they can’t. But I bring this up again because I’m
13
noticing, Jim, and I wanted him in here, Mr. Mayor, are we saying when we do this and
we increase this right now to add this on, that we will not be -- and I assume you’re not
extending the contract back to this company, then I assume we are not accepting any
proposals from them, then, to do anything past December 31?
Mr. Wall: That’s correct. There is RFP [inaudible] December 31. Now this
company may have the best proposal, but we wanted to get other prices and other
options.
Mr. Mays: Well, I guess that’s what I was trying to find out. [inaudible] the
contract will not be extended, but it could be then hypothetically, it could be another
contract that’s extended?
Mr. Wall: Awarded.
Mr. Mays: Okay. Mr. Mayor, my only comment to that, and I’m certainly going
to vote for the motion because of the seriousness of the nature of it, but I again, as when
we awarded this contract to this same company, and when the Sheriff’s Department at
that time had its reservations and fears, which they expressed, but we dealt with the bid
process and we were dealing with numbers, but I would ask all of us to be very careful
that, to look and to make sure that we are dealing apples to apples and oranges to oranges
because this is not one that does not -- that just depends totally on numbers, and we may
have to look at it for what is best and will keep us out a multi-million-dollar situation, we
could, like the Goodwrench formula, we pay it now, we pay it later. We are going to
have to look at what is best and suit that so that we are not under that eye of that court
doctoring again. We took a long while to get it out. The previous company who was
there worked very hard to get us into compliance, got us under a situation whereby we
were accredited, got us out of the dog fight, and then we got to -- and I wish it had never
happened -- into a numbers game. And it was voted on because it was the lowest bid, per
se. But it definitely, I think, has proven more than one time that this has not been the best
bid situation to happen there at the jail. And I just wanted to make that early on for the
record, and I think that when it does come up at the end of this contract, we need to be
mindful of the consequences that we can be under in terms of -- I say this particularly for
my new [inaudible] friends, if you ain’t been in federal court and dealing with a judge
with a jail, and right now when we also exploring the possibilities of having to deal with
an expansion, whether we want to or not, if we deal with this medical and keep it under
control, it may help us not to have to do the other, along with some other things, and I
just want to throw that out for the record, Mr. Mayor, that this is something that we have
to seriously take under consideration. It is not one that we can play a numbers game with
because it means more than that. And I’ll vote for it because of its importance and what
we have to do.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Mays. Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Thank you. Mr. Mays, I’m always grateful for the verbatim
minutes. We have that from the committee. I’m also grateful for the Clerk when she
14
knows to stop my motioning and start my questioning. So my first motion, was I said I
moved we accept the first amendment to the contract as recommended by Chief Toole.
Then Lena correctly observed that I didn’t see a funding source and I speculated that it
would have to come from contingency and asked George the question. George then
responded, said we could probably fund it within the current allocation of the Sheriff’s
Department, so the motion that I next made was I move we accept the first amendment to
the contract as recommended by Chief Toole, funded within the current allocation, and
that we follow the Attorney’s recommendation by giving notice of termination of the
contract 12/31/02, and that we start the process to obtain a new provider, which would be
the RFP process. And that was seconded by Mr. Beard. And that’s what the committee
passed. I was indicating my willingness to, if necessary, dip into the contingency fund,
but I think it’s important that when we have that kind of motion to come before the
committee, that between the committee and when it gets up here, our financial impact
statement ought to be decided between the Sheriff and the Administration. So I put the
same motion before this body that I put before the committee. It worked before, so I
move that we accept the committee’s actions.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Further discussion? Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just two items. In any requests for
proposals, I want us to make sure we include performance criteria in that. I understand
from staff members that quality and performance may be issues that we want to look into
under any future contract. And secondly, just as a reminder and a heads-up to this body,
and to the public, the latest Grand Jury presentment that I saw discussed staffing levels at
our local jail as being between 80 and 90 people below adequate numbers to fully cover
those areas, to protect both our employees and to provide adequate services as required
by federal law for these inmates, and that this is something that we may be faced to deal
with this coming budget season, to bring those staffing levels up to whatever is required
by federal law. But that was a part of the latest presentment from the Grand Jury and it’s
something for us to consider for the future.
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Anything further? Mr. Kuhlke?
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to propose a substitute motion that we
accept the recommendation of the committee; however, if the funds are not
available in the Sheriff’s budget that we take those funds out of contingency.
Mr. Boyles: I’ll second that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Substitute motion with a second. Discussion on the substitute
motion?
15
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Clarification.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Kuhlke’s motion says we get it out of the Sheriff’s funding
and if it’s not available then we go to contingency? Is that your motion, Bill?
Mr. Kuhlke: Yes, sir.
Mr. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Further discussion?
Mr. Williams: So it is designated out of the Sheriff’s, and if it is not there, then
we go to somewhere else?
