Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-04-2004 Regular Meeting REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER May 4, 2004 Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:08 p.m., Tuesday, May 4, 2004, the Honorable W. H. Mays, III, Mayor Pro Tem, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Hankerson, Smith, Colclough, Grantham, Cheek, Williams, Sims and Boyles, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. ABSENT: Hons. Bob Young, Mayor; Beard, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Also Present: Steve Shepard, Attorney; George Kolb, Administrator; Lena Bonner, Clerk of Commission. The Invocation was given by Dr. Gregory Fuller. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Before we start with our guests and delegations, Ms. Bonner, that are here, I would like, I have consulted with our Engineering Services chairman, but because of the committee meetings, which in some cases there were not quorums, I would like for the other committee chairmen if possible, since we have a very short consent agenda, if there are things on your committee when we get to that portion to do a consent, if you could be ready to -- while at the same time giving attention to our guests that are here, but at that same time be ready to give us certain numbers that we could put on the consent agenda. However, you will still have the privilege, individual Commissioners, to pull those items and to have them read for individual discussion. But if we could do that also in the essence of time. And now we give our attention to the delegations, presentations, Ms. Bonner. The Clerk: PRESENTATION: Citizens for Nuclear Technology • Mr. Joseph: Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity of being with you this afternoon. My name is Walt Joseph. My colleague is [inaudible] Crawford. We are representing Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness. We’ve come to talk to you about a proposed Savannah River Site Heritage Center, and we’re not asking for money. Okay? So that’s a good start, I hope. I’ll keep it short. Most of you are aware that the Savannah River Site played a very important role in ending the Cold War. I trust you’re also aware that the site established criteria for environmental preservation, which was unmatched at the time and far exceeded anything that was at that point required by law. 1 The requirements for the site have changed dramatically with the end of the Cold War, and as a result many of the historic buildings and much of the equipment out there is currently in the process of being destroyed and dismantled, despite that it’s one of the very few Department of Energy sites in the nation that does not have a visitors center or a museum to explain the role and the heritage of that facility. We propose that it is time, if we’re going to save any of the artifacts and facilities from the site, it is time to begin that preservation process. Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness has established a committee, and Todd and I are proud to be part of it. We’re currently building public support. We’re visiting political entities, such as yourself, around the two state area. We’re working with organizations that promote heritage tourism. And we’re in negotiation with the Department of Energy, South Carolina State Historic Preservation Office, and the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Our job imminently is to save a few existing structures and as many artifacts as may be useful to interpreting the history of the Savannah River Site. Our vision is to have a heritage center which would house exhibits, classroom space, and a library. It would be accessible to travelers on the South Carolina Heritage Corridor, the school groups, the scholars interested in studying the impact of this site on the technology, the ecology and the local society. We also expect to have available to us C reactor, which is one of the site signature facilities, for eventual public access. It is not publicly accessible now, but we believe that is only a matter of time as some of the site missions change, before we can have access to the road which will permit the public to see this important technology. What we would like you to do, what we would like to ask for today is to approve a resolution to [inaudible] Allison, manager of the Savannah River Operations Office, which simply supports the concept of a Savannah River Heritage Center. And I will leave this resolution with you. I’ll be happy to answer questions if you have any. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: We thank you so much for your presence here today and for the City’s continued partnership with SRS. One of your own, I’m going to yield at this moment and to recognize our chairperson of Engineering Services for the purpose of making a motion. RESOLUTION: Savannah River Operations Office U. S. Department of Energy • Savannah River Site Heritage Center Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I’d like to make a motion that we receive today’s report as information and also with that we pass, that we pass this resolution of support for this heritage center. And I’d like to add, Mr. Chairman, in traveling in business, I’ve traveled and seen the National Atomic Museum in the Bradbury Center in Los Alamos, and there is very little in the way of recognition for the contributions of the many thousands of Cold Warriors that fought to fight the darkness of Communism at this world at the Savannah River Site, and the technological and other contributions made at that site needs to be recognized, and there’s no better place than at home to recognize that. I just urge support for this measure and this resolution in hopes that we will see a center out there that will be educate and inform the public and provide 2 a place for people to come and learn the real facts about our contributions here in Augusta and Savannah River. Mr. Williams: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? If not, all on favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, the Mayor and Mrs. Beard will not be in attendance today’s meeting. They’re out of town. Mr. Joseph: Thank you very much. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you. So noted. Before -- I think the Attorney has a couple of items that he needs to still get together, and we have our committee chairpersons that may still need to look through some items that are down there in front of them. I’m gong to take the right of personal privilege, and I guess since I’m chairing I don’t have to take it, I just do it. I often refer to Ms. Bonner, particularly when we are speaking to visitors or we’re out of town at conferences that Augusta has the best Clerk in America. That’s usually her title, the Best Clerk in America. Well, it just goes to show you that she does not know everything that happens in the Clerk’s office, because we had four freshman Commissioners that came in in January. Three that are present today. Ms. Beard is out of the city. But something that was spearheaded by those three, something that’s been enjoyed by all of us, and I guess since I’ve had to work with her now over a quarter of a century, I learned over the years who is the real boss in this courthouse. But she does not know everything. So I’m going to ask those, three of those four freshmen that are present today if you would join me down front for just a moment, and particularly for an issue that you all spearheaded and to prove that she’s still a little bit fallible, we’ll make her know so at this time. If you would join me in the front for just a moment. If I’d had to cover this thing up one more time, I was just going to hand it to you. I have something here, just a little token, and these words from our new Commissioners [inaudible] spearheaded and put this together, and all of us unanimously concur [inaudible]. And it’s from the Office of the Mayor, City of Augusta, proclamation: In recognition of Lena Bonner, friend Lena Bonner, Augusta Richmond County Clerk of the Commission, has served the residents of Augusta, Georgia for more than 31 years; and Whereas, Ms. Bonner graciously assists all Augusta Richmond County Commissioners with the transition to public service; and Whereas, Ms. Bonner attends to the continuing education and travel needs of the Commission; and 3 Whereas, Ms. Bonner prepares Augusta Richmond County Commission agendas and minutes [inaudible] residents of Augusta, Georgia; and Whereas, Ms. Bonner goes beyond what is expected of her and offers a helping hand whenever it is needed; and Whereas, Ms. Bonner is a true professional and community leader. Now, therefore, I, Bob Young, Mayor of the City of Augusta, Georgia, do hereby proclaim Tuesday, May 4, 2004, as Lena Bonner Day in Augusta, Georgia and urge all citizens to recognize this day. In witness whereas, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of Augusta, th Georgia to be affixed this 4 day of May, 2004. It’s signed by our Mayor, Bob Young, and I’m going to ask one of those who made history on that day, particularly one of the ladies that’s here, since she’s the best looking one in the bunch, if you would present this to Ms. Bonner. Commissioner Sims. (A round of applause is given.) Mr. Williams: Speech, speech. Mr. Smith: It shouldn’t be a day, it should be a month. The Clerk: Thank you. Thank you. It truly has been a privilege and an honor for me to serve my community through serving several Commissions and the Mayors I’ve work with. I hope to continue to honor and to serve you well. Thank you so much. (A round of applause is given.) Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Members of the Commission, we have a consent agenda that contains items 1 through 8. I will recognize those committee chairpersons, starting with the one with the largest agenda, being Engineering Services, for the purpose of submitting numbers hopefully to put together a larger consent agenda. The chair recognizes first Chairman Cheek. Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Yes, we have several items to add, with the consent of the Engineering Services Committee, we’ve developed a consent agenda. Item 21 we would add if we had information concerning is that budgeted for that particular job within the budget of that project, but we’ll hold that pending an answer. Items 22, 23 and 24 we’d like to defer back to Engineering Services for those reports. 22. Update from the Utilities Department regarding the request from Judge Herbert E. Kernaghan, Jr. regarding the Rae’s Creek Sewer Line. 23. Update from the Attorney regarding citations to be issued concerning the clean up of the City’s right-of-ways in District 2. (Referred from April 12 Engineering Services) 4 24. Status report from the Public Works Department regarding the Windsor Springs Road Project. (Referred from April 12 Engineering Services) Mr. Cheek: Items 25 through 34 we’d like to add to the consent agenda. 25. Motion to approve a Consultant Services Agreement with Quest Engineering, Inc. to conduct a performance audit of the OMI agreement for a fee of $32,000.00. 26. Motion to approve execution of Atlanta Gas Light Company Encroachment Agreement for a paved entrance, a 42” DIP water line, and a gated chain link fence. 27. Motion to approve execution of Atlanta Gas Light Company Encroachment Agreement for a 42” DIP water line, a 24” DIP water main and an underground power crossing. 28. Motion to approve the award of a construction contract for Phase I of the Rae’s Creek Trunk Sewer Replacement Project. 29. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 51, Parcel 69.1 which is owned by Curtis Smith for a temporary and permanent easement on Project 50130 – Butler Creek Collector/Belair Hills Estates. 30. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 40, Parcel 071 which is owned by Sarah Alice Reeves Brown for a temporary and permanent easement for the Wrightsboro Road/Sue Reynolds/Belair Road Sewer Improvement Project. 31. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 52, Parcel 117 which is owned by Jonathan Edwards and Christine Edwards for a temporary and permanent easement on Project 50130 – Butler Creek Collector/Belair Hills Estates. 32. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 213, Parcel 156 which is owned by John S. McElmurray for a temporary easement and permanent easement on Project 10175 – Groundwater Treatment Plant #3 20” Water Main. 33. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 52; Parcel 124 which is owned by Rosalyn Brown Lark, Cilla P. Brown as Guardian for Stephanie Patricia Brown and Stephanie Patricia Brown for a permanent and temporary easement on Project 50130 – Butler Creek Collector/Belair Hills Estate. 34. Motion to ratify Commission’s Letter of Approval dated April 22, 2004 regarding Change Order Number One in the amount of $33,660.00 with Beam’s Construction Company for the resurfacing Various Road Phase VIII Project (CPB) 324-04203824045) to be funded from the project construction account. Mr. Cheek: 35A and B we would like to add to the consent agenda. Like to 35A and B we would like to add to the discuss and hold out 35 to the regular agenda consent agenda, with the consent of the body. 35A. Approve Change Order Number One in the amount of $168,510.00 for the Barton Chapel Road, Phase II project (CPB# 322-04-292822678) to be funded from project contingency. 35B. Authorize execution of state aid county contract with the Georgia Department of Transportation for Fed Ex Road subject to receipt of said documents 5 and approval by the City Attorney. (Requested by Commissioners Boyles and Grantham) Addendum Item 3. Motion to approve an Option for Easement between The Bagwell Family Trust, as owner, and Augusta, Georgia, for the following properties located at Willis Foreman Road, 2989 Ulm Road, Ulm Road and Kitchens Road for a purchase price of $11,730.00: 24,803 square feet, more or less, of permanent utility and maintenance easement and 21,699 square feet, more or less, of temporary construction easement. Mr. Colclough: So move, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: If you would, if you could hold off, I -- recognize all these chairmen, for a minute, Commissioner Colclough. Mr. Colclough: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: And I can get them all on and one, if we can get those other committees in at the same time. Did you get the numbers, Ms. Bonner, off of Engineering Services in there? The Clerk: Yes, sir, let me just make sure I did. Item 22, 23 and 24 will be referred back to committee. Items 25 through 34 will be added to the consent agenda. Item 35 will stay on the regular agenda, as well as 35A. Mr. Cheek: 35A and B will go to the consent agenda, as well. The Clerk: Okay. Mr. Hicks: Mr. Chairman, item 21 that you asked about, that’s well within the funds that we have budgeted for that. Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I’d like to go ahead and add 21 to consent agenda, with the consent of the body. 21. Motion to approve a Consultant Services Agreement with Quest Engineering, Inc. to conduct a performance audit of the OMI agreement for a fee of $32,000.00. