HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-15-2003 Regular Meeting
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
July 15, 2003
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:10 p.m., Tuesday, July 15,
2003, the Honorable Bob Young, Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Hankerson, Mays, Bridges, Kuhlke, Colclough, Shepard,
Beard, Cheek, Williams and Bridges, members of Augusta Richmond County
Commission.
Also Present: Jim Wall, Attorney; George Kolb, Administrator; and Lena
Bonner, Clerk of Commission.
The invocation was given by the Rev. Terry L. Phillips.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
The Clerk:
EMPLOYEE OF MONTH AWARD:
Mrs. Martha King
Augusta Cares Program
The Clerk: Ms. Martha King, would you please join with the Mayor and Mr.
Kolb here at the podium, please? The Employee of the Month Selection Committee has
selected Ms. Martha King with Augusta Cares as Employee of the Month for June, 2003.
Ms. King has worked with the City of Augusta for over nine years. Ms. King is
employed as the Augusta Cares Coordinator. She was nominated by a fellow employee
and private citizen, Lucy Jackson, who writes: “Ms. King is an asset to the CSRA. She
goes beyond the call of duty. She is dedicated to her job. Whenever you call on her, she
gets right to the task. I had a situation in my neighborhood with debris and abandoned
vehicles and Ms. King acted quickly to make sure that the area was cleaned. I feel that
she puts herself in our place and works like she lives in the area, too, and she wants to see
it clean. She always takes the time out of her busy schedule to respond to all complaints
for all the citizens of Augusta.” The Committee felt that based on Ms. Jackson’s
recommendation and Ms. King’s attributes, she should be awarded Employee of the
Month. In addition to Ms. Jackson’s recommendation, the Committee reviewed many
letters of commendation for Ms. King for all her hard work with all the citizens of
Augusta. The Committee was also notified that Ms. King was the weekly Customer
Service Award which was presented at the Department Heads staff meeting.
Congratulations, Martha King. You’re making a difference for the City of Augusta.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Kolb: I’d just like to add my congratulations to Ms. King. Martha is truly
what we call Augusta Cares. She represents and really cares about what happens to you
1
as citizens and in Augusta. I also believe that she is the model that we want all of our –
and that we’re striving for – all of our employees to be, and that’s customer oriented,
providing the best possible customer service to this community and to this organization
as we can. So again, Martha, congratulations.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, if I might add. Martha, all of us receive calls from our
Districts and we have two large Super Districts that receive calls [inaudible]. You, next
to the Mayor, are the only other person that is truly an at-large representative of the
th
people of the city of Augusta, and on behalf of the 6 District we thank you for your
representation and care for our city.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Williams: Likewise, Martha, in District 2, and you know we represent those
people who have been neglected for a long time, but with your assistance and your
dedication, we have made a great difference in District 2 and we certainly want to thank
you. Commissioner Cheek and I have promised you a luncheon and we are still planning
that, so hold us to that, and we just congratulate you and thank you for all you do.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk, we have a recognition item on the agenda.
The Clerk: Yes, sir, we do, Mr. Mayor.
RECOGNITION:
Congratulations…..Commissioner Bobby Hankerson for receiving his Elected
Officials certification from the University of Georgia Harold F. Holtz Municipal
Training Institute for Elected Officials during the Annual Georgia Municipal
Association Meeting June 21-24, 2003.
The Clerk: At this time, we’d like to offer our congratulations to Commissioner
Bobby Hankerson for receiving his Elected Officials certification from the University of
Georgia Harold F. Holtz Municipal Training Institute for Elected Officials during the
Annual Georgia Municipal Association meeting this June. Congratulations, Mr.
Hankerson.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor: Okay, under delegations.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
DELEGATION:
2
Five (5) minute time limit per delegation:
Mr. Brian Green
RE: Street Basketball Racks and ARC Coliseum Authority
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Green, if you would give us your name and address for the
record, then you have five minutes.
Mr. Green: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Commission. My name is Brian Green. I’m
at 2515 Center West Parkway, Augusta, Georgia. I’m here today, Mr. Mayor and
Commission, for two reasons. The first one being a concern at this point more than a
complaint. Concern of street basketball which basically is becoming more of a nuisance
than anything as time goes on. Basically what’s happening is that these temporary
basketball racks that you can buy for your yards, and play basketball in your yard, are
now on the streets and all, and what is happening more and more, that you’re getting
bigger groups and things like that, that pose a liability to people driving in the
neighborhood, and the safety problem to the young people playing out there in the street.
And I’m just here today to offer a suggestion that maybe you considering how you’re
going to spend some of that SPLOST money or whatever. I’m here to suggest today as a
possible remedy to this situation that we can pick out about five to seven strategic
locations around the county and build double basketball courts. I’ve checked on some
different price ranges and I’m hearing numbers from $10,000 to $12,000 for a nice
basketball court. Not a park. But a basketball court, doesn’t necessarily have to be lit.
And I feel if you were to build a certain amount of these, build seven to eight of these
courts in strategic locations around the city, we can accomplish a few things from this.
We can implement a low cost program, we can give the kids a place to actually play a
legitimate basketball game, get them out of the street, return some order and quality back
to the community. We can look at it any way we want to, but if a person is spending
$100,000 in the community or whatever they’re spending their hard-earned money, they
have the right to come home to a peaceful community and that sort of thing or drive
through a community and not expect that maybe some young men who are out there
playing ball don’t think you have a right to be driving a car down the roadway. And this
is by no means condemning the young people who need somewhere to play. I don’t
mean that at all. And again, this is just a concern today, at this point, more so than a
complaint. I just think if we got on top of this situation, we can give another alternative,
because it is coming frequently more. And also, Mr. Mayor, you’re having in some
cases, you know, three and four racks in one neighborhood, you know. Some people are
saying hey, I’m hearing basketball games going on till 12 o’clock, one o’clock at night. I
just think this would be a low cost answer to that problem. And I’d be more than happy
to address this in private with any one of the Commissioners and you, yourself, Mr.
Mayor, at any time.
Mr. Mayor: You have one minute left.
Mr. Green: My last comment concerns the Coliseum Authority. For years we’ve
gone back and forth about various issues and what I call ineffective politics. And there
have been some change of faces down there and that sort of thing. And I think the time
3
has come, if we’re looking at the progress of the community, to disband the Coliseum
Authority. And personally, as a citizen of this community, I think that Mr. Kolb is more
than ample, that we would consider placing the Coliseum Authority underneath him. I
don’t mean to put you on the spot, Mr. Kolb. I just think that it’s time that we seriously
consider disbanding the Coliseum Authority. And I thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Green. Mr. Green, I would suggest with respect to
your comments about the SPLOST money that you put that in writing and send it to the
Clerk, who will send it to the SPLOST Committee. They are soliciting suggestions now
and conducting a series of weekly hearings, at which time they will be glad to discuss
that in more detail with you. We have a request on item number 5 on the consent
agenda, request from the Commissioner from District 6 to move this item to the next
Commission meeting, to delay this until next Commission meeting. And if there’s no
objection, we’ll do that with unanimous consent. Is there any objection. Item number 5.
Okay. And for the benefit of the people in the audience, Madame Clerk, would you read
the caption if anybody is here for that item, they’ll need to come back in two weeks.
The Clerk:
5. A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to approve a petition by Gilda Moore, requesting a Special Exception
for the purpose of establishing a Family Day Care Home effecting property located
at 1034 Caddenwood Drive.
Mr. Mayor: If anyone is here for that item, we’ll take that up in our meeting in
two weeks. Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Just a comment. I’ll be – I’ve been through the neighborhood. I live
just up the hill and I have some concerns about that particular corner and that being one
lane of traffic on both sides, and I’d like to meet with all the neighbors and just make sure
we have concurrence within the neighborhood before we proceed, and so you’ll be seeing
me very soon.
Mr. Mayor: The next item, number 23 on your consent agenda, the Chairman of
the Finance Committee has asked that this item be referred back to the Finance
Committee for some additional work. If there is no objection, we will refer that back to
the Finance Committee with unanimous consent today. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The reason is, I believe Mr. Crews, who
represents Augusta GYN, was not able to attend the last meeting of the Finance
Committee and that may be because we got the dates confused. I think he wanted to
th
come before Finance Committee on the 28 and I may have told you the next meeting.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Shepard: And if I did that, I apologize to Mr. Crews and the Clerk.
4
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Any objection to moving that back to Finance? None heard, so we’ll
dispose of those two items, them. Madame Clerk, if you would, let’s move on to the
consent agenda.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: And we have some items from Engineering Services we’d like to add
to the consent agenda.
The Clerk: Yes, sir. The consent agenda consists of items 1 through 24, item
30 under the regular agenda under Engineering Services, and item 32A. Item 30,
the Engineering Services Committee accepted staff recommendation regarding to
that adjustment. Item 32A is authorization with the dollar amount not to exceed
$60,000. For the benefit of any objectors to our Planning petitions, would you
please signify your objection by raising your hand once the petition is read?
PLANNING:
1. Z-03-49 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Bishop Morris L. Williams, Sr., and
Michel Isaacs, on behalf of Milton Martin, requesting a Special Exception for the
purpose of establishing a church with day care activities per 26-1 (A) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property located Milledgeville Road. (Part of Tax Map 68-4 Parcel 27) DISTRICT 5
2. Z-03-50 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Larry Boyd, on behalf of Life in the
River Worship Center, requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of
establishing a church with day care activities per 26-1 (A) of the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property located at
2260 White Road and containing 6.54 acres. (Tax Map 57-4 Parcel 47.02)
DISTRICT 2
3. Z-03-51 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by National Wireless Communications,
Inc., on behalf of Rayonier Timberlands Operating Co., requesting a Special
Exception for the purpose of establishing a telecommunication tower per Section 28-
A of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property located at 5570 Deans Bridge Road and containing .23 acres. (Part of Tax
Map 288, Parcel 1.01) DISTRICT 8
4. Z-03-52 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by National Wireless Communications,
Inc., on behalf of Richard and Anne Maynard, requesting a Special Exception for
the purpose of establishing a telecommunication tower per Section 28-A of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
5
property located at 2987-A Willis Foreman Road and containing .13 acres. (Tax
map 151 Parcel 22.18) DISTRICT 8
6. Z-03-54 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Maureen Ruiz requesting a Special
Exception 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 2033 Bassford Drive and containing .37 acres. (Tax
Map 164 Parcel 65) DISTRICT 4
7. Z-03-55 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Bernard Morgan
requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of establishing a Family Personal
Care Home per Section 26-1 (H) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for
Augusta-Richmond County affecting property located at 1722 Barton Chapel Road
and containing 1.06 acres. (Tax map 54 Parcel 37) DISTRICT 3
8. Z-03-56 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Lashanda Samuels requesting a
change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business)
affecting property located on the northwest right-of-way line of Scott Nixon
Memorial Drive, 235 feet, more or less, southwest of a point where the centerline of
McKnight Industrial Road extended intersects with the northwest right-of-way line
of Scott Nixon Memorial Drive and containing .68 acres. (Tax Map 22 Parcel 3.01)
DISTRICT 3
9. Z-03-59 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Otis Benton requesting a change of
zoning from R-1 (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1A (One-family Residential)
affecting property located at 2625 Helen Street and containing .35 acres. (Tax Map
44-1 Parcel 1) DISTRICT 3
10. Z-03-62 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by David Duffie requesting a change of
zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting
property located at 3819 Wrightsboro Road and containing .69 acres. (Part of Tax
Map 39 Parcel 19) DISTRICT 3
11. Z-03-64 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Church of Father God in Christ, on
behalf of Michael W. Byrd, requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of
establishing a church with day care
activities per 26-1 (A) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-
Richmond County affecting property located on the western portion of 2247 Willis
Foreman Road and containing 7.5 acres. (Tax Map 195 Part of Parcel 1)
DISTRICT 8
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to those Planning petitions?
Mr. Mayor: None are noted, Madame Clerk.
Mr. Mayor: Gentlemen, what’s your pleasure with respect to the consent agenda?
6
Mr. Kuhlke: So move.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and second.. Would you like to pull any items for individual
discussion?
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull item 6.
Mr. Mayor: Number 6 for Mr. Colclough. Okay. Any others?
th
Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor, on item 8, I believe that’s been changed to the 7
th
Commission District. [inaudible] that’s been changed to the 7.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, where it says District 3, it should be District 7?
Mr. Boyles: District 7, right.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so we have had a request to pull item 6. Mr. Beard, did
you have -- anyone else?
CONSENT AGENDA
PLANNING:
1. Z-03-49 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Bishop Morris L. Williams, Sr., and
Michel Isaacs, on behalf of Milton Martin, requesting a Special Exception for the
purpose of establishing a church with day care activities per 26-1 (A) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property located Milledgeville Road. (Part of Tax Map 68-4 Parcel 27) DISTRICT 5
2. Z-03-50 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Larry Boyd, on behalf of Life in the
River Worship Center, requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of
establishing a church with day care activities per 26-1 (A) of the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property located at
2260 White Road and containing 6.54 acres. (Tax Map 57-4 Parcel 47.02)
DISTRICT 2
3. Z-03-51 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by National Wireless Communications,
Inc., on behalf of Rayonier Timberlands Operating Co., requesting a Special
Exception for the purpose of establishing a telecommunication tower per Section 28-
A of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property located at 5570 Deans Bridge Road and containing .23 acres. (Part of Tax
Map 288, Parcel 1.01) DISTRICT 8
7
4. Z-03-52 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by National Wireless Communications,
Inc., on behalf of Richard and Anne Maynard, requesting a Special Exception for
the purpose of establishing a telecommunication tower per Section 28-A of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property located at 2987-A Willis Foreman Road and containing .13 acres. (Tax
map 151 Parcel 22.18) DISTRICT 8
5. Deleted from the consent agenda. (To be considered at next meeting)
6. Deleted from the consent agenda.
7. Z-03-55 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Bernard Morgan
requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of establishing a Family Personal
Care Home per Section 26-1 (H) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for
Augusta-Richmond County affecting property located at 1722 Barton Chapel Road
and containing 1.06 acres. (Tax map 54 Parcel 37) DISTRICT 3
8. Z-03-56 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Lashanda Samuels requesting a
change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business)
affecting property located on the northwest right-of-way line of Scott Nixon
Memorial Drive, 235 feet, more or less, southwest of a point where the centerline of
McKnight Industrial Road extended intersects with the northwest right-of-way line
of Scott Nixon Memorial Drive and containing .68 acres. (Tax Map 22 Parcel 3.01)
DISTRICT 3
9. Z-03-59 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Otis Benton requesting a change of
zoning from R-1 (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1A (One-family Residential)
affecting property located at 2625 Helen Street and containing .35 acres. (Tax Map
44-1 Parcel 1) DISTRICT 3
10. Z-03-62 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by David Duffie requesting a change of
zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting
property located at 3819 Wrightsboro Road and containing .69 acres. (Part of Tax
Map 39 Parcel 19) DISTRICT 3
11. Z-03-64 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Church of Father God in Christ, on
behalf of Michael W. Byrd, requesting a Special Exception for the purpose of
establishing a church with day care
activities per 26-1 (A) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-
Richmond County affecting property located on the western portion of 2247 Willis
Foreman Road and containing 7.5 acres. (Tax Map 195 Part of Parcel 1)
DISTRICT 8
12. ZA-R-161 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta- Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve an amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County amending Section 35 by adding a new
Section 35-9 entitled “Land Adjacent to Fort Gordon” to be consistent with
O.C.G.A. 36-66.6.
8
13. FINAL PLAT – LION’S GATE, PHASE ONE – S-645-1 – A request for
concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to approve
a petition by Southern Partners, Inc., on behalf of ATC Development Corp.,
requesting final plat approval of Lion’s Gate subdivision. This development of fee
simple townhomes is located on Bertram Road, north of the right-of-way of Center
West Parkway.
PUBLIC SERVICES:
14. Motion to approve the acceptance of a grant from the State of Georgia –
Children and Youth Coordinating Council in the amount of $24,150.00. (Approved
by Public Services Committee July 7, 2003)
15. Motion to allow Walton Options the use of one (1) Paratransit vehicle on July
26, 2003 for the 13th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act. (Approved
by Public Services Committee July 7, 2003)
16. Motion to approve request by Dawn Hadden for a Therapeutic Massage
Operators License to be used in connection with Paradise Island Day Spa located at
210 Robert C. Daniel Parkway, Suite F. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by
Public Services Committee July 7, 2003)
17. Motion to approve the continuation of the bid process for Savannah Place
Park Renovations; once bids are received on August 19 review and make decision as
to whether build whole facility; look at alternate or the use of in-house forces to do
project. (Approved by Public Services Committee July 7, 2003)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
18. Motion to approve an Ordinance providing for the demolition of certain
unsafe and uninhabitable properties in the Turpin Hill Neighborhood: 2106 Grand
Boulevard, (District 1, Super District 9); Laney-Walker Neighborhood: 1249-1251
Eleventh Street, 1012 Spruce Street, (District 1, Super District 9); Olde Town
Neighborhood: 120 Walker Street, (District 1, Super District 9), and waive 2nd
reading. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee July 7, 2003)
19. Motion to approve the hiring of a consultant to facilitate a strategic planning
retreat for the Commission on September 26 -27, 2003. (Approved by
Administrative Services Committee July 7, 2003)
PUBLIC SAFETY:
20. Motion to authorize the recruitment, training and sponsorship of an
AmeriCorps resource. (Approved by Public Safety Committee July 7, 2003)
21. Motion to approve fee adjustment based on final construction costs for fire
stations. (Approved by Public Safety Committee July 7, 2003)
FINANCE:
22. Motion to deny communication hardware upgrades for the new Animal
Services Facility. (Approved by Finance Committee July 7, 2003)
23. Referred back to the Finance Committee.
PETITIONS & COMMUNICATIONS:
9
24. Motion to approve the minutes of the Commission July 1, 2003 regular
meeting.
30. Consider a request from Henry and Elizabeth Jordan for an adjustment of
costs in connection with water services incurred at 2422 Mt. Auburn Ave. [Staff
recommendation accepted]
32A. Approve authorization to repair chiller at the Law Enforcement Center.
[Approved at a cost not to exceed $60,000]
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to approve the consent agenda, minus item
number 6. All in favor of that motion, please vote in the affirmative.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes?
Mr. Shepard: If I could be shown as abstaining on number 16 due to a client
matter.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard abstains.
Motion carries 9-1. [Item 16]
Motion carries 10-0. [Items 1-4, 7-15, 17-22, 24, 30, 32A]
Mr. Mayor: We’re going to bounce around a little bit because we have a number
of people in the chambers for different things and we’d like to take those up so they can
move on to other business they have today. First I’d like to move to item number 29 and
ask Ms. Cheryl Turner from the Board of Health to give us an update on the mosquito
control program. I’m sure that’s of interest to a lot of folks in these chambers today.
ENGINEERING SERVICES:
29. Receive an overview from Ms. Cheryl Turner, Environmental Health
Specialist, Richmond County Board of Health, regarding their Mosquito Control
Program.
Mr. Mayor: Cheryl, if you could pull the mike down and speak right into it so we
can hear you.
Ms. Turner: I’ve been working with the Department of Health with the mosquito
program for over 25 years and of course you all know what we’ve had five years of
drought and this year we haven’t had a drought. So with that in mind, the waters have
10
been accumulating and the mosquito eggs that have been laid on the sides of ditches and
in holes and in areas that haven’t been bothered for the last five years have now gone all
into the water and we’ve had a massive brood of mosquitoes coming out over the county.
We also have a lot of work that’s being done in the county which has caused some
problems with water building up behind homes, especially adjacent to the Bobby Jones.
Last year, in June of 2002, we had 63 complaints. And this year, in the month of June we
had 315 complaints. That’s five times the number of complaints. When we have a
complaint, we go out to the residence and look for those things that could be causing the
mosquitoes and treat those and also spray the area. We have, we spray four nights a
week to do, to kill the adults during the evening hours, and we adulticide during the day.
We’ve had help this year from several, from four different entities in the community, in
the county. We’ve had Engineering, Trees & Landscape, Recreation & Parks and
Utilities helping us. They’ve all been armed with a molecular film that they put on any
type of water that they find, no matter how big or small. It only takes three squirts of this
to -- from a quart bottle -- to cover 100 square feet of area, so that has put a big dent in
some of our mosquito problems. The majority of our problems seem to still be coming
from the north, although the south is where our swamps are, a majority of our complaints
come from the north. This could be because of watering in some of those areas that I was
talking about earlier that have to do with maintenance that’s going on. I know there’s a
big problem in the Beverly Hills area. I’ve been notified of some problems off of Perrin
and Lafayette and also on Martinique, which is in Kingston. Prior to this year, we had
numerous complaints from west Floyd area and also Yates, which are in south Augusta.
However, with the help of Engineering, we are able to do some work in those two areas
and we have almost gotten rid of the mosquito problem there. We still have a problem
because of the water but it is much, much decreased with their help. We would like to
increase working with Engineering and maybe be able do some [inaudible] in other areas
to help alleviate the mosquito problem. And we appreciate the county’s help with
supporting the Health Department in mosquito control and all the efforts that they’ve
gone to to help us. They’re even giving us reports when they do do the larvicide. Are
there any questions?
Mr. Mayor: Cheryl, thank you very much for that important report. That’s some
very timely work you all are engaged in right now. Are there any questions from the
Commissioners? Mr. Williams, then Mr. Bridges.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Cheryl, I just want to know, have we
increased the number of trucks that been spraying? I mean a lot of people -- I heard you
say about the spraying you do in the water, but most people don’t see that equipment any
more, and I’m wondering have we increased or are we at the same level and what level,
how many piece of equipment we have for the entire county?
Ms. Turner: We have five trucks. Only four of them are in working order right
now. After talking with the guy who is over the maintenance department, half of our
fleet is in excess of ten years old, going on 20. We have an ’81, an ’86 and an ’89 truck.
And the other three are more recent trucks. So we have problems keeping them
mechanically moving. And then also the machines on the back. I hope to be able to get a
11
new truck and a new machine this year which will help with that problem, if it
[inaudible].
Mr. Williams: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Bridges: How many trucks do we have out now, then?
Ms. Turner: There are four trucks that are on the road every day.
Mr. Bridges: What, how long will that -- you originally started out with one and
then in the summertime you increase it. How long will those four trucks be out there?
When will you cut back to the one truck?
Ms. Turner: Well, I found out yesterday, unfortunately, three of the guys are
starting college the first of August, and so we’ll be back to one, unless we can coerce
some of the regular employees of the Health Department to help with the load during the
rest of the summer.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: I have a question for the Attorney. Some of these vehicles,
couldn’t they be purchased through SPLOST?
Mr. Wall: Yes.
Mr. Shepard: Might be something we can put in that list.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think the efforts the government, in
partnership with the Health Department, has made some really good progress this last
year, but as representative of Commission to the Health, Board of Health, they are under
continued budgetary pressure, sometimes percentage-wise great as or greater than we are,
and we are going to have to come to some type of arrangement where we do assist with
the purchase of vehicles with SPLOST money, as well as shelters to house those vehicles,
and ways to staff those trucks, in the event that the Health Department is not able to do
that. Mosquito-borne illnesses are major concerns, becoming more so every day. Ms.
Turner, thank you for your cooperation, and I look forward to any process improvements
you can suggest in the course of this summer.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beard.
Mr. Beard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My concern is, which you just mentioned,
you mentioned one thing about the three young people leaving, going to college, and I’m
really concerned [inaudible] we’re going to have one truck in August into September,
we’re going to really be in for a time during those two months, and I was just wondering
12
maybe the Administrator, if he could look into some assistance or work with the Health
Department in seeking how we can really alleviate that problem for those months.
Because I see how it is going to be a problem. You can tell the difference there when you
have all the trucks on the road. But one truck on, this a lot of square miles to cover.