Mr. Kuhlke: Go to contingency.
Mr. Williams: Go to contingency. Mr. Mays, does that answer your question?
Mr. Mayor: Anything further on the substitute motion? We’ll call the question
on the substitute motion.
Mr. Mays: I ain’t going to jail, I’m going to vote for both motions.
(Laughter)
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the substitute motion, please vote aye.
(Vote on substitute motion)
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair would note the substitute motion did not include the --
follow the Attorney’s recommendation to give notice of termination of the contract and to
reopen the RFP process, so it is incumbent upon this Commission, I assume we need to
action on those items, too. Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Wall: The recommendation of the committee, and that was part of the
recommendation.
Mr. Mayor: The substitute motion --
16
Mr. Kuhlke: Was to accept the recommendation of the committee.
Mr. Mayor: All right. The Chair stands corrected. All right. Move on to item
number 12.
The Clerk:
12. Motion to approve a proposal from Cranston, Robertson & Whitehurst, P.C.
to provide design services for the Rae’s Creek Relief Sewer Project. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee June 21, 2002)
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, the reason I asked to bring this up is I’ve tried to walk
down many of our major trunk lines, those that I can get to without a bulldozer. And I
noticed that in one of my opportunities to be around the Augusta National and the
Augusta Country Club area that we have a sewer manhole cover there that has sand bags
stacked on top of it, presumably to hold that down in case we get into a surcharge
situation where we’re actually putting, pressurizing the sewer lines. The reason I asked
this with number 12, and this deals with the Rae’s Creek Relief Sewer Project, are we out
of the surcharge realm on these sewers? Do we have adequate capacity to flow under
peak conditions? Are we approaching those conditions now? Is this a remedy or do we
still have a long way to go?
Mr. Cheek: Yes to all. It’s a long way to go. This is one of the major first steps.
We have taken a lot of steps in the Rae’s Creek basin. But this is the real major step that
needs to be taken. Estimate construction at about $8 million, so it’s going to fix any
problems in the trunk line area. But as far as being out of the surcharge area, no, we’re
not. We did construct something just prior to the National, around the first of the year we
built a little bypass that could relieve the system and actually work a lot better than we
thought. It actually got a siphon mode out of it as well, which we weren’t expecting. But
that has helped relieve any possibility of surcharging. We still are under some EPD
guidelines in that basin. They’re watching us. We’re under a moratorium with adding to
the sewer system in the area. So this is something we’re really being told to do and it’s
important that we do get it done as soon as possible.
Mr. Cheek:
I can imagine with the proximity of that particular manhole, which
was probably 50 yards from the gates there at hole number 12, on the Augusta National,
that we could dump hundreds of thousands of gallons of sewer into Rae’s Creek, and that
would cause some pretty major finage if that occurred. So my main concern is that we
A motion to approve.
are working away from that problem, and it sounds like we are.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Further discussion? All in favor then please vote aye.
Motion carries 9-0.
17
Mr. Mayor: That takes us to item number 14.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES:
14. Consider recommendation(s) from Attorney and Risk Management
regarding sewer situation at 508 Hillwood Circle. (No recommendation from
Engineering Services June 21, 2002)
Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Who’s got that? Mr. Boyles?
Mr. Boyles:
Mr. Mayor, I asked this item be placed on the agenda at our
committee meeting and also to be brought back here. Since that time, I have met with
Mr. Cheek and I have met with the complainant, Mr. Peek, and some new information
And Irespectfully ask that we delay this
has come up that we’re going to look into.
until our next meeting and give us time to relook and revisit that situation up there
and Mr. Peek is in agreement with that.
Mr. Cheek and Mr. Peek.
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and second. Discussion? All in favor then please vote aye.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: The next item is number 15.
The Clerk:
15. Motion to authorize condemnation of 188.45 acres of land from Leroy H.
Simkins, et al.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Wall?
Mr. Wall: Mr. Mayor, if I could, I have been handed a letter that Pat Rice has
requested go into the record. And they are questioning the appropriateness of taking the
entire 188 acres that we’re seeking to condemn.
Mr. Mayor: Would Mr. Rice like to be heard at the appropriate time today?
Mr. Wall: [inaudible] to demonstrate why we are in fact asking that the entire 188
acres be condemned. This was a design/build project, and so therefore there were various
plats that were prepared insofar as getting a maximum price for the project. Part of that
18
was that we submitted a plat that did not show taking the land on, fronting on Old
Savannah Road, which would have given a smaller pond -- it’s called a detention pond --
detention pond for the water. In pricing that out, it was discovered that in order to waste
the dirt, because the topography of the land you have to dig these ponds, that it would
take $1.8 million just to dispose of the soil off site. However, we could use that soil and
build the larger pond that had been hoped for in the original concept, to build a berm
around this so that you would get a much larger pond, and that cost would actually be less
than taking the water off, taking the soil off site. In other words, construction of the
pond, the smaller ponds -- to build the pond would cost $4 million. To dispose of the soil
would be another $1.8 million, for a total of $5.8 million. Whereas, to build the berm and
construct the larger pond would only cost $5 million. So we are actually saving $800,000
by building the bigger pond. And so therefore we do submit that it is appropriate to take
the entire tract and we urge the Commission to authorize condemnation of that larger
area.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Rice, would you like to be heard?