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: So noted as on the proposed numbers that we have. I guess since we’re kind of moving backwards a little bit there, Public Safety has a discussion item, so that would not go to consent. Am I correct, Mr. Chairman? Mr. Williams: That’s correct. 6 Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: That comes off for discussion. Okay. Under Administrative Services, Commissioner Hankerson, can any of yours go on or do we need to move them all to the regular? Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Chairman, item 16, 17 consent. I’d like to hold 19 and -- on 18, are those recommendations identified? The Clerk: Well, the minutes are included, but to summarize it, I think it was all moratoriums come before the committee before being implemented, as well as any problems or concerns with HUD be brought before the committee to address, prior to any moratoriums being placed on any CDBG projects. Mr. Hankerson: Okay. They can go to consent. 18. 16, 17, and 18. And I’d like to discuss 19. 16. Motion to approve the disability retirement of Mr. Robert Harrison under the 1977 Pension Plan. 17. Motion to ratify Commission’s Approval Letter dated April 22, 2004 of the Local Government Support Letter/Resolution for the May Park Villas Apts. Rehabilitation Project. 18. Motion to approve the recommendations from the April 13th Administrative Services Committee’s Work Session. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. The Clerk: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: We’re moving -- yes, ma’am? The Clerk: Yes, sir. Item 17, the petitioner, Mr. [inaudible] called on yesterday and he’d like to change the total number of units that was approved on the authorization letter from 80 units to 64, with the total set aside units for low income residents to 50. He wanted a corrected letter. However, I told him that it would have to be approved and ratified by this Commission because you only authorized the letter that he received last [inaudible]. 17. Motion to ratify Commission’s Approval Letter dated April 22, 2004 of the Local Government Support Letter/Resolution for the May Park Villas Apts. Rehabilitation Project. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Is he here today? The Clerk: No, sir, he’s in Atlanta. 7 Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, I’ll yield to the Chairman of that committee, but I think it’s going to need to come back to our committee, if there’s going to be a change of that magnitude. Mr. Hankerson: I agree. That need to be discussed. Just can’t do that and not knowing why the changes are being made. The Clerk: His explanation was that the sample letter that the letter was drafted from had the wrong numbers in them. The resolution does mirror the 64 units that he’s requesting to be changed in the support letter. So however, I’ll let the Attorney -- if he wants -- Mr. Shepard: I think they should be consistent and I support the Chairman’s motion to return this to his committee. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, that will be noted. It will be dropped from the proposed consent agenda. Also recognize -- did you want to move -- cause the next one is not a committee, but it’s there and I guess they have to be heard, unless you’re prepared, Steve, to do what we had discussed. Mr. Shepard: I would like, I would like to have number 16 taken up after legal. I’ve got one issue to raise with the Commission in legal, if we could. I don’t want to take it off the agenda, I’d like to take it up after legal, please. 16. Motion to approve the disability retirement of Mr. Robert Harrison under the 1977 Pension Plan. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. And I think it can come under personnel. Mr. Shepard: It can. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: What we need to do on that one. Okay. Under Historic Preservation, those will have to be heard on the regular agenda unless, Mr. Shepard, you have something to bring before us on those at this point. Mr. Shepard: I do not. I believe that both parties are represented here, the Historic Preservation Commission, and the appellants. Those will have to be heard. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Yes, sir? 8 Mr. Boyles: On item 17, I hate to revisit it, but I sat in that meeting and I thought I recalled that today was the deadline and that is why we had passed the resolution with the signatures, and I’m concerned about why the number would change, and as the Clerk told us, there may have been an error in the draft letter that was typed that day, and I would hate to see us lose that funding if today is the last day. And I thought that was the conversation that we -- and I may be recalling something from memory, but it seems that if we put something in a draft letter that was drafted probably from a sample, and I thought I remembered him talking about 64 units during the -- you know, we didn’t have a full committee meeting but we did have open discussion on it, and that’s when the decision was made to go ahead and compose a letter and have enough of us that were present to sign it. So the thing that concerns me is if today is the deadline, they might lose that money. It doesn’t affect us, but it affects the city of Augusta. I’d just like to get some clarification because again, I’m going from memory and I appreciate you letting me bring this back, but I would hate to see us lose something like that because of a technicality in what was given to us in a draft letter and what was given to us in an actual proposal. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: That’s not, that’s not a problem with me in reference to the project. I just have concerns to a point and that’s why I yielded to the Attorney for a moment, and I asked also was there anybody here to represent that project. Now what we can do, and pardon my eyes, I didn’t put my 250’s on to look out of, if they can address is, then I yield back again to the chairman. If they can address it, then we can put it on for discussion today, and I think if that can be gotten through in this particular meeting to that satisfaction, but I was thinking that they were not here to be present, and that’s why I said we needed to get in back in order to do it. But I, I did, I had looked out of my right eye, and Commissioner Sims and then I yield back to Chairman Hankerson. Ms. Sims: Thank you, Commissioner. I just wanted to say that I believe the party is here that can address that, so I wanted to let you know that. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Chairman, is that okay if we keep it on the -- if we move it to the regular agenda, but not on consent, and then allow that clarification to be made so that the Attorney can get it on record? If it’s a typo, then we can get it in public and we can ask questions at that time, if there’s anything that’s any different with it. Mr. Hankerson: I’d rather lay it on the table and we discuss it, we bring it back up at the, after legal, after we get a chance to discuss is to see whether it’s something that in the resolution is different, is what the Clerk was saying, we’ll get a chance to correct that before this meeting ends today. [inaudible] Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: We can move the agenda such that it’s recognized in the period of while we are discussing those other items and then we can get to it during this meeting. That won’t defer it back to the regular committee status in order to have to do it that way, and it gets you cleared out while you’re in here today, and I think that’s what we were trying to get accomplished. But the project itself, I’m glad to see it moving and 9 I want to see something progressive done with it, so that’s a good sign that you’re moving there with it. Mr. Hankerson: I do want my colleagues to know that I’m not in opposition of it. We want it, we don’t want to jeopardize the project, we just want clarification, that’s all. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I think, I think this is just the opposite from one of the other that dealt with before, and I’ve been real careful about when there are changes in them, to make sure that they’re moving in the right direction as opposed to the opposite direction. But Mr. Colclough, in Public Services, and I know we got folk here to deal with those. Mr. Colclough: [inaudible] Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. All right. And what we will do, since we’ve got guests here for those items under Public Services, Madame Clerk, before we move to the regular agenda, because I know those are concerning licenses that we’ve got. If we can -- other than items that may be pulled from consent, if we can move first with the Public Services items that are there and then move to the Historic Preservation Commission, and I think that will pretty much get us with our guests that we have and then the May Park Villa that will give Steve enough time to peruse where we’re going in there, and we’ll move to your item in order to take care of that during regular discussion. Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, members of the Commission, in reference to item 7 on the approval of the minutes, it came to my attention that the action minutes, which were distributed before this meeting, and the resolution as to Section 11, the resolution should reference sections 11A and 11B, as opposed to Section 11, as it did last, last time. And also, it came to my attention that Section 13, 14 and 15 in the resolution regarding Waste Management, Inc., should not just reference those but should reference Sections 13A, 13B, 14A, 14B, 15A and 15B. And I would ask that as part of the approval of the minutes that we conform those resolutions to the action minutes. The Clerk and I have consulted and she agrees with that. Mr. Mayor: It’s so noted. Do we need -- I’m sure the Clerk, she’s got them when nobody else has got them. But does anyone need a refresher on the numbers that we’ve got on the potential consent agenda? If you can go through those, Ms. Bonner. And ladies and gentlemen, seems like it’s a little bit lengthy at the beginning, but this will give us a chance to knock out a whole lot hopefully in one punch. Mr. Shepard: And one last matter, which can either go on this agenda or it can go, I guess, to Engineering Services, but I was asked to bring them forward due to the matters that involve -- two of them involve Warren Road, one was an older matter and one was a matter that should have reached the Commission floor before now, and I just refer to them as addendum items. We have one addendum already, which is the motion to approve the intergovernmental agreement between Augusta and the Augusta Canal 10 Authority. I will refer to the ones I brought forth this afternoon as agenda item addendum 2, which is the amendment to the fiber capacity and pole attachment sharing agreement with Knology, and then addendum 3 would be the option for easements in the Jamestown sanitary sewer project. And item addendum 4 would be the acceptance of the right-of-way deed from the Richmond County Board of Education and addendum 5 would be a grant of easement to Georgia Power Company on Warren Road. I know the Commissioners were concerned with the Warren Road projects when we brought those last two forward. Here again, item addendum 3 was something I thought I had brought over here, but we could not find that, and then item 2 has some, has some length of time, not in my office but in another office, if the Commission would see fit to add and approve those, I would recommend it, or we could put it on the agenda for Engineering Services. ADDENDUM AGENDA: ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: 2. Amendment to Fiber Capacity and Pole Attachment Sharing Agreement. 3. Motion to approve an Option for Easement between The Bagwell Family Trust, as owner, and Augusta, Georgia, for the following properties located at Willis Foreman Road, 2989 Ulm Road, Ulm Road and Kitchens Road for a purchase price of $11,730.00: 24,803 square feet, more or less, of permanent utility and maintenance easement and 21,699 square feet, more or less, of temporary construction easement. 4. Motion to accept Right-of-Way Deed from Richmond County Board of Education along right of way of Warren Road. 5. Motion to grant Easement to Georgia Power Company along right of way of Warren Road. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: That’s good that we got that information, Mr. Shepard, but what the Chair is going to rule at this time, before this body gets into an anti-addendum mood, we’re going to hold all addendums, cause when they up to 5 and 6, I’m going to give you the opportunity to pass those out to the Commissioners, they can get an opportunity to peruse them as we are discussing some of these other items, and then we will come back to those when we have finished the items for consent and for those that are, that are here on the regular. I want to go ahead and move as soon as we can to get this consent passed and then get on to the guests we’ve got here. We’ll dispense with that and then we’ll come back and then we’ll -- it’ll be the choice of the body to either approve all of them, some of them, or none of them. I recognize Mr. Cheek, and then we’re going to go ahead and read those numbers, Madame Clerk, and then we’re going to move with this consent agenda. Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. With the exception of item 2, the fiber agreement, items 1, 3, 4 and 5 on the requested addendums to the agenda are all part of well established projects that I believe have been exhaustively discussed before this body in past situations. Warren Road is a project that we’ve all heard about and tried to push forward through time, and these are just easement 11 agreements. And the Atlanta Gas Light property, we’re all aware of the timeliness of passing that item. And so with the exception of item 2, this Commissioner is satisfied with those and would move to have those added to the consent agenda. Mr. Boyles: Second, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: With the exception 2, is there unanimous consent to do that? Mr. Williams: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Yes, sir, Mr. Commissioner? Mr. Williams: I don’t want to hold up any of these, but this first addendum we got, requested by the Attorney, I think, got Mr. Wall down here, was the Attorney, we been talking about this, this, this funding and the money and we trying to get this process going, but I would love to hear from the Attorney before I accept that to be a part of this, this, this, this discussion. I’m not fighting the issue, but I don’t want to sit here, and here we are with all this stuff on the plates today, and then make a decision on that. So if I can hear from the Attorney, I got no problem with holding and bringing it back, but I don’t want, you don’t have unanimous consent to add it to without going through the Attorneys. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, Mr. Wall is going to be here for a couple of matter in the legal session, and I can just ask him to come over and do that, as well. If that would satisfy the Commissioner. He’s been delegated, that’s been delegated to him and I’ll have him over here and we can discuss it at that time. Bring him for both matters. Mr. Williams: So if we do 3, 4 and 5, how will we handle this, this, this 2? I mean would that -- what, Mr. Chairman? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: It’s going, it’s going stay to the end, and we got about 15 seconds to accept 3, 4 and 5 or else I’m going to go back to my original ruling of the Now is there unanimous consent to do 3, 4 and 5? Any chair. Cause we going move. objections to it? 3, 4 and 5 are added to consent. We have no further discussion on the addendums right now, and Madame Clerk, if you would read those for the record, we’ll move with the consent. The Clerk: The consent agenda consists of items under the consent agenda 1 through 8, items 1 through 8; from our regular agenda, item 16, 18, item 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35A, 35B; as well as items, addendum items 3, 4 and 5. Mr. Cheek: I move to approve. 12 Mr. Williams: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the consent agenda? PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Motion to approve an award of bid to Norvell Fixture & Equipment for $13,657 for the installation of a new exhaust hood for the Julian Smith BBQPit. (Approved by Public Services April 22, 2004) 2. Motion to approve a professional services contract for architecture and engineering at Lake Olmstead Park to Davis Design Group in the amount of $25,768.00. (Approved by Public Services April 22, 2004) 3. Motion to approve a request from First Presbyterian Church to place banners on the light poles on Telfair Street between 6th and 7th Streets. (Approved by Public Services April 22, 2004) FINANCE: 4. Motion to approve the abatement of tax balance on Map 131, Parcel 28. (Approved by Finance Committee April 22, 2004) 5. Motion to approve abatement of tax balance on property of Board of Education. (Approved by Finance Committee April 22, 2004) 6. Motion to approve the acquisition of 37 public safety patrol vehicles, four (4) traffic vehicles for Sheriff’s Office – Road Patrol and 3 public safety transport sedans for Civil/Fugitive Division of the Sheriff’s Office. (Approved by Finance Committee April 22, 2004) 7. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held April 20, 2004. PLANNING: 8. Z-04-37 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to approve a petition by Nathaniel Culpepper, on behalf of Nathaniel Culpepper and Steve Strouble, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) and Zone R-MH (Manufactured Home Residential) to R-1E (One-family Residential) affecting property located on the southeast right- of-way line of Old McDuffie Road, 1,001 feet, more or less, southwest of Winn Drive and contains approximately 8.1 acres. (Tax Map 84-1 Parcels 2 & 3) DISTRICT 5. (Deferred from the April 20th meeting) ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES: 18. Motion to approve the recommendations from the April 13th Administrative Services Committee’s Work Session. ENGINEERING SERVICES: 21. Motion to approve a Consultant Services Agreement with Quest Engineering, Inc. to conduct a performance audit of the OMI agreement for a fee of $32,000.00. 13 25. Motion to approve a Consultant Services Agreement with Quest Engineering, Inc. to conduct a performance audit of the OMI agreement for a fee of $32,000.00. 26. Motion to approve execution of Atlanta Gas Light Company Encroachment Agreement for a paved entrance, a 42” DIP water line, and a gated chain link fence. 27. Motion to approve execution of Atlanta Gas Light Company Encroachment Agreement for a 42” DIP water line, a 24” DIP water main and an underground power crossing. 28. Motion to approve the award of a construction contract for Phase I of the Rae’s Creek Trunk Sewer Replacement Project. 29. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 51, Parcel 69.1 which is owned by Curtis Smith for a temporary and permanent easement on Project 50130 – Butler Creek Collector/Belair Hills Estates. 30. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 40, Parcel 071 which is owned by Sarah Alice Reeves Brown for a temporary and permanent easement for the Wrightsboro Road/Sue Reynolds/Belair Road Sewer Improvement Project. 31. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 52, Parcel 117 which is owned by Jonathan Edwards and Christine Edwards for a temporary and permanent easement on Project 50130 – Butler Creek Collector/Belair Hills Estates. 32. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 213, Parcel 156 which is owned by John S. McElmurray for a temporary easement and permanent easement on Project 10175 – Groundwater Treatment Plant #3 20” Water Main. 33. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Tax Map 52; Parcel 124 which is owned by Rosalyn Brown Lark, Cilla P. Brown as Guardian for Stephanie Patricia Brown and Stephanie Patricia Brown for a permanent and temporary easement on Project 50130 – Butler Creek Collector/Belair Hills Estate. 34. Motion to ratify Commission’s Letter of Approval dated April 22, 2004 regarding Change Order Number One in the amount of $33,660.00 with Beam’s Construction Company for the resurfacing Various Road Phase VIII Project (CPB) 324-04203824045) to be funded from the project construction account. 35A. Approve Change Order Number One in the amount of $168,510.00 for the Barton Chapel Road, Phase II project (CPB# 322-04-292822678) to be funded from project contingency. 35B. Authorize execution of state aid county contract with the Georgia Department of Transportation for Fed Ex Road subject to receipt of said documents and approval by the City Attorney. (Requested by Commissioners Boyles and Grantham) Addendum Item 3. Motion to approve an Option for Easement between The Bagwell Family Trust, as owner, and Augusta, Georgia, for the following properties located at Willis Foreman Road, 2989 Ulm Road, Ulm Road and Kitchens Road for a purchase price of $11,730.00: 24,803 square feet, more or less, of permanent utility and maintenance easement and 21,699 square feet, more or less, of temporary construction easement. Addendum Item 4. Motion to accept Right-of-Way Deed from Richmond County Board of Education along right of way of Warren Road. 14 Addendum Item 5. Motion to grant Easement to Georgia Power Company along right of way of Warren Road. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. Motion carries 9-0. [Items 1-8, 21, 25-34, 35A, 35B, Addendum Items 3, 4 and 5] Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: We can go to -- The Clerk: Are you going to Public Services? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Yes, ma’am. The Clerk: Mr. Sherman? Mr. Sherman? The alcohol petition. Mr. Sherman: [inaudible] The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Sherman has asked that item 11 be pulled and deferred to our next committee meeting. I think the Sheriff’s Department has some issues or some concerns. 11. New Ownership: A.N. 04-20: A request by Ritaben S. Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Discount Food & Beverages located at 1342 Gordon Highway. District 1. Super District 9. (No recommendation from Public Services Committee April 22, 2004) Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Let me just ask this. Is there anybody here representing item 11? Mr. Sherman: No. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Nobody’s here representing it? Okay. The Clerk: We need a motion. Mr. Colclough: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we pull Item 11 and refer it back later. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Is that to go to, back to Public Services? Mr. Sherman: Back to Public Services. 15 Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. Mr. Sherman: I think we need to postpone this and just bring it back. The Clerk: Okay. Mr. Sherman: The Sheriff’s Department [inaudible]. Mr. Colclough: I’ll amend my motion to that effect. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second on the amended motion to do what that chairperson has said. All in favor of that motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. I vote yes. The Clerk: Mr. Colclough, are you voting yes? Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: Number 9. Mr. Sherman: PUBLIC SERVICES: 9. New Application: A.N. 04-18: A request by Jan Scholer for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Wild Wing Café located at 3035 Washington Road. There will be dance. There will be Sunday sales. District 7. Super District 10. (No recommendation from Public Services Committee April 22, 2004) Mr. Scholer: My name is Jan Scholer. I live at 1020 Highland Avenue in Augusta, Georgia. Mr. Sherman: The Sheriff’s Department and the License Department have reviewed the application and recommend that it be approved. th Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor, since that’s in the 7 Commission District, I move for approval. th Mr. Grantham: Second from the 10. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Any discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. The Chair votes yes. Mr. Colclough: Madame Clerk, I’m voting no on Sunday sales. 16 The Clerk: Yes, sir. (No objectors present) Mr. Colclough votes No on Sunday sales portion. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Sherman: 10. New Application: A.N. 04-19: A request by Tara Nichols for an on premise consumption Beer license to be used in connection with Snuffys II located at 2610 Peach Orchard Rd. District 2. Super District 9. (No recommendation from Public Services Committee April 22, 2004) Mr. Sherman: Please state your name and address for the record. Ms. Nichols: Tara Nichols, 2202 [inaudible] Court, Augusta, Georgia 30906. Mr. Sherman: The License Department and the Sheriff’s Department have reviewed the application and recommended it be approved. Mr. Colclough: So move, Mr. Chair. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. The Chair votes yes. And I’m assuming there are no objectors on any of these. The Clerk: Mr. Hankerson, are you going to vote? Mr. Sherman: Are there any objectors to any of the alcohol applications? There are no objectors. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. Let the record show on both, then, where they are, at least for the ones on alcohol there being no objections. (No objectors present) Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Sherman: 17 12. New Ownership: A.N. 04-21: A request by Ying Huang for an on premise consumption Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Hong Kong King Buffet located at 3064 Washington Road. There will be Sunday sales. District 7. Super District 10. (No recommendation from Public Services Committee April 22, 2004) Ms. Huang: My name is Ying Huang. I live at -- Mr. Sherman: Wait a second [completes reading item 12]. State your name and address, if you will. Ms. Huang: Okay. My name is Ying Huang. I live at 3225 [inaudible] Road, Augusta, Georgia. Mr. Colclough: Mr. Sherman? Are you the applicant? Mr. Chair? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Go ahead. Mr. Colclough: Are you the applicant? Ms. Huang: Yes. Mr. Colclough: Could you tell us, could you speak into the microphone and give us your address? Ms. Huang: Okay. My name is Ying Huang. Live at 3225 [inaudible] Road, Augusta, Georgia. Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Boyles? th Mr. Boyles: That is also in the 7 Commission District at the old Damon’s . I move for approval. restaurant. We welcome the business to Washington Road Mr. Williams: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? None being, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. The Chair votes yes. (No objectors present) Motion carries 9-0. 18 Mr. Sherman: 13. Discussion: A request by Kihwan Kim for an extension of time to purchase the retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with DLS Convenience Store located at 3741 Mike Padgett Hwy. District 8. Super District 10. (No recommendation from Public Services Committee April 22, 2004) Mr. Sherman: Please state your name and address. Mr. Kim: My name is Kihwan Kim. [inaudible] Clinton Way West, Martinez, Georgia 30907. Mr. Sherman: The -- Mr. Kim is going to be constructing a new building at this location and his plans are not complete at this time. Do you have an anticipated time for completing your plans? Mr. Kim: [inaudible] Mr. Sherman: He said he’s anticipating starting construction in about a month. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The Chair recognizes Commissioner Hankerson, then Commissioner Smith. Mr. Hankerson: Have this, have this been before us before? Mr. Sherman: Yes. This was approved -- previously it was approved. If he does not purchase his license within 90 days, the Commission has to approve an extension and that’s what he’s asking for. Mr. Hankerson: Okay. Number 20 on the application, what was the date on fine sign for Sunday sales, when did that occur? And when that occurred, was there any probation or anything besides the fine, the $30 fine? Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir, he was put on probation, and this application was to come before y’all before, and we postponed it until after his probationary period was over with. Then we brought it back [inaudible], so he served his probation. Mr. Hankerson: When was the date? Mr. Speaker: I don’t have the exact date, but I can look it up and give it to you. But he did do it. That was one of the reasons it was pulled the first time it was brought before the Commission, he had not finished his probationary period. So we held it out and brought it back after the probationary period. 19 Mr. Hankerson: Well, for clarity for us as a committee, that when we have a charge on there it should, I’d like for the date to be on there so we know whether the probation period is up or not up or what. That’s why I questioned it, because it just say Sunday sales, court charged misdemeanor fine $30. It didn’t say when or the time of probation. But you say it’s beyond that period? Okay. I have no further questions. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Smith? Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Where is this location on Mike Padgett? What’s it close to? Mr. Sherman: The intersection of Old Waynesboro Road -- there’s a vegetable stand at that location right now. Mr. Wall: So right where the vegetable stand is? Mr. Sherman: Correct. Mr. Kim: Behind. Mr. Hankerson: You said at Old Waynesboro Road and Mike Padgett? Mr. Sherman: Uh-huh [yes]. Mr. Hankerson: Where there’s a vegetable stand? Mr. Sherman: It’s going in that corner. Mr. Kim: Right there behind the vegetable stand, right [inaudible]. Mr. Hankerson: How far is that church from there? Isn’t there a church [inaudible]? Mr. Speaker: [inaudible] Mr. Sherman: Okay. [inaudible] location, it’s 500 feet to the front door, 337 feet to the corner of the building. It meets the distance requirements. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any other questions by any other Commissioners? If not, all in favor of the motion -- do we have a motion, Ms. Bonner? The Clerk: No, sir. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The Chair will entertain. 20 Mr. Colclough: I make a motion we approve the item. Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. The Chair votes yes. Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION: 14. Consider the appeal hearing request from Mr. James Anderson, regarding the Historic Preservation Commission’s denial of his request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) affecting property located at 949 Johns Road. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Anderson? Mr. Anderson: Yes, I’m Jimmy Anderson, I live at 949 Johns Road. I started off and have gone around to a majority of my neighbors. I’m going to have Mr. Adamson pass some things to y’all showing the neighbors who support me with Summerville to build this driveway, and I wish y’all would look at the names, the addresses. Every neighbor on each side of me has seen my plans and they are highly recommending me to make these changes to the house. All I want to do is put a driveway in front of my house where I can drive to the front. I turn it over to Mr. Adamson. He’s done some preparation for y’all. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Go ahead and speak your name and address for the record. Mr. Adamson: I’m Clay Adamson, landscape architect. 815 Dogwood Lane. And if you would first take a look at the -- there’s two sections of photographs here. I’ve presented the letter that’s supporting this project, along with a list of petitioners which have signed this in close proximity of the residence in question. And also the photograph of the Andersons’ residence showing -- at the corner of Johns and Pickens Road, which is a major intersection at that given area. Our concern is, if you look at the drawings, the site plan which we prepared for this, it provides driveway and guest parking to this residence. The residence was built in 1911 and it’s certainly a historical residential structure in this community. One of the things we found in doing the design concept for this project is the fact that it’s triangular. It has a very small frontage. Johns Road is heavily traveled and we tried five different design concepts to try to make this work. A parking lot and a guest area and a driveway that would be complimentary to this residence. And this is the one that we finally came up with. And what happens is that by entering and exiting on Johns and Pickens, it saves about 25% to 30% of hardscape, which is concrete paving to the front of this residence. It also minimizes the number of trees that would have to be removed, and it also preserves the historical log house in front 21 of the residence. And the building materials that you will see in the correspondence that we’ve prepared is going to be constructed out of exposed colored aggregate, with brick curbing, brick entrance, proper lighting, a brick entrance to the house that compliments the brick landing that goes into the residence. It is centered on the front door and it provides parking for six spaces. We also found that, found out that this was not the original wall around this, to the front and to the side. We have some [inaudible] elements that, that’s located in the yard since we started cleaning it up. This parking area and the guest creates a courtyard environment. And I think it’s a real safety issue to not have these entrances and exits on Johns Road. It minimizes the one entrance and one exit. And I think the building materials, if you go back and look at history, that aggregate was used years and years ago, so it would be blending in and be very complimentary to the residence. It would be recessed, because the land slopes down to the street. We plan to landscape the front of this completely. Mr. Anderson is in the process of looking at doing an overall master plan for this residence. And it certainly is not going to take away. The parking in that area is very limited, and if we tried to put the entrance in on Johns Road, it’s so close to that intersection, and then another intersection or exit would cause, with a 12’ width you would be unable to pass -- we’d still have to come out and put parking in front of it. So again, it presents a real design issue for it of making it work, and making it work, aesthetically pleasing and very functional. We can make it look good, but it wouldn’t be functional. And I think last, but not least, if you look on the second photographs, starting at 918, on the photographs, down to 1122, you’ll see the excessive amount of paving that has gone in over the last three to five years at the restoration of those homes. The last home on Johns, which is 1122, has the same courtyard concept that we would like to achieve. They’ve added a carport to the end of this. We would not be using the same building material, but I think you can see how functional and aesthetically pleasing [inaudible] hardscape [inaudible] right in front of the residence, but when you’ve got an issue, a pie shaped lot and all the elements do not allow you to do this, it creates a serious design problem for us, and so we appreciate the opportunity to make this presentation here to you today. If you have any questions, I’ll try to answer. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. Thank you for coming forward. If you would remain there for just a moment, what we’re going to do -- there may be some Commissioners that have questions of you. Mr. Adamson: Okay. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: And then we will go to the Commission side and then representatives who will be here from Summerville, in that order. Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: I yield. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: You’re going to yield? Mr. Grantham: I yield to Commissioner Cheek. I’ll speak last. 22 Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: That young fellow may not give it back to you. Mr. Grantham: Thank you, though. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Go ahead, Andy, and then Don. Mr. Cheek: I’ve just, I’ve reviewed this and I can find no fault with it as far as the aesthetics. It’s not inconsistent with what is, what’s already within the neighborhood, I’m just going ahead and make a motion that we approve nor will it be a detraction. the appeal. Mr. Grantham: Second. You’ve got a second. I’m going to speak, if you don’t mind. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: There’s a motion and a second. You bailing him out, now. They like to hit [inaudible], go ahead. Mr. Grantham: He stole my thunder a little bit and I’m going to let him have it this time, but I will, I will talk to him later about it. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, thank you. I, too, have reviewed this. I’ve been a resident of that particular area all my life, I was raised on Central Avenue, I know this, this home, I know the Andersons, I know the type of family that they are and I know the type of work that they’re going to put into this yard. As we see, so many of these older homes in that area have gone and been revitalized, they’ve been saved for the historical value that they are, but in doing so, you know, we’re not, we’re not driving mules and wagons or horses and carriages anymore. And I think that we have got to understand and realize that parking is needed when you’re talking about a family of this size and about an area of this area. He and, he and Mr. Adamson has taken all precautionary measures in that the safety features of this driveway and of the ingress and egress of this property is taken care of. I think they have proven with the pictures that they have presented to us -- if you’ve only been in that area and ride around you’ll see that a lot of these older homes have the type of drives and the type of parking areas that Mr. Anderson is looking for. And so I applaud my colleague in the second of the Commissioner from District 3 in passing this motion and I’d ask that this body pass it unanimously today. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Before I take his legs away from him, does any Commissioner have any questions at this time before we go to the other side? Okay, if you could go ahead and take your seat for moment, and then I’m going to recognize the Commission as well as the representative from Summerville. There is a motion and second on the floor, but we will have adequate discussion on the matter. Are you going to represent Summerville or the Commission? I want to hear from the Commission. Mr. Warlick: Both. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: You’re going to do both? Okay, no problem. 23 Mr. Warlick: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem and members of the Commission, my name is Byrd Warlick. I’m an attorney in Augusta and I’ve been asked on behalf of the Summerville Association to make an appearance in support of the decision made by the Historic Preservation Commission some two months ago. Let me first of all summarize, if I might, the Historic Preservation ordinance history, as well as the guidelines that have been adopted and what the Historic Preservation Commission is trying to do in issuing or not issuing certificates of appropriateness, which have to be issued in the Summerville neighborhood area. The first ordinance was 42-57. It was introduced in 1971. The second one was 44-23, in 1974. The next one was 53-53, in 1986. 56-48 in 1992. And 56-48 again in ’94 and again in ’99. Some of you may remember in ’99 that the Historic Preservation Commission took out a criminal warrant for someone who had filed plans and then proceeded to construct a driveway and a parking pad not in conformity with those plans. Through some discovery, it was learned that in 1994 when the Summerville Neighborhood Association was added to the preservation ordinance, the advertisement had not been properly run and the ordinance was unconstitutional. This Commission held town hall meetings, one of which I attended at ASU. There were some 400 people. It was a packed room. I can’t remember, I don’t know if there was an official count, but it was a very big crowd. To see whether or not the historic preservation ordinance should be allowed to lapse or whether indeed this Commission would reaffirm the preservation ordinance as it applied to the Summerville Neighborhood Association. After that meeting -- there were some 20-odd speakers -- this Commission voted that they would in fact ratify and adopt it and they did so by an ordinance dated April -- excuse me, October 5, 1999, in which it recites all the earlier ordinances and reaffirms the commitment of this Commission to the concept of historic preservation. Now the second thing is the -- historic preservation is not done in a vacuum. Certificates of appropriateness are not simply granted or denied at the whim or at the personal preference of the ten member Commission that hears these things. Instead, they have adopted guidelines and I hold a copy of these guidelines in my hand and I have copies of excerpts to show you what the basis was in the decision that was rendered in Mr. Adamson’s [sic] case. And if I might, I would like to point out from -- and this was done by a professional group known as the Frazier & Associates -- they’re out of Staunton, Virginia, they came to Augusta, they spent a great deal of time surveying the neighborhood, finding out what commonalities these properties on the Hill had and what was worth preserving and saving and what was not. In the handout you’ll receive, on page 42 of these guidelines, item four is that in reviewing for certificates of appropriateness, the Commission should minimize the impact of the automobile and parking on private sites through the proper placement and selection of materials. Then on page 58, and you have that stapled together, are the design criteria, and what it says is that parking to the extent possible needs to be put to the rear of the house or on the side of the house and not in front of it. Then on the opposite page, which is 59, we found the fifth criteria: large paved areas of parking should not be placed in the front yard of any size property. Now, Mr. Adamson just told you that this house, I believe he said, had been there for at least 70 years. What he addressed is that he was employed to try to figure out how to put access from this house to Johns Road. What he didn’t tell you is that for some 70 years, this house has a large 24 parking lot in the back. It is accessed through a driveway on Pickens Road. In the photograph I just handed out, you will see that not only is there a driveway, but the parking area has curbing around it. I don’t know how many vehicles could park back there, but it looks to me like 20 or more. So this is not something new. What Mr. Adamson and Mr. Anderson would like to do is move the parking that has heretofore has been behind the house to the front of the house, which is contrary to the zoning guidelines that were adopted in 1996. And if I might, let me just talk just for a second or two about what the historic preservation ordinance says. Well, give me just a second. In the general purpose section, and I’m quoting now from the ordinance that is 58-58, the historical culture and architectural heritage of Augusta Richmond County is among its most valued and important assets. The Augusta Richmond County Commission hereby declares it to be the purpose and the intent of this chapter to establish a uniform procedure for the protection, enhancement and perpetration of [inaudible] districts and buildings. It also provides in section [inaudible], the Historic Preservation Commission - - and this is the language -- shall adopt rules and standards for the transaction of its business and applications for designations and certificates of appropriateness, including design guidelines. These are in fact the design guidelines. At the very beginning of these guidelines, we find the following language: as a property owner, you, residents of Summerville, should refer to these guidelines whenever you plan to change your property. These guidelines clarify what is valuable and worth preserving in the district and explain how you can respect these features as you may changes or repairs to your historic building or design new buildings adjoining the old. This section introduces you to the important historic features that the district possesses. And then it says these guidelines are tailored to the neighborhood. They are based on extensive study of Summerville’s historic district, including the types and styles of buildings, their condition, the current preservation, and the policies and goals of the Summerville Neighborhood Association. Now, it may be that the petition has photographs of a number of other parking areas, some of which, most of which I’m familiar with. Most are in side yards, not in front yards. Some predated the adoption of these guidelines. Some, indeed, predated the, the Historic Preservation Commission itself. Bug going on with the, the act to create the ordinance that created the Historic Preservation Commission, in 7-4-18, we find the following: when considering applications for certificates of appropriateness impacting existing buildings, the Secretary of the Interior standards for historic preservation should be consulted. That’s what this document is based on. Then we find in the section for review by this very Commission the following: in the event that the Historic Preservation Commission rejects an application for a certificate of appropriateness, it shall state the reason and transmit the record. If the applicant appeals, this Commission, the Commission of Augusta, Georgia, may affirm the determination or, and listen to this language, if the Commission finds that the Historic Preservation Commission abused its discretion in reaching its decision, the Commission may modify or reverse the determination made by the Commission. Now, as a lawyer, I will tell you what that means. That means that you’re not under this ordinance to substitute your judgment for the ten member Historic Preservation Commission. You can reverse it, but to reverse it you must find evidence that they acted arbitrarily or capricious 25 or wrongly. It can’t be just a matter of style or taste. Should I respond -- is this a question? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I was going to yield to the Attorney for just a moment because -- Mr. Warlick: [inaudible] Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Just a minute. With all due respect to you, and I appreciate where you’re, you are representing Summerville and the Commission, but as far as the legal advice, we would have to take ours today from Mr. Shepard, and I’m going to hold you for just a moment, because from the standpoint that what it contains in the ordinance as to whether or not we find abuse by the Commission, I do think that this is the board where the appeals come to. And I’m going to yield to you at this moment, Steve, from the standpoint that I think we need to clarify that just for the record, from the standpoint in reference as to what grounds this board can operate under. And that’s to no disrespect to you. But under this board’s policy, we’ll have to follow the advice of the Attorney that we hire and pay. Mr. Warlick: It’s what you pay for. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Exactly. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, members of the Commission, in, in these cases we have historically not been bound to that standard. We have remanded cases with the idea that they be heard again at that level. We’ve mediated them here. We have, we have interposed our own sense of what is appropriate to certificate of appropriateness. So I don’t think it’s an abuse of discretion. I think it’s, it’s what the board considers the community, the community standard to be, and I do see -- these are guidelines, so guidelines are supposed to be to guide a framework for a decision. They are not mandatory. There can be exceptions. I think the, the Commission has to make the decision which it feels best serves the interest of that neighborhood. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I just wanted our Attorney to insert that, and before you -- if we could kind of wrap up on your side a little bit. I was there at that meeting at ASU and I’ve also voted in ’99 to affirm that particular ordinance and to, I guess for lack of a better term, to get the, the clarification straightened out and to make it a formal ordinance per se and to do that. I think every member of this board respects the historic values that we have in this city, not just in Summerville, which is one of the oldest and one of the most participating in terms of being active in a historical nature. But I think we have to hear the balance of both sides in terms of where we are going. If we could kind of wrap up on, on that side -- I know you represent both bodies -- cause I think there are going to be some questions that may, that Commissioners may want to ask both of you and of the Andersons, representatives from that side, if we could do that. 26 Mr. Warlick: Mr. Mays, I’ll try to speed it up. Respectfully, I disagree with the City Attorney in that the language is pretty clear. Regardless of what this Commission may have done in the past, it clearly says that the Commission must find that it abused its discretion in reaching the decision before they can modify or reverse it, and there is Georgia case authority on that. I’m not arguing with historically that perhaps this body has made suggestions or even said yes or no and the parties have accepted it, and nobody’s appealed it, so. And certainly we are mindful of this body and what they try to accomplish through mediation and moderation and settlement, and we respect that. But lastly, I would say that these guidelines are no more and no less than what most every developer puts in subdivision covenants. If you buy in West Lake, if you buy in Conifer, if you buy in Montclair, there are certain restrictive covenants and what you can do and what you can’t do, and that enhances the value of the property. In Summerville, it was never done as a subdivision, it was built over a 250 year period, but what they have passed, as Mr. Mays correctly point out, and the neighborhood as unanimously adopted these guidelines, and these guidelines were followed by the Historic Preservation Commission when they reviewed these plans. The plans -- I understand he complains about the entrance on Johns Road, but if you look at the site plan, this gate at the back, this whole area as shown in the two photographs I submitted, and show the parking area, where it has historically been, behind the house, consistent with these guidelines. Now I have with me Laura Closer, who is the president of the Summerville Neighborhood Association. Here on behalf of the Historic Preservation Commission are George Bush as chairman, Bryan Haltermann, a member, and Julie Bicknick, a member. Also on the far side is Mr. Erick Montgomery, who is executive director of Historic Augusta. And if I might, I would like Laura just to tell us about the relationship between Historic Augusta, the Summerville Neighborhood Association, and the Historic Preservation Commission. And then if I could, just have Mr. Montgomery just state briefly how these guidelines were obtained, a little bit about how the Frazier Group came to town and made photographs, looked at what was common, looked at what they thought was valuable, what was worth keeping, and how they came up with these guidelines. And with that, Laura, would -- Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Let me, let me say this. Erick and I have never been brief, but we’re going to -- let me say before you leave the podium. If there are questions that you may want to ask of this gentleman while he’s there, if we could do that. Cause I am going to allow that order to go in there and then I’m going, after you’re finished on this side, I’m -- because we had two representatives earlier, I’m going to allow this young lady to speak as well, and then we’re going to try to reach to some conclusion possibly today, we may or we may not, but if you’ve got questions -- Mr. Warlick: May I make one final point? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Sure, go ahead. Mr. Warlick: The final point I would make, when I was talking about subdivision restrictive covenants and regulations, the current owner bought this property in October 27 of 19--, October of 2003. It’s not as though he got property and these guidelines have been imposed upon him and he’s objecting to them. He bought into this neighborhood knowing these guidelines were there, the same were there, the same way a person who buys into a subdivision knows that there are probably going to be restrictive covenants that he’s going to have to comply with. With that, I yield to any questions. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams, you had your hand there? Anyone else on that end I need to recognize? And I’ll go to Commissioner Boyles and back to Commissioner Cheek and Commissioner Sims. They beat you on the right this time. Go ahead. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. First of all, I think we fixing to get into something here that we’re not a court of law to hear all of these, this testimony here. I think the people who trying to add to it had two people to speak, but I’ve got a couple of questions. And I guess my first question is, is it the problem with the HPC whether the parking is in the rear or the entrance is where the person want -- what is the real issue? Is it the moving of the wall to go in to that or is the parking in the rear? Cause I’m hearing two things in my ears and I want to know which, which one of those are the main issue that you’re saying? Cause it’s already got the parking, you said. I think the question is how are they getting to it? Mr. Warlick: Mr. Williams, I think the answer is, the two sheets I handed out on the guidelines, the guidelines say parking is preferable in the rear of a how and not in the front of a house. Number 1. Number 2, parking is already available to this house and has been there historically for the last 70-80 years. He wants to change the driveway and move it -- I guess it’s on Pickens now, but he wants to move it closer to Johns. And if you’ll look at the site plan, the parking slab that he proposes is almost the same size as the house. It’s 60-something feet wide by looks to me like -- 60 this way and 40 feet deep, the way I read it. I think the objection was putting that big of a parking area in front of the house. I was not on the Commission, but that’s my understanding. Mr. Williams: And I guess my next question is that the Summerville area, each area got different guidelines, is that what you’re saying? [inaudible] HPC? Mr. Warlick: [inaudible] Mr. Williams: And my question is, if, if, if the Historic Preservation have got guidelines for all of the historic area that they protected, I hear a lot of concern about this, but there’s area that there’s nobody looking at. I mean that’s able to, to leave cars on the roads and it’s under the Historic Preservation. I mean I hear what you saying, but I hear a lot of emphasis on this, but if that’s a rule, if that’s a guideline, why isn’t it that it’s uniform all over? Mr. Warlick: Because the ordinance when this was adopted described a geographic area and had a list of the names of all the owners, and there’s a map in this 28 book. It’s an 88 square block area, that’s bounded roughly by Mount Auburn, by Wrightsboro Road, by Hickman, and by Highland Avenue, I believe. Mr. Williams: My last question is, nobody have, have did any of this type work since the board been, since the Summerville have been under these guidelines? Mr. Warlick: I believe the answer is, a lot of people have. A lot of people have applied for certificates and received them. A few have been rejected but, but you know, what one would hope, if somebody wants to do something that’s different from the guidelines is they would negotiate with the Commission and try to reach a compromise. I don’t believe that’s been done here. The plan was submitted, it was rejected, and then it was appealed. Mr. Williams: That’s all, Mr. Mays. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. If, if, if I could for just a moment. If you would, rest your legs for just a second. There will be some other questions of you. We are trying to be audience friendly. We are not going to end 14 and 15 very quickly. What I’d like to do, for just a moment, if we could -- unless there is objection from the body, the Attorney needs to address us just on one point of technicality. Mr. Boyles brought up a good point earlier and that was in reference to item number 17, and on the time limits, getting the deadline in for those folk with the grant, I think the Attorney has properly researched that with the representative of that group in terms of so that they don’t lose out on that project. I think it’s ready to move forward. I’m going to yield to him, if we could in that process hear him for just a moment, I think we can probably take on a motion. We the Chair will, will entertain a motion that we postpone may have to -- I tell you what, the action that’s on the floor for a few minutes, moments of time in order to accept a non-related motion that will be brought to us. Ms. Sims: I so move. Mr. Hankerson: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. There being no discussion, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. The Chair votes yes. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: That’s carried. And we’ll come back to that one in just a moment. Steve, it’s on you and then I think we can take a motion. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, I’d ask the Commission to address item number 17, the resolution of support for affordable housing in May Park Villas Project. 29 17. Motion to ratify Commission’s Approval Letter dated April 22, 2004 of the Local Government Support Letter/Resolution for the May Park Villas Apts. Rehabilitation Project. Mr. Shepard: I did check, Mr. Boyles, today is the deadline. There is a gentleman here in the chamber, if he’d stand up, Mr. Kirk Walker, who is prepared to transmit a copy of our resolution as passed and the letter as passed. Mr. Taylor indicates to me that, that the reference in the letter to 80 units was a, was a typographical error, that he would ask that we approve the project with the scope of 64 units as in the resolution. So -- but this gentleman needs to attempt to file this in Atlanta this afternoon. If we don’t take it up now, I fear he won’t be able to do it. So if we could take it up, pass it -- if we send it back to the committee, we have effectively missed the deadline, or his, his applicant has effectively missed the deadline. So it’s not, it’s -- I don’t think it’s on any agenda, it’s just on the regular agenda. Does the body wish to consider this now is my question. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: My questions, Commissioners, are there any questions to the Attorney or to the gentleman representing? I yield to the Chairman of that committee. Mr. Hankerson: Okay, I just want some -- thank you, Mr. Chairman -- some clarification. I’m looking at the documents and resolution did say 64, and that’s what he’s asking for, 64, right? Mr. Shepard: That’s what he just reiterated to me on the phone, Commissioner. Mr. Hankerson: Okay, and we signed a resolution for 64. But how many of those units are -- cause the original letter said that 63 would be low income residences, how many would be low income? Mr. Shepard: 50. Mr. Hankerson: 50 out of the 64? Okay. So 14 would be for regular pricing, where before it was 17. I have no problem with that. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any question from any other Commissioners? The Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Hankerson: I so move to approve. Mr. Colclough: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Is there discussion? Attorney? Mr. Shepard: And just so that the record is clear, that all references in the resolution and the letter should be 64 units. 30 Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: It will be so noted. There is a motion and a second. There being no further discussion, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. The Chair votes yes. Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: You want to take the other one up? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Yes. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem? If you -- in the past we have attempted to mediate these HPC disputes. I don’t know if that’s in order now, but I would, I am going to have to be absent from the chamber momentarily. If you take Mr. Walker’s matter up, I could as well talk with Mr. Warlick and the petitioner here if the body desires. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I personally have no problem with it. We were kind of in the middle of where I think some Commissioners had some other questions and some other presentations and then that’s on 14. We still got to go to 15. However, I do think we’ll probably need your services before this afternoon is over. I just -- Mr. Warlick: That would be acceptable to us, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Hankerson? Mr. Hankerson: I have one question I’d like to ask the Attorney on that resolution. Can I back up? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Yes, sir. Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Shepard, what’s the difference between affordable housing and low income? Cause the reason I asked, the resolution says affordable and the letter said set aside so many for low income and then the rest of them would be for -- I thought that would be for -- is that the 17 originally would have been affordable? What’s the definition of affordable versus low income? Mr. Shepard: For purposes of Housing & Urban Development, I think low income probably has, has a definition. But you know, Mr. Hankerson, I did not anticipate that question and I would have to defer to [inaudible]. Mr. Hankerson: Could we ask Mr. Smith? 31 Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The director of HND is here and we might can deal with that, cause we’ve carried that motion, out of courtesy, but if you want to address that, Warren, no problem. [inaudible]. Mr. Manning: Good afternoon, everybody. Douglas Manning, housing program manager. Affordable is the range. It’s a general range that HUD uses HUD uses. Specifics within the range there are very, very low; low; and then there’s moderate. So there’s different divisions within the [inaudible]. But all falls within the division under the mid income. The median income for Augusta is $53,000. Mr. Hankerson: Okay, it falls under medium or low income? Mr. Manning: All of it is low income, sir. Mr. Hankerson: All of it is low income? Mr. Manning: All of it is low income. Mr. Hankerson: Okay. Mr. Manning: This, the specifics that deal with this project are that there are different divisions within low income, so it’s very, very low, which is 30% of area mid income; then there is 50% of area mid-income, which is low; and then there is moderate, which is 80% of area mid-income. And what they’ve done for this project is selected a group across the board. Mr. Hankerson: Okay. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you, Mr. Manning. Okay. (Discussion continues on Item 14) 14. Consider the appeal hearing request from Mr. James Anderson, regarding the Historic Preservation Commission’s denial of his request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) affecting property located at 949 Johns Road. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Were there still questions of Mr. Warlick, while he was there? Cause what I wanted to do, I think he and Mr. Shepard, I think they got a sidebar that’s probably going to take place but I wanted for the record the, the young lady – I got two young ladies and both of them – but I want to try and get one – she needs to get out of here on her work schedule. If I can switch the two of you in terms of presentation for the record, if we could do that for just a moment, that would get everybody on for the record, and then if we need to deal with trying to set a date of working further compromise on this, then we could do that at that time. But I think she wanted to get on the record and I wanted to allow you the opportunity to be on the record, too. But I had you recognized, first. If I could yield, the Commissioners could hold, if you could come 32 forward, state your name and address for the record, let’s get you on, then we’ll move to you, and [inaudible]. Ms. Allen: I appreciate it. I’m Robin Allen, and I’m a resident of Summerville and I have been there since 1982 and I live on Pickens Road, which is – the Anderson home is right in front of Pickens Road. We run down along the side, but we also run down and it’s not a real big street, but I have to say when Jimmy Anderson and his wife bought this house in October, there was much jubilation on the street, number 1, because, for a long time – and this is where I don’t understand our guidelines in Summerville – the house that they bought has been in disrepair, it’s been an eyesore, we were thrilled, ecstatic to have a nice family. We all know them. They’re very family oriented, and when they brought these plans to -- everyone in the neighborhood has signed them. I know every single person on our street and most of them on Johns, the ones that I know, are all in favor. And I, I love the guidelines of Summerville. I have no problem with it until this kind of thing, when you kind of forget your common sense. Now if they want to put a three-car garage in front, I totally agree – that’s where you need your guidelines. But I’m going to tell you what, if you think this looks good, I don’t know where your design degree came from. This is, this has been looking like this every since we’ve been there, and all they want to do is grass it in and make it pretty. You can see the entire yard from all the areas. They’ve got three different streets that border on it. I think it’s great they want to do something in the front. The way they have it on here, it’s recessed, you won’t even see it. That has been the biggest eyesore, it’s been like a forest for how many years. And where I don’t understand the guidelines, we let a house – I mean I hate to even say the color, cause you’ll know where it is – it’s the most God-awful blue I’ve ever seen on Milledge Road, it’s just been painted, then you let – there’s a little cut-out Winnie-the-Pooh that sat on Central. It’s gone now, but it was in Summerville. It sat there for years. And you talk about a guideline, I mean I just feel like that’s where you’ve just got to use your common sense. We love our neighborhood, we love our specific little street, we like everybody on there, everybody tries to get along, and when you want to do something like this just to enhance the looks of the house, I just don’t understand it, I really don’t. And that’s really all I have to say. I love Summerville. I’ve been on the Tour twice to make money for Summerville. I think it’s great. But I think somewhere in your guidelines, I don’t know who is – I don’t understand it, I really don’t. And I just hope you’ll – this guy is not trying to deface his property. It’s, they are a great family, and I’m going to tell you what we’re going to do is keep people from buying in Summerville because the houses aren’t cheap to start with and then you buy it – and my husband is a general contractor – but I’m going to tell you, every time you turn around there is something falling apart on it, and I love my neighborhood and I love my house, but I don’t want to see people like the Andersons packing their bag and selling their house. And that’s what you’re going to have if this keeps up. And I appreciate it. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: [inaudible] 33 Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: But if you would, what I did, I yielded, cause we were on this side, and she was next to come behind him, and what I was trying to do was to get her to her next appointment, and I’m going to recognize you after we [inaudible] that. And she looks a lot better than you. [inaudible] You behind the ladies today. Go ahead. Ms. Closer: Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Laura Closer, and I’m the president of Summerville Neighborhood Association, and I’m here to speak on their behalf today. I’m not here to speak on or to address whether or not the Andersons are a great family. I know they are. And I’m not here to talk about whether the project that they have proposed is beautiful or enhancing. I’m here to ask you to support the Historic Preservation Commission in its role to uphold the guidelines that were developed in conjunction with Historic Augusta, the Augusta Richmond County Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Summerville Neighborhood Association back in 1993 and then approved again in 1999. These guidelines protect the unique character and historic integrity of the Summerville Neighborhood District and these guidelines – you know, the people that live in Summerville, have benefited from these guidelines, as Summerville has become a more desirable place to live and also it has increased the property value in Summerville because we have managed to maintain the historic integrity of that district. Now Mr. Anderson’s proposal clearly does not fit within the guidelines for parking. The guidelines state that parking should not be in front of the house, the parking should be in the rear of the house, and for a large house semi-circular driveways are appropriate. And I would ask that you continue to support the Historic Preservation Commission in its role to uphold the guidelines that were approved by this Commission. Thank you. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you. I’m going to yield to this gentleman at this time, then this will, will, will kind of concluded in terms of presentations, cause I think we’ve got a motion and a second that’s on the floor. We can either take action on the motion. We have, like we’ve done in various zoning cases, and particularly where it’s involved HPC, we have – it’s not been unprecedented that we’ve not had further talks on what we were doing. That still will be left up, you know, to the body in terms of where you all may want to go on the motion or whether you may want to deal with a substitute motion. But I will go at this time and yield to you, sir. State your name and address for the record. Mr. Steed: Thank you. My name is Bob Steed. I live at 1219 Meigs. I’m a Summerville resident. I am a friend of the Andersons. And I’m not here to speak about their character or anything else, but I will say that I visit the home, and where the driveway or entrance is presently located is right at Katherine Street, and I’ve been almost hit twice by Augusta State students coming out of there and around that curve. There is a curve coming around [inaudible] Katherine Street, and that driveway goes out right there. It’s very narrow and just my personal opinion, I think you should consider this as a safety issue, which I haven’t heard anyone mention, as well as an aesthetic issue. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you for your comments. 34 Mr. Williams: Call for the question. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: He said call for the question. No, sir – Mr. Warlick: Did the Commission want to hear from Mr. Montgomery about how these guidelines were adopted or do you want to hear – Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Well, in reference to – if it’s anything pertaining to this particular issue that he wishes to bring to us at this time – I think from the standpoint, and not saying that they aren’t important, but I think we probably from the standpoint that we have, we have heard them, whether it’s been in Summerville or whether it’s been cases with HPC. I think we pretty much have, on the guidelines and the historical nature of the ordinance – Mr. Warlick: Just to – Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: -- on that, I think what we need to try and do is either get into the context of where we move, either today, either it be on the appeal process or it be in further negotiation to deal with it. Mr. Warlick: Mr. Mays, I think I can shorten by simply saying if he came up here he would tell y’all what steps they went through to find out what was common and what the Interior Secretary of the United States recommends and how they came up with is, and so I agree with you, I think that would save time, but I think it would show how they were meticulous in adopting these and how they thought they made sense at the time and what all was done. Having said that, I am sure whatever the Andersons do is going to be a big improvement on what’s there now. The house had run down. There is no question about that. I’ll be happy to answer – Mr. Williams: Call for the question, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I’m still chairing, Reverend. I got a Commissioner here that had a question on this side still, and I recognize Commissioner Grantham. Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I only had one question of Mr. Warlick. And I appreciate you bringing us this information about the guidelines. You passed out two pages to us that talked about owning property in Summerville and then the site design, and then you read from a third sheet that the rest of the Commissioners do not have, but I was privileged to one of them. And in doing so in your reading if item number 5, you didn’t complete the paragraph that was read. It said that large paved areas for parking should not be placed in the front yard of any size properties, and that’s where you stopped your recital here. And then it goes on to say except extremely large end lots with deep setbacks. And we’re talking about a 2-1/2 acre lot that the Andersons own in this particular location, and I think if we’re going to try to convince someone of making a decision, then we need all of the information, and that’s why I wanted to provide this to 35 our Commissioners so that they would have all the information in regards to this particular item. Mr. Warlick: Mr. Grantham is correct. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Since my back was turned [inaudible] I’m going to go back to it. Commissioner Boyles and then Commissioner Cheek. Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I don’t know who this question would go to, but maybe someone can answer it for me. Mr. Warlick, since you’re up there. As you know, by the district I represent, I do not live in Summerville but I have attended the Woodlawn United Methodist Church since 1970. And with a lot of interest and a lot of I guess original concern and maybe wonderful we watched Mr. Knox, Mr. Boone Knox, build his home there on the corner of Milledge Road and Walton Way I guess about this time last year or maybe a little bit sooner that he completed that. And if I recall, his driveway is kind of in the front of the house, and I’m just wondering do we maybe have two different sets of standards? Because that was a lot that just sat there for years and years and years, right down from the president of the Medical College of Georgia, and then that home was built. And I think he’s got two accesses. I think he has one, I recall, going from memory now, but I think he can come in off Walton Way and he also has a parking area, such as I see designed on this, in front of his home there entering from Milledge Road. And we’re glad Mr. Knox is there because when he’s in Augusta he attends our church when he’s not in Thomson. But I thought it was very, very beautiful for that whole area, especially as I just mentioned the president of the Medical College, Dr. Rahn, living right down the street. So I’m just wondering why that’s okay at that point -- I mean on almost a busy intersection, high visibility, and yet over at Pickens and Johns Road, probably for Augusta State University there is a lot of traffic at that point, but I would think probably the folks that go through there are either like me, looking at the beauty of it or else they’re just, just maybe lost. But -- or residents. But I’m just wondering about how that works. Mr. Warlick: Mr. Boyles, I don’t sit on the Commission and I don’t attend their meetings on a routine basis. I can just point out some observations. Number 1, Mr. Knox’s is not paved, it’s gravel. Number 2, it’s more on the side than in front of the house. I realize it’s probably the front yard, but it’s, it’s on the side property line. And number 3, it’s a lot smaller than what the Andersons propose. And having said that, those are just observations. Mr. Boyles: Wouldn’t be a bigger lot be, as I think Mr. Grantham read out? Mr. Warlick: The lot is not deep. If you look at the site plan how the house is situation to Pickens. Those are just personal observations. I can’t answer beyond that because I’m not on the Commission. 