Mr. Mayor: Anything further? Do we have a motion to -- yes, Mr. Hankerson.
Mr. Hankerson: And I just want to follow up on what Mr. Beard said. I am
wondering whether or not we could have some feedback on this probably in the next
committee meeting because we don’t want to wait until August and the students are gone
and then we’re without that protection out there, because we know about the virus and so
forth. And these mosquitoes, they’re very large mosquitoes out there. Very large. And
it’s a serious problem I know in the rural areas and where there’s standing ponds and the
subdivisions that have those detention ponds, retention ponds around them. It’s a
problem there. So I hope that we can get a report back to know where we are with that to
make sure that that is ongoing. Another thing I wanted to mention, what time of year do
the program start? I think I called a couple of times and they said it starts somewhere
around June because you’re depending on students.
Ms. Turner: Right now we have a 75% person who works year round in mosquito
control, so we are basically working all year round. We follow up on every complaint
that comes in when it comes in.
Mr. Hankerson: That’s one truck, though; right?
Ms. Turner: One truck.
Mr. Hankerson: Then you get the full crew out?
Ms. Turner: The full crew is usually, has been in the past, because of the weather
and the times [inaudible] second week in June. However, this year they were trained the
last week in May because we were inundated with so many complaints prior to June.
Mr. Hankerson: Okay, maybe Mr. Cheek, you’re on that committee, maybe we
could look at next year of trying to start that program earlier than June, because June, the
mosquitoes are already out there. Some way that we can try to get a full crew out there
for some prevention before they get so serious.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb, would it be possible for our staff to get with Ms. Turner
before the next Engineering Services Committee and see how we can get through the rest
of the summer and then have that report for the next committee meeting? Okay. Mr.
Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: I appreciate the recognition in that we did start over two years ago in
developing this partnership and it came just in time for the rain, working with the Board
of Health. But I’m concerned that we don’t have that vital time when you lose your part
13
time help, that by the next Engineering Services Committee that we do have a
recommendation, some form of staffing support or partnership, further partnership
relation to keep those trucks on the road, keep spraying and [inaudible] those mosquitoes.
Ms. Turner: The City of Hephzibah has already allowed us to have two people
th
that they’re going to utilize after the 17. Well, they actually have taken one of the old
machines and revamped it and has volunteered to use their equipment and their people to
use that machine under our [inaudible].
Mr. Cheek: Anything we can do, Mr. Mayor, anything we can do to further keep
th
all four and perhaps get that 5 truck back on the road, I certainly hope that we will as a
government take care of.
Mr. Mayor: All right, do we have a motion to receive this as information?
Mr. Cheek: So move.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
Ms. Turner; Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Discussion: All in favor, please vote in the affirmative. Thank you,
Ms. Turner. Appreciate your update.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: We have a number of people who are here for item number 27.
Madame Clerk, if you’ll read the caption, we’ll proceed with that item next.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES:
27. New Application: A.N. 03-20: A request by John M. Marks for a retail
package Wine license to be used in connection with Delmonico’s Fine Food located
at 139 Davis Road. District 7. Super District 10. (No
recommendation from Public Services July 7, 2003)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Sherman, you want to give us the background on this and
recommendation, please?
Mr. Sherman: This is a request for a wine license. It’s to be used in conjunction
with a retail food market on Davis Road, 139 Davis Road. The Sheriff’s Department and
the License Department have reviewed the application. It meets our requirements with
regard to the zoning and distance requirements to the front door of the church, and we
recommend that it be approved.
14
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Are there any objectors here for this item? If you would,
please raise your hand so we can get a count. Hold your hand up while the Attorney gets
a count here, please.
(20 objectors noted)
Mr. Mayor: Are there any people here in support of this application? If you’d
raise your hand, Mr. Attorney, if you can get a count.
(12 supporters noted)
Mr. Mayor: Is there someone here who wanted to speak on behalf of the
petitioner? John, did you want to speak and address the Commission?
Mr. Marks: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Come up and do that, please, and if there are any supporters who
wanted to speak, we’ll hear from them and then we’ll hear from the objectors. If you
would, pull the mike up and speak right into it so we can all hear.
Mr. Marks: Mr. Mayor, we’re back down here. We have met all of the
requirements. The License bureau has been for it, the Sheriff has been for it, and the
people in the community have been for it, other than the church. And I went back to the
surveyor today and got another survey done on the back of the property, from the door to
their back yard. And I have it right here. I also have a letter here from Rep. Sue
Burmeister giving a recommendation for this pass, if you all would like to see it.
Mr. Mayor: Give that to the Clerk. She’ll get it to us.
Mr. Marks: All right. It’s not going to be what they’re trying to make it out to be.
It will be a Monday through Saturday store, from 10 to 7. There will be no drinking. No
beer, no whiskey. Just all wine. And it won’t be that much of wine. No [inaudible].
You’ll buy your wine when you get your meat and you’ll go home and have it cooled
down and go from there. And that’s all we’re trying to do.
Mr. Mayor: This is not on premise consumption?
Mr. Marks: It is not on premises. No, you come in, you buy what you want to
buy, and you get in your car and you go home.
Mr. Mayor: Do y’all have any questions for Mr. Marks? Mr. Bridges.
Mr. Bridges: Yes. Mr. Marks, what have I got here and what are you trying to
show with the map?
15
Mr. Marks: We had -- the License bureau told me to get a surveyor and get the
distance from my door to the church’s front door. And we did. That didn’t seem to be
good enough because they have another rule in the regulations book from the property
line, so I went back to the front door and went to the closest property line, and we are
over 100, 130, or 150 feet over what we’re supposed to be from the back property line.
Mr. Bridges: So “D” is the church? I mean “D” is your business?
Mr. Marks: Yes.
Mr. Bridges: Okay. All right.
Mr. Marks: And there’s not a single residence on that street, from Scott Nixon
Boulevard to Washington Road. It’s all commercial.
Mr. Mayor: Are there any other proponents that want to be heard?
Mr. Marks: I’d like for her to read that letter from Representative Sue
Burmeister.
Mr. Mayor: Well, she’ll share that. It’s up here, isn’t it?
The Clerk: I have it.
Mr. Mayor: Why don’t you just pass that around up here and we’ll look at it? All
right, let’s hear from the objectors then. Is there a spokesman for the group or -- if you’d
like to be heard, just raise your hand and we’ll get a sense of -- just one person? Two of
you will speak for the group? Okay, if you’ll come up and give us your name and
address for the record and then --
Mr. Davenport: I’m Michael Davenport. I’m the pastor of Pineview Baptist
Church.
Mr. Mayor: Pastor, if you’ll speak right into that microphone.
Mr. Davenport: 154 Davis Road. We know that Mr. Marks meets the criteria of
the way the distance is figured and we understand that., even though I don’t agree with
that. But we’re just too close. Our church has been there for 50 years trying to make a
difference in that community, and all I’m trying to do -- I deal with people who drink and
the problems of alcohol every day, and the first man, the drunkest man in this town did
not intend to be a drunk when he took the first drink. And families are destroyed by it.
And lives are messed up. And jobs are lost. And whether they’re going to consume it on
the property or they going to take it home with them, it doesn’t matter. And if we let a
loophole get in here and one place is established, then more and more can be and
surround our church. And our church has been there a long time trying to make a
difference in that community. And we just oppose it because if you go from corner to
16
corner, it’s much too close. And Mr. Mayor, I support your character work agenda you
had, I support that, and I put that in our bulletins and things at church, and I was looking
through it today. There’s words such as faith, honor, orderliness and responsibility, and
if this body, I assume, supported you in that, they need to live by that, also. And you
know, you’re asking us to do one thing and then we get here and do something else. And
we need to just stop this thing once and for all, because those kind of things are what’s
destroying lives in this community. And we ask you again to vote no.
Mr. Mayor: Give us your name and address for the record, please. And speak
right into the microphone.
Ms. Williams: Hello. I’m Nancy Williams. And I’m the owner/director for the
Ace DUI Community Intervention Program in Augusta, Georgia. And the reason why
I’m here today is because I’m very much concerned about them giving permission,
allowing for the alcohol license. We have very strict rules and regulations that govern
our program. We have to please the Department of Human Resources in Atlanta, we also
are required to please the Department of Motor Vehicle Services. And what they tell me
is a driver improvement license will not be issued for a location where the distribution of
or the sale of alcoholic beverages has been approved. So we’ve had that school there
since early 90’s. It’s been located there at 138 Davis Road. The location he’s proposing
is 139 Davis Road, which would be across the street. It is very much a concern to me
because of the fact that we do the multi-offender group in the evenings, the afternoons
and evenings. We have numerous DUI offenders come and they are sitting out on
benches out in front of our facility because they do not have a driver’s license. They’re
dependent on buses and other transportation. And I feel like we’d be doing a disservice
to them to be looking straight across the street. We’re talking habitual violators that’s
gotten two or more DUI’s in five years, that are mandated to come to these classes.
They’ll be looking straight across the street at a facility that serves alcohol. That’s very
much a concern to me. And I don’t care how upscale it might be, to an alcoholic, they’d
just as soon drink wine as any other alcohol if they can’t get their beverage of choice. So
I would strongly encourage all the panel members here, Commission members, to
disapprove of this alcohol request for this license there. This move alone will cost me
thousands of dollars. I have been in that facility for some time and I know that our
Atlanta office would not approve of me having DUI offenders that close a proximity to
the alcohol establishment across the street. We’re talking 138 Davis Road. He’s talking
139 Davis Road. I mean it’s very much a concern to me. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do any of the Commissioners have any questions for the
objectors? Mr. Bridges.
Mr. Bridges: I’d like to question the lady that just spoke. You’re saying you’re
running a DUI school; is that right?
Ms. Williams: That’s correct.
17
Mr. Bridges: And the State, if this is opened up, the State would require you to
close?
Ms. Williams: The State would come in, upon site visit, and knowing that this
alcohol license, they could force me to move. That’s correct, they could close our
facility.
Mr. Bridges: You’re saying “could.” Now what is the ordinance or what is the
rule or procedure that that would be done?
Ms. Williams: July 1 they just passed a new set of laws, rules, regulations that
govern both the DUI and defensive driving, and what they told me this morning on the
phone when I called Atlanta was it would be close proximity, they said a State official
would have to come out and view our program and they would decide at that time, that
moment, as soon as his doors come over, we could opted to be closed. I’m talking tens of
thousands of dollars just to relocate and get another facility established. And we’ve been
there for some time.
Mr. Bridges: Did you give them an indication of your situation and what they
would do in that, just over the phone?
Ms. Williams: I talked to them and I told them there was a proposed location at
139 Davis Road and they said well, you know, we’d have to come out, we’d have to look
at the school, we’d have to measure the square footage and all, we’ve got all these new
regs that just came in July 1. And so at that time they’d make a decision on whether or
not the doors would be closed.
Mr. Bridges: All right. They didn’t give you a definition of close proximity in
regards to yards or feet or anything like that?
Ms. Williams: No, they didn’t. But let me tell you something. It is no small feat,
when you’re operating a DUI defensive driving school, you have to jump through a lot of
hoops to get the Department of Motor Vehicle Service to approve you to do a school, and
also the Department of Human Resources Community Treatment for Multiple Offenders.
I mean it’s a lot of hoops to go through to be able to get up and going.
Mr. Bridges: Mr. Mayor, could I continue?
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Bridges: Could I ask Rob a question?
Mr. Mayor: Certainly, go ahead.
Mr. Bridges: Rob.
18
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Bridges: Mr. Sherman. In regards to our ordinance, was this DUI school
taken into consideration when you or the Sheriff recommends?
Mr. Sherman: Well, actually, we didn’t know that it was there. Or at least I
didn’t. But it’s 300 feet to government owned alcohol treatment centers. Owned or
operated.
Mr. Bridges: The 300 feet, so that’s 100 yards.
Mr. Sherman: Right.
Mr. Bridges: To government owned, now what does that mean? Is that in our
ordinance?
Mr. Sherman: That’s in our ordinance. Government owned.
Mr. Bridges: Am I understanding this school is not government owned?
Ms. Williams: No, this school is privately owned. Are you referring to
Brightmore? I mean which government facility are you referring to?
Mr. Sherman: Any that --
Mr. Mayor: Wait a minute. Let’s address our questions to the Chair. Don’t have
side conversations.
Mr. Sherman: [inaudible] ordinance that an establishment desiring to sell alcohol
has to be no closer than 300 feet of a government owned and operated facility for the
treatment of alcohol.
Mr. Bridges: Following that up, are you in Richmond County or Columbia
County?
Ms. Williams: We’re right there on the property line, which is considered
Columbia County. It’s right on the line. We’re at 138 Davis Road, and the proposed
location is 139 Davis Road.
Mr. Bridges: So you’re across -- are you directly across the street?
Ms. Williams: Across the street.
Mr. Marks: No, not directly across.
Mr. Bridges: You’re in both counties?
19
Mr. Marks: No.
Ms. Williams: No, we’re on the property line. Right there on the property line.
Bristlecone Square.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Colclough.
Mr. Colclough: Ma’am, you keep mentioning treatment. What is the
qualification for the treatment, the type of treatment you have for A&D people?
Ms. Williams: Qualifications for the treatment?
Mr. Colclough: Yes.
Ms. Williams: You have to be a Level 2 Certified Addiction Counselor in the
State of Georgia or a Licensed Family Therapist.
Mr. Colclough: A [inaudible], you have to be a [inaudible]?
Ms. Williams: Uh-huh. You have to be a GACA Level 2 or above.
Mr. Colclough: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Boyles.
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Rev. Davenport, if I may, you said that we
didn’t want to establish a loophole in here somewhere. Where would the loophole be? I
--
Mr. Davenport: I told the committee the other day, if they get the wine license,
the next thing is the beer and liquor license if they want it, and my idea is just don’t ever
do it to begin with. Because if you ever get one, then somewhere down the road they can
come back with a smart lawyer and put anything they want to over there. And we’ve
seen that happen already all over this county.
Mr. Boyles: So we cannot put a restriction on this? Mr. Wall, can we put a
restriction on that? If he wants to sell wine only, can we put a restriction on any other
form of alcohol?
Mr. Wall: Well, any --
Mr. Mayor: Could you come to the microphone, Mr. Wall? Talk into your
microphone so we can get you in the minutes.
20
Mr. Wall: Any change in the license, any additional license, whether it be beer
or liquor, would have to come back before the Commission to be approved, and so it
would come back before this body and only this Commission could approve any change.
Mr. Boyles: May I ask Mr. Sherman, then, Rob, on Davis Road, do we have any
other establishments other than the Snug that sells alcohol by the drink? And then the
Smile station or whatever it is now, the 76 station?
Mr. Speaker: Cadwalladers.
Mr. Mayor: That’s Columbia County.
Mr. Boyles: I’m only dealing with the Columbia County line along that stretch of
road.
Mr. Sherman: Right. In Richmond County would be the Snug and then the --
formerly the Smile station. That’s all in Richmond County in that vicinity.
Mr. Boyles: Can you approximate the distance from Toucan Road or the
Pineview Church down to the Snug?
Mr. Sherman: It’s probably a couple of thousand feet.
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kuhlke.
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Who?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kuhlke, our Super Commissioner.
Mr. Kuhlke:
Mr. Mayor and fellow colleagues, I expressed this at the committee
meeting the other day and said we adopt laws for this county, we try to eliminate as many
loopholes as we possibly can. The applicant has met all the rules of the ordinances that
we have adopted for this County. While I’m sympathetic to your position at the church
and your position, also, but I think we have a similar situation out on Peach Orchard
I’d like to make a motion that we approve the
Road. But with that being said,
application for Mr. Marks.
Mr. Beard: I second that.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Discussion on the motion? Mr.
Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you. My question for the petitioner. Is this facility going to
be like Fresh Market? I mean it’s not a restaurant?
21
Mr. Marks: Something like that.
Mr. Shepard: Grocery?
Mr. Marks: There’s no eating.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Anything further?
Mr. Bridges: I’ve got --
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bridges.
Mr. Bridges: Jim, in regards to the school, my understand is, you know, our
ordinance reads strictly a government school and this is private. But does the
government school make any difference by county line? I mean what I’m trying to get to
here is I see no difference with the government operating one and a private one. I mean
the effect is going to be the same. What I’m hearing is we are going to open one business
up and shut another one down. That’s what I’m hearing.
Mr. Wall: I’m not certain that that’s the case. Because, I mean, there is --
Mr. Bridges: Well, we don’t know until they come and look at it, you know, but -
-
Mr. Wall: Well, I hear there is another school already operating in the county
that’s in close proximity to a business that sells alcohol, so I don’t -- there is no --
Mr. Bridges: Has there been a precedent set or anything like that done thus far?
Mr. Wall: Well, and I’m not totally familiar with the location that they’re talking
about, but it was mentioned to me that there is another DUI school that’s in close
proximity to an alcohol establishment. And I don’t now what type of business that is.
But the ordinance is specific in specifying government schools. Private schools are
defined and limited as to what type. In my opinion, this does not fall in the definition of
a private school that would allow you to exclude it. And so I mean under what’s been
said today, they meet the criteria.
Mr. Mayor: Anything further? We have a motion on the floor. All in favor of
that motion to approve, please vote in the affirmative.
Mr. Boyles, Mr. Bridges and Mr. Hankerson vote No.
Motion carries 7-3.
22
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk, do you know if we have any delegations here for any
other items?
The Clerk: Yes, sir, we have a person here on [inaudible].
Mr. Mayor: As soon as we clear the chambers, those who want to leave, we’ll
take that one up next. All right, Madame Clerk, I understand we have a member of the
public here for item number 26, so we’ll go ahead and take that item up now.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
26. Z-03-61 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to deny a petition by Steve Brown, on behalf of Courtney
Tobb Well, et al., requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family
Residential) to Zone P-1 (Professional) affecting property located on the northwest
right-of-way line of Mayo Road, 306.09 feet southwest of a point where the
southwest right-of-way line of Stevens Creek Road intersects with the northwest
right-of-way line of Mayo Road and containing approximately 5.33 acres. (Part of
Tax Map 6 Parcel 13) DISTRICT 7
Mr. Mayor: All right, Mr. Patty. Planning Commission here? George. We’re on
26, if you can give us the background on that.
Mr. Patty: Okay, 25 and 26 are related cases.
PLANNING:
25. Z-03-60 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Steve Brown, on behalf of Courtney
Tobb Well, et al, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family
Residential) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) affecting property located where
the southwest right-of-way line of Stevens Creek Road intersects with the northwest
right-of-way line of Mayo Road and containing approximately 2 acres. (Part of Tax
Map 6 Parcel 13) DISTRICT 7
Mr. Patty: These cases involve a 15-acre tract at the intersection of Mayo Road
and Stevens Creek Road that were put on the market as a result of the death of the owner
some time ago. 26 was denied. 25 involved the corner property. Two acres. And it had
Commercial across Stevens Creek Road, a convenience store across Stevens Creek Road,
and it had Commercial across Mayo Road, which was a gift shop. And it was approved.
And 26 was a request to zone an additional 5.33 acres Professional fronting on Mayo
Road from the Commercial corner to the end of the property on Mayo Road. And there
were objectors. The zoning of the entire property did not conform to the comprehensive
plan which indicates that 500 feet approximately on Mayo Road should be zoned and it
was denied for that reason.
23
Mr. Mayor: Are there any objectors here? All right, if you’d raise your hand so
the Attorney can get a count. If you’re an objector, raise your hand.
(10 objectors noted)
Mr. Mayor: Is the, are there any people here to speak in favor of this rezoning?
Is the petitioner here? All right. Steve, if you’ll come up.
Mr. Brown: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Right now we’re taking up item 26, which is recommended denial,
then we’ll get to 25.
Mr. Boyles: Okay.
Mr. Brown: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, my name is Steve Brown and I’m here
at the request of Courtney Well and her two sisters to change the zoning from R-1A,
One-family Residential, to zone B-1, Neighborhood Business, affecting property located
on the northwest intersection, the right-of-way where Stevens Creek intersects with Mayo
Road and containing approximately two acres. The entire tract contains approximately
7.33 acres. Excuse me, I went from 25 on to 26. We’re talking about Professional. The
P-1.
Mr. Mayor: I tell you what. Steve, I’ve just spoken with the Clerk, and let’s do
this. Let’s go ahead and I understand the objectors are here for both of these items, so
let’s go ahead and have our discussions with respect to items 25 and 26, and we may end
up voting on them separately, but let’s go ahead and discuss them.
Mr. Brown: Item 25, and I have two pictures here I want to show. And
[inaudible] the intersection here of Riverwatch Parkway and Mayo Road, you see
[inaudible]. We have another [inaudible]. We have submitted with Mr. Patty protective
covenants on the property to conform with the neighborhood. Those will be recorded
with the deed on the sale of the property. They run with the property for 20 years and
renewable another ten years. And we intend to have a neighborhood use, that’s
compatible with that neighborhood. A gift store is across the street. Gift store or outdoor
clothing store or something like.
Mr. Mayor: All right, do we have any questions for Mr. Brown? Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Are your construction patterns going to be consistent with the
existing neighborhood in the style and quality?
Mr. Brown: Yes, sir, Mr. Cheek. I’ve got the [inaudible]. I think George has got
that.
24
Mr. Cheek: What kind of operating hours would businesses like these typically
have?
Mr. Brown: Just general business. You know, from 8 to 6. 8 to 8. Whatever it
is. [inaudible] and let me say this. The reason I have those [inaudible] --
Mr. Mayor: Speak right into the mike so we can hear you.
Mr. Brown: We, we intend something on the example of Monte Sano and Central
Avenue, where you have the Rags, the clothing store, and then as you go south on Monte
Sano you have a series of dental offices. That was our plan, and you have residential
property behind it and you have residential property across the street. And that was our
intention for this.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Boyles.
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Steve, if I could, I guess I’m probably
closer to that intersection than any other member of the Commission because I live two
blocks from there. Two questions. One, what, what type of business are you talking
about putting in there? We’re talking the B-1, the B-1 zone.
Mr. Brown: Right. Any business that is supported under the B-1 zoning. We
think that there’s, you know, a gift store there but if we have the opportunity to have
something a little larger, a little nicer, more accommodating the neighborhood, that’s our
intention. But out intention is not to have any sort of fast food restaurant or anything like
that. No liquor license or anything like that. No. No. Strictly B-1. Neighborhood use.
Mr. Boyles: Steve, let me follow up by saying that in my neighborhood, which
would be on the right-hand side of Stevens Creek going out, how difficult it is early
morning, late afternoon, trying to get out and make a left turn back towards Augusta on
Stevens Creek, and I think the Administrator can vouch for that, too. Because we get all
of our traffic there that comes from Columbia County, from Hampstead, from Stevens
Pointe, from West Lake and on out past there. They come down that stretch of Stevens
Creek Road and they are coming at a pretty good rate of speed. And they come around a
corner, a curve going downhill. And I sat over for two days over at the nursing home,
just at random times for the last two days just trying to watch that traffic come down, and
we have enough problem there now, without a traffic light at that point, and I fought this
battle on Pleasant Home Road with folks who were trying, people who were trying to go
to the nursing home to see relatives and then they, at their age, trying to get out. That’s
what concerns me the most about this property on the front side. And I think for those
reasons, without the proper traffic lights, lighting, and what else it may take right there,
I’m just afraid that I’m against that.
Mr. Brown: Well, I appreciate your concern, Mr. Boyles, but you know, it is a
neighborhood use and we are only developing two acres, so the amount of square footage
25
and the people we serve are not going to be overwhelming, I believe, for that intersection.
And then of course, there’s no more Commercial development that will occur north of the
property except for what is already zoned B-1 that’s on the two, two or three lots up on
Stevens Creek. My opinion, I guess Mr. Patty might be able to expound on it, to create a
traffic -- I don’t believe a traffic hazard would be created there with a two acre B-1
zoning.