Mr. Rice: If I may.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Please come up here.
Mr. Rice: Thank you. I apologize to you gentlemen. I did not know that this was
going to be on the agenda today and I’ll just take a moment. The owners of this property,
the Simkins family -- and I fault not the City Attorney or anyone else -- but we have not
ever been provided with the plans that have been discussed here with you today. We
think there are legitimate alternative plans for the development of this property for the
purpose the city intends, for the water treatment plant. But we have never been given the
opportunity to study any of the plans. We would like to have that opportunity and
present an alternative proposal. Now the reason for that, Mr. Mayor and gentlemen, is
simply that this is the entranceway into your city. This is where you drive straight out of
the airport and go up Tobacco Road and go to Highway 56. This is the entrance that
people are going to see when they come into our city. We think it’s most important what
type of presentation our city makes on that first glance, first introduction. We would like
to have the opportunity to say there is an alternative way to do this. We also think this is
very, very valuable property. It has high utilization. And I think the best and highest use
of it is going to be for commercial development, which we would like to do in an orderly
and progressive manner. We would like to preserve some of this property along the
frontage and develop a water treatment plant in back. This is a condemnation of 188
acres. We don’t think the city, in all fairness and in all honestly, needs that many acres
for this project and this development. I’m not prepared to present that to you in any
technical description today, but I would like the opportunity to do that. We have not been
given that opportunity. I fault no one for that. I think there is a little misunderstanding,
probably mainly mine, about where we were in the process. So what I would like to ask
the Commission to do is to simply table this and give us the opportunity to sit down with
the city Attorney and with the engineering staff and see if there is not an alternative
design which would accomplish their purposes, but also leave something there for the
19
family. This property has been in this family for a long time, and we would like to have
the opportunity to develop it at least in part, as we have envisioned over the years. So all
we’re asking for is a little time. We will act quickly. We will do it in 30 days, if that’s
the wishes of the city. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Wall? Just a minute, Mr. Kuhlke. Mr. Wall, could you speak to
the timeliness of this condemnation?
Mr. Wall: Again, the contract with Montgomery Watson was a design/build
contract. My understanding is that the guaranteed maximum price is supposed to be
finalized. It is hoped to bring that contract before the Commission at the first meeting in
August. It’s what I understand is coming forward. We need to have the land under
control so that we can move forward with that project as soon as we can. We have had
discussions with Mr. Rice. In our opinion, those discussions are not going to be fruitful.
The engineering firm and Utilities Department has identified this site as being the ideal
site for the water treatment plant. They have suggested land across the road. It is not as
desirable and compatible. This board has the discretion to certainly weigh and choose the
best site. This comes as a recommendation from the Utilities Department, as well as the
engineering consultant, that this is the most ideal site. I think that we’ve demonstrated
hopefully the need for the entire tract, rather than trying to carve off some on the frontage
on Old Savannah Road that he’s expressed a desire to keep. And we need the property,
and it makes more financial sense to acquire the entire property and with all due respect
to Mr. Rice, I’d ask the Commission to go ahead and approve the condemnation.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kuhlke?
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor, the thing that concerns me is the way Mr. Rice found
out about this is I happened to see Mr. Simkins at lunch and asked him if he was going to
be at the meeting, and he was totally unaware that this was on the agenda. And I don’t
think that’s right. I don’t think that’s treating somebody right that you are getting ready
to condemn 188 acres from. And the other thing is that Ms. Wilhelmi made her
presentation, she was very adamant about the economic development impact that airport
will have coming down Tobacco Road, and my personal opinion is economic
development is going to come more from the private sector than it is from the
governmental sector. I have no idea what sort of discussions. I know Mr. Revelle has
been working on this. He’s had with Mr. Rice. But I think that in all fairness that we
should give Mr. Rice and his client an opportunity to come back to us and see in fact
whether there is an alternative way to do this. Now if we’re going into a design/build
contract, I’m assuming that the plans have already been done on this. Otherwise, I don’t
know how you’re going to even estimate it. So we’ve gone a long way on the thing. But
I just think in fairness, when we’re talking about taking 188 acres of land, which is
valuable property, that I think we ought to give them the opportunity to see if they can
convince the engineering [inaudible] there may be some alternative way that they may be
able to keep some frontage on Tobacco Road. So I’d like to move that we table this until
our first meeting in August. Is that too long?
20
Mr. Wall: Yes.
Mr. Kuhlke: Can you be ready in two weeks, Pat?
Mr. Rice: Any time you can give us.
Mr. Kuhlke: At our next meeting and see if they can convince us to change our
mind or we go ahead with this.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to that motion?
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, is it in order to put in a substitute motion to table?
Mr. Mayor: Well, in order to -- it would be a motion to postpone as opposed to
table. Motion to table would be at the end of this meeting.
Mr. Kuhlke: Okay. To postpone.
Mr. Mayor: So if you’d like to make a substitute motion, you’re in order.
Mr. Cheek
: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I’d like to make a substitute motion. We’ve talked
about the master plan now since I’ve been on Commission. It’s been in numerous public
meetings. We are in desperate need of the 20,000,000 to 40,000,000 gallons of water that
this particular facility will deliver. Tobacco Road and this particular area has Amoco
Polymers and several other major heavy industrial companies located there. There are
also several empty buildings there that are used for different businesses. I believe there is
U.S. Battery next to that. Retail has not developed on that Tobacco Road corridor. Quite
the contrary. It’s heavy industry. We are in desperate need of building this facility as
soon as possible. I know discussion of it has been listed in all forms of the media. It is a
shame that we have to condemn anyone’s property, but the fact of the matter is, is the
I’d make a substitute
need of the many in this case outweigh the needs of the few.
motion that we authorize condemnation and that we proceed with building this
water system as we promised the people in the time frame we promised them.
That’s my motion, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to that motion?
Mr. Williams: Second, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Motion and second. Mr. Beard, you had your hand up?
21
Mr. Beard: I was just thinking, Mr. Mayor, [inaudible] substitute motion on it,
I’ll just let it speak for itself. The only thing I would say in reference to that is that I can
understand both sides and I can understand if he has not been notified that maybe he
should have been. But like Andy, it’s kind of hard to believe that as much as this has
been talked about. My second point would be in reference to if we need this plant. I
know we can talk about the airport, we can talk about the gateway, we talk about other
things. But I think we have to list our priorities here. And if it’s necessary, like our
Attorney has asked us to move forward on this, I think that in his mind he must have felt
that he’s given everybody ample opportunity to look at this and do whatever is necessary.
So those are the points I was going to apply to the substitute motion, but I guess we can
go on and vote at this time.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Beard. Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I heard the Attorney say we were going to consider the design/build
on the first meeting of August, so I can’t see how this slows down the process. I think it
we moved it past the first meeting in August to the second meeting it August it would
slow down the project. I feel like we should have some opportunity here, if we can avoid
condemnation and avoid litigation, we should avoid it and the attendant expenses. But I
see two weeks is not excessive, and if were more than that I wouldn’t vote for it. But I
think we can give the parties a chance to work it out. If they don’t, we can vote it up in
the same month it came up. It has not come through the committee process, I noted, so
it’s the first time on the agenda for anybody, and I just think we should have that courtesy
extended to a potential condemnee so that a potential condemnee might become a seller.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Wall and then Mr. Bridges.
Mr. Wall: If I can respond, it was on the committee agenda and was, in fact,
approved by the committee, but to come out because I did want to make a presentation as
far as the necessity of acquiring the entire 188 acres. I knew that there had been
discussion with Mr. Simkins and Mr. Rice about the necessity of taking the complete 188
acres, and anticipate that they may very well want to challenge the taking of the entire
amount. That’s the reason that I wanted to put in the record that there is actually an
$800,000 savings in construction of the project by taking the entire acreage that we’re
requesting. The second thing, insofar as the delay of the project, understand that when
y’all approved the second part of the design-build contract, it will be to build. And there
would be a notice to proceed that is going to be dependent upon our having control of the
property. So we could not issue the notice to proceed until we did in fact have the
property under our control. And so it would delay the project if we waited, particularly,
until the first meeting in August to authorize the condemnation and frankly, a delay of
two weeks is going to push us to have control of the property. We’ve got to get the
condemnation filed, we’ve got to have a schedule for the special master that probably
may be some discovery that Pat wants to do, et cetera. So, in getting the special master
proceeding schedule, I think it’s going to push us to get it done, and that’s the reason
we’re moving forward and ask that it be done at this time.
22
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bridges?
Mr. Bridges: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Jim, was Mr. Rice or Mr. Simkins given
notice of what was involved here? I mean, I’m really concerned that we didn’t notify
him, and we’re taking this property.
Mr. Wall: They were not notified that we were going to have it on the agenda,
but, in fairness, we don’t usually notify anyone. I mean, we tell them that we’re going to
condemn the property. Or we pursue negotiations as far as we can, and when
negotiations come to a point where we don’t feel they’re fruitful, which happened in this
case, then we put it on the agenda to [inaudible] it.
Mr. Bridges: So there have been negotiations, then? This is not the first they’ve
heard of it?