Mr. Boyles: Well, it just concerns me because, because of the heavy influx. And
we’re glad they’re coming down from Columbia County to their jobs in Richmond, we’re
very proud of that. But it sure makes it tough for us on that side of the road to try to get
out. And I think that problem is going to continue with the development that we are
trying to do along -- I was just given another copy of this a while ago from Tom Beck of
the park that’s going in there, that we’ve spent $1.5 million to develop. Those are just
comments of mine, Mr. Mayor, and I appreciate you allowing me to express them.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard and then Mr. Kuhlke.
Mr. Shepard: Well, Mr. Mayor, and Mr. Boyles, would a traffic light, signal, at
Mayo -- at Mayo and Stevens Creek, would that be in the interest of public safety for
those folks that are in your neighborhood and help control this?
Mr. Boyles: I don’t know that it would be a good, a good idea because a lot of us,
you know, sometimes we think there’s too many traffic lights as it is. But something is
going to have to be done there in the future and that is probably less than ¼ mile, of
course, from the intersection of Stevens Creek and Riverwatch Parkway. Maybe less
than ¼ mile. And you get the traffic signalization at that intersection. I just think we’re
kind of getting, we’re turning what has -- we changed all 1-A zoning from Agricultural
not too long ago and we’re going to turn it to something that for long term we may not
want up there.
Mr. Shepard: A couple of follow-up questions, maybe to the Administrator or to
Mr. Patty. What would signalizing that cost or -- I think there are State warrants that you
have to deal with now. Is it something we can do or couldn’t do or can you help me out
on that?
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, Mr. Boyles is correct. There
is a problem there. I’m not sure what the traffic control solution would be. Specifically
to answer your question, it would cost about $80,000 probably to signalize that or some
intersection. One thought that I had is that we have to get with Columbia County, since
the county line is right there. Signalization could occur on Evans-to-Lock Road and
Stevens Creek, where they have a four-way stop there now.
Mr. Mayor: That’s signalized now.
Mr. Speaker: It’s a four-way stop.
26
Mr. Kolb: No, it’s a four-way stop. And perhaps the signal is being planned
there that would impact traffic further down Stevens Creek Road. So without further
study, I don’t think -- we could compound the traffic situation if we try to do something
immediately.
Mr. Shepard: Well, I think we’d get some coordination with the Columbia
County Commission, wouldn’t we, Steve? And I was just wondering for my study of this
issue, is there any sentiment to holding it over to see if we can deal with the traffic and
public safety concerns?
Mr. Kolb: I would recommend not, to proceed with whatever you’re going to do
with zoning.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kuhlke.
Mr. Kuhlke: Yeah, I just wanted to ask Mr. Brown, obviously you hadn’t
submitted any site plan on this piece of property, but what is your idea as far as getting in
and out of the property that faces on Stevens Creek? Are you going to do it on Stevens
Creek or are you going to do it on Mayo Road?
Mr. Brown: One curb cut on Stevens Creek and one on Mayo Road.
Mr. Kuhlke: One on Mayo Road. And isn’t it customary for small retail shops,
they normally don’t open till about 9 or 9:30 in the morning?
Mr. Brown: That’s correct.
Mr. Kuhlke: And if I’m not mistaken, most of your heavy traffic is gone by that
time. Now at five o’clock in the afternoon it’s a different story. And facility-wise on that
two-acre tract, are you proposing how many structures?
Mr. Brown: One.
Mr. Kuhlke: Just one structure?
Mr. Brown: Yes, sir.
Mr. Kuhlke: But maybe with two or three businesses in there?
Mr. Brown: One.
Mr. Kuhlke: Just one business?
Mr. Brown: Correct. Let me say. There’s a distance factor. [inaudible] and the
road does [inaudible]. I mean myself have been down there many times and I’ve never
had a problem with turning on Mayo Road, and I honestly don’t think that this one
27
Commercial with B-1 surrounding it is going to have any safety or detrimental affect on
people coming on Stevens Creek.
Mr. Mayor: We have some objectors who are here today. I’d like to give them a
moment to be heard before we continue our discussion. Is there a spokesman for the
group, not that we’re trying to stifle anybody from speaking. We’ll be glad to let
everybody speak that would like to, but if there’s a spokesman for the group, if you’d
come forward, give us your name and address for the record, and tell us what you think
we need to hear.
Mr. Stewart: Okay, I’m Charles Stewart. 2060 Bridgewater Drive. I live in
Brookfield Subdivision, which is right off Mayo Road. And I’m here in the place of my
wife, Fran. Many of you know Fran, and unfortunately she couldn’t be here. I cleared
this with her, by the way.
(Laughter)
Mr. Stewart: I’ve provided each Commissioner with just a map of the area we’re
speaking of, and it’s clearly marked, orange being the neighborhood area you’re looking
th
at, as well as the 7 District perimeter there, along with a fact sheet that relates to a lot of
things that are going on that are impacting just our neighborhood and quite possibly other
neighborhoods outside of our area. First, up front, I’d like to say we do recommend the
rezoning petition be denied. That’s for both requests. I do have a petition signed by 87
individuals to support this. The citizens in our area have been collectively working, even
before Riverwatch Parkway was built, and more so thereafter, to preclude unwarranted
encroachment of businesses that will have a derogatory effect on our neighborhoods.
This rezoning request is just one situation among others in the past where we, as
responsible citizens and homeowners, feel compelled to present our case to guide the
conscience of our leaders who have the power to effect or prevent change, who have the
power to effect or prevent change that adversely affects our neighborhoods. Already we
are impacted by 53 acres zoned Business on Fury’s Ferry Road across from Prattwood
Drive, which is a Brookfield neighborhood entrance. And behind West Hills, areas are
zoned [inaudible], Light Industrial and Commercial. Older neighborhoods, such as those
in our area, Brookfield, West Hills, Hunters Ridge and Mayo subdivisions are pretty well
holding their own value so far. We do not want to evolve into neighborhoods that will
one day require drastic revitalization efforts, such as downtown. Planning & Zoning has
been sympathetic to this by rezoning some Agricultural properties Single-Family.
Commercial, and I include Business and Professional -- Commercial encroachment, if not
checked, will contribute to the decline of adjoining neighborhoods. Businesses come and
go and there is no guarantee that the original business plan will continue to provide
quality tenants or facilities for them to remain a neutral influence on adjoining
neighborhoods. Obviously, we’re looking at the short and the long term effects of this.
Businesses by their very nature will generate more traffic, as Mr. Boyles has pointed out.
In economic downturns, many businesses become vacant and not maintained. As you
know, other areas in our city are facing those type problems right now. Through the
efforts of a few dedicated individuals, my wife included, the neighborhoods in our area
28
have a nice 6-1/2 acre park being constructed on Mayo Road, and this is just one positive
step, rather a major step, in the effort to maintain the quality of our neighborhood. The
bottom line, we feel, is that commercialization near parks and neighborhoods is not
considered a positive factor. So, I urge you to deny this rezoning petition. By doing so,
you are discouraging commercialization of arterial and [inaudible] where commercial
development is not established. Commercial zoning on major transportation facilities
should be limited to an area within 500’ of the center of such intersection, or to a strip no
more than 300’ deep. And this is quoted from the Comprehensive Use Plan. And I do
have copies of this if anyone would like a copy after the meeting. I’ll be glad to provide
a copy of this. I’m not ashamed to provide that to you. That’s all I have.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. And if you would give the petitions to the Clerk so we
could have those for the record. Do we have some other speakers? Okay, if y’all would
come up individually to the podium, give us your name and address for the record.
Mr. Cromer: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Harold Cromer. I live at 2706 Mayo Road. The
rezoning on this property, at the present time I would be the only resident that it would
affect. Mr. Brown and myself have discussed this and I am very sympathetic to the
property owners, I’m very sympathetic to Mr. Brown and what he’s trying to achieve.
And there’s all possibilities that would increase the value of home. But that’s not what
I’m looking for. Stevens Creek Road at the intersection of Mayor Road is one of the
busiest intersections there is above Riverwatch Parkway and Stevens Creek Road. You
have to look at the traffic out there on a daily basis to see what goes on. An exit on Mayo
Road would be probably safer, but no more efficient than it would be on Stevens Creek
Road. Now the businesses that are already out there, that exist were residences. There’s
a gift shop on the south side of Mayo Road. Corner of Stevens Creek and Mayo Road,
that was a home. There’s a widow who lives there, has a little gift shop. Next to her,
south of her, is a heating and air conditioning business that the man only uses to park his
trucks and conduct his business. Mayor Road, for those of you that are not familiar with
it, is approximately a mile long. It’s a dead end both ways. It dead ends at Big Hunt
Road going west and it dead ends at Stevens Creek Road going east. I frankly don’t see
how it could be practical to put a traffic light there. As Commissioner Boyles has already
stated, there’s a curve and a hill and I think were it not for anti-lock brakes, I don’t know
how people get from being killed out there. The traffic is tremendous going both ways,
as was stated, early in the morning and late in the afternoon. But I would like the
Commission to consider the amount of traffic and the condition for people coming from
the subdivisions on both sides of Stevens Creek Road and down Mayo Road. Thank you
very much.
Mr. Mayor: You’ve asked for denial of both?
Mr. Cromer: I’m asking for denial on both of them.
Mr. Mayor: All right, thank you. Next, if you’d give us your name and address
for the record, please.
29
Mr. Brown: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, my name is John Brown and I thought I
was the closest person to this.
Mr. Cromer: My front yard.
(Laughter)
Mr. Brown: On the other side of the street, I’m the closest. Selfishly, I would say
that, you now, it is really good. My wife and I get up and walk at about 4:30. We didn’t
go this morning cause I stayed up late last night practicing, Steve. But it’s so good to get
to the end of Mayo. And Mayo is actually exactly 1.0 miles. I walk it every day. We’ve
only lived there, I guess a couple of years. We moved from Martinez there and with the
boys gone, I figured this would be the last house. So selfishly, I would not like to see
anything else make it any busier. In the mornings, you can hear the frogs. (Makes frog
sounds.) And one morning, I saw a family of possums going across that road. There’s
always a big turtle there. It is just so good. And Mr. Brown, it would really change the
complexion. I know you mentioned the other day that you drive through Evans to your
house, and I’m looking around, I’m gray, a lot of you guys are gray. I mean you
[inaudible] Pleasant Home – it’s okay, Mr. Mayor, if I look at him while I tell him? But
you wouldn’t want your business on that street you live at in Evans, I would assume, so
that’s what we are saying. It’s already very, very business. Mr. Boyles, it’s already busy
now. I was thinking that we might need to do like Springlakes and get some of those
bumpers because there are two or three guys that go 70 mph on Mayo. But my
selfishness says because it would make it even busier and I want to live there, I figure
I’ve got another 20 at least, so I’d like to stay there. And I wouldn’t want – the lady who
has the little gift shop sells the best jam in the world. I’m glad she’s there. And she says
she’s been there 30 years. We just don’t need – right now [inaudible] Fury’s Ferry and
Riverwatch [inaudible]. They’re not taken up yet. There’s plenty of space there. I don’t
now [inaudible] there was something in the paper about them not getting it complete.
It’s complete. Ready to go. I just don’t see the need. So from a selfish standpoint, I’m
close. I think that’s all I wanted to say. And thank you very, very much. Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Any questions for the objectors or for Mr. Brown? Mr.
Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Just a couple of questions. I’m somewhat familiar with the area. Mr.
Patty, what is the most likely use of this property in the future? The map that I see here is
pretty much open, open ground between Mayo and Riverwatch. Undeveloped property.
Mr. Patty: Well, I would submit to you that the plan provides for non-residential
zoning within 500’ of the intersection, and that would include this property and
approximately 150’ of the property he’d like zoned Professional. If you look at similarly-
situated properties, this is a T intersection. You’ve got two other properties that
[inaudible]. Both of them are zoned Professional, I mean both of them are zoned
Commercial. The question is, frankly, R-1 zoning, which would only allow single-family
30
houses to build on this property, does that provide for a reasonable use of the property?
And I frankly think the answer is no. Now as far as the Professional, if you get on down
Mayo Road, even though the plans support 150’ of that to be Professional, you know, you
do have houses. Across the street you’ve got somebody who is building a new house
over there. So I don’t think you can make the same case that the present zoning isn’t
adequate. But the plan does support 150’ of that Professional being zoned, 150’ of that
second request being zoned Professional, but, you know, I think the Planning
Commission has made a reasonable decision there, but I think the corner – I just don’t
think R-1A, Single-family Residential, is the reasonable zoning for that property. I don’t
know if I answered your question or not.
Mr. Cheek: You did. And I guess the thing that – we learned a lesson on
Tobacco Road at Sand Ridge subdivision where property zoned Commercial years and
years ago – but it was a situation to where sooner or later – we fought and fought and
sooner or later something was going to come in there. And we were able to get
something Professional – Business – in that property and working with the neighborhood
and their ingress and egress position. That has not been a detriment to the community
and it has not been nearly a traffic problem and so forth, but in any event it was
something that did occupy the space and did not bring – it was a quality piece of
construction, and that is my concern here, is that if we defer this, there’s no guarantee
that in the future we’re going to [inaudible], in fact, there’s a chance we will get
something less desirable located in that position. And Stevens Creek Road is definitely
becoming more commercial and I have deep feelings for the neighbors in that area. We
fight the same battle in south Richmond County all the time. But its close to Riverwatch
and the ability for this property to perhaps be used in a way that would be less
detrimental, if you can put it that way, if zoned as requested today, I think would be a
better way to go than to just leave it there and hope that nothing bad happens in the
future. Mr. Mayor, I’m just going to support, I’d like to support the zoning for these
properties. Are we taking both of these at the same time?
Mr. Mayor: Well, we can, unless we see some reason to split the two. But if we
have a motion to approve both of these items, then we can take it that way.
Mr. Speaker; [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: Just a moment. [inaudible] Commissioner, see if he’s going to make
a motion or [inaudible].
Mr. Cheek: I’m just, I’m concerned, I don’t want, like the neighbors I don’t want
to see us intrude into the neighborhood, but I do think the corner there [inaudible] we
need to look at. I guess I’m trying to look at a win-win situation here.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ll continue discussion. Mr. Brown, you wanted to
make a comment?
31
Mr. Brown: Yes, sir. Let me, my theory is as Riverwatch [inaudible]. And as
that occurs, you know, this property right here [inaudible] and this part is going to be,
too. And my theory is that you have the highest density of [inaudible] intersections, and
as you move back toward Residential, you step down [inaudible]. And that’s what we’re
doing. We’re going from B-1, I mean a B-2 to B-1 [inaudible]. And we’ve agreed to put
on record how we are going to design these buildings in perpetuity. And then also, you
know, we want to put a sidewalk in our development [inaudible] to give access to the
park and people that want to travel Mayo Road and enjoy that atmosphere back there.
But on that note, I talked to George and I know the [inaudible] going down Mayo Road.
We asked for five lots [inaudible]. We’re willing to give up the two that abut Residential.
There’s a pond right there that we’re willing to stop at the pond, which makes a natural
buffer between Professional to the corner and Residential that continues down Mayo
Road. I don’t really know if we could even develop that lot with the pond on it. It
doesn’t have a dam. It’s just a natural wet weather pond in there. And then there’s two –
there’s one lot there, then there’s another lot before you reach Mr. Fleming’s property,
and with that on the Professional [inaudible]. I think that is pretty complementary of the
neighborhood and the style of the neighborhood and sets a, sets a sense of stability and
permanency. I mean this won’t change. [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: Let me ask you a question, if I could, Steve.
Mr. Brown: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: The item as it relates to the P-1 zoning, the way it’s presented to us
today, is that for five lots or – you just said –
Mr. Brown: We did request five. We agreed to delete two.
Mr. Mayor: Is that the request before us that’s on the agenda, Mr. Patty? Is that
the five lots?
Mr. Patty: That would be all the frontage on Mayo Road, with the exception of
the 306’ requested for Commercial zoning. That was the request and presented to as
denial from the Planning Commission.
Mr. Mayor: Denial of the original request. Mr. Boyles.
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for the purpose of keeping item 25 and 26
separated, because apparently that’s a change in item 26. I’d like to move that the
Commission deny item 25.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to that motion to deny item number 25?
Mr. Colclough: Second.
32
Mr. Mayor: We have a second from Mr. Colclough. Is there any further
discussion? We’ll take up the motion on 25 to deny that one. We’ll continue discussion
on that. Mr. Bridges.
Mr. Bridges: The 25 is the two acres, is that right? Now what you just passed
around, is that what you are going to put on the corner?
Mr. Brown: The first.
Mr. Bridges: The very first one that went around?
Mr. Brown: [inaudible]
Mr. Bridges: Okay.
Mr. Brown: That’s professional architectural design.
Mr. Bridges: George, if I could, what was the reasoning of the board or the staff
in recommending the corner here but denying the balance back there?
Mr. Patty: Well, the staff’s position was that you should follow the Plan that
would zone anything within 500’ of the center of the intersection, and that included the
corner, two acres for Commercial and would include part, but not all of the Professional.
It would have included 154’ of the area they requested Professional for. The Planning
Commission felt that – one Planning Commissioner questioned whether Mayo Road is in
fact a major street. One Planning Commissioner pointed out that there’s houses right
across from the area requested Professional, and that makes a difference. And frankly,
some of them were just reluctant to zone it Professional. Zone part of the lot, but not all
of it. They [inaudible] all or not and therefore they voted against it.
Mr. Bridges: Right now it’s Residential; right? The corner is?
Mr. Patty: Yes, sir.
Mr. Bridges: And maybe I’m looking at what I was thinking about earlier here
with what this gentleman passed out, but I thought we had an ordinance that said any
intersection that’s not now developed commercially we would not develop commercially.
Is that in the Master Plan or what is that?
Mr. Patty: Let me read you what the Plan says.
Mr. Bridges: Okay.
Mr. Patty: You know, if you remember the ’95 Plan, it was adopted before
consolidation. You have neighborhood planning areas for the neighborhoods. The west
Augusta neighborhood planning area that is the pertinent section is as follows: number
33
(c) “Discourage commercialization of arterials and collectors where commercial
development is not established, except at major intersections, including but not limited to
the following.” And one of those is Stevens Creek Road, and it goes on to say
“commercial zoning on such transportation facilities should be limited to an area within
500’ of the center of the intersection or a strip no more than 300’ in depth.” There are
two factors here. One, is it established now? And like I said, the two similarly-situated
properties are zoned Commercial. The second factor is, is it a major street? I think that’s
an arguable point, but like I say, you’ve already got the Commercial, and you know, it’s
definitely a collector street. It’s not an arterial, but it’s definitely a collector street with
other streets running into it.
Mr. Bridges: Okay. So we really don’t have an ordinance which says the, where
the intersection’s at, if it’s not Commercial now – we don’t have that?
Mr. Patty: No.
Mr. Bridges: That’s not out there. Okay.
Mr. Patty: You’ve got a Plan that consist of policies that try to fit, that give you
guidance, gentle guidance for specific situations. You’ve got to interpret that Plan.
Mr. Bridges: What’s the highest and best use for that corner there?
Mr. Patty: Commercial. C-1.
Mr. Bridges: And that’s the staff’s recommendation?
Mr. Patty: Yes.
Mr. Bridges: I sympathize with the neighborhood and everything and I certainly
– I mean the way the Committee, the Commission has come out and recommended these,
I can understand the reasoning for it. I wouldn’t want to have a home at the corner of
Stevens Creek and Mayo, either, but I haven’t made my decision yet. Mr. Mayor, was
there a proposal to place this back for further consideration?
Mr. Mayor: It was a suggestion to discuss from Commissioner Shepard to let
staff take a look at this with respect to the transportation issues, the traffic signal
and so forth.
Mr. Bridges: I make it in the form of a motion for both items.
Mr. Mayor 25 and 26?
Mr. Bridges: 25 and 26.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
34
Mr. Shepard: I’ll second that.
Mr. Mayor: And your substitute motion would have the effect of this come
back at the next Commission meeting?
Mr. Bridges: That would be correct.
Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute motion. Is there any discussion on the
substitute motion? Mr. Mays.
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, in reference to both motions, has there been any meeting
with the residents/objectors and the petitioner in this plan for both of these items already?
Mr. Brown: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: You have?
Mr. Brown: In length. I haven’t met with all the people, but I was here – if you
want me to speak, I’ll speak.
Mr. Mayor: I want you to speak. I want you to answer Mr. Mays’ question as
fully as you can.
Mr. Brown: I mean I – we came here – I did this on our best effort. I talked to
George. We asked him, we had this property, what was the Planning Commission
[inaudible]. It’s not our intention at all, when we first started this endeavor, to any way
have a negative impact on this neighborhood at all. And we developed these ideas, these
concepts, we’re willing to put something in writing, something that’s recordable, that
creates something that someone cannot come back and change. I spoke to Ms. Stewart at
length. I went by to see her. I spoke to David at length. I spoke to Mr. Cromer twice,
who lives across the street. I mean I don’t know what else I can do.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays.
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, what I’m, what I’m observing is that – and I’m – if
Ulmer’s motion does not pass, I’m going to vote for Tommy’s. But what I was looking
at is that I think it’s good when you send these things back, it’s good for the professionals
who consider what changes may happen or may not happen, but I think it really falls
upon deaf ears to a point that if all the affected people are not in the same room at the
same time. Now that’s not to say that when they get in the room at the same time that
they are going to reach an agreement. I’ve seen it come back to a point, some times
compromises are made, some things are put in, and then everybody lives happily ever
after. Then some times, nothing changes. But I think certainly if it’s going to be sent
back and this body cannot make folks meet, but I think if you’re going to send it back,
then I think there needs to be an organized effort to meet with everybody that’s
35
concerned, so that the issues of traffic, the aesthetics of it, the things that Mr. Brown
wants to do, the things that they are totally concerned about in that area, if that’s going to
be done, I think that they maybe need to before – once a vote is taken, if the substitute
motion passes, then I think they can have something, and particularly if that’s the last
zoning item that’s there, I know Mr. Patty likes to play referee on special occasions. And
it might be a good idea if that’s set to a point that a meeting date or proposed meeting
date or two can be set to where these two groups can come together and discuss all the
issues that are there. If they are not worked out, obviously in two weeks we’ll be back
and we’ll vote it up or down on both items, 25 and 26. But I think to send it back and
look at professional things on there, those are good things to do, but when they involve
people, you’ve got to put them in the process and get a mindset of everybody that’s
concerned. Because I think on Mr. Brown’s part, I think you’ve got honorable people on
both sides of this issue. But I think that immediately when the question went up, there
was already to a point friendly disagreement and everybody had not been in the same
room together. So I think that in itself would lead me if you’re going to do a substitute
motion then I think George, maybe when we [inaudible] if that motion passes, cause it
may fail and it may be denied on both of them, but if the one to send it on is passed, then
I think to be able to gather before they leave, [inaudible] so that they can get together,
and then if that doesn’t happen then we’ll be back here and let us vote it up or down.
That’s just my only suggestion and observance, Mr. Mayor, on how we’ve done these
type of situations before.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Mays. Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And just to kind of follow on what
Commissioner Mays has said, I’d like to at least include language, if the maker of
the substitute motion will allow it, to strongly urge the neighbors and Mr. Brown to
get together
and try to come to some terms and I would offer that with a word of caution,
that there are things that will be coming to that area in the future and that when a few of
your neighbors move away, and there is less of a force to fight change, you may get
something you are quite unhappy with, versus something that may, you may be able to
compromise with and come up that is in fact a benefit to your community with sidewalks
and other things. So I do encourage you to at least take a look and discuss this thing and
see if there are some common grounds, grounds available that you can come to, to both
preserve your neighborhood and put something on that corner that is going to be
beneficial and protected for the long term.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb.
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, if I understand the motion correctly, you gave us until the
next Commission meeting to do it.