Mr. Wall: No. Not at all.
Mr. Bridges: So, I mean, have we gone through the procedure in the past of
trying to acquire the property at a marketable price, and only then going through
condemnation?
Mr. Wall: We have gone through the discussion with them. First with Mr.
Simkins, insofar as trying to acquire the property at its appraised value. There’s then
been discussion about possibly looking at alternatives. We met with the Utilities
Department, we met the Engineering Department to consider whether or not there’s some
type of redesign or relocation. And all those avenues have been explored, both with the
engineering firm and with Utilities. And this is the site, and this is the acreage that we
need.
Mr. Bridges: Okay, but he’s telling me this is -- I mean, my understanding was,
this was the first thing -- we’re taking the property at all, but you’re telling me that’s not
the case at all.
Mr. Wall: No.
Mr. Bridges: It’s just he didn’t know it was on the -- we did not specifically tell
him it was on the agenda. We did tell him that we were going to condemn the property.
Is that the case?
Mr. Wall: We told him we wanted to acquire the property. He knew that
condemnation was an alternative. I personally did not have the discussion, so I don’t
want to say that we told him we were going to condemn the property, but it was always
understood, if it wasn’t expressly stated that if we could not negotiate a reasonable value,
that we would condemn.
23
Mr. Bridges: All right. If we hold it off for two weeks, is that going to hinder
anything in regards to construction?
Mr. Wall: I think it will for this reason. We cannot file the condemnation
proceeding until y’all authorize it. The next Commission meeting would be on Thursday,
July 18, and, because the Commission meeting is not going to be held on Tuesday. The
first Commission meeting in August is August 6, so we would have two weeks, to a day
or two, to get the condemnation filed, get the special master appointed, get the special
master hearing set, have a special master enter the award --
Mr. Bridges: How long does that normally take?
Mr. Wall: Up to 30 days, roughly 30 days.
Mr. Bridges: All right.
Mr. Mayor: All right, Mr. Mays, and then we’ll come back down here. Mr.
Boyles? Okay, Mr. Mays, and then Mr. Boyles.
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, I think normally, most of you know how I feel about
consolidation, I mean --
(Laughter)
Mr. Mays: Yeah, I dealt with one for 25 years, I’ve dealt with the other one more
recently, and I do think it should be used as a last resort effort, or whenever you’re
dealing with a negotiation. But I remind you that -- and I agree that the two weeks on the
surface, I don’t think will make a difference, from the standpoint that I don’t think you’re
going to solve anything in two weeks anyway. Because about 100 and some odd acres
and where it is, I assume it’s going to be a dogfight about it before it’s over with anyway.
So it’s going to be a lot said about it. But the point is, I think the attorney, if this had
been something that we were dealing with most recently, just popped up, and we’re using
a last resort effort to deal with it. But there will be time, once the filing is done, and I can
tell you this from personal experience, that once it’s filed, that’s when the real negotiating
starts. Because Mr. Wall will be pressed to sell the case of the City, in terms of the
importance and the need for this facility being built, being built on a timely basis and
everything else. And the importance of the magnitude of the community in particular, on
the south side of this county, in terms of what these people have suffered for for years,
and the continued growth that we’ve got, and with infrastructure still trying to catch up
with development. We’re putting building permits out, we’re putting subdivisions
together. We’re laying the work for them everyday, and we got folk that are building on
that side of town six figure homes that are still on septic tanks. That’s a deplorable
condition to be under. So I think you going have ample time to hear this thing go back
and forth, Jim, and I think the important thing is, when do we eventually get started. And
I think if the attorneys or if our attorney, and the owners of the property have been in this,
and not reached any type of agreement, whatsoever. And I agree, the property owner has
24
more than just a right to be compensated, to be compensated fairly, and also to present at
that particular time, what future plans are. If it’s to be an alternative economic
developmental project that’s on board or that will be done, that’s when you get into the
timeframe of doing it. But I think if you’re serious about providing water, then to a point,
two weeks does get to be important if you set a deadline. If you’re taking about saving
six figures of money. Now, also what comes into play in this deal, you mentioned about
the airport being next to it, well, then, if the airport have some alternative that they might
want to [inaudible] in that gate where, and want to do something with it. All of that
comes into play. But the point is, it does not get started until you do something, and what
our attorney is basically telling us in a nutshell, is that it’s been talked. It’s been talked a
lot. And it’s not going anywhere. That’s why it’s here. And gentlemen know
everybody that gets condemned does not get the benefit. I can tell you that from personal
experience, but I’m saying you’re going to be on the agenda. You get a Dear John letter.
And that’s what it say. And whether your property is valued high, or whether it’s valued
low, you get the same kind of letter. Because usually negotiations have already gone on,
and they get to this point, and they broken down. And I’m not a normal supporter of that
in terms of condemning property. [inaudible] maybe for a year or so, and [inaudible].
But I think to a point when you talk about water, its importance, what has to happen at
some point, sometimes the element of condemnation can be the blessing too. Because, if
nothing else makes you talk, condemnation makes folk talk. And both sides present. It
may come a fact that something else better arrives on the table, and, like Mr. Rice says, it
may mean that another alternative is reached. It may mean that special master award so
high that this body doesn’t want the property, but you will never reach that point sitting
around and talking about it. That is not going to happen. So I do think if you set
deadlines, whether they are artificial or whether they are for real, that if your attorney is
saying, hey, this is now reached and gone through all types of backroom negotiation. We
chatted about it by phone, in person, or whatever it might be, and I think if an apology is
due to say it, technicality, or whatever, it got find out to a point of a great [inaudible]
piece of paper. You know, that can be dealt with too, but obviously, Pat Rice and Jim
Wall are going to have a lot of conversation about this 185 [sic] acres that’s going to be
out there. The point is, do we start talking about it in a formal way, and do you use the
tool of condemnation to get folk to talking. If there’s an alternative proposal, then I say,
let it come forward. Let it come forward in the negotiations, but to sit here and have to
answer, and then somebody represents four districts, to a point, as to when do we answer
the question about water, then I do think that it does get to be important. It’s incumbent
that it moves past the arena to do it, and I think then we let the attorneys fight that out and
deal with it, and other alternatives -- Jim may come back gentlemen, and just quite
frankly tell us, hey, it’s going to be too high to deal with this in this negotiation. Then we
have to look at something else. But he will not be able to tell us even that in a worse way
unless you exercise the rights that you have in order to move a project like this forward.
And I’m prepared to support the motion for a condemnation.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Boyles?
25
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I thought that I heard in Mr. Rice’s remarks
to us that they were trying to save the frontage of the property. I thought that’s what I
heard.
Mr. Rice: [inaudible]
Mr. Boyles: Can we see on this end, Jim, what frontage he’s talking about?
Mr. Wall: Well, he was saying there’s not only this frontage but also this
frontage.
Mr. Boyles: Well, I guess my comment or question is, do the adjoining property
owners that may be to the rear, I say the rear of that, looking from here -- do we have to
have the frontage? I apologize for not being in on all the conversations because of my
newness here, but, as Mr. Kuhlke said, and as the Airport Commissioner said a while ago
about the economic development, and once it’s sold and turned into a water system
operation, then we don’t have the business or the economic impact that we could have
from the frontage if it goes to business to an overflow from the airport. Again, I would
kind of go along with waiting two weeks to try to find out if that has been the case, Mr.
Rice. If none of this has been brought to the Commission before, and I don’t know that it
has. I’m sure my colleagues do, but I don’t know that it has. But is it all needed, Mr.
Wall? The entire portion that you have outlined on your chart there, is it all needed?
Mr. Wall: Yes, sir. I mean, we have met on several occasions with the
engineering firm, as well as the Utilities Department, to analyze whether there was a
possibility of reducing the size. And, as I say, the property that we primarily heard
they’re being interested in keeping was a property on Old Savannah Road. That’s the
reason there was a plant prepared, which was carried around to a number of contractors in
order to get estimates for the purpose of preparing the guaranteed maximum price.
That’s when we discovered that it would cost a million-eight just to dispose of the soil,
and it made more sense to build the berm and get the larger pond that we wanted
originally, and actually save $800,000. So, yes, it has been looked at, at cutting down the
size of the take, or the property that would be acquired.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Boyles?
Mr. Boyles: Thank you. I guess, again, I’m just concerned about what could
happen with the economic development if all the good things that they keep talking about
are going to happen at the airport, I don’t really see that -- maybe as Commissioner
Shepard said, that if we could work out something on this part we may have a happier
customer who wouldn’t charge us as much for what we don’t need, but what we do need
on the back. [inaudible]
Mr. Wall: [inaudible] I’d be recommending that, but we’ve had discussions for
months, and their value on this property and our value on this property are so far apart
that I don’t see us ever getting together. With all due respect, they’ve asked for time to
26
load the guns, and if we ‘re going to have a fight on our hands, it’s a question of whether
we fight it immediately or whether we fight it 30 days from now.
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams and then Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don’t ever have much contact with
attorneys until I come to this Commission meeting with Jim or my counterpart, Mr.
Shepard. But if paying a lawyer to do a job, then we need to listen to that man we’re
paying. We sit here and talk about the economic impact that may happen and the things
that we want to do, but we talking about water. South Augusta is all we got left. We
can’t go to the river, we can’t west, so we got to go south. We have been promising and
promising and promising the people of that area that this was coming. Mr. Mays made it
plain when he said that nothing is going to happen till we make a step. I mean you can
stand in the sand all day long and point fingers, but until you step across the line, I mean
nobody is going do anything. It’s time for us to be men and make decision. I just learned
a course in politics and I tell people I’m not a politician. You can’t please everybody.