Mr. Mayor: Two weeks.
Mr. Kolb: We would like 30 days.
We don’t believe that we can do an
adequate -- at best, we can only give you our best guess as to what the transportation
36
issues would be. We would like a little more time to actually look at it and take more
study time.
Mr. Mayor: Steve, how long, how would 30 days affect you?
Mr. Brown: That’s fine. I mean whatever they wish. I’d just like to make one
comment to Mr. Cheek and Mr. Mays.
Mr. Mayor: You wouldn’t have any objection?
Mr. Brown: No, I wouldn’t. I’ve talked to these people, and I understand their
concern. I’ve been there. And I’m there. But they want single-family residential. That’s
it. That’s all they want. And I don’t believe that what we’re proposing here is going to
have any at all, any adverse effect on their privacy, on their right to enjoy their property
whatsoever. If it did, I wouldn’t be here. I would not be here today to try to help out
Courtney and her two sisters on this property. And if I thought it was bad for Richmond
County, I wouldn’t be here. I was born in Richmond County. I take pride in where I’m
born. And I’m trying to do what we think is best for this neighborhood. And that’s our
concern, and that’s what we are trying to do. We’re putting all of this in writing, we’re
guaranteeing it, we’re giving our word. We’re not just giving you our word, we’re giving
it to you in writing. We’re willing to follow the guidelines of the county. And it’s a
simple issue, whether it’s going to remain single-family or if they are going to have
something that is going to be compatible with the future of this neighborhood. That’s the
issue.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Bridges. Have you got anything else?
Mr. Bridges: Well, I was just going to say, as far as making that motion, I was
going to incorporate the 30 days as well as the meeting between the developer and the
neighborhood, too.
Mr. Mayor: Anything else?
Mr. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I call for the question.
Mr. Mayor: All right. One final word from Mr. Cheek and we’ll proceed with
the -- I’m sorry, Mr. Williams, did you have your hand up? I didn’t want to pass over
you.
Mr. Williams: I yield.
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead, Mr. Cheek and then we’ll go to Mr. Williams.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Brown, I fully understand and agree. We live with places where
people have come into south Richmond County and did not care, that would not put it in
writing, in fact misled us in many occasions. And this is a case of where we all recognize
37
where Riverwatch and Stevens Creek are going to become commercial corridors sooner
or later, and I just, I think sometimes for a pause and perhaps just in time to think this
through it’s an opportunity, as you said, to get something that is guaranteed and in
writing and would be better than many of the storage units or other things that come,
which are right up the street from this, which would be an ugly addition to that general
area. There are some run-down convenience stores stacked along those roads and things,
and this is a chance to perhaps get something very nice that would be stable and for the
long term guaranteed, and that’s something we’ve never seen in south Richmond County
and would love to have.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’ve been very quiet, but I wanted just to
add a couple of comments. And I listened to everybody quite attentively and I’m
sensitive to the neighbors and their objections, but our statistics has shown that Augusta
has grown 5% over some period of years. We’re talking about traffic, but every day
Augusta is growing. And if we going grow, if we going be an effective community,
change is going to take place. And I understand again the neighbors coming down, not
wanting stuff in their front yards and not wanting something that’s going to decrease the
value of their homes in their neighborhoods. But when you got somebody who is trying
to bring something positive and something that’s fitting in that community, I think we
need to sit down and at least talk and at least try to get some understanding from each
other. We’re talking about the traffic issue. The traffic is growing every day in Augusta.
There are several different areas that need traffic signals that we have not signalized. We
talk about how much the cost is, but you can’t grow and stay the same size. You’ve got
to expand when you grow. Some of it you like, some of it you don’t like. If you meet the
guidelines, if you meet the guidelines of the law, we going to have to bite our teeth and
hold our tongue and just do whatever is right. But I think the motion is good that we
going to go back and at least sit and talk and at least try to find out some of the pros and
cons. Maybe there are some compromises that could be made that everybody be pleased
with. What Commissioner Cheek said earlier, it could be a situation where something is
coming in, fast food store or something of that nature, that you really don’t want, that
really going to cause a congestion and going cause unsightly signs and stuff going in
there. What I say, I would welcome in my neighborhood, trust me. But I mean my
neighborhood needs some improvement in every aspect of this community, but I just
think that it’s a good motion, I think that we ought to support that, I think if that 30 days
not going to affect Mr. Brown, that give them time to look at it and see.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beard has called the question. The Chair will rule there has been
adequate debate on the motion, the substitute motion which would bring this back to us in
30 days. All in favor of that motion, please vote in the affirmative.
(Vote on substitute motion)
Mr. Boyles, Mr. Colclough and Mr. Hankerson vote No.
Motion carries 7-3.
38
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb, would you have staff please facilitate an opportunity for
these groups to get together and talk about this?
Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to know when that meeting is, too, cause I’d like
to be there.
Mr. Mayor: All right. All right, let’s take up --
Mr. Wall: So that we don’t have run another notice, would that be August 19 that
this would come back before the Commission, so that those that are here would know
when -- that would be the second meeting?
Mr. Mayor: Second meeting in August?
Mr. Wall: Second meeting in August.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. August 19. We’ll get word to Ms. Stewart, and I’m sure Fran
will let everybody know.
(Laughter)
Mr. Mayor: What we’d like to do is go back to item number 6, which Mr.
Colclough asked be pulled from the consent agenda. And I think that will be our last
zoning request. Madame Clerk, if you’ll read the caption, please.
The Clerk:
6. Z-03-54 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Maureen Ruiz requesting a Special
Exception 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 2033 Bassford Drive and containing .37 acres. (Tax
Map 164 Parcel 65) DISTRICT 4
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough.
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Patty.
Mr. Patty: Yes, sir?
Mr. Colclough: Is there another day care home on Bassford?
Mr. Patty: Not according to our records. We keep a [inaudible], with all of these
that are approved and licensed by us on it, and I assume if there was, License &
Inspection would be on it.
39
Mr. Colclough: Ask License & Inspection then.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Sherman. Rob Sherman. Rob, we have a question from
Commissioner Colclough for you.
Mr. Colclough: Rob, is there another family day care on Bassford?
Mr. Sherman: Bassford?
The Clerk: Bassford. B-A-S-S-
Mr. Colclough: F-O-R-D. Bassford Road.
Mr. Sherman: I would have to check into it. I don’t know.
Mr. Colclough: You don’t know?
Mr. Sherman: Bassford?
Mr. Colclough: Yes, sir.
Mr. Sherman: Have you asked me about this before?
Mr. Colclough: No, sir, I’m asking you now. Another family day care.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s -- Mr. Sherman, if you don’t know, let’s do this. The Chair is
going to take a recess anyway. Let’s take a recess now and you can call your office, and
when we come back we can resume discussion of this item. A five minute recess.
[RECESS]
Mr. Mayor: It’s after recess. Mr. Colclough, you have the floor and you had a
question for Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, I found my answer, so I don’t need Mr. Sherman to
I’m going to make a
answer it. But what I’m going to do – I may not get a second, but
motion that we deny this request for a family day care.
Mr. Mayor: Motion to deny item number 5, then. Is there a second to that
motion?
Mr. Bridges: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, the petitioner is here and we’d like to hear from the petitioner,
Ms. Ruiz.
40
Ms. Ruiz: I would like to know why it was denied. I would like to know why it
is being denied, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Well, it hasn’t been denied.
Ms. Ruiz: Oh.
Mr. Mayor: There’s just been a motion, so if you would like to speak as to why it
should be approved or not denied, this is your opportunity to speak.
Ms. Ruiz: Yes, sir. I am [inaudible] family day care in my home because of my
small children, give me the opportunity to raise them myself rather than put them in a
commercial place or someone else’s home day care. And also give me a chance – my
husband has been diagnosed with an illness. It give me a chance to be home and take
care of him as well. And I just love doing my job, taking care of small kids and you
know, raising them and instilling morals and given them that personal and tender care
that they don’t get at home, because they with me so many hours, by the time they go
home it’s time to go to bed. And like I say, my reason for this is that I am able to take
care of my own children, cause the school bus stop is right in front of my house. Where
they get off the bus. And you know, I get a chance to work from home.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Ruiz, are you caring for children in your home who are not
residents of that home now?
Ms. Ruiz: Would you repeat the question, please?
Mr. Mayor: Are you caring in your home for children who are not residents of
that home?
Ms. Ruiz: That is correct, sir.
Mr. Mayor: How many children are you caring for there now?
Ms. Ruiz: I have six children.
Mr. Mayor: You have six? Okay.
Mr. Colclough: Those your own?
Ms. Ruiz: I’m sorry?
Mr. Colclough: Of your own?
Ms. Ruiz: Two of my own.
Mr. Mayor: And four come from outside your home?
41
Ms. Ruiz: No, no. I have six from [inaudible]. My kids are in school.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Ms. Ruiz: Right.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, first of all, I’d like to know the answer to the question
that Rob was supposed to been trying to come back and bring to Commissioner
Colclough and then I will continue it.
Mr. Colclough: The two streets are similar, but the names are different. One is
Basswood and the other is Bassford.
Mr. Williams: So that means there’s not another day care?
Mr. Colclough: Not on Bassford.
Mr. Sherman: I checked with the ladies down at the office and we do not have a
business license for anything on Bassford.
Mr. Williams: Thank you. I just wanted to find out what the outcome was to that
question. I was in Planning & Zoning and I told the young lady to look for some
opposition today because of the guidelines. Out of 159 counties in this State of Georgia,
we’re the only ones that directing or administering license to do family day care. The
lady had no objectors at Planning & Zoning and I don’t think we have any now this
afternoon, Mr. Mayor. But my thing is that she’s coming and asking for a license to be,
to be a family day care in the neighborhood. I understand about the neighborhoods and
we can talk a great extent about neighborhoods but if she was talking about putting up a
big sign or any kind of sign for that matter, if she talking about putting up sliding boards
and different stuff to change the structure of the neighborhood as to make it look bad with
playgrounds equipment, I can understand us denying it. But for the life of me, I cannot
figure out why when people come to try to better themselves and to help children – you
know, at last [inaudible] meeting we talked about the alcohol sale to minors and met a
lady at the bank today who talked about how young people are going astray because
people are not training and raising children any more. And that’s our biggest problems
with our youth. But when a person comes to this board and wants to be licensed to have
a business and not change the structure, and with no opposition, we make a motion to
deny it? I mean I’ve got a serious problem with that now. If there was some objectors,
then I may still be able to see why you denying. But somebody need to tell me before we
go any further why are we making a motion and why we won’t support a home business
whose not a rental but a home business who we can put stipulations. George, help me
out, now. We can put stipulation in that says that they won’t, they can’t change the
structure of their home as far as signs and playground equipment; is that right?
42
Mr. Mayor: Let me do this. Since you’re asking about why we deny it, and I
think that’s an appropriate question for the maker of the motion to answer for you.
Mr. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible] and if that doesn’t satisfy you, then we’ll go to some
other people.
Mr. Colclough; Well, Commissioner Williams, the reason why I made the motion
is that I think that commercial businesses in neighborhoods are not the place for them.
We have commercial zones and I would applaud the young lady if she would have a
building in a commercial zone where she could have a family day care. A home is
someplace where someone invested their money in to be able to live in, in a
neighborhood without commercialization. And that is the reason why I made the motion
to deny this application.
Mr. Williams: Okay, Mr. Colclough, I can understand that, but tell me how many
small businesses that you know that can afford a [inaudible] go down and rent a building
and open up a business downtown. Now if they going have 25 children and they got a
large facility, I can understand that. But you talking about a small neighborhood
situation.
Mr. Colclough: We do have stipulations at Planning & Zoning where it says that
you can keep your own kids plus two kids of somebody else’s without a license. That is
in the rules and regulations of our ordinance. Any more than that, you are going into a
commercial type business.
Mr. Williams: I think the ordinance reads that you can keep six unrelated. They
don’t have to be her children personally. They can be related. Be cousins, grandmother’s
sister’s brother’s child, uncle’s children, as long as they are related she can have six of
those and her own children and not – and then two being unrelated, I believe, is that right,
George?
Mr. Patty: Actually, she can have as many related as she can get in the house plus
two unrelated.
Mr. Williams: Okay. Okay.
Mr. Patty: By special exception that allows her to have six unrelated in addition
to whoever else is there.
Mr. Williams: And my saying, my saying, these are young business people who
are coming to try to better themselves, to help the community. There are people who
need this service in the community. Now if my mind don’t fail me if I go back to some
years ago, people like her had to leave her house to go to somebody else house to take
43
care of somebody else children while they worked. But now what she’s doing now is
rather than leave her house to go to somebody else house to watch their children, she
watching them, other people’s children, at her own house. This ain’t just got started.
This been ever since the beginning time. People been watching other people’s children.
And, and, and I think they ought to be commended, I think it’s something that she ought
to be proud of, she ain’t on welfare, she ain’t coming in here begging and asking us to do
something for her. She’s only asking for a license that we can regulate, that we know
what’s going on, and we going to get revenue from. But if we see here and deny this one,
along with some more been denied, and I told her in Planning that if she didn’t have any
objectors, to look for trouble cause going to be trouble when she got here today. And the
first thing we did was, before we heard her case, was offer to deny her license today.
And Planning & Zoning passed it, she met all the guidelines. What do we have these
guidelines for, George, if we put them out there and people meet them, then we come in
here as Commissioners and we turn them back? I can save some time cause I’m on
Planning. I don’t have to come to that meeting and then to have some approved and then
come in here and we turn it down. [inaudible] I mean either the rules shouldn’t be in
effect at all, we ought to tell them don’t come, and they are out there, many out there that
we don’t know about that [inaudible] we can’t keep a record of. So, Mr. Mr. Mayor, I’m
going to make a substitute motion that we approve this lady, who don’t have any
objectors and don’t have anybody to oppose her, approve her in giving her a license with
the stipulations there that she cannot put a sign, that she cannot change the interior or the
exterior of her home to present, to make it look like a day care, it should look like the
home that it looks like now. So I may not get a second on that, but that’s my motion, Mr.
Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s see if there is a second.
Mr. Mays: I’ll second it.
Mr. Mayor: There’s a second to that motion. We have a substitute motion to
approve with stipulation. Mr. Colclough, you wanted the floor again.
Mr. Colclough: I was going to explain to Mr. Williams, I came down here five
years ago and there were no rules and regulations that Planning & Zoning had. I was part
of that group that helped to facilitate the rules and regulations that we have in place now
where we can keep neighborhoods as neighborhoods, commercial as commercial. So I
remember when I came here that there was no rules and no regulations that govern
anything in this town.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, thank you, if I can respond to that.
Mr. Mayor: One minute, Mr. Williams, you need to be recognized.
Mr. Williams: Well, yes, sir, I need to respond to what he just said, thought,
because –
44
Mr. Mayor: Well, y’all can just keep going back and forth here and not give
anybody else a chance to speak. Now let me recognize you and I will recognize you.
Mr. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Give me a chance to recognize you. Go ahead, Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Okay, Mr. Mayor. I’m glad he, Mr. Colclough, said that because
if he was a part of making the rules that Planning & Zoning have, then something is
wrong with him coming to denying it cause he know what the rules said in Planning &
Zoning. He said he’s a part of when they made it.
Mr. Mayor: Let me ask a question of Mr. Patty. Do the rules permit her to have
signage in front of her home if this is approved?
Mr. Patty: No.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. So you don’t need to put that in the motion then. Mr.
Bridges, you had your hand up.
Mr. Bridges: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I think this is a clear issue of a
business, a commercial business going into a neighborhood, and I always try and look at
this package that the Planning Commission presents. And this is, every lot there is less
than an acre that’s a residence, and then we make a special exception to place a business
in the middle of residential area. And it’s like Mr. Colclough said, when you go home at
night you don’t want – or in the evening or day time, any 24 hours, you’re there for a
residential purpose. You don’t want a business, you don’t want traffic, you don’t want
anything. And to establish a special exception for one business, establish a special
exception for the next one, to use that as a practice to establish another one. Now I don’t
think it’s proper for a neighborhood, particularly one that’s just, it’s nothing but strictly
residential, just you know, one acre homes throughout the area. And we’ve denied these
in the past. It’s been our common practice and policy, just as a policy established by
practice, to deny commercial businesses in residential areas, and I think we should
uphold the motion.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I have to also concur with Commissioner
Bridges and Colclough. And just further make a point here. Item 5 that we have put on
hold – I’ve driven up the street several times and much of the time is single-lane traffic
under normal conditions without adding a business to that. Apparently the Zoning &
Planning board did not, board members did not go down and take a look-see for
themselves. But the introduction of the business, a business, increases traffic in the
neighborhood, has to be dependent upon the conditions in that neighborhood, and as
Commissioner Bridges has pointed out, these are smaller lots. It’s a high density
development as it is. Adding additional traffic to that area is detrimental on top of the
45
fact that when you introduce a commercial business, a for-profit business into a
residential neighborhood, you change the nature of the neighborhood.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays.
Mr. Mays: Yes, Mr. Mayor, let me just say this real quickly. The rules are there
and what is going to get into a very confusing state, I think if we, if we are going to – and
I’m looking lately – we’ve had a large percentage of reversals lately on – whether it be
day care for children, whether it’s adult sitting, or even to a point of personal care homes.
Let’s be real honest about something. We’ve not been going by just what the rules say.
Now, gentlemen, let’s be, let’s be real truthful now, what we’ve been going by is that
we’ve let the rules make a basis for establishment and then if there are objectors from the
area that are overwhelming, and I think all of us to a person have been supportive of what
the neighborhood wants, whether it’s from the river or whether it’s past the south side of
Tobacco Road. Now that’s been the real rule. Hadn’t been the rule that’s been written.
It’s been the rule that if folks show up, it gets turned down. Now we ought to go with the
fairness of the rule that we’ve been doing. If it goes through one board, nobody objects,
if it comes to us, nobody objects, then we ought to apply the fairness of the spirit of the
rule. Because sometimes we’ve had people to come in where actually people have been
supportive in an area to say I want this person to keep my child, and they come in and
they do it. Different strokes for different folks. All neighborhoods don’t want the same
thing. All neighborhood may not have the same [inaudible]. So I think when we say
that, all of us want to be fair to the neighborhood. I think [inaudible] when we getting
neighborhood folk come down, sign petitions saying we don’t want things in the
neighborhood even where zoning may have approved it, we’ve turned them down. I
think that’s fair game because we’ve helped the neighborhood. But when they come in to
a point that the objectors are not there, and then the objectors are not there when they
come to this body, then we ought to have a certain standard of fairness [inaudible]
objectors, not the written portion of the rules. The objectors are what we gauge our
support by or our lack of support. So you know, that kind of [inaudible] itself. That’s
[inaudible] we been voting. So I think when zero objectors show up at two meetings and
you have a legitimate situation that’s on the books, now if we want to outlaw it and
telling Planning & Zone we are not going to have any and [inaudible] determined by law
whether we ought to be hearing them or not, then I think we get into another category.
But I think the rule of thumb that we’ve been using basically has been the spirit of the
law, based on objectors that have been there, and that’s what has determined whether
we’ve [inaudible] things up or down. I think that’s where we’ve been going, if we really
want to be fair about it. That’s what we’ve been doing. And that’s why I second the
motion.
Mr. Mayor: Anything further? We have to approve – the substitute motion is to
approve it. Call the question on that. All in favor ---
Mr. Mays: Any objectors, for the record, Mr. Mayor?
46
Mr. Mayor: For the record, any objectors? None are noted. All in favor of the
substitute motion to approve this, please vote in the affirmative.
Ms. Ruiz: Can I say something?
Mr. Mayor: No, ma’am, we’re voting now. Just a moment.
(Vote on substitute motion)
Mr. Bridges, Mr. Kuhlke, Mr. Cheek, Mr. Hankerson, Mr. Boyles and Mr. Colclough
vote No.
Motion fails 4-6.
Mr. Mayor: That takes us back to the original motion.
Mr. Bridges: Would you call those names off again, Madame Clerk?
The Clerk: I have Mr. Beard voting yes, Mr. Marion Williams, Mr. Willie Mays
and Mr. Shepard voting yes. Voting no I have Mr. Bridges, Mr. Colclough, Mr. Kuhlke,
Mr. Cheek, Mr. Hankerson and Mr. Boyles.
Mr. Mayor: I thought it was 6-4.
Mr. Wall: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: That’s why you’re the Attorney and not the Finance Director.
(Laughter)
Mr. Mayor: That motion is defeated. That takes us back to the original motion,
which was to deny this. Now if you wanted to be heard, I’ll allow you to be heard.
Ms. Ruiz: Thank you. I apologize for interrupting.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am.
Ms. Ruiz: There’s a beauty salon a few houses down from me. How would affect
that, because that really draws a lot of traffic, where as with my business, my parents
come, drop the kids off and they leave. There is no cars hanging around, there is no
traffic at all. And the beauty salon is six houses, across the street, down to the front of
the road. Go to the main road. Beauty salon.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. George, I need to get you to do something
for me. Will you tell us how many unrelated children again she can have without a
license?
47
Mr. Patty: Two.
Mr. Williams: Two unrelated children. How many related children can she have
without a license?
Mr. Patty: However many she can get in the house.
Mr. Williams: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Patty, how does one substantiate relationship? Is that cousins –
Mr. Patty: We give them a blood test.
(Laughter)
Mr. Cheek: In all seriousness. I mean I know it’s probably never been really
challenged. I’ve got houses full of cousins, uncles, brothers, nephews and stuff. You
know, 50 people living in a three-bedroom house [inaudible] dealt with.
Ms. Ruiz: How do I tell my parents – they –
Mr. Mayor: Just a minute. Let him answer the question. Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Sherman: We would have to go to the door and we would have to ask are
these individual related. Regardless of how many they’re keeping there, if they’re in the
business to generate a profit, they are required to get a business license.
Mr. Mayor: The question was how, what criteria do you use to determine whether
somebody is related?
Mr. Sherman: We have to ask.
Mr. Mayor: How far out do your relations go? Members of the immediate
family.
Mr. Sherman: [inaudible]
Mr. Patty: I’ll be honest with you. I can’t give you the answer. It goes to a
certain point, though. How you, other than their testimony, how you make that
determination I don’t now.
48
Mr. Cheek: I’ve got 15 people living in a three-bedroom house right now that are
supposedly related that aren’t. And really, it’s a serious question maybe we’ll get
answered later. But there needs to be an investigative mechanism to determine that.
Mr. Sherman: Well, we go with the definition under the zoning ordinance.
Family and two unrelated individuals.
Mr. Cheek: But if everybody is a cousin and nobody challenges it, I mean they’re
all family.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bridges.
Mr. Bridges: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Rob, are you familiar with a beauty parlor
in the neighborhood that she’s talking about? Is that a licensed one?
Mr. Sherman: I’m not familiar with it. I’ve got a note to check it. If there’s a
beauty parlor out there, we’ll check [inaudible] license.
Mr. Bridges: Please check that. I mean, you know, another Commission may
have done something different, but you know, this one does not [inaudible] at the time
but I’d just like that checked.
Mr. Sherman: We can do that.
Mr. Mayor: Find the relatives, Mr. Patty?
Mr. Patty: What is says is a group of one or two persons whose parents – this is
definition of family – [inaudible] parents or their direct descendants [inaudible] adopted
children (including the domestic employees thereof) – in this case, you can’t have any
employees so that’s moot – together with not more than two person not so related. So it’s
their direct descendants, so I would guess that would mean their children and step-
children, adopted children, and grandchildren.
Mr. Williams: And adopted. Okay. Do it all the time.
Mr. Cheek: I mean do we require a burden on the citizen or is that on the City?
[inaudible]
Mr. Sherman: I would imagine we would end up in Magistrate Court.
Mr. Williams: Exactly right.
Mr. Speaker: Mr. Mayor, could you call the question?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, you had a final comment before we vote on the motion
here?
49
Mr. Williams: Yes, the guidelines says that she meets all the guidelines, we have
been in court with this several times, not just with this but with other similar situations
that we passed the guidelines on. I would hate to see us sit here sit here now with --
Ms. Ruiz: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: One more outburst and I’m going to have to ask you to leave the
chambers while we decide this. Okay? Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you. The guidelines say they meet the guidelines that we
have had, other cases come in here where we have denied them, they met the guidelines,
they carried us to court, we end up paying them and their attorneys. I’m just hoping that
we got more sense as Commissioners to be good stewards of the community’s money and
not have these people go to court and then come back and we have to pay them for going
into business and maybe building that building that Commissioner Colclough was talking
about earlier. That’s all I have, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Williams. The question has been called. The Chair
will rule there has been adequate debate on the motion from Mr. Colclough, and that is to
deny this petition. All in favor of the motion to deny, please vote in the affirmative.
(Vote on original motion)
Mr. Beard, Mr. Williams, Mr. Kuhlke and Mr. Mays vote No.
Motion carries 6-4.
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk, I believe that takes us to item number 28. You want
to read the caption, and then we’ll hear from Mr. Wall.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
28. Update from the Attorney regarding amendment of the Administrator’s
contract. (Requested by Commissioner Williams)
Mr. Wall: I have had several conversation with Mr. Bill [inaudible], who
represents the Administrator, and I have forwarded to him some proposed language as he
requested. I have made two telephone calls since I was asked about this matter and since
it’s been on the agenda, and I called again this morning prior to coming over here, trying
to get a response. But at this point, I have not had a formal response from him, so I’ll
continue to follow up with that.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Jim, we been, we’ve been waiting on this
for quite some now. I understand about the call this morning and recent contact, but if I
50
can make it in the form of a motion that we have something back at committee meeting to
give us a deadline on the Administrator’s contract as to when we should, when we have
to renew that, when that’s supposed to be in effect. We had several contracts. And I got
a problem with some of these contracts that been written, and we talked about them, but
I’d like to make it in the form of a motion that we get a, in committee meeting, a
designated date, along with the other things we supposed to have gotten, but a designated
date as to when we have to renew the Administrator’s contract or we going to default.
Default meaning that we have to go ahead and extend it. If we got to do something, we
need a drop dead date.
Mr. Wall: December 31.
Mr. Williams: Okay, well, I need that [inaudible] committee that we got to renew
his contract on or before December 31.
Mr. Mayor: That’s correct.
Mr. Williams: Okay, well, I just, I been asking for that and I been asking for the
issue about [inaudible] but we have not got back on any of that. But that –
Mr. Wall: I wasn’t aware that you had asked me. I mean I told those who had
asked me that question.
Mr. Williams: Okay, well, update from the Attorney regarding the
Administrator’s contract was several things, but that was one of them. And I didn’t know
that date, but we need to know what that drop dead date was, and you’re saying it’s
December –
st
Mr. Wall: 31.
st
Mr. Williams: 31. Okay, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Al right. Thank you. Mr. Bridges.
Mr. Bridges: Jim, I’m not familiar with any amendment to the contract. What are
we – I didn’t see anything at all in the backup.
Mr. Wall: Well, I was instructed to try to negotiate an amendment to the contract
to deal with the physical examination.
Mr. Bridges: By the Commission?
Mr. Wall: Yes.
Mr. Bridges: When did that take place?
51
Mr. Wall: In April.
Mr. Williams: April? I think it was before, Mr. Mayor, if I can. I think it was
before April, but regardless of the time –
Mr. Wall: [inaudible] April.
Mr. Williams: Okay, regardless of the time, that was something we had asked
him to go back and come back to us and present to us, but we had not had that, Mr.
Bridges.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beard?
Mr. Beard: I guess I’m trying to find out what’s going on here at this point. I was
about to second the motion that he was making, that [inaudible]. I think that there need
to be some discussion on this because – and maybe it’s my fault that I’ve missed some
meetings in this event. But I think at some point we need to discuss this among the body,
whether it’s in legal or wherever, bring back some information. And maybe that needs to
be cleared. And I’m going to suggest that – not in the form of a motion at this point, but
[inaudible] – but maybe at some point we all go over that contract in legal and get a clear
understanding of what, what is expected of the Administrator, what is expected of this
body. Probably not, I don’t know the time line but possibly at the next meeting we can
go into legal or one of the committee meetings next week, could possibly go into a legal
session and discuss this, either through Administrative Services or the Finance
[inaudible] update and give us an opportunity to ask some questions that some of who
have. And it may be a minority of us up here that don’t know, but I think we need that at
this time.
Mr. Williams: [inaudible] motion, Mr. Beard, I mean I can. I mean I was going
to [inaudible] but if we need to, we can have that in the form a motion to have it brought
back to committee, next Commission meeting, go to legal.
Mr. Mayor: Put it on the committee agenda.
Mr. Williams: Well, we can do it that way.
Mr. Mayor: In fact, Mr. Wall, I would ask that you send each Commissioner here
another copy [inaudible], go ahead and send them a copy of Mr. Kolb’s contract, so he
can look over it before the meeting. Then everybody would have the benefit of what the
contract says and the time lines spelled out in the contract.
Mr. Williams: Now we’re talking about contract, Mr. Mayor, now [inaudible]
committee. I mean legal. Y’all want to do it in committee on the floor? It’s fine with
me.
Mr. Mayor: The contract is a matter of public record.
52
Mr. Williams: Okay. Well.
Mr. Mayor: If everybody gets the contract ahead of time, have a chance to look
over it, and then if you want to go into legal meeting to discuss –
Mr. Williams: Any particularly, okay.
Mr. Mayor: -- any particulars, you already have the benefit of having a copy of
the contract and being able to review that. Can you do that, Mr. Wall?
Mr. Wall: Certainly.
Mr. Mayor: Get everybody a copy. Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: I think Mr. Mays had his hand up before me.
Mr. Mays: That’s okay, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to be clear on something, and I
think where the Commissioners can get information, but also in fairness to the
Administrator. I just want to make sure what we’re bringing back is what is being asked.
I wasn’t so much concerned myself personally as to the total contract and the wording of
the contract in there, but I think if another copy of it is going to be sent back, that’s fine.
But I think what needs to be done in clarity, and Commissioner Colclough can probably
back me up, because he serves as the Commission’s representative on the Aviation
Commission at Bush Field. Where I think some clarity needs to be, and this falls, I think,
in an area, quite frankly, of nobody’s fault, but then again it needs to where it [inaudible]
anybody’s fault. There was somewhat of a misunderstanding, I believe, with that
contract as to what date they were supposed to be voting on a contract, whether it was on
a certain date – and I was one of those Commissioners that had verbal contact with Mr.
Wall. But what I think needs to be brought back, and like I said I have no problem about
the contract coming back. That’s all well and good. But I think something needs to be
very clear. First of all, I’ve got a little problem with December 31. There is no
scheduled meeting date for December 31. That’s the first thing. So if you’re saying that,
you could call a meeting on December 31 and lack of a quorum doesn’t appear in this
Chambers –
Mr. Wall: Before December 31.
Mr. Mays: The only thing I got was the December 31. That’s the purpose of
bringing it back in writing, Mr. Wall, so that on or before. But what I’m getting to,
though, in fairness to Mr. Kolb, it needs to be where he agrees to what you say or the
language needs to be sent to him that is – let’s say he doesn’t agree on that time frame
and his not responding makes it become agreement. But I think it ought to be clear the
time frame that you’re talking about within what period, be it a closure date of 7 to 10
days prior to that, 30 days prior to it, because the airport I think is what precipitated
Richard’s discussion with mine, in reference to the fact where it was on a certain date.
53
And I don’t think we need to be, in fairness to the Commission and in fairness to the
st
Administrator, we don’t need to be [inaudible] that occurs on say the 181 day, it makes
th
it a moot question of what we’re talking about, or the 179 day that makes it before time.
I think as long as you – that sounds good to me where you’re going, but I think you and
the Administrator need to have that in agreement so that when we get it in the committee
or get it in the Commission that everybody’s on the same page and that when it’s voted
on in public of that being the understanding of the date that it’s going to be, then that’s
the date that it’s going to be, or the dates that it’s going to be. And have a window
[inaudible] that are within scheduled dates of this Commission [inaudible] result to being
a called meeting to deal with it.
Mr. Wall: It’s not.
st
Mr. Mays: And that was my first observance when you said December 31, cause
if to a point where you’re talking about New Year’s Eve, nobody shows up, and then to a
point where we start scrambling and everybody says well, I thought. Well, it doesn’t
need to get into I thought. It needs to get in to a point of where it’s covered prior to the
second meeting in December, which is the regular scheduled meeting, and I think
something in that language – and whatever you and Mr. Kolb work out, I am in total
agreement with.
Mr. Mayor: All right, Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, I was going to make the motion that we refer this item
to legal today.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to refer this item to legal today. Is there a second
to that motion?
Mr. Bridges: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Discussion on the motion? Yes, Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: I just got a couple of comments about –
Mr. Mayor: The motion?
Mr. Williams: Well, not – well, about the contract itself and the reason – and I got
no problem talking about it in legal and I brought it up earlier, but the reason it was on
here in the beginning is because the City has been held accountable for the contract on
the City side, but on the opposite side where these contracts being written, the people that
benefiting have not been held, and I just thought we need to know for sure if it’s a
binding document, if it’s a legal piece of paper than been handwritten or whatever has
been notarized, it ought to be binding on both sides. We have had to fulfill and stand
behind the obligation that the City have agreed to, but at the same time the people who
have been hired under these contracts, and there’s another one on the agenda today, too,
54
have not had to do it. And I just think it’s unfair to the City and to the taxpayers of
Richmond County. That’s how it got here in the first place. But I got no problem going
into legal, Steve, and talking about it. We can go from there.
Mr. Mayor: Is there any –
Mr. Mays: Yes, Mr. Mayor. If it requires – and it doesn’t require unanimous
consent, I’m not going to be that bullheaded to hold an item hostage. But I don’t think
unless – now if we fixing to go into legal with this to talk about a personnel item, I don’t
think that’s on the table today. And it can be put on the table, but I think in fairness to
the Administrator, I don’t think a false cloud needs to be put over his head today to say
that something is going on that we need to talk about in legal, and then I don’t think the
Commission ought to be operating under a cloud. Now if it’s a public document, which
you so stated a few minutes ago the contract is, and if we’re [inaudible] talking about
dates and times that the contract has called for, then I don’t think that’s an item that
qualifies under Open Records to go into legal. Now the Attorney can overrule me on it,
but I think that has to be discussed in public venue and out here. That is not a matter for
a legal session to go into in order to deal with that part of it.
Mr. Wall: I’m not sure what the questions are.
Mr. Mays: Could I – I couldn’t hear what you said.
Mr. Wall: It depends on what the questions are in legal.
Mr. Mays: [inaudible]
Mr. Wall: I did.
Mr. Mays: [inaudible] a little louder.
Mr. Wall: I agree with you that the issue about what type of notice is required
under the contract, that when that notice has to be given, is not something that can be
discussed in legal session. And I do agree with that. But I don’t know what other
questions there may be, but I mean the issue about the contract itself is not something that
can be discussed in a closed meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beard [inaudible].
Mr. Beard: I just think we need a little time in fairness to everybody. Normally I
can go along with Steve on most things that he suggests, but I think in all fairness to
everybody, let’s do what we ask, and get the contract and discuss it so everybody can
become a little more familiar with what’s going on. You know, we need to move on
from this and do it in the appropriate way where we’re fair to everybody.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
55
Mr. Shepard: Well, the answer – Mr. Mayor, the answer to that is to vote against
the motion. Or make a substitute motion. Is my motion the first motion?
Mr. Mayor: The only motion.
Mr. Beard: Then I make the motion that we get the contract, have the
Attorney get the contract to each individual and come prepared at the next meeting
to discuss the Administrator’s contract.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Substitute motion. Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Is that the next Commission meeting, Mr. Beard?
Mr. Beard: I think it would have to be, would have to be inclusive of everything.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, what about the, Mr. Mays’ addition, if they can call it
addition? Can that be created into Mr. Beard’s motion about the date? Cause Jim saying
st
the 31.
Mr. Wall: [inaudible] last date.
Mr. Williams: No, no.
st
Mr. Wall: [inaudible] December 31.
Mr. Beard: And I think in this, you can [inaudible] you want to if it’s that
[inaudible] public meeting, so you can put those dates in there or whatever, but it give us
some time, and I’m not going [inaudible] today trying to address dates or look at a
calendar, see where dates are, you know. I think give it time, and that’s ample time to do
it, and that’s what we need to do.
Mr. Mayor: All right. So this will be back on the next meeting agenda, if the
substitute motion passes. Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, I know my motion belongs to the body, but I would
like to withdraw it in light of the clarification of the substitute motion.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s go ahead and vote on the substitute motion and then yours may
be moot. All in favor of the substitute motion, please vote in the affirmative.
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor.
56
Mr. Hankerson: I have one question.
Mr. Mays: To your left.
The Clerk: Mr. Hankerson, are you voting?
Mr. Mayor: I’m afraid if I look to the left, Mr. Mays, you’re going to want to
speak again.
(Vote on substitute motion)
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Wall, you’ll see those contract copies get sent. Mr. Cheek, item
31, I’m sorry I was not in your meeting. Was that put off until your next meeting?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, that was deferred to the next Engineering Services
Committee meeting and in the interim I’ll be contacting Commissioners to develop a list
to send to Mr. Hicks concerning major commercial corridors that they have concerns
about to ensure that sewer and water, adequate water, are either planned or in place for
future economic development of our city.
Mr. Mayor: All right. And then what about item number 32? Is there a report
today for us?
Mr. Cheek: We have a report coming back at the end of August. I believe that’s
the correct date.
Mr. Mayor: So there’s no report today then?
Mr. Cheek: Or end of September. No report today. Although we, Mr. Mayor, I
would like to bring to the attention of the Commission –
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Cheek: In the investigation of the structural integrity of buildings, apparently
some of those that are occupied were not as seriously scrutinized as they should have
been, there being one downtown with serious structural cracks through the entire front of
it, in the 600 block on the south side. And perhaps staff ought to be instructed to go look
at all structures. If that crack was missed, and I can see it in a moving car, perhaps there
are more serious structural flaws that need to be examined on all the buildings downtown,
not just those that have been abandoned. But that can be included in the report when it’s
returned at a later date.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Thank you, Mr. Cheek. Madame Clerk, let’s go on to item
33, then.
57
The Clerk:
FINANCE COMMITTEE:
33. Consider a request from the Augusta Flyers Track Club, Inc. regarding
financial assistance in the amount of $1,000 to support the athletes’ trip to Detroit,
Michigan to compete in the 2003 National AAU Junior Olympics. (Referred to HND
for possible funding source by Finance Cmte. July 8, 2003)
Mr. Cheek: I move that we approve pending a funding source.
Mr. Colclough: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Mr. Kolb, can you identify that
funding source that has been referred to HND?
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, we did check with HND. It
is probably not an eligible activity since it does not benefit low- and moderate-income
individuals and contrary to the goals of the CDBG program. We looked at a promotional
account that it could be taken out of, if the Commission so desires, or it, at last resort,
could come out of contingency. The $1,000.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek, you want to identify that as a promotion account, sir? In
your motion?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to see us – promotional accounts seems to be an
appropriate source in that this would take the name of Augusta to Detroit, Michigan, and
knowing our athletes, they will favorably represent our city, so that would be the source I
would specify.
Mr. Mayor: All right. So we’ll incorporate that. Mr. Beard and then Mr.
Bridges.
Mr. Beard: Before I could vote on this, Mr. Mayor, I’d like to know how much
we have in the promotional account. It’s still a half year and we’ve got at least five, 6-1/2
more months to go and I think this is, we’re doing something here we normally don’t do
and take it out of promotional account, so we are setting a precedent here. So I just want
to know, you know, maybe next month when I come up with something can we go to
promotional account or do we go to some other account?
Mr. Kolb: If you want to hold off of your motion until after the next item, the
Finance Director is looking at that now. We can let you know. I’m talking about the
Commission’s promotional account.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bridges.
58
Mr. Bridges: Are we continue to discuss this, or are we going to hold – okay.
Mr. Mayor: No, go ahead. We have a motion on the floor. Go ahead and discuss
it.
Mr. Bridges: This was [inaudible] Finance Committee and normally we, I think
[inaudible] point of information, but this organization we have, I think, if I’m not
mistaken, in the past funded through CDBG. [inaudible] we funded. I don’t think I’m
incorrect in that regard. But that was the only funding source that I would think that we’d
be able to, based on previous practice and procedure, to fund them from. If we, if we
fund them from anything else, I mean once again, you’re talking about things that there’s
probably hundreds of different groups, dozens of groups that would be legitimately able
to come down and claim the funds. Normally we’ve supported organizations and clubs
when they had the promotional tables and pretty well held to it. I wouldn’t think that
that’s something we’d want to fund out of – certainly not contingency because that’s the
operation of this government, nor promotional. And the only reason that I recommended
we send it over to CDBG is because at one time we had funded it through there and I
thought there might be some possible funds there now that they could utilize, but that not
being the source, it would not be my recommendation that we fund it, what is obviously
an emergency for the club.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bridges, just for clarification, in the backup there is reference to
some previous funding in 1997 for the D.C. Flyers Track Club. And this is the Augusta
Flyers Track Club.
Mr. Bridges: Well, maybe those are the two that I’m –
Mr. Mayor: Changed their name?
Mr. Bridges: Yeah, changed their name. But nevertheless, I guess the D.C.
Flyers came through the CDBG, if my memory serves me correctly. However, my
memory hadn’t been doing too good at one point today and at one point at the last
meeting. Okay. Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Hankerson.
Mr. Hankerson: Yes, I’d like to direct my question to Mr. Smith, please.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Smith, if you would come up.
Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, sir. How was that determined, the income source of
these track students?
Mr. Smith: Income source?
Mr. Hankerson: Right.
59
Mr. Smith: There was no determination of the income source. There was a
determination of the type of activity, whether or not that general type of activity fit into
the overall mission of Housing & Neighborhood Development, having to do with the
elimination of blight and community development. And the purpose of the organization
being to promote sports activities versus either one of those things mentioned.
Mr. Hankerson: Okay. I thought I, I thought I heard that because of the income
category that was denied, and I was wondering if all those young kids are running track,
after I find out more about this group, you know, I’m wondering how they didn’t meet
the income requirements. Cause if they do, I think I --
Mr. Smith: [inaudible] not kind of a real close review of the individual
participants, it was a review of what that organization did in the context of what the
mission of Housing & Neighborhood Development is. I mean this was not an application
that came to us wherein we looked at and screened the application based on what they
had intended to do, whether or not they were eligible. We were just asked whether or not
this would be something that CDBG funds in general could support. And it’s in term of
general, looking at the sports activity emphasis of this, that’s not something that CDBG
funds would support.
Mr. Hankerson: Okay, I thought maybe you didn’t get the message correctly,
then. I thought this Commission directed the [inaudible] not to ask whether they
qualified for the funds, but to go and ask for you to fund it if funds were available, not
whether it qualified. Because we could qualify it and I don’t think that we need to start
going to no promotional account for these funds. I think the way that we been getting
them, and if it’s available, it’s coming to the year of the year, if it’s available, I think that
we should do it and also suggest that we consider next year, that we [inaudible] how we
are going to fund organizations as they come forward and kind of put some guidelines on
that, whether we going to do it or whether we going to provide someone else, a
committee or your department, to do that. But I thought we asked to check with you to
see whether the funds were available.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb.
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, Community Development
Block Grant funds are, are highly regulated funds and we just cannot spend the money at
the direction of the Commission without meeting HUD guidelines. We advised, I mean
the Commission can absolutely say where the money can be spent from, but then HUD
has the overall authority of telling the City that you have to pay it back if the funds are
spent in conflict with what their regulations say. And we believe strongly and we are
advising the Commission that this would not be an eligible activity that would meet
HUD’s scrutiny.
Mr. Hankerson: Could I have a follow-up?
60
Mr. Mayor: Go right ahead.
Mr. Hankerson: Well, if that’s the case, Mr. Kolb, I think we just been wasting
time. The time is running out for this team to have these funds – if you knew that when
we made that suggestion, that we [inaudible] that, then I think you should have said that
at that point. We could have discussed that at that time or looked for other alternatives.
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, we did not know that at that time. It had been suggested
that it had been done in the past, so I was not aware under what circumstances that would
have been done. We were asked to see if there was a possibility that HND could fund it,
and we asked that question and that was the response that we had to come back to you
with.
Mr. Hankerson: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb, this could be funded out of recaptured UDAG, could
it not?
Mr. Kolb: Yes. It could be.
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible] no restrictions on it like there are in Community
Development?
Mr. Mays: May I make a motion that it so be funded out of that if there is
some money in there to do that with, I think they got $1,000.
Mr. Hankerson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second. Substitute motion to fund it out of
UDAG. Mr. Boyles.
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had two comments I was going to make
and I think Mr. Mays’ substitute may have put a damper on one of them. But I’ve just
got something of a pet peeve, I suppose, that we pay for a pretty good Recreation
program. We pay a lot of money for it. And I had a call last night from another group
that wanted some personal funding, and plus, I had to call Barry White with CVB today
to try to raise some things for them. What kind of concerns me that we’re paying for a
Recreation program for all the citizens of this county, but yet we keep coming up with
different little groups that want to do something on their own and contrary to what the
Recreational policies may be. They don’t seem to want to follow, or at least they didn’t
when I was out there, follow some of the guidelines. And that’s just a pet peeve, and I’ve
always said that and I still do. The other was about a couple of weeks ago we [inaudible]
some money, about $150,000 from the sale of the Landmark Apartments, the sale of that
loan, however that developed, and we set aside $130,000 of that for the Senior Citizens
Council and I think $10,000 went to the Augusta Youth Center, and I don’t know
whatever happened with the other $10,000.
61
Mr. Mayor: It went to Project Success.
Mr. Boyles: The other $10,000 went to Project Success, but did Project Success
come about?
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Boyles: How did Project Success happen? I don’t know that they went ahead
with that program.
Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor, in answer to Commissioner Boyles’ question, the answer
is no. They had to cancel the program. We did not write a check for that activity.
Mr. Boyles: So that gives you a $10,000 cushion right there, but Mr. Mays’
motion from recaptured UDAG funds must have superceded that.
Mr. Mayor: That is recaptured UDAG, is it not?
Mr. Kolb: That is recaptured UDAG funding.
Mr. Mayor: That’s what that is. Mr. Mays.
Mr. Mays: If I might, Mr. Mayor, I [inaudible] expedite it from the standpoint
that as long as it’s legal and I don’t think that the group would come and ask for any
funds that would be illegal [inaudible], I think what opened the door to this is really the
fact that when it was mentioned about – the motion in committee was to direct it back to
CDBG. When we started this conversation, it was said that the group was in ineligible
because it did not meet low- to moderate-income. And we kind of joked on this end – I
said well, maybe everybody on the track club is rich, then, so it made it ineligible to go
through CDBG. So we were just searching for a source. If it comes out of there, I’m
really not picky about where it does come from, but I think something needs to be
clarified. One, in terms of getting where guidelines are, I don’t think that we need to get
a wholesale lecture on whether or not we going to take something that’s illegal from the
Administrator. I don’t think anybody is asking that. I think that [inaudible] that warning,
but I agree with Commissioner Hankerson, that could have been resolved some time ago.