You got to do what’s right. You got to do what’s going to make this city grow. You
going have to do those things that people may not think is popular, but if they the right
decisions, then you got to stand on that. And we are always waiting until our backs are
up against the wall and then we talk about we got to come out swinging. We been talking
about this and we been talking about this and we been talking it. I’m going to support the
motion. I think we need to go ahead and make those steps. Two weeks, our Attorney
done told us what they going do to us. [inaudible] fight in a phone booth like Mr. Mays
like to do. We need to get ready. I mean what, what, what’s the holdup? I don’t
understand why we can’t do what is right to do. They done negotiated. Jim made it plain
they done talked about it and tried to come up with a price and they couldn’t do that, so
the next step is condemnation. I’m going to support the motion, Mr. Mayor, and I wish
we’d go ahead and vote. I’d like to give Commissioner Cheek the opportunity to speak
but after him to call for the question so we can vote on this issue.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Well, Mr. Cheek would like to be heard and so would Mr.
Shepard, so we’ll hear from Mr. Cheek and Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, just a few comments. We don’t have enough space at
Peach Orchard Road. We don’t have enough space on Highland Avenue where you have
the only major water production facility in the country with a major thoroughfare through
the center of it. This allows us to do what we promised we would do, would be build our
water system for the next 50 years as our forefathers did when they built the initial water
system for the city of Augusta. This property provides adequate space. There is
significant savings. It’s already developed heavy industry, so light retail and other
businesses are not likely to locate there. Along the Tobacco Road and Highway 56
corridor, in that area, there are 10 to 20 times the availability of vacant land that other
people could live in, buy in, develop. We’ve talked about this master plan for four years.
Let me remind everybody that we are under order from the State of Georgia to get off of
27
well water. This is the step that takes us in that direction. If we turned the shovel today,
it would take us at least two years to have water running through that plant, if not three.
That’s 2006. folks. We haven’t solved our water problems. We’ve stepped back from
the edge because we’ve given our people the tools to do it. We still do not have a surplus
of water for the people of south Richmond County, let alone the people of all of Augusta.
Delaying this, after we have had so many town hall meetings, so many discussions with
our Attorney, further delays, delays, delays, has this Commission not keeping the priority
that it set when it adopted the 2000 water master plan by saying we will fix this water
problem and we will fix it soon? Delays beget more delays beget more delays. I
encourage us to move forward with this. It’s already been in discussion. We need to
give our people the tools and the space to build it. They need this area. We need room to
grow. If we’re going to save again, as we did with our pumping station and the location
of our piping, millions of dollars in projects, if we can save another nearly million dollars
by utilizing this property, I think that 99.9% of the people in this city will be very proud
that we did that.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Well, Mr. Mayor, I don’t want to make a decision in haste that we
later regret. I understand we have to move forward. And I think we ought to table this
until after legal session so we deal with it today so we can ask some legal questions of
our Attorney rather than have them asked in the presence of opposing counsel. So I
would move we table it and add this matter to our legal session agency if that motion
would be in order.
Mr. Mayor: We can take a motion to table, and it does take precedence. Is there
a second to the motion to table? The motion dies for lack of a second. Is there any
further discussion on the substitute motion? We’ll vote on that first. Would anybody like
the substitute motion restated?
Mr. Beard: Yes, I would like to know what the substitute motion is.
Mr. Mayor: Please state it, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk: The substitute motion was to authorize the condemnation of the
188.45 acres of land from Mr. Leroy H. Simkins and proceed with the building of the
water plant.
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of that motion, please vote aye.
(Vote on substitute motion)
Mr. Kuhlke, Mr. Boyles and Mr. Shepard vote No.
Motion carries 6-3.
Mr. Mayor: That takes us to item number 16.
28
The Clerk:
ATTORNEY:
16. Motion to approve a request by Edward N. Johnson, Jr. for an on premise
consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with E J’s
Catering of Augusta located at 1543 Aviation Way. There will be Sunday Sales.
District 1. Super District 9.
Mr. Wall: If I may. I asked that this be put on the agenda. There’s some
corrections that I need to make. This was put on at my request while I was out of town
and I thank Mr. Larry Harris for drafting it. High Flight -- I had placed on your desk in
front of you the actual name of the business. High Flight Enterprises. And that is an
entity that has already been formed. The Aviation Commission has approved a lease
agreement with them. This is to facilitate the opening of a lounge there at the airport. I
realize that this comes to you in a little bit incomplete fashion, but I would ask that you
approve this. The local manager is present, Ms. Ivey. With Mr. Johnson being a non-
resident of Georgia, it was necessary that he designate a local manager for the license to
be placed in her name, so I would request that the Commission approve this license.
Mr. Beard: I move for approval.
Mr. Kuhlke: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and second. Discussion?