Now I’m, before you rule me out of order, Mr. Mayor, but I do want to get an answer, not
today, but I think we ought to get one. If we voted the other week, if there was some
technical reason why that other program didn’t get its money, now that’s the first time
today that I heard that the program was canceled on Project Success, that the money
didn’t get down there. Now if they did something wrong and had to fold because they
didn’t get it, but because there was already enough recaptured money there. Now we
couldn’t do the Seniors Program cause we were waiting on the $150,000. But now there
was enough money in there that since they came out of the same pot, gentlemen, that that
money for those two small organizations could have been used out of existing money
which was more than enough to do that. Now I’m going to be out of order if I [inaudible]
62
but I am going to put it on Mr. Beard’s committee agenda for committee cause I think in
things like that, if the Commission votes on and I’m hearing in an open meeting today by
accident that they did not get their money, and I’m glad Commissioner Boyles raised that
issue, it’s something that we voted on, if it didn’t get [inaudible] memo to come out from
somebody, I’m going to use Commissioner Williams’ term, from folk that we pay, when
we vote and direct money a certain way – folk don’t have to like motion I make, but you
darn sure going respect them. And if six votes decide that it’s going somewhere, if there
is a reason for it, then it ought to be brought back to this Commission, if nothing else out
of common courtesy to say that a program didn’t get its money. Now I’m mad as hell
about that. [inaudible] And if it didn’t get there, and I know some people say well, it’s
real smart, something happened so I don’t have to do it that way. Well, I [inaudible] if
that’s the way we going to play the game, I learned the rules well. I learned from the
best. I can show you how to play them. Mr. Administrator, I think that’s a sorry way to
do business. That wasn’t done. And I realize you didn’t like what was done, then it
wasn’t your call to make – if something happened in that process [inaudible] that check
did not reach those folk. Now I got a real problem with that. And it’s happening every
week, somehow or another, things that this Commission does and directed in certain
policy, we either find it out by accident or we have to come out here and argue about it.
And I for one am just sick and tired of it.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s hear from Mr. Cheek and then Mr. Beard and then Mr.
Williams.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, aren’t these the kids that [inaudible]? So these are the
kids from Augusta that will be hopefully having an opportunity to go represent Augusta
in Detroit? I will forego my trip to the National League of Cities, whatever my plane
tickets or whatever else, to chip that money into [inaudible] get it, the promotional
account or travel account or whatever else. The reason our kids don’t compete in this
state or in this region is because we don’t fund the programs in Recreation to allow them
to travel, to go compete. And to bring back the name recognition of this city that
Columbia County and Aiken County and North Augusta have. I, for one, will give my
share of whatever remaining travel money I have this year to fund these kids going up
there. Mark it off of whatever my amount is. Dad gum it, let’s send our kids off with
Augusta on their shirt, like we went to Georgia State [inaudible] Championship a few
years ago and represented well. Kids that they didn’t think had a chance came up there
and nearly beat Columbia County. Let’s give these kids a chance to represent, like they
are capable of doing, and maybe open some doors for them and bring some eyes back to
Augusta. These are good will ambassadors of this city and I will be more than happy to
chip in any travel money I have to send these kids, and it doesn’t have to come out
[inaudible] whatever other trip I may be scheduled to take this year, give it to the team.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beard, then Mr. Williams.
Mr. Beard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think we’re missing the boat a little bit here
in this [inaudible]. Nobody [inaudible] we want them to go in style and all the amenities
that are needed for that. The point [inaudible] recaptured UDAG money [inaudible]
63
going in that direction. So, you know, I’m [inaudible]. Secondly, [inaudible] what I
heard about [inaudible] until Commissioner Mays [inaudible] was not getting [inaudible]
check. And I thought [inaudible] because [inaudible] the Commission [inaudible] we
need to know why. I would particularly like to know why.
Mr. Kolb: When we called to tell them that they had gotten the check, it’s my
understanding that they said well, we don’t need the money because they had canceled
the program. That they were not going to do the summer program.
Mr. Beard: Oh, so they refused the check?
Mr. Kolb: Right. They said we don’t need the money because – [inaudible]
specific purpose, as I understand it, when – anyway, when we called them to tell them
that we were going to cut the check, they said that they had canceled the program and
they didn’t need the money.
Mr. Speaker: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: George, in relation to when the Commission voted to approve the
money, when did you call them?
Mr. Kolb: It happened shortly after the meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Shortly would be what? A day or two?
Mr. Kolb: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Mayor I went there the night that we had that
meeting, because [inaudible] dire straits of Project Success. I went to the assisted living
facility where former Commissioner Brigham, who started that [inaudible] and put it
together for those kids. Went there to his room that night, his wife, my former
homeroom teacher, to let them personally know that we had just approved that money,
that it was going to be forthcoming, that we had. Now where that went on one call that
they had canceled it, I don’t know. But I think if anybody would know whether or not
they were going to be continuing a program, it would be both Henry and [inaudible]
Brigham, and I went there, over in the facility there in Beverly Manor, and talked to them
that same night. Made it a point of going there before visiting hours were over, to let
them know that it had been approved. And Henry [inaudible] said well, is it going to be
for next year, [inaudible]? I said no. I said we’ve approved that so the kids will be able
to carry on in this year. Now I don’t think they went that next morning – all y’all know
Henry very well and how he loves that program. They ain’t went that next morning and
get [inaudible]. So somebody’s got a different story, and [inaudible] somebody call it
lying. But I think somewhere in the midst of it, we got a different story from two
different sets of folks.
64
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beard, are you finished?
Mr. Beard: I think he covered it all. But I do think that –
Mr. Kolb: I’ll get you a report on that.
Mr. Beard: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: A chronology with it, too, that would help. Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I just want to say that I’m glad to see
the concern for the children [inaudible] athletic part of their lives. But when it comes to
young children, we don’t think they need no guidance, I guess. But to move on to what
we talking about here now, to say that the recaptured UDAG money is money we can
use. The [inaudible] money that have to [inaudible]. I experienced that twice with Apple
Valley, where we had to go from house to house to survey the parents to fit those
guidelines. So the Administrator is right in that respect. [inaudible] Mr. Boyles’
comment and the fact about the Project Success [inaudible]. I want to know right now if
it hadn’t come out in this setting, when were we going to be told? When was somebody
– I mean because we’re the policy makers and we make those policies and give out
direction for folk who making money do what they want to, when they want to, if they
want to. I would like to know when would we have known that, if Mr. Boyles hadn’t
brought that to light? [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Williams: I’m not finished. I need an answer. My question is –
Mr. Mayor: You’re not getting an answer. Nobody –
Mr. Williams: Somebody make too much money not to answer, Mr. Mayor
[inaudible] if it happens, they know it happened.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, you’re sitting in the same Chamber that I am and –
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, and that’s why I’m asking the question.
Mr. Mayor: Let me finish. And you asked the question and there was silence.
Nobody answered it. I’m trying to move this discussion along.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, as the [inaudible] as the Mayor of this city, I expect
you to direct it. If you want me to direct it, I can direct it.
Mr. Mayor: I understand that Mr. Mays had just asked that this item be put on the
next committee agenda, and I’m sure there will be a thorough airing and discussion of
65
this at the committee meeting. Mr. Beard has asked for a written report from Mr. Kolb.
And Mr. Kolb is going to get him a written report.
Mr. Williams: Well, Mr. Kolb ought to have sense enough [inaudible] at our next
[inaudible] or whatever. I mean that don’t take a report to do that. Folk may too much,
money, Mr. Mayor, when we direct people to do things. And that ain’t the only thing.
That just something that just happened to come up.
Mr. Mayor: What we’re trying to do is get some money for some kids so they can
go to Detroit.
Mr. Bridges: Call for the order of the day, Mr. Mayor, if I could.
Mr. Mayor: Well, the question has been called, and the Chair will rule there has
been adequate debate. And we ought to move ahead and let’s get these kids their money
so they can – [inaudible]
Mr. Cheek: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: You’re not ready to vote? If you’re not ready to vote –
Mr. Cheek: Just for a minute.
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Cheek: Gentlemen, a coach for a number of years, I’ve struggled to raise
money to take kids on trips. Not knowing when you try to prepare a team is one of the
hardest things a coach and parents have to go through, to deal with raising money to send
in to an event to represent this city. The very last thing we ought to do, we ought to say
yes, we’re going to find a way to finance this and I apologize if I got a little carried away
on that. But dad gum in, these kids go and it means a lot to them, but it means a lot to
this city for them to come back after representing us well and be able to stand before us
and to proudly say we represented Augusta well and we were proud to be there in your
name. So ---
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion on the floor, for $1,000 out of recaptured UDAG.
That’s the question we’re calling. All in favor of that motion, please vote in the
affirmative.
(Vote on substitute motion)
Mr. Boyles votes No.
Motion carries 9-1.
Mr. Mayor: Next item, Madame Clerk, is item number 34.
Mr. Mays: Excuse me, Mr. Mayor.
66
Mr. Mayor: Yes.
Mr. Mays: If I can just ask one thing of a point of order.
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. Mays: Can, can the group be told when they will get that check? Cause I
hate to be here next month and find out they didn’t get theirs, either [inaudible]?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays, let me ask this. Mr. Smith, would you go over and meet
with a representative of this [inaudible] about when they can get their check? They’re
leaving next week.
Mr. Mays: And I hate to be that arrogant about it, but it’s getting to be that
[inaudible] no offense to Mr. Smith, but I’m just getting tired of this Commission voting
for things and directing and then we decide, folk want to [inaudible] and set policy, too.
They ain’t going to do both.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am?
Ms. Speaker: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: Come up to the microphone and give us your name and address for
the record and then say what you want and we’ll move along [inaudible].
Ms. Speaker: I won’t hold you all. My name is [inaudible] and I represent the
Augusta Flyers Track Club [inaudible] vice president. And a couple of comments that
were made regarding the Recreation Department and the money that is allocated to them
for these programs. This is a, this is a community involved track club. It is not
[inaudible] Recreation & Parks. This is through a volunteer, a group of volunteer
parents. We don’t get any funding from Recreation & Parks but we do, they do have a
track and field program they do during the school year. They don’t have a summer track
and field program. This is a summer program that we try to carry on ourselves to involve
children in the neighborhood and [inaudible] so we don’t actually have community
funding to do this. As I said, the Recreation & Parks, they support us from time to time,
and we support them, also, when they are doing the school year activities. But this is a
community track and field program and as a matter of fact, there is not a whole lot of
[inaudible] all that stuff, but when it comes to track and field, there’s very little support
for these young people. [inaudible] these are ambassadors that are representing Augusta
and all we ask for is the $1,000 to help with some of the finances. So I’m just hearing all
of this and I’m trying to understand what, you know, what is the big problem. Because
[inaudible] community, I don’t know if it would be under Augusta Richmond County but
we asked for support before. And I heard you mention to the gentleman earlier about one
of the organizations [inaudible] and I would like that same information also so we won’t
have to go through things like this [inaudible] included in all the other stuff that’s funded
67
[inaudible] go out of town [inaudible]. I would like to know how we can come through
Augusta Richmond County or whatever programs you all have that can help fund for
these children.
Mr. Mayor: We want to thank you for what you and the other volunteers do on
behalf of these children. It’s important work and we appreciate it and we’re glad to
support it. Mr. Smith is going to talk to you about getting this $1,000 for your
organization. At the same, Warren, would you please talk to them about the time table
and the budget process and how they can apply for funds on a regular basis so they won’t
have to come in here at the last minute and we go through [inaudible].
Ms. Speaker: Thank y’all.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you very much. Y’all give us a report now when you get back
from Detroit. We want to know how you did. Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS:
34. Commission present the Legislative Delegation a Resolution abolishing the
Coliseum Authority and that the Commission payoff the remaining bond
indebtedness and the Commission will enter into a contract with the CVB to
administrator the civic center. (Requested by Commissioner Bill Kuhlke)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Kuhlke.
Mr. Kuhlke: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I put this on the agenda because of the
difficulties that seem to continue to take place over at the Civic Center. It appears to me
that we have an ineffective organization that’s running the Civic Center. They have
difficulty getting people to come in and be the promoter for the Civic Center. They have
trouble retaining an attorney. There is continuing bickering at the Civic Center. The
facility is filthy. We have a situation where revenues continue to fall. They continually
lose money on an annual basis. In one particular case, we lost an economic of $1 million
this year because of the sloppy job that they did last year for the North Georgia
Conference. And they moved that particular convention to Athens. So my, my request to
this body is just very short and very sweet. And I would like to put in the form a motion
that the Commission present to the Legislative Delegation at their next session a
resolution to abolish the Coliseum Authority, that this Commission will either pay off the
remaining bonded indebtedness that’s on the Coliseum or assume that obligation itself,
and further that this Commission will either accept responsibility under its umbrella of
running the Coliseum Authority or that we contract with the Convention & Visitors
Bureau to do the administrative part of the Coliseum work and including the hiring of a
professional management firm to run the Coliseum on a day-to-day basis.
Mr. Shepard: Second.
68
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Mr. Beard.
Mr. Beard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Most times I can concur with a lot of things
that Mr. Kuhlke says because I think he makes a lot of sense on those issues. But this is
[inaudible] I hear a lot of those things about this body that I’m a member of.
(Laughter)
Mr. Beard: [inaudible] also. I’m a little [inaudible] rush to judgment. I know
they’ve had problems over there. I know that, you know, [inaudible] we’re going to have
problems. But I think a lot of this is coming from different aspects [inaudible] images
[inaudible]. I truly believe that as [inaudible] took the time [inaudible] with the Civic
Center, but [inaudible] kind of got [inaudible] these people might work out their own
problems. [inaudible] what they were going to do. [inaudible] selecting a person to
operate or [inaudible] and person [inaudible] hire is adequate or not I don’t know because
I don’t know enough about that person. But I think that these things show that they are
moving in [inaudible] time to do that. [inaudible]. And I think that [inaudible] but I
think that what I’ve seen and what I’ve heard over the last few days that they [inaudible]
operate [inaudible]. [inaudible] And we have to understand that when dealing with a
complex of this nature that [inaudible] going to run a deficit because they are really not
[inaudible]. [inaudible] oversight committee or [inaudible] and come back. [inaudible]
can [inaudible] facility [inaudible] how that goes. And the other thing, since I have the
floor, [inaudible] but one of our [inaudible] CVB [inaudible] and I guess I have to get a
[inaudible] for that because I was wondering where that came from. I’ve been reading
about it in the paper and [inaudible] and I guess I need to ask Jim a couple of questions.
[inaudible]
Mr. Wall: CVB?
Mr. Beard: Yes. [inaudible] How did they come up with that?
Mr. Wall: That came before the Commission. The CVB, there was some issue
about whether or not they needed to incorporate as a non-profit organization. And they
opted to incorporated and prior to doing that and prior to our changing that, that came
before the Commission for Commission approval.
Mr. Beard: Okay. This is what I was wondering because I knew [inaudible] by
the County and the City, then how does – and I [inaudible] hearing that [inaudible] two
that [inaudible].
Mr. Wall: It came before the Commission to approve their incorporating, yes.
Mr. Beard: And the other thing, Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to state that [inaudible]
I don’t see how we can [inaudible] about they were not going to promote [inaudible] and
we [inaudible] in the [inaudible]. Now we talk about [inaudible] go get another –
[inaudible] that kind of bothers me in that. And I think that that kind of attitude, I have a
69
lot of reservations about [inaudible] I would have to question that [inaudible]. Until
somebody [inaudible] as to [inaudible].
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Beard. Let me – just before we go on down the line
here. I would concur with the motion made by Mr. Kuhlke today. As you recall, we
were in this Chamber last year talking about this same issue and we had a meeting at the
boat house with the Delegation, met with the Coliseum Authority, and this body, trying to
bring some peace to that family and trying to move that organization forward. And here
we’ve come full circle in the past year. And I would encourage members of this body
[inaudible]
Mr. Cheek: [inaudible] bond [inaudible] requires less utilities and less staff to
take up that additional money has some slight benefit but the net, the net indicator should
be for the last three years the total number of events that have been held there and the
profit margin for each event. We have, as you said, come to this issue more than once. I
remember [inaudible] years ago being promised by the then-chairman of the Coliseum
Authority that we would be getting regular financial reports. I remember last year
[inaudible] to you that what [inaudible] did in fact take place that last year’s financial
statements were worse than the year prior to that. Without the refinancing and other
things that have taken place this year, in fact, would be just as bad or worse. Actions
must be taken to turn this facility around. This is a facility that has not been maintained.
It is in poor mechanical shape and in desperate need of a restoration. We fight over
concession prices when ours were already some of the lowest in the area and further
reduced them. We are further reducing our profit margin. It seems at every turn we are
trying to make a very, very [inaudible] civic center fail. But [inaudible] we have the
power to suggest. There are some fine staff members over there that with some proper
guidance I believe could do a good job. There are some well intentioned board members,
some who have stepped down from the chair and others who have tried to bring together
that board. There are board members who serve on that board who also conduct events at
that facility. And yes, the very newspaper that writes about us is also one of the first ones
to come in and ask for a reduction in fee. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a myth that we all
have a part in, but again, we have only the power to suggest. Therefore, I’m going to
make a substitute motion that we do confer with our Legislative Delegation at the next
available work session with our standing committee, requiring a full financial report from
the Coliseum Authority and an action plan with the intentions of abolishing the Authority
or coming up with an action plan that would resolve the problems there and have it
professionally run. We do not have those answers today. And while we may pass a
resolution, until we come up with a [inaudible] with those in Atlanta who do have the
power to make that decision, we’re blowing smoke. So let’s get together, our people with
their people, find out [inaudible] facts, as Commissioner Beard said. Some of the same
things have been said about us and we know that they’re not true. Some of them are.
And then let’s plot our course of action with the Commission and the Legislative
Delegation working together to finally resolve this problem.
Mr. Beard: I second that.
70
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I first of all, Commissioner
Beard answered one of my questions. I was going to ask the question how bad is the
Coliseum? From my understanding, with today’s economy, with the way things going,
we are really doing pretty good. There always room for improvement and we can always
see something better. But let’s be real honest, as Mr. Mays, as he always say. I don’t
know how you can be honest and not be real honest. But let’s be real honest and look at
Augusta. We are quoted to be the second largest city in the state of Georgia. Now that’s
because we combine our city and our county together. We do not have the population if
we build anything or added to what we got now, no acts, no shows is going to come to
Augusta with the number of people in Augusta. Why would they skip Atlanta, Columbia,
Macon to come to Augusta to pull those people from those cities into Augusta?
Anybody, any businessman or any businesswoman will know that you go where majority
of people may be located and try to draw the minority or the rest of the folks to you. I
mean Augusta has got a lot of growing to do. I [inaudible] some problems. This whole
city got some problems. I mean in fact every city got problems. I don’t understand how
we can sit here and think that we are doing so bad that we just, we at the verge of losing
everything we got [inaudible] have not [inaudible] I think somebody just mentioned, it
may have been Mr. Cheek, that the report came back that we really kind of balancing
ourselves. [inaudible] mindset of the people in Augusta I think we’re really doing good.
Cause we are [inaudible] in our thinking as far as getting progressive and doing some
things. And no shows, no acts, nobody is going to come to Augusta because we in a nice
location. We got to open up the thinking capacity of the leaders of this city, we’ve got to
do some things differently. If we were flourishing in the area in other ways and our Civic
Center wasn’t flourishing, I think we got a problem. But there is a lot of things
[inaudible] and we act like we don’t see it. We sit here every day and go on and say
everything is fine. This is still a town. We will not let it be a city because we don’t want
to get open minded. We don’t want to do the things that’s going to [inaudible]. We want
to designate what we think people ought to be doing. And the thing that you don’t like,
somebody else may like. But we need to look at [inaudible] we ought to at least sit down
and talk with them and try to see what is going on. And it’s really simple, y’all. And it
ain’t no magic to it. [inaudible] people coming together you’re going to have
disagreement, you going to have people that don’t see the same thing. And we got to get
on the same page. That’s the whole ball game. We will never grow, we never do what is
right until we start to at least mix and mingle. We can’t designate just what we want. It’s
a community. We got to find out what the community would like to have. We can’t
designate just the things that we think is good. So if we not doing that bad, I think
Commissioner Beard said [inaudible], I think [inaudible] with no more economic growth
or no more money flowing through this area. I think [inaudible] I can support the motion,
Commissioner Cheek. I just hope the people of Augusta understand that we got to grow
in all shapes, form and fashion if we want to get [inaudible] anything we want to do, we
got to get open minded. We got to see what’s working in other cities and apply that to
[inaudible] so we’ll be able to be competitive where people will come here and want to
live here and work in this city. That’s all, Mr. Mayor.
71
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kuhlke [inaudible].
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor and my fellow Commissioners, I don’t want to sell
ourselves too short here. You know, I look at our City, and we’re working under a
balanced budget. We have not G-O bond indebtedness. We have three months’ reserve
from a financial standpoint. This City is in good, good shape, compared with Macon,
Savannah, Atlanta, whatever you do, we’re in good shape. And I would encourage each
one of you Commissioners to take a look at the nine months statement that was sent to
each one of y’all by the Civic Center, and then we’ll come back and talk some more. But
look at it. It’s not like we are. And my other point is last year we sat down with the
Delegation and we gave them a list of things that we would like to see done in this
community. Mr. Beard chaired that committee. We got not one thing. Not one thing did
we get from the Delegation. So I don’t have a problem sitting down and talking. I’m
throwing this on the table. It’s an idea. I didn’t just say the CVB, Mr. Beard. I said this
Commission could take control of the Coliseum. So I didn’t tie it to just one thing and I
want you to understand that. But anyway, I think that it’s time for us to step to the plate
and we need to take some action.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hankerson.
Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I am somewhat surprised [inaudible] we
asked to make a knee-jerk reaction here. I know we worked with the Civic Center board
members before. And my question, how many new board members? Don’t we have
some new board members there on the board? I know we have several. I’ve been
reading in the paper we had several new board members, haven’t been on there long
enough to really get the swing to make some changes. But also, I keep in touch with my
appointee and I know she [inaudible] finance and now is in another position from a
resign, I think the chairman resigned and it caused a change there. So I think that if we
give them enough time for the new people to take position and we’ll see some change
made in the Civic Center. I think that we, we need to go over sometimes and sit in their
meetings and actually see what is going on. Because from what we hear, may be a lot
different from actually being there and seeing what’s going on. Another thing is the
board members, who appoints them? We appoint the board members. So we should
appoint the quality type of board members that is able to work with a group of diversity, a
diversified group, and being able to have the business expertise to help promote the Civic
Center. I read an article from the [inaudible] Convention Center in Macon. And if you’ll
allow me, it said this. During the past several years, records from civic centers in other
towns such as Albany, Savannah, Columbus show that their civic centers also lose money
each year. They lose money each year. And also the Mayor there, Mayor Jack Ellis
made this comment. He says we always, we always had to subsidize them. We probably
always will, although our goal would be some day at least break even. We are moving
into that direction. And he also said the shows and the employees and so forth should
promote the civic center. And I have a problem also and I heard a comment was made
that we’re not promoting any more, and I made this comment to other Commissioners. If
we had an employee here that they’re not promoting Augusta, I will recommend that they
be fired because I think if you’re not promoting it, you’re just killing it. And we need
72
promoters, we need people going to talk up Augusta and not talk down Augusta.
[inaudible] I appointed a 30-year school teacher that used most of her time in her last year
before she retired to work hard [inaudible]. Took off of work to come to those meetings
when people wouldn’t even – she was there and [inaudible] wouldn’t meet. They
literally, couldn’t have a quorum. [inaudible] doing that, they are killing the Civic
Center. Not promoting it. [inaudible] I just met with her a few days ago and talked with
her about the Civic Center. I [inaudible] report here, too, that shows that yes, they’ve
been in a deficit but they are coming up. She was proud. [inaudible] have some
improvements shown here. And I have these records here that shows some achievements
that they were making in the last five or six months. And [inaudible] I got on there and I
was thinking about resigning. She says but now I want to really stay and work to see this
work. I’m dedicated to her since I appointed her during that school year and she lost all
of her time [inaudible]. And I think we ought to give Mr. Frazier, Mr. Albright, those
new members [inaudible], give them a chance to get in there and work together and try to
make this work, rather than just make a decision that we are just going to abolish it.
That’s [inaudible] just abolish it but give someone a chance just beginning there to work.
I know when I came on this Commission 2-1/2 years ago, I had to have some time to
really, to find out what was really going on and to really work with every individual that
is sitting here. So I think people deserve some time and I think we can do it. [inaudible]
the Civic Center really needs someone to promote the activities. We need somebody who
know what’s going on, someone that’s been in other towns and cities to know what the
people like in Augusta and what’s going to bring people to Augusta from hours away, to
bring them and make them want to come to Augusta. And I think if we give them some
time, I think we could all see that we have a good working program. We’re also talking
about a new arena and these sort of things. I think this is a bad time to really talk about
abolishing something that when we’re trying to get [inaudible] and making sure that
[inaudible]. We need to come together now. We don’t need to be, nothing to divide us.
And so with that I can’t support abolishing. But I do, I think that all the Commissioners
that made motions and comments, there were very good, and we need to work on
something and we need to work on it like we did before.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bridges and then Mr. Shepard [inaudible].
Mr. Bridges: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I keep hearing about the Civic
Center not making any money. It’s like Mr. Hankerson pointed out, none of them make
money. I don’t think they’re designed to make money. We didn’t expect it to make
money or to make a profit. However, over a period of 15-20 years, it has paid it bond
down from I think $12 million down to $5 million or $6 million. But to actually make a
profit is not the purpose of the Civic Center. The purpose of the Civic Center is what
they can draw in in room nights, conventions, that type of thing. Sales tax dollars. That
type of thing. That’s what we’re interested in, the economic impact it has on the
community. But as far as actually making a profit, I don’t think that’s going to happen.
In regards to, and we were all at the meeting before and I’ve been here almost eight years
now, and I can count on my left hand the number of financial reports I’ve gotten,
received from the Civic Center. And that’s supposed to be done quarterly. I mean that’s
the Legislation, that’s the law, I understand, Jim, that we’re supposed to get that. I
73
haven’t got that in some time until just recently. I think it’s real interesting that we went
through professional managers that the board hired, we went through professional outside
managers that sent a part-time manager down here to do it. We didn’t get any reports
then, and now we don’t have a manager at all and got an interim person in there and she
sends out financial reports. You know, maybe we’re looking at this time the wrong way.
I mean if we’re going to get results and information from down there that takes –
somebody interim can do it, then maybe that’s what we need to do. But as [inaudible]
used to say, all seriousness aside, we have got some proposals on the board here. I have
a, I don’t have any trouble sitting down and discussing this. I mean if you want to
abolish the board and take it under us, I don’t have a lot of problems with that. I do have
a lot – the Civic Center has been an issue ever since I’ve been in Augusta, and that’s been
almost 20 years now, more so an issue, more so a controversy than the Commission here.
And I don’t know if it’s the nature of it or just what it is [inaudible] what’s involved
there. But I sure would hate to see us put that on an organization that we think is
dysfunctional and not working like the Civic Center board. I sure would hate to see us
place it on the back of an organization that is working, that is doing a good job, that is
bringing, promoting this city and bringing tourism dollars in here, motel and hotel
business in here, and see them get saddled with something that might not be positive to
their image. And you know, I see the Chairman of the CVB out there and I hope he and
his board are very cautious about agreeing to take this thing on, [inaudible] that where it
comes from. My understanding is they have not requested this but are willing to look at
it. But yeah, I think we need to sit down with those who have the responsibility and the
legal means to making changes on the board. I don’t have any problems with that at all.
But I would just be very cautious of placing the burden of the Civic Center and the
authority of the Civic Center on the back of an organization that functioned well and take
a chance of ruining their image and their promotion in this community.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess what I wanted to offer to the
Commission was from the perspective of being a former official in a statewide
convention. Mr. Mays will recall that in 2000 the Augusta Lions Club was the sponsor of
the Georgia State Lions Convention. And in a moment of lapsed judgment, perhaps, I
agreed to be one of the co-chairmen. But I remember Mr. Mays coming, and what you
have to do when you have an event like that in Augusta, because we are obviously very
far east in the state, when we have to compete against other facilities, we have to offer a
little extra in our hospitality. We have to really, really work hard to get people interested
and to make them welcome here so that they can weigh that against a more central
location of a Macon or the metropolitan offerings of Atlanta. I guess what I took away
from the CVB board was that [inaudible] can no longer afford to meet in the Atlanta
market because the downtown industry, convention industry is largely a function of a
national market now. They’re out in Hapeville and they’re out in Stone Mountain and
they’re around the metropolitan area. But they’re also in Athens and I know that as part
of that 2000 Lions Convention, the year before that we had a committee that went to
Athens to see what was done right. And let me tell you, the Lions were very impressed in
Athens. The Methodists were also very impressed in Athens. And this year, what we
74
didn’t have back, we did not have the United Methodists. The United Methodists had a
two-year commitment here and they did not exercise that second option. And those
preachers and lay delegates were also involved in other organizations. And I also learned
when I was at the CVB what meeting planners were. They are folks who go out and plan
meetings and the CVB, of course, presents to the various associations of meeting
planners, and they [inaudible] our community. And when you have problems like they
did – I remember Mr. Boyles and Mr. Kuhlke telling me about the Methodists had to
serve their own meals. I mean that, that’s not a hospitable situation. That’s not
hospitality that I know this community is capable of. And I think that what, what has
been done today is [inaudible], Mr. Kuhlke has made a noise about this problem. We as
community leaders cannot [inaudible]. The Methodist Convention that was in Athens,
those dollars could have come down here. And what’s not happening here this summer is
arena football. You know, I don’t do a real scientific survey, but when I go to -- the
Civic Center is in my office area, and sometimes I work late and you see the cars parked
and they were at the Lynx and the arena football game, I saw car tags from a lot of other
counties around here other than Richmond. And that’s people that are coming in here,
[inaudible], probably buying dinner. So this is a problem that we have got to attack as
community leaders. And that’s why I seconded Bill’s motion, because I think we need to
get the attention of this community. I could sit down and meet with them, but I thought
that that’s what we did last year. But if it would take another meeting, that’s fine. And I
think we’ve got a process that we had in place last year to meet with our State
Legislators. And just as can change all the parts of our charter, we can certainly change
the Coliseum Authority [inaudible] state organization, it has some dignity as a creature of
the State Legislature. And we need to go to our Legislators, and I agree with what Mr.
Cheek said, but I don’t think we can just say that everything is all right at the Coliseum.
It may be losing money, but I think more importantly it is losing its standing among the
competitors statewide. And when you have meeting planners talk, and they will talk, and
when you have Methodists who came down here and had the experience they had, they
will talk. They will talk to other denominations. And our convention industry, the
motels, the hotels, the restaurants, the stores, they are all going to suffer, gentlemen, and
we’d better [inaudible] and do something about it quickly. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays.
Mr. Mays: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Obviously everything is not perfect over
there. If it were, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. [inaudible] I’m a little, I
probably won’t vote for either motion that’s on the floor. I [inaudible] don’t like to
telegraph [inaudible] or predetermine how meetings are going to turn out. I think if you
assemble a group of people for the purpose of saying that you’re going to do something,
then I’m [inaudible] enough to say you ought to just [inaudible]. [inaudible] meet but
talk about abolishing something [inaudible] go on and do what you’re going to do. If
that’s what you’re going to do. But I do think there is room for positive dialog, because it
concerns me about what happens in the future of this city. [inaudible] generation
business owner and [inaudible] in this city, my family has benefited a lot by what has
happened in Augusta. What happened with this economy. And I’m seriously concerned
about the Coliseum Authority being receptive to new ideas, [inaudible] changes,
75
[inaudible] a lot of options to do. So I think when you telegraph the type of message,
one, on one motion that you’re just going to send it to the General Assembly to
[inaudible] abolish it, and then on the other one that you’re going to have a meeting to
talk about abolishing it, then that’s already a [inaudible] of made up minds [inaudible]
which does not create the type of environment of where you have an open and honest
discussion about what you’re doing. Now I think [inaudible] can be done. We may still
end up with the deficits that are there like in other cities, but then you ask yourself the
question is it the structure or quite frankly is it just the personalities of the board?
There’s a lot there that I think needs to be discussed in an open meeting, quite frankly.
I’m going to [inaudible] Commissioner Hankerson in reference to the promotion of the
Civic Center. Now that event that happened last year with the United Methodists I think
was very, very unfortunate. I was not involved in that direct discussion of what went on,
how it happened. I know Commissioner Boyles and Commissioner Kuhlke were quite
close to that. But [inaudible] Mr. Mayor, cause I don’t like to rely on what I read or even
sometimes what I hear somebody else reporting, and Barry and I have known each other
for a long time. We have worked on a lot of projects together. But I think the question
needs to be asked, did the CVB’s board, did the [inaudible] was there some movement?
Because the only thing I’ve done is read and I think the only way [inaudible] was there an
official tool that said CVB will not be marketing the Civic Center? Or what I read in The
Spirit or what was read to me in an editorial the other day out of the daily paper
[inaudible]? Because I think that’s something that needs to be answered, not to a point of
criticism per se but of information and my reason for asking it in a point blank way that
way is the fact that we need to know, say for instance, number one, [inaudible] first two
weeks of January [inaudible] so if that’s the case the conventioneers are looking to come
to Augusta and everybody can’t [inaudible] Radisson or stay at the Sheraton or a
combination of hotels [inaudible]. [inaudible] if I’m going to bring a convention and it’s
a [inaudible] group, and I ask the question, and I call and I say where can we house these
people [inaudible] then – and [inaudible] I think we need to know that. Because part of
us wants to turn this over to CVB. Now if there is a problem already existing in that
vein, then I think that does give us something to talk about [inaudible]. But to a point, I
just need to know that. Because I read it but I’ve not heard it. And I need to know that.
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible]
Mr. White: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. To answer your question, Mr. Mays, we are
promoting that facility. We do have some events that are scheduled to take place in that
facility, including a Mustang Grand National Car Show, Southeast Region. It’s going to
take place Labor Day. I think it’s Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority that’s going to be meeting
there with a couple of thousand delegates. We are working on some other conventions as
well and have a meeting actually scheduled with the staff of the Civic Center next week
to renew some of those bids that are out. There is no formal motion on our board, from
our board that says do not market that facility.
Mr. Mays: And that’s what I needed to hear from you. Because I mean if I read
that in a story line or if I read that in an editorial and I’m the first one [inaudible] I
believe in that old Gladys Knight song, you know, [inaudible] half of what you see and
76
basically none of what you hear. But [inaudible] the question. Now I need to get that out
in a public meeting to a point because if I read that to a point say your organization is
doing that, then I need to know whether or not that’s the board, because we have a
building there that the public has invested in. Now if we need to run everybody off to a
point of starting a new board, that might be something that [inaudible] but to a point I
don’t think any organization should be – and you answered the question – but I’m going
to say how I feel about it. I think that [inaudible] should make a decision to a point
[inaudible] on a building that is built with public funds, even if something went wrong or
something went bad. [inaudible] try and correct it, you make proposals, you come before
[inaudible] and say [inaudible] change what they’re doing and [inaudible] to what Mr.
Kuhlke [inaudible] that type of dialog [inaudible]. I’m glad to [inaudible]. You know, I
thought I [inaudible]. But I’m glad I’m not the only one now that’s realizing [inaudible].
So you know, I think that that [inaudible] creative things [inaudible]. We need to talk
about everything from [inaudible], we need to talk about what’s occupying it, why you
can’t attract certain events, why you can’t even promote [inaudible] going out to get other
shows, to get [inaudible] because I’m going to tell you what happens now on my side of
town. Now you know, Mr. Kuhlke’s motion sounds good to where it is, but see now,
there are all sorts of people [inaudible] motion has got out here. There’s some folks that
[inaudible] Coliseum Authority and the building just die a slow death. See, I’ve been
[inaudible] folks already made that kind of decision. [inaudible] and I just want to make
sure that for those folk who stop me in Wal-Mart, who stop me on the corner of Laney-
Walker and James Brown Boulevard, that I can answer them truthfully what’s going on
with the motion and have a honest discussion with [inaudible] not about a way to
[inaudible]. Now some times [inaudible] table. Quite frankly, [inaudible]. Now
[inaudible] and why all this all of a sudden to a point [inaudible]. [inaudible] it ought to
be cleaned up. It ought to be in immaculate condition. [inaudible] alternatives out there.
[inaudible] to a point if you walk between the aisle [inaudible] 20 or 30 years ago that
were not broad minded enough, who fought the original Coliseum ideas of how it should
have been built and came along with [inaudible]. But that’s a whole other deal
[inaudible]. Now, where you’ve got a situation there that would [inaudible] I want to
make sure that we’re not playing a [inaudible] here, that we don’t have a [inaudible] to a
point that set the tone to eliminate what’s there, then all of a sudden you eliminate the
building and then my [inaudible] quite frankly, cause I don’t pull no punches, my
question for asking [inaudible] being promoted, I didn’t wanted to [inaudible] to a point
if it’s not being promoted now, that you get [inaudible] not promoting it in the future and
that you basically [inaudible] that it dies, goes out of business, it become defunct and
[inaudible] once you don’t have an Authority, once you don’t have [inaudible]. Guess
what? [inaudible] talk about what’s really the deal and what game’s on the table, then
you [inaudible] cause we all [inaudible]. If you don’t want to talk about the real thing,
[inaudible] but if you’re a man, talk about what you really want to talk about. So now
[inaudible] to deal with it, but I think you ought to be men enough to deal with what the
real thing is about. So now let’s [inaudible] another way [inaudible]. I agree, we
shouldn’t be operating out of a filthy building. It ought to be creative, it ought to be
receptive to ideas, and receptive to criticism. [inaudible] it comes with the territory. But
also it comes with an element of fairness [inaudible]. [inaudible] just be a man about
77
what you feel. That’s the only thing I’m saying about both motions and I ain’t going to
vote, quite frankly, for either one of them.
Mr. Mayor: Let me ask this. Is there anyone who has not spoken yet on this issue
that would like to speak before we start revisiting folks who have already spoken? Mr.
Boyles.
Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor, I kind of felt left out. Mr. Colclough hasn’t had
anything to say, but you know, I go to the Wal-Mart, too, just like Mr. Mays alluded to,
and people say well, why don’t you all do something about the Civic Center, and the
perception to the general public out there is that it is our responsibility. It’s [inaudible]
responsibility in case it fails over there, then the bonded indebtedness falls on the full
faith and credit of the taxpayers of Richmond County. The Legislative Delegation, when
it was set up, when this government was set up, they kept, I believe it’s the only board of
its kind that keeps four appointments. This Commission appoints eight members to that.
Our two Super Districts don’t have, don’t appoint a member.
Mr. Mays: Thank goodness.
Mr. Boyles: So [inaudible]. There is a general perception, to the general person
on the street out there that that, that this is a Commission responsibility. And what we
need to get the message out, because everybody has postured today and everybody has
taken a position on this and so we still come back with this same problem. No matter
what we want to call it, we still come back with an image problem for the City of
Augusta. I just took a moment to walk down and ask Ms. Minchew from the Board of
Education because I remembered something about the Board is not going to have their
graduations down at the Civic Center, and she told me because all of them now are
building football stadiums. Each school is going to have its own stadium, that some of
the principals have chosen to do that. But I guarantee you that somewhere along that
line, there was a cost factor involved, too. And I said this a long time ago that we have
taken the word “civic” out of Civic Center. I think by us being so focused, by this
community being so focused on how much money is lost over there, that we have kind of
put them in the position of where they kind of had to raise higher rates than they should
have, they may be charging people more, and it takes the “civic” out of Civic Center
because all folks in this community can’t use it. Try to book a party of there, try to book
a meeting room over there. I met with a civic club, I was and still am in a civic club that
started over there in 1978, when the Civic Center first opened. We left a restaurant and
went over there and stayed there until three years ago, when the cost and the general
condition of the building caused us to leave. And there were others, too. The Augusta
Exchange Club. I don’t know if Steve’s Lions Club is still meeting over there. But
they’ve had problems. We can talk to Georgia Food Service, we can talk to a lot of other
organizations other than United Methodists who are not coming back to Augusta because
of the condition. We can start with one of our own, that’s Georgia Recreation & Parks,
not coming back to Augusta because of it. I just wanted to make those comments, Mr.
Mayor. I wanted to be a little briefer, but I think that some of us have a genuine concern
about what does go on over there and we all realize any form of civic centers do lose
78
money. They’re designed to lose money. We do have, they do have, they won’t ever go
broke, they won’t ever go out of business because we’ve got – as long as people keep
buying beer, that is, they won’t ever go out of business. Because it is the house that beer
built. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough, would you like to say anything?
Mr. Colclough: Not today. [inaudible]
Mr. Kuhlke: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: But you sit up here and you get a little cranky.
(Laughter)
Mr. Kuhlke: I wanted to make this clear to the Commission. When I decided to
put this on the agenda, I spoke with Barry White to let him know that I was going to put
it on the agenda. And the purpose of him being here today is because he knew it was
going to be on the agenda and he had no idea what was going to happen. I have full –
they haven’t requested or anything else. But I know that they are a professional
organization, they have a tremendous reputation throughout this state, I know that they
would be capable of handling the job, should the Commission decide to do that. But I
just wanted to make that clear, that I only made him aware that I was going to put it on
the agenda. Period. That’s it. And from the standpoint of answering Mr. Mays, my
interest is maximizing what can be done at the Civic Center for the betterment of this
community and its citizens and that’s it. Purely. It’s not to build a new arena.
Mr. Mayor: All right. We’ve got two motions on the floor. [inaudible] we’ll go
back to Mr. Cheek and Mr. Hankerson and y’all be brief, I’d appreciate it.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, if I remember correctly, at our last meeting with the
Delegation, we discussed if we did not outline any method of the Coliseum Authority as
far as expectations for performance for the year. Therefore, they were left to go back
over to the Coliseum and develop their own path to follow, many of them lacking the
promotional or business experience to look over operating systems to see where their
costs were and how to reduce them, how to look at many other aspects of it and come up
with strategies to help the Civic Center perform, but also to meet our expectations and the
expectations of the people of this city. I would like for us to get together with our
Delegation members as soon as possible and not do typically what politicians do and say
okay, we’ve talked to y’all, we’ve slapped you on the wrist, now go and do better. Let’s
outline expectations. Because yes, it is true, museums and other large venues like this
typically don’t pay for themselves, but the one [inaudible] over the past three years have
the number of beds that have been slept in by people who have attended events at that
Civic Center increased or decreased? Now I can massage numbers all day long and make
them look really good. But the fact of the matter is we’re on a declining curve of
attendees at that facility. That [inaudible] makes us, the Coliseum Authority and the
79
Legislative Delegation, who are embarrassed about this, just like we are. I’ve talked with
the citizens of Augusta, and yes, a new civic center is DOA when it comes to SPLOST.
So we’re going to have to make what we’ve got work. [inaudible] the voters decide if
they want to pay extra money for a new civic center somewhere else, but we’ve got to
make this one work. But until we give the board a specific set of goals that we expect
them to achieve in the coming year, like establishing performance goals for whatever
manager they put in place, numbers of events that we expect to have over and above
hockey, days the arena will be filled with conventions, until we start setting goals for this
board to achieve [inaudible] own devices and I’m telling you, I think I’ve got probably
the most accurate report from that Civic Center in the course of my [inaudible]
representative that you can get. I’ve seen the beds where the employees sleep. I’ve seen
the places where the air conditioners were repaired on company time. I’ve seen the holes
in the bathrooms that were ordered repaired over the years. I’ve seen the dirt. I’ve seen
the broken systems that nobody listened to about getting repaired. I’ve seen the lack of
concern where we have broken roof tiles that could have been fixed for $25 that cost
more than $5,000 to fix after they completely fell through. I got a pretty good handle on
what’s going on over there. None of us can afford to keep it going the way it is. It makes
us all look bad. This board – I’m an optimist. Sometimes. This board, this new board
over there has lot some good people because of the bickering, the black, the white, the
men, the women, the old, the young. And I don’t care. The bickering. People not
coming to meetings. People acting like children when they should act like adults. You
may not believe it should make money, but dad gum it, you should at least try to make it
break even, and if you don’t you need to get off the board. Augusta is a great venue for a
lot of things. I’ve seen Elton John, Bon Jovi, Bob Dylan, Reba McEntyre, some of the
best acts in the world right across the street. We can attract the people. Have we done it
lately? All I can say is, Mr. Mayor, let us with due diligence reach out to our Legislative
Delegation, who are equally embarrassed, as soon as possible, and come up with a
strategy, a [inaudible] strategy, whether it’s abolish it, give them goals and guidelines, or
let it go like it is. But let’s not do this without a plan and let’s [inaudible] plan
[inaudible]. If Commissioner Colclough and I can facilitate a meeting to develop a
specific list of SPLOST projects in under an hour, I bet between six or eight politicians
we could develop a specific list of goals in anticipation of the civic center in under an
hour. Let’s give them that list, and if they don’t perform then let’s abolish it.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hankerson.
Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I keep hearing the problems that we say
is with the board and I think our expectations of the board is more than we expect of
ourselves. And the more I hear people talk about the different things that happened –
now one thing I keep hearing about it was a food problem. The Methodists didn’t come
back because of the food problem. I never heard anyone – and we have a board member
in here, I’d like for him to take this back for unfinished business – cause the board has
some unfinished business. They fired Reggie Williams. Reggie didn’t cook the food.
But the food, the catering service is still there that served the bad food. If Reggie had of
been there, right on the spot, the food was already prepared, the service was already bad.
He couldn’t correct that. Nobody has said well, we abolish [inaudible] board members,
80
the Coliseum board, we need to make sure that we abolish that catering service over
there. They’re still there. They served the bad food. If it was awful, then we should deal
with that. If I got a food committee at the church, the church ain’t going to fire me for
the food. They are going to tell me to get rid of that committee. That’s [inaudible]. And
also about losing money. We know all these things about uncleanliness and all of this,
but they should be responsible [inaudible]. If you are already in the [inaudible] clean up
the building? You don’t have anything. Nobody offers. [inaudible] how could we help
them or maybe some [inaudible] to clean it up. If they don’t have [inaudible] they cannot
do it. And we talking about how much money that they are spending. And I heard my
colleague say all these repairs need to be done. Take a look at the jail house. We are
spending $1 million a year in maintenance and that’s an awful place and we supervise
that. And we are still spending $1 million every year in repairs. [inaudible] security
system [inaudible] was over there the other day. Water, the office [inaudible] wet carpet,
with our computer system that we just put in. Is wet. Nobody [inaudible] responsible
for. But we need to address the real problems of this [inaudible] and I just think that
[inaudible] we need to make sure that the [inaudible] how they [inaudible] contract
[inaudible] and I think that should be taken care of and [inaudible]. So I mean we had a
lot of problems over there [inaudible] new people but I hope that the next meeting will be
a very successful meeting and that we can do some things and the city move forward.
We all need to work together in doing that.
Mr. Mayor: Anything further before we go to vote? I think Barry wanted to say
something.
Mr. White: If I could, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. One more [inaudible] in response
to Mr. Mays. I can say that it has been extremely challenging to market that facility and
to promote that facility. And it is becoming an issue around the state. It’s becoming well
known. There’s a network of planners and people out there who host meetings. And it
makes it extremely challenging to promote that facility. I also agree that it is, that a
tremendous amount of improvement must take place over there very quickly. Every day
that we go that it is not improving, we are losing business, the city is losing convention
revenue and we’re losing a quality of life through activities and events. And I believe it
is up to this board or to this body to make that decision and if the CVB can be of
assistance in helping you with that decision, providing information, we here and more
than willing to do that.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Ready to vote, Mr. Beard?