Mr. Williams: [inaudible] committee? I was not in committee.
Mr. Wall: It did not come through committee because I was frankly was unaware
that there was a problem in getting the license, but again, this is the lounge that is within
the airport itself. If this was not facilitating keeping the airport open and providing full
service, I would say run it through the committee. But because this is the lounge that is
actually inside the airport, and without this license it would be closed and so we are
penalizing the airport as opposed to penalizing the license holder. And so I would
request that we maintain the airport as having full service and having the lounge open.
Mr. Williams: So why didn’t it come through the committee in the beginning?
You said that it’s in the airport and you didn’t want to close it, but why didn’t the license
come?
Mr. Wall: I can’t answer that question other than I think that there was some
misunderstandings along the way insofar as what was going to be required to get the
license in his name and [inaudible] opened. Those misunderstandings, I don’t think came
from the county but came from other sources.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beard?
29
Mr. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I think I’m one of those Commissioners who is always
saying that things should go through the committee. I think there is an exception here
where we can do this. If this was a private entity, I think I would be voting, would not
have made the motion that I made. But since, you know, the airport is a part of us, in a
sense, I see no reason why we can’t make an exception here and go on with allowing
them to have this license and do it today instead of holding them up another two to three
weeks or maybe a month. It would have to go through committee and then bring it back
to the body, and I think we don’t need to the airport in that light.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Commissioner Beard, I don’t want to put
the airport through anything, either. But I’m thinking, I mean, Jim brought a ball and
[inaudible] another one, but if we going to do this thing, everybody ought to be playing
with the same ball. I mean the airport ought to know better than anybody else what they
[inaudible] and what they had to go through. And that’s no reflection on the applicant
and who is trying to do it. I’m in support. But I just think we ought to do everything like
we been doing. We, we talked about it, Jim, even that contract we talked about earlier. It
ought to go through committee like anything else.
Mr. Wall: As a general rule, I agree with you. I think there are some extenuating
circumstances here that there were some unanticipated problems in getting the license
which necessitated us going through this process. By then it was too late to get it on the
committee, and so I, since -- as Mr. Beard stated -- we’re helping ourselves. The
Aviation Commission is part of us, and so in that sense I felt it was worth a shot to try to
get it approved today without having the opportunity to go through committee. And it
was after -- I didn’t learn about the problem until after the committee had already met, so
I didn’t have a chance to have it added to the committee agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Wall, I appreciate everything you’ve said. We had a discussion
this week about bringing this directly to the Commission. But I would note that the
application was signed only yesterday, even though this was on the agenda for the
meeting today. We’ve got a procedure that we need to follow, and the city needs to
follow its own procedures, too, and the people we contract with and lease space to ought
to follow the procedures, too. And in the future, I would hope that we would try to be as
attentive to that as we possibly can. Is there any further discussion on this application?
All in favor of the application then please vote aye.
Mr. Williams abstains.
Mr. Bridges and Mr. Colclough vote No on Sunday sales portion.
Motion carries 8-1.
Mr. Bridges: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, Mr. Bridges?
30
Mr. Bridges: Ms. Bonner, could you record my No vote for the Sunday sales
portion of that application?
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Colclough: Likewise, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
17. OTHER BUSINESS.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Wall, did you have anything for our -- the item we carried over.
I’m sorry, we didn’t carry it over. That didn’t pass. Go ahead.
The Clerk: On the addendum agenda, do you want to do that item?
Mr. Mayor: I was going to see if we had anything for legal. If we don’t have
anything for legal --
The Clerk: Do you have anything for legal?
18. LEGAL MEETING.
Mr. Wall: I do have a real estate matter, as well as discuss pending litigation
matters.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Let’s go ahead and take up legal session and then we’ll
take up the addendum item when we come back in. We need a motion.
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Any objection? None heard.
Motion carries 9-0.
[LEGAL MEETING]
19. Motion to approve authorization for the Mayor to execute affidavit of
compliance with Georgia's Open Meetings Act.
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Kuhlke: Second.
31
Mr. Mays out.
Motion carries 8-0.
Addendum Item 1: Discuss department responses to citizens’ request. (Requested
by Commissioners Shepard and Boyles)
Mr. Shepard: In view of the lateness of the hour and some other data I
wanted to bring to the Commission’s attention, and I do appreciate your adding it in
my absence, I’d suggest we defer this to the next meeting, and I so move to defer it.
Mr. Bridges: Second.
Mr. Williams: Committee meeting?
Mr. Shepard: No, it needs to come before the full Commission. Next
Commission is what I’d suggest.
Mr. Mayor: Any objection to deferring it to the next Commission meeting? None
is heard.
Mr. Mays out.
Motion carries 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: Now we’ll entertain a motion to adjourn. We’re adjourned without
objection.
[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 July 2, 2002.
Clerk of Commission
32