Mr. Beard: I just wanted to say something Barry. That I think that you said it is
extremely difficult to [inaudible] the Civic Center. I think that [inaudible] sometimes
[inaudible] really conflicts with what we are trying to [inaudible] to the city. And I think
that [inaudible] statement that you know [inaudible]. They say the same thing about this
body [inaudible]. It’s really [inaudible] to bring [inaudible]. [inaudible] people in this
time have [inaudible] being said and because of some of the decisions that have been
made over there [inaudible] and I think we [inaudible].
81
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: I just wanted to follow up what Mr. Beard said, Barry. I am
thankful for what you do, but if it’s as difficult as you say it is, look like you would have
a solution as to what is the problem [inaudible] hard to promote and [inaudible] why it’s
hard to promote it. And if nothing else, talk with us about it. But when you say it’s hard
to promote it and you walk away, I mean it could be any number of things. But if there is
something specific that you know in that field that we’re not doing or they’re not doing,
you need to bring to this board so we can direct our appointees and [inaudible]. I mean I
think the board want to work with [inaudible]. I appreciate your effort and your
comments, that’s all.
Mr. Mayor: Let me just say one, one brief thing, and that is that I wouldn’t want
you to get the impression that we’re not supportive of the Civic Center. Indeed, Barry
and I last fall went up to Atlanta and met with the Bishop of the North Georgia Methodist
Church and we personally apologized to him for the treatment of the Methodists in this
community and asked them to give us another chance, and they promised to give us
another chance in 2005. So we’ve got two years and the clock is ticking. And I think
[inaudible] if you’re not going to vote for any of them, that’s your choice today. But the
point is we’ve got some issues that have got to be dealt with, indeed that clock is ticking.
We have a substitute motion from Commissioner Cheek. Does anyone need that motion
read back? Okay, we’d like to have it read back, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk: Commissioner Cheek’s motion was to confer with the Legislative
Delegation at the next work session, to require full financial report [inaudible] with the
intent to abolish the Civic Center or come up with an action plan to resolve the problems
in a professional manner.
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of that motion, the substitute motion, please vote in the
affirmative.
(Vote on substitute motion)
Mr. Boyles, Mr. Kuhlke, Mr. Shepard and Mr. Hankerson vote No.
Mr. Williams abstains.
Mr. Mays out.
Motion fails 4-4-1.
Mr. Mayor: That takes us back to the original motion from Commissioner
Kuhlke. You need the original motion read? All right, we’ll proceed to vote on the
original motion. All in favor of the original motion then please vote in the affirmative.
(Vote on original motion)
Mr. Beard, Mr. Bridges, Mr. Colclough and Mr. Cheek vote No.
Mr. Williams abstains.
Mr. Mays out.
Motion fails 4-4-1.
82
Mr. Mayor: We’ll move along with the order of the day.
The Clerk:
34A. Discuss the decaling of city vehicles. (Requested by Commissioner Marion
Williams)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I asked this be put on the agenda. I asked
for a report from the Administrator about the decaling of city vehicles and [inaudible]
with the Airport Director. I’ve got some photographs, if the Clerk could pass those out.
The state law says that any public employee or public funded vehicle would have an
affixed seal on the front door on each side. And also our, our own city ordinance says
that the vehicle will have a 12” x 3” decal designating the department. And also it says
between 12” to 18” affixed below the circular decal [inaudible]. The pictures that are
passed out to you are pictures that when I saw the new Expedition, the Eddie Bauer
edition that we all had the reference about, had a decal that was very easy to remove. It
wasn’t even a stick-on decal. It was a magnet type decal. And it was at each side of the
door. I pulled the decal up and I turned it upside down like in the photograph like I want
you to see that this is a public piece of equipment, a public vehicle that the city is
responsible for and it’s not to be used, I wouldn’t think, at any other time. But with this
type of decal not being affixed, it might not be decaled at all. So I brought this to this
committee, to this body. The Administrator gave us a report saying that everybody had
complied. I talked with Ron over in Fleet Management. He said that his job was to
provide the decals, his job was not to put them on, but he provide the decals so they could
be put on. But somebody had to go out of their way, Mr. Mayor, to even purchase this
type of decal. This is not the regular standard piece of equipment. This is not what our
ordinance states nor what the state law says. And I think that [inaudible] decaled
properly and I think somebody need to answer for the reasoning the decal the way it is.
And I just wanted to bring that to the full Commission so we can make some [inaudible]
some change, something, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Are you asking for something specific?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Are you making a motion?
Mr. Williams: I’m making a motion that we have the decals affixed, decals
prescribed by the ordinance of the state and our own city ordinance, Mr. Mayor,
and not a stick on or something capable of being pulled off at the will of whoever is
driving it.
Mr. Colclough: Second.
83
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second.
Mr. Cheek: Is that going to be in leather or vinyl?
Mr. Wall: Your motion ought to be clarified. It’s city policy, not ordinance.
Mr. Williams: Well, city policy.
Mr. Wall: [inaudible]
Mr. Williams: Okay, city policy, but this is a state law.
Mr. Wall: [inaudible] doesn’t say what size.
Mr. Williams: The city policy says what size. The state law says affixed. We are
the city so we just made the size.
Mr. Mayor: Sounds like the taxi cab discussion.
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Is it magnetic or is it [inaudible] or what?
Mr. Williams: I think the [inaudible] to be attached.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we have a motion that has been seconded. Is there further
discussion on the motion? We’ll go ahead and call the question. All in favor of the
question, please vote in the affirmative.
Mr. Shepard votes No.
Mr. Beard and Mr. Kuhlke out.
Motion carries 7-1.
Mr. Wall: May I ask a question?
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead, Mr. Attorney.
Mr. Wall: Is there any objection to the Augusta-Bush Field logo being used as
part of the decal? I mean the policy that was written, I think is the city seal basically –
Mr. Speaker: [inaudible]
Mr. Wall: All right. [inaudible]
84
Mr. Williams: Okay. And the city seal, what was [inaudible], I missed that.
[inaudible] along with the aviation on the bottom of that?
Mr. Wall: It will be like this, I assume. Be the proper size. [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kolb, if you would be kind enough by memo to certify to the
Commissioners that that, that that has been done and report back to us? All right, Mr.
Wall, I think you have the next item, number 35.
ATTORNEY:
35. Motion to approve ordinance amending Augusta-Richmond County Code
§3-6-2(b) regulating radios, phonographs, and similar devices.
Mr. Wall: This is the noise ordinance. I put it in the agenda items where Judge
Jennings had struck down one sub-paragraph of the noise ordinance and the amendment
to the ordinance puts in an “objective man” standard and in order to have an ordinance in
effect to prohibit loud playing of phonographs and radios and bands and things of that
nature that we’ve had problems with in the past [inaudible] bars and lounges [inaudible]
be amended and the language is included in the ordinance. I ask that you approve that
and ask that you consider waiving the second reading.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Wall, let me ask a couple of questions. Would this specifically
include public address systems?
Mr. Wall: Well, this is – yes, it would. [inaudible] device producing or
reproducing a sound in a matter so as to disturb [inaudible].
Mr. Mayor: And so this not only would apply to music coming from night clubs
and bars, but also some outdoor concerts at Riverwalk or the Augusta Common or First
Friday or anything like that?
Mr. Wall: Well, I mean, it would if it’s between the hours of 11 p.m. and 7 a.m.
Mr. Mayor: So by 11 o’clock at night all the music has got to –
Mr. Wall: Well, I mean –
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible] outdoor concerts downtown [inaudible]
Mr. Wall: [inaudible] and I think people that [inaudible] Riverwalk and living
next to events like that understand it. But people that are living in neighborhoods or
backing up to some of the clubs that are on Washington Road, which is where this
incident took place, I mean we’ve had problems through the years [inaudible] going back
to the 70’s where some of them were playing the stereo, the bands and everything so loud
that the surrounding neighborhoods could hear. And it was struck down and that’s the
85
problem that this ordinance was intended to address. For example, if you live next door
to Augusta Common [inaudible].
Mr. Mayor: Does this apply to these boom boxes that people have in their
automobiles?
Mr. Wall: That’s not what it’s intended to apply to, no.
Mr. Mayor: It would not apply?
Mr. Wall: [inaudible] we’re talking about [inaudible], we’re not talking about
[inaudible]. If you’ve got somebody that parks out in the neighborhood and [inaudible]
then I think [inaudible].
Mr. Mayor: Right, but it wouldn’t apply until after 11 o’clock at night, so if they
had it going at 10:30, it wouldn’t apply.
Mr. Wall: That’s correct.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Let’s go around the table here. I think – start with Mr. Boyles
and then we’ll go around.
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. About two weeks ago, I got a call from the
neighborhood back behind the skating rink on Washington Road. And the noise had
gotten so bad, I went up to investigate just to hear it, and the noise really gets loud out
there. So I called Sheriff Strength at home. We found out that Judge Jennings had
overturned the ordinance that we had. Had Sheriff Strength go up there and have them
turn it down on Friday night, and they did. But brother, the neighborhood paid for it the
next Saturday and Sunday night, because they stepped it up a little bit higher than it was.
Now then that also – I’ve been talking with Sheriff Strength, they also have this problem
out at North Leg with the teen night clubs. The people back behind those locations don’t
even want to stay home on Saturday and Sunday nights any more. And because, I think,
Jim, Judge Jennings said what may be loud in the senses to you may not be loud in the
senses to me. But it seemed that the part of our ordinance that did not hold up, and I
asked Mr. Wall to address it, this is what he has come back with and I hope that all of you
will see this for the sanctity of the people who live in our neighborhoods, that this is not
intended, I don’t think, if you’re out at Butler High School and they’ve got the PA system
going for a football game, a public address system, I don’t think that should count into it
because it’s not after 11 o’clock, when Mr. Wall is talking from 11 to 7. But it’s awful
difficult, if you live up around Westside High School, back in those neighborhoods
behind that roller rink up there, to have to put up with this, and so I’m just going to ask
you that -- and beg you and plead with you for the people all over these night spots
across the county to support this.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Wall, you want to clarify something?
86
Mr. Wall: Well, the prohibited noises that are enumerated go from paragraph A
through P. However many letters of the alphabet that is. You’ve got the horns and
signaling devices, and I’m not going to read all of it. You’ve got the loud speakers and
amplifiers for advertising, the yelling, shouting, etc. again between those hours. Steam
whistles, exhaust, defects in the vehicular load, construction repair buildings, interfering
with school sports, places of worship, hospitals, office [inaudible], noise to attract
attention, transportation of metal rails, blowers, [inaudible] trucks, etc. These have all
been carried forward from the County Code and the City Code. The only sub-paragraph
that was at issue was the radios, the phonographs and similar devices. And that’s the one
that the Court struck down and the only one that we’re dealing with. But there are other
provisions, noises that are prohibited.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough.
Mr. Colclough: I mean that doesn’t – I mean that’s fine and I appreciate what
you’re doing. But I know, as in my neighborhood, we’ve got these youngsters with these
$3 cars and $200 speakers in them. And they come into the neighborhood, I mean before
even 10 o’clock, and these things are shaking the community. Now if we already have
that law on the books, then I think someone needs to send over to our Sheriff’s
Department that they need to be able to enforce some of these laws we have on the books.
We’ve got these youngsters with these old cars, and I mean at two o’clock in the
morning, I’m calling the police department. It takes them forever to get there, but I mean
it’s [inaudible] by the time a cop gets there. They call me, do you want me to come to
your house? The music ain’t coming out of my house. It’s coming out of the
community. I think the ordinance is good. I think we need to do something to strengthen
the ordinance and kind of broaden it a little bit where, you know, a lot of this stuff can be
curtailed, you know.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek and then Mr. Williams.
Mr. Cheek: [inaudible] scientific instrument like a [inaudible] which is what the
industry standard is for these stereos and all anyway?
Mr. Wall: Well, there are some ordinances out there that we looked at that do
have that. The problem with that, in my opinion, is that you then are going to have to
equip a lot of officers, not necessarily every one, with those sound measuring devices so
that they can go out there before they can write a ticket. And so I asked the one who was
drafting the ordinance to come up with something other than that because in my opinion
that’s an added cost, it’s a delay insofar as getting people out there, you are going to have
one in each precinct, you’re going to have one on each shift, or put one in every car. I
mean it seemed impractical to me, but we did look at that.
Mr. Cheek: It’s not nearly as expensive as a radar gun. [inaudible] industry
standard. And [inaudible] calibrations [inaudible] measurement at a given number of
feet.
87
Mr. Wall: I agree with you, but the radar gun – I mean you’ve got many, many,
many cars that it’s used on, whereas this, I mean you’ve got bars and events going on
around the city, and I didn’t know, quite frankly, how it would be practical to use that. I
mean I think an officer would have to go back to the station somewhere, pick it up, take it
out there –
Mr. Cheek: It’s only about – I mean they’re very tiny.
Mr. Wall: That’s an option.
Mr. Cheek: And you can drive by in a car and turn it on and hold it out the
window. I mean it’s a simple thing to tell. I guess there are two other questions. I’m
like, I’m like Richard. We need to strengthen this. When that glass of iced tea on my
dining room table is jerking around from the car that’s driving down the street, my
internal organs are doing the same thing. Those people need to be fined. Can we include
language into this [inaudible] hearing on a traffic accident. Every time they picked
someone up for noise violation, they doubled the fine. Is there any way we can
strengthen this ordinance to where they have that kind of penalty for playing their music
so loud?
Mr. Wall: Well, I mean you could, you could put in a provision recommending
that the second offense [inaudible], you would have an elevated fine structure. What we
currently do, however, is leave that up to the Courts. For each offense that’s included in
our Code, we authorize up to the maximum penalty, rather than for most offenses
creating a staggered fine system, and leave it up to the Court to do that.
Mr. Cheek: Can you [inaudible] Commission as far as how this is disruptive to
our neighborhoods?
Mr. Wall: I think the Court recognizes that it’s disruptive to the neighborhoods
but the Court found the language of the existing statute was not specifically [inaudible]
enough. And while I understand that measuring the decibel level is a foolproof system,
what I was looking for was one such that an officer, you know, utilizing this standard
could make the charge without having to call the lieutenant out, without having to go
back to the station, could deal with the problem on the scene, without equipping every
officer with such a device. And if y’all want to do it the other way, that’s fine, but I think
there will be a cost involved. In my opinion, this corrects the problem which allows it to
stand and basically the same ordinance we had in effect, but with an objective standard.
Mr. Cheek: $100 per car, it would pay for itself in one citation, and then you’ve
got something that’s pretty foolproof. I know radar has stood the test of time in Court.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, you need to talk to the Attorney or is there something
you wanted to –
88
Mr. Williams: I think I [inaudible], Mr. Mayor. This here is a very serious
problem. I had several neighbors to contact me and I went out and I had a conversation
with a young man who has an automobile he cranks up in the morning, he get ready to go
to work, and he lets the music warm up when he lets his car warm up. And so I called the
Sheriff’s Department and naturally by the time they got there, he has done gone. So I
thought he had a scanner to know when they was directing or dispatching a car. Well,
find out he didn’t, he just – the length of time. So I went back and talked to the young
man several times and finally I had to call Ronnie again, [inaudible] not here, but I call
the Sheriff and I talked with him. He sent an officer out and the officer gave him a
citation. He went to the Court and it got better. But the neighbors are afraid to come to
the door out [inaudible]. They will not come to the door. You go knock on the door, the
young kids of playing loud music, I say young kids, young adults. Playing loud music in
their front yards, working on their cars, and if you go over and tell them something then
you got problems. So I promised the neighbors that they wouldn’t have to be fearful of
the loud noise. And it’s gotten better, Jim, but there’s a serious problem with these
people coming through the neighborhoods. Three o’clock in the morning with the music
just blasting. I told the young man I know your favorite song. I hear it every time you
come in. And I said I like music myself but you ought to be respectful and at least
respect the neighborhood. Well, after he got that ticket, he got better. The other night I
had to call the Sheriff’s Department who came to my address. I had no problem them
coming to me cause I was willing to go around there with them to show them this young
man. And find out it was somebody else playing music next door to them. So to make a
long story short, Jim, we’ve got to do something to let these people understand they can’t
come in and tear up a neighborhood. That’s what happening to the neighborhood. We
have sit back and let them come in and not been aggressive in changing those things. So
I need to know from you what –
Mr. Wall: Let me correct one thing. This does apply to vehicles. I apologize for
that error. I looked back. So it does deal with vehicles so that the situation that you
talked about –
Mr. Williams: But it’s only in effect after 11 o’clock?
Mr. Colclough: We need to change that.
Mr. Williams: That really need to be changed. Any time.
Mr. Wall: That’s the current ordinance and that’s the way I kept it, I brought it
forward, just correcting the defect that the Court found. If you want to have multiple
definitions, we can use this as it is, then we can create another one that uses a decibel
level any hour of the day, and maybe that will cover both situations. And then I think
that there is going to be a funding issue, but y’all can address that at the appropriate time.
Mr. Williams: Well, I got a neighbor that said her pictures come off the wall
every time the young man cranks his speakers up and said she just quit putting them on
the wall. And that’s really bad.
89
Mr. Wall: What I would ask you to do is plug the hole at this point by passing
this ordinance and let me come back and bring another ordinance that addresses those
provisions that you’re concerned about, putting in a decibel level, and I will track some
ordinances that are already on the books that set a level.
Mr. Cheek: OSHA has got ear damage standards.
Mr. Williams: Jim, don’t we have some on the books already for vehicles, loud
music and stuff?
Mr. Wall: The ordinance was struck down that has that provision in it. What I’m
trying to do is put it back in.
Mr. Williams: So move. Move for approval.
Mr. Shepard: I want to second Mr. Williams’ motion. Jim, the problem is if we
follow our usual ordinance procedure, there would be nothing in force this weekend; is
that correct?
Mr. Wall: That’s correct.
Mr. Shepard: So I was wondering if the maker of the motion would waive
the second reading so we can go ahead and get the plug in place?
I think it is a
sufficient problem, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, that Mr. Boyles brought up that we need to have
some [inaudible] on the books by Saturday night, isn’t that right?
Mr. Boyles: Friday night.
I would ask the maker to add the waiver of the
Mr. Shepard: Friday night.
second reading and I’ll second that as well.
Mr. Williams: I can accept that.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: But this does include automobiles?
Mr. Wall: Yes.
Mr. Cheek: And is it usable during the daytime hours?
Mr. Wall: No.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: [inaudible]
90
Mr. Cheek: Can we pass this and come back with one that is going to deal with
[inaudible]?
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Wall, what’s the time frame you are coming back with
this second ordinance if we pass this? When we will have the second ordinance?
Mr. Wall: I’ll have it back the first meeting in August.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The first meeting in Augusta. Any further discussion?
We’ve got a motion and second on the floor. Any further discussion?
Mr. Wall: Let me ask this. [inaudible] what the cost of the equipment and how –
I don’t know that I would have that by the first meeting in August.
Mr. Cheek: I can – I have [inaudible] that I work with. I can –
Mr. Wall: [inaudible] Sheriff’s Department [inaudible].
Mr. Cheek: Okay.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Well, we need something back.
Mr. Speaker: Better have the Sheriff in on that.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: We need something back by the first – we can deal with the
decibels anytime, we can add the decibels, is that correct? But we need something –
Mr. Wall: If you are going to do it in the daytime, I think you need to tie it to a
decibel level.
Mr. Cheek: [inaudible] put the meter on them.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: So you’re saying the second meeting in August?
Mr. Wall: [inaudible] cost of [inaudible]
Mr. Williams: Let me say this now. They ain’t going to set there and let a police
car pull up there and listen to their music and so I mean you ain’t going to be able to get
it that way. But I think if a neighbor complains and there is sufficient complaints, we
need to do something on that. Because if you wait till when they come down the street,
they – even now they got enough sense to cut the music down. So I think Andy’s idea is
a great one, but let’s not fool ourselves. They ain’t going to sit there and say well, I’m
too loud. This is extremely loud. This ain’t where you’re saying I hear it in the next
room. This is extremely loud stuff.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Three blocks over.
91
Mr. Williams: That’s right. And sometimes you can’t tell which direction it
coming from, it’s so loud.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: We’re going to have the second ordinance back the second
week – gentlemen, we’re going to have the second ordinance back the second week in
August, the second meeting in August.
Mr. Cheek: We’re going to waive the second reading then and then have –
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Waive the second reading on this.
Mr. Cheek: I will get you training and price figures, too, pretty quickly.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, gentlemen, we’ve got a motion and second on the
floor. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor of the motion, please signify by
the sign of voting.
Mr. Beard, Mr. Kuhlke and Mr. Hankerson out.
Motion caries 7-0.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Madame Clerk, next item.
The Clerk: Mr. Wall.
Mr. Wall:
36. Motion to approve the extension of Chief Tax Appraiser’s contract through
December 31, 2003, at a monthly salary of $7,147.00 per month.
Mr. Wall: You’ll recall that the existing contract runs through August 6 of this
year and the Commission instructed that I got back and seek an extension of the contract.
I met with the Personnel Committee of the Board of Tax Assessors, along with Mr.
Reece, and the recommendation and the agreement from the Board of Tax Assessors was
that they wanted to extend the contract through December 31 at a monthly rate of
$7,147.00 per month, which, so that you will know, is the dollar amount that they
recommended for the original contract. However, there would be no obligation beyond
December 31. This is an interim measure to carry you through December 31 as a part of
the review of the financial information, as well as review of the budget for the Board of
Tax Assessors, you then will have the opportunity to address a longer term contract. But
this is the recommendation from the Board of Tax Assessors and I recommend approval
of this.
Mr. Mays: So move.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
92
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and second on the floor. Discussion? Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you. Sonny, while you’re here, could you give us some
indication of how the mobile home – I can tell you about one case where the mobile
home taxes got caught up. But can you tell us about that across the board? That was a
part of the revenue that we thought we could find and my question is how much of it have
we found, if you could speak to that? That was one thing you brought to us.
Mr. Reece: Well, I can probably give it to you off the top of my head.
Mr. Shepard: Ballpark it.
Mr. Reece: Ballpark it. The mobile home inspectors themselves [inaudible] cost
benefit analysis, at the budget hearings, preliminary budget hearings, Mr. Kolb asked for
a report and I emailed him that report I think yesterday. It shows that they have made –
just the inspectors – have dropped 475 door hangers. We had 139 responses, of which 59
of those were homesteaded mobile homes that the decals were not displayed or they were
already prebilled 2003 mobile homes that they had not been displayed. 99 responses
have come in, generating approximately $18,000 from just that portion. We have 241
non-responses that are being researched, the owners, in process of being turned over to
the Marshal to start through the Court process. The average, average tax that we’ve
collected on these units is $163+ per unit. Some have been less and some have been
more. This has also allowed us to free up the other mobile home inspector, our fulltime
one, and which I believe the total revenues to date from those combined is approximately
$88,000.
Mr. Shepard: And if I could, one more follow-up, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Your pro
forma – refresh my memory, if you could, the projection we would realize about, you
remember about how much we realized in excess revenue over the cost of these
[inaudible]?
Mr. Reece: Yes, sir, it was going to be about $50,000 - $60,000 over. If you take
the average collections that we have just for those two employees on the 99 that we
tracked for them, with the 214 or 217 that’s outstanding to be processed using that
average, that would be generating a total of $51,000 in revenues for the three month
period that we’ve had them employed versus the cost of $15,000 – no, $11,000 plus about
$600 worth of mileage.
Mr. Shepard: And this would be recurring? I mean decals are an annual –
Mr. Reece: Decals would be an annual reoccurrence that would be on the digest.
We would not have to worry about that again. [inaudible] picture on that.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
93
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor of the
motion, please signify by the sign of voting.
Mr. Beard, Mr. Kuhlke and Mr. Hankerson out.
Motion carries 7-0.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Next item.
Mr. Shepard: No legal.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: No legal meeting.
[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 15, 2003.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
94