36 Mr. Boyles: I thought there was tremendous setback, I thought on the drawing we were provided here. Mr. Warlick: It is on Johns, but if you look where the driveway is on Pickens, it’s not. In fact, the corner of the house is fairly close to Pickens. Mr. Boyles: Is there less space there than Mr. Knox has or is that more? Mr. Warlick: I don’t know without measuring. Mr. Boyles: I’m just curious. I appreciate that. Mr. Warlick: That’s the best answer I can give you. Mr. Boyles: Thank you, sir. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Cheek had his hand up, and I am going to -- because we moved back to an item, did that, and I’m trying to keep track of the order in terms of [inaudible] and to allow that adequate discussion, in the process of trying to wrap up, I’m going to recognize Commissioner Cheek. I did say earlier this chair had recognized Mr. Montgomery. We go away from that. I’m going to allow him two minutes to deal with a wrap-up and then we are going to deal either with a motion that’s at hand. If no one else makes a substitute motion, that will be the one and we’ll have the order of the day. Commissioner Cheek and then Mr. Montgomery for the wrap-up, and two minutes in that, and I think we’re going to have to go ahead and make a decision. That will be the final amount [inaudible] recognized. Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I think, I think the thing that we’re all interested in is maintaining the integrity and quality of life in the Summerville area. I think if we look at -- and several things concern me. I’m glad you brought that house up, because as I sit here at this Commission, in this Commission seat, I’ve seen people gravely chastised for using some of the -- requiring or requesting to use some of the same materials that that new construction was made up, and yet they were disallowed and held to task and this building was allowed. So I’m concerned about some consistency. I read the site design plans and it says, it recommends that there be no onsite parking on small lots, which I find not consistent with common sense in this day and age. And then when we talk about maintaining the integrity of Summerville, which my neighborhood took a lot of its guidance from, our covenants have lapsed and we wanted to regain some, a foothold on control of our neighborhood and the quality of life there, we took a lot of the information and the leadership from Summerville to do just that. But if you look at -- anybody that would think that this, maintain this is better than this needs to stop and pause for a moment and think things through. Like it or not, this is consistent with what is in Summerville from one side to the other in one way, shape or form. Has it detracted from, has it detracted from the quality of life, the property values of that property, or made it a bad place to live? I think the answer everybody is pretty much aware of is no. 37 In fact, what this has done is enable people in the modern age and not at the turn of the century who have many cars and children that have cars to accommodate those needs on site in a tasteful manner and still keep those families in single-family residences, which is beneficial to the community in that people that live there all the time typically take better care of and maintain those properties, which should be our goal here. But this and the next item up, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, is a case of where we as a body have to look at the rules and the boards that we appoint to oversee the important issues of this city, to see if that decision rendered is in conflict with an individual property owner’s right to use their property in a manner they see fit, that is in the best interest of their quality of life and not inconsistent with the needs of the community. This is a case where a property owner has made an attempt to make an improvement over pre-existing conditions with a tasteful design, consistent with what’s already in the neighborhood, and I think we as a board should endorse that without any further precautions or appeals or further discussion, that we should endorse that and take it forward, and I think we should do the same thing on item 15, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The Chair will recognize Mr. Montgomery. Two minutes in presentation. And at that time we will move to the order of the day. It will be left to this body to carry or reject the motion that’s there or to make a substitute one. Mr. Montgomery, and then we are going to be finished. Mr. Montgomery: My name is Erick Montgomery. I’m executive director of Historic Augusta. I think Mr. Warlick has adequately covered the history of the ordinance. I don’t think I need to restate it for you. I think one thing that Robin Allen said made sense to me and probably everybody in here, that you need to use common sense. But I also think that this body has appointed a commission that they do not usually support when there’s appeal, when there’s an appeal here. You’ve appointed them and they’ve done their job, not arbitrarily, and I think that you need to support them to the degree that is possible and consistent with the law. Common sense tells me that what should be done here, whether you do it or not, is to ask them to get together and arbitrate. So many of these appeals -- you never see the ones that everybody is happy with, they don’t come to you and appeal them in 90% and more of the cases that pass. You just don’t hear about them cause everybody’s happy. So in your opinion, because the only ones you really hear about are the ones that people are unhappy, it sounds like the Preservation Commission is, is just un -- making some arbitrary decisions, and that’s not the case. I would urge you to ask these, these two sides to get together and negotiate. It sounds like they have not done that. And surely something can come out between them that will satisfy Mr. Anderson’s needs and satisfy the Preservation Commission’s needs to follow their guidelines. Because part of this has to do with precedent setting, regardless of what’s there before the guidelines were adopted, there’s got to be some consistency, and that’s what the Preservation Commission is trying to do, I think. Thank you. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: There is a motion and a second. It’s on the floor of this Commission. The floor is open for a substitute motion. If not, it’s open for discussion. 38 It’s the only motion that’s there. If there is none from any Commissioner, then those in favor of the existing motion and second that has been made will do so by the usual sign. Mr. Smith: What’s the motion, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: It is to -- Madame Clerk -- I believe to uphold the appeal. Am I correct? The Clerk: Yes, sir. To approve the appeal. The appeal request. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The appeal request. Any opposed may do the same. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The appeal on that is approved unanimously. Now we’ve got another item. The Clerk: Want to go to item 15? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Item 15. The Clerk: 15. Consider the appeal hearing request from Daniel J. McCabe, Ph.D, 1317 Highland Avenue regarding the Historic Preservation Commission’s denial of his request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) affecting property located at 1317 Highland Avenue. Mr. Bush: It’s very similar issues, the one that’s just been decided adversely to the Commission, and I would -- Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Just a second. Mr. Bush: I’m sorry. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: For the record, if we can get your name. Mr. Bush: George Bush, chairman of HPC. The issues are identical to the one before the Commission which were just unanimously rejected, so we’d just ask you to uphold our decision for the reasons already made part of the record on the previous item. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Were there -- before going to representation of the petitioner, will there be any presentation of any kind by Mr. Chairman or anything as far as any pictures, drawings, anything we may need? 39 Mr. Speaker: No, sir. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The Chair will yield. State your name and address for the record, please. Mr. McCabe: Good afternoon, I’m Daniel McCabe. I recently bought the house at 1317 Highland. That was in October. And I would like to thank you for taking time to consider my appeal, and I do wish to appeal the rejection of that application. My application is not to expand or modify the driveway or parking areas. It is strictly to replace the gravel with concrete. I’m not going to expand anything, I’m not going to change anything other than that. I have some photographs. It shows the view. I will pass these around. The view of my property and the gravel driveway. This also shows the entrance and at the entrance, as you’re coming out of my property, it’s very difficult for me to see onto Highland Avenue for traffic that’s coming from the left because my neighbor has a large pillar and a wooden fence, and so it’s very difficult to see as I drive out onto Highland Avenue. This photograph shows the parking area in the front of the house as it currently stands. It is gray gravel. I also just walked down the street and around the corner and took a couple of photographs of nearby homes that have very similar size lots and their parking areas as well. I have both a front and a rear parking area. And I need both of those, be they gravel, be they concrete, whatever, I need to be able to turn around on my property. I live in Highland Avenue. It is not safe to back out of my driveway, across the sidewalk, which I could not see backing up, and onto Highland Avenue, which would be very dangerous to try to do. If my two cars are parked in the driveway, whether they be in front or in back, if anybody comes, if anybody comes to work on the house, any visitors come, they would not have a place to turn around, because I don’t have enough room for somebody to turn around. They can’t park on Highland Avenue, so they have to drive into my property. The primary motive for replacing the gravel with the concrete is 1, aesthetics, I believe the concrete looks nicer, and 2, that my children have a place to play, to ride their bikes, play basketball, whatever. I don’t really have a place to do that because they cannot go out on the sidewalk or on the street, certainly because Highland Avenue is again a very busy place. I do plan to install a gate. That has already been approved by the Historic Preservation Commission in February. That gate will be set back from the street, right along the house, and that will keep the children from coming out into the street. The Historic Preservation Commission guidelines I have read, I have looked at. They don’t give you like an objective number that you can measure against. It doesn’t say you can only have 20% concrete, you can have 30% concrete, it doesn’t give you any specifics like that, it doesn’t tell you you have to use a specific type of aggregate or specific type of concrete or anything. There are no - - the rules are therefore somewhat subjective. And the final point is that virtually all the other properties in Summerville have concrete driveways. I have not taken a scientific survey, but [inaudible] the order of 95% of them are concrete, so you know, I’m just trying to come into compliance with what’s common in the neighborhood. That’s all I have to say. Are there any questions for me? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Ms. Sims? 40 Ms. Sims: Yes. I’m assuming that maybe a lot of those people don’t have concrete driveways cause they’re just too expensive, so what you’re talking about doing is probably something that the previous owners would have loved to have done if they maybe could have afforded it, so you simply want to pave, put concrete, like everyone else along your way? Mr. McCabe: Correct. Ms. Sims: And the gate will be set back so that anyone coming in will be able to make the turn into your driveway without projecting into the street or being at risk when they turn in; is that correct? Mr. McCabe: Yes. The gate will sit back right along my sunroof [inaudible] parking area in the front [inaudible]. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any other questions on this end? Any questions on this end? Mr. Colclough? Can’t hear you, into the mic, Commissioner. Mr. Colclough: Dr. McCabe, was you aware that the HPC was in that area, in the Summerville Neighborhood Association prior to buying that? Mr. McCabe: Yes. We were aware. I didn’t know the specifics, but yes, we knew it was in Summerville. Mr. Colclough: You knew there was a neighborhood association? Mr. McCabe: Yes. Mr. Colclough: Okay. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: I guess just a question, on this particular thing, is the objection to adding concrete over gravel? Or is it perhaps the color of the concrete? Is the gate consistent with what’s recommended by the association? I guess what I’m looking for is some common ground here. I mean we already have established parking areas within the residence. There seems to be some legitimate life safety issues. It’s not enlarging an existing area, it’s basically converting from one material to another? Mr. McCabe: Yes. Mr. Cheek: There again, that would be consistent with I guess current times while maintaining a historic parking area and not changing that. Unless there is some I’d like to other objections to that, I don’t see any reason why we can’t uphold this, and 41 go ahead and make a motion that we uphold the appeal on this and also request to revise and extend my remarks at the conclusion of voting on this on another issue related to parking, HPC and our local government too, please. Mr. Williams: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: There is a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? Mr. Hankerson? Mr. Hankerson: What was the last part? I didn’t hear Mr. Cheek’s last part of the statement about historic development. Mr. Cheek: There’s another issue dealing with this same type of thing that we, we’ve compromised and approved on and it’s months old and unresolved and involves our government and HPC and I’d like to get a resolution on that, as well. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Let me, let me ask this. In reference to the question on the, on the material, the concrete paving versus where it is now, was, did you all want to have any response to that part of that, Mr. Chairman, on the material? I think the question -- the Commissioner was searching for some common ground, I think before making the motion, and I think the question was asked in there. He made the motion, however, and I didn’t know whether -- I wanted to give you a chance to respond to that if you needed to in reference to the objection, whether it was on the -- going from concrete to the gravel or was it the size of it or the color of it or where were we kind of on that? And I didn’t want to move until you had the opportunity to answer that. Mr. Bush: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The reason for the objection by the -- and the denial by the HPC was based on the fact they were changing the gravel, which we thought was appropriate, to concrete, which is disapproved for the same reasons as were indicated in item number 14, which is that large areas of concrete are not recommended and are not -- we are not supposed to approve large bases of concrete in the front of buildings. This building already had parking to the rear, and it also had this gravel parking in the front, which was not in violation of the ordinance, and so we approved the paving of the driveway, I think as a compromise we also gave approval for the gate and approval for any kind of pavement or use of concrete in the rear, but the paving and use of concrete in the front of the residence is not recommended in the guidelines and in the ordinance, so that is why there was a disapproval. We often like to use -- if concrete is going to be used, or a concrete type substance, we like to use something off-white. I cannot recall specifically if that was discussed with the applicant. I believe he indicated that he did not want to use off-white coloring because it would be hotter than white concrete. And so I think we actually bent over backwards in this case to try to work it out with the applicant. He wants concrete, he wants white concrete in the front of his house, and that was the impasse and that’s why we are here. Mr. Hankerson: You want white concrete? 42 Mr. Bush: Correct. Mr. Hankerson: I thought you said he didn’t want white cause it was too hot. Mr. Bush: It was the other way around. Just regular concrete. It’s not white. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Just concrete. Mr. Bush: Whatever common sense tells you what color concrete is. We know what the color of concrete is. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. Mr. Williams: I thought I knew what color concrete was, but I need to know now what’s the difference if he changed the color. I mean if it’s red concrete, I mean -- Mr. Bush: It just has less of a visible impact on the front of the house and it’s less noticeable. We deal basically, this ordinance and our job is to deal with the appearances of these structures, and how it impacts the neighbors and when things are done to the rear of the homes we typically have no problem at all, and that was why the last issue was so controversial, because it deals with a very visible part of the Summerville, Summerville residence. Mr. Williams: Okay, and I think those photographs that was passed out demonstrated that there are other residences that has the natural concrete, you know, already down, which his probably wouldn’t [inaudible] because of the precedent that’s already been set there with other, with other -- and you know, I don’t sit on that board, I don’t know, I just hear it when it comes here. I hear, like the gentleman said, hear only the unsatisfied customers, I don’t hear the satisfied. Mr. Bush: Right. Mr. Williams: But if, if there’s already been established in other homes with the concrete and he, his situation, I can imagine driving out with these rocks. I asked Commissioner Sims what would happen if he put larger rocks down, larger stones that what he got, would that make a difference. It would still be stones. But this is just one big stone, so I second the motion, I just -- I don’t understand, I got so much, I don’t understand all this. Mr. Bush: Was that a question I need to respond to, or a statement? Mr. Williams: [inaudible] Mr. Bush: [inaudible] not respond. 43 Mr. Williams: No, that was just a statement. You don’t need to respond. I think we need to move on. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I’ve still got a Commissioner over here, a Commissioner that has her hand up, and I’m going to recognize her. Commissioner Sims? Ms. Sims: I was really just curious. Is there a cost difference in the plain concrete and the non-plain concrete? Cream concrete? Mr. Bush: I’m sorry, Commissioner, I’m not trying to interrupt you. Because -- if the applicant -- that’s really not one of the issues that we deal with, it’s mainly appearance and cost is not a factor which is even dealt with in our guidelines. Ms. Sims: I was just wondering from his standpoint if there was a difference in cost. Perhaps he would be more willing to negotiate, unless it involved a great deal more money, and if it did, then, you know, maybe we need to ask -- have you investigated? You have? Mr. McCabe: Yes. I was quoted $2,000 to color the entire area. An additional $2,000. Mr. Bush: We haven’t been privy to that number and that was not brought up in front of our board and we have not had an opportunity to respond to that. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Cheek, I’m going to recognize you for the point of the extended question while we’re still in the discussion before the motion is carried, because we’ve talked about the nature of the ordinance and concern for it, and I think we have a concern [inaudible] and that’s why I’m going to recognize you in reference to where you want [inaudible] during this period and to wrap it up during this discussion portion. Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I guess two things. One, on this, it would help if we had guidance in percentages or square foot for a total lot space, things that would remove away from the subjectivity to something more, I guess, concrete, if you will. But some guidelines that say so much percentage of the front yard, so much of the side, so much of the back, so much of the total land mass, maybe some landscaping to go with it. And so forth. But while we’re on this, I wanted to bring up something that is related to this. As we have dealt with and tried to be faithful to preserving historic preservation in this city, and we worked out an arrangement in the past with HPC concerning the demolition of a property, over on Reynolds Street, historic property, with the allowance of a parking lot, with the promise of landscaping and other things. Now I guess the question, and we’re seeing policing on these properties in Summerville -- that’s been several months ago and we have a parking lot with a chain link fence and gravel six or eight months after the fact and over here on Reynolds Street, one of our most busy and 44 commercial arteries, and I guess my question is who dropped the ball on making the property owners follow up on that? And while we’re paying great attention to private home owners, why are we not paying as much attention to that? Is that code enforcement, is that license and planning, is it HPC? Where did the ball get dropped on that particular issue, while we’re discussing parking lots and so forth? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Steve? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, Commissioner Cheek, I understand [inaudible] germane to the issue. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, members of the Commission, I understand where the Commissioner’s question is grounded and my suggestion would be that that would not be germane to the discussion of this item today, but it would certainly be appropriate for consideration by the Commission in the future, and I’m sure the Commissioner would want to put that on the appropriate agenda. Mr. Cheek: I guess to make it somewhat germane, is there is awfully, there is the appearance thereof of strict enforcement on some people while other people make promises and are allowed to skate, so that’s something certainly by codifying the large area of concrete by percentage of total land mass may be helpful in removing that subjectivity. No further questions. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Let me state this from the chair. The reason why I allowed that question to go on, Mr. Attorney, without him stopping it was the fact that I wanted to make sure that you know, because it had been said or alluded to the fact that we may not be supportive of our own commission or that we would only do certain things at certain times. And I think if we’re going to allow that to come into the context of the discussion overall in terms of what we’re doing, then in terms of fair play to a point that if we’re going to talk about all of those cases, that’s why I did not block him in the middle of where he was talking about. However, I do agree that’s an issue for another time, that we can discuss, but I think to a point that it is kind of like where you lawyers say in court, when you open that door, sometimes you have to just watch it when you open it because [inaudible] out there on the floor, it’s one of those things do you, do you beat your spouse sometimes or is it all the time? So you know, it’s a trick question and answer the same way. So that’s why I did allow it to come into format and play. But there’s a motion and a second that’s before us at this particular time. All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The motion carries unanimously. Mr. McCabe: Thank you. Good afternoon. 45 Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Ladies and gentlemen, we’ve been moving pretty good and we’re just about down to the bottom of this regular agenda. The chair is going to declare a five minute recess at this point and we’ll come back. [RECESS] Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Best Clerk in America, where are we at? The Clerk: We’re at item 19. Item 19. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: [inaudible] The Clerk: No, sir. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, I’m sorry. The Clerk: [inaudible] questions regarding item 19. Commissioner Hankerson. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Maybe he’ll be in in just a moment. I’ve got Commissioner -- Attorney Shepard and Commissioner Williams, same law firm. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, in this matter I was reminded that there is a request that the staff attorney, Mr. James, send a second series of letters to the persons in default. And so I just remind the body of what we talked about in the assembly of the Administrative Services Committee. It was not committee action. There was no committee action. So the body can make a choice between these two alternatives, but I was reminded by Ms. Flournoy this afternoon that that seemed to be the consensus. Here again, the matter is up for Commission decision, but it would not, it would not slow the process down that much if Attorney James were instructed to send the letters to those delinquent parties. Usually those are like a ten day letter, and then it may cause a response, it may not. But that would be the alternative to approving foreclosure. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. Commissioner Williams and then Commissioner Hankerson, you’ll be next. The Clerk: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, could we just read the caption for the record and -- Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Go ahead. The Clerk: 19. Motion to approve resolution to authorize the Attorney Harry James of Law Department to proceed with foreclosure on Housing & Neighborhood Development delinquent loans. 46 Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I -- that word, to proceed with foreclosure, does something to me. And I think there are some we are going to have to foreclose on, but I think there are some different circumstances that’s going come to us or come to the table when we address some of these. Now I heard the Attorney say send a letter to maybe get these people attention, but when you say proceed with foreclosure, that does not say just a letter to me, that, that’s, that says proceed with foreclosure. And some of these homes, for whatever reason, and I think we discussed this in the committee, Mr. Shepard, that some of these people are aware and some are unaware of some of these situations. I see Ms. Flournoy there and maybe she can enlighten me a little bit on the awareness of those and exactly what we plan to do. These, these are not something that just come up, they didn’t come up last week. They been here for a while, we been looking over [inaudible] we need to be mindful of how we [inaudible] to go out and just foreclose. I’d like to hear a little bit more about it before I vote on that. Ms. Flournoy: Mr. Chairman, may I? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Go ahead. [inaudible] let her [inaudible] and I’ll come back to you [inaudible]. Ms. Flournoy: Mr. James was not aware that this was on the agenda. I did call him [inaudible] it was determined it was on the agenda. And at the last Commission meeting during legal session, Mr. James discussed this matter with members of the Commission, and the consensus of the members there was that he send another letter and require these persons to appear before the Administrative Services Committee. He is asking this be removed from the agenda today so that it can proceed as he was given authorization to do at the last legal session. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Hankerson? Mr. Hankerson: I move that we pull this from the agenda. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion do so by the usual sign. Any opposed the same. Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: Next item? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Yes, ma’am. The Clerk: 47 PUBLIC SAFETY: 20. Discuss the PowerFest held April 24, 2004 at Lock & Dam Park (Requested by Commissioner Williams) Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I asked for this to be placed on the agenda because this is the second time that I’m aware of that we allowed that event to be, to take place at Lock & Dam. I thoroughly disagree with, with what happened. I don’t know all the particulars but I do know there was between, just from the reports I got, between 12,000 to 15,000 people. I see Mr. Beck, our Recreation director. He may have an exact number. But I was thinking that was very, I guess wrong is a good word, for us to be a part of that, to have that many people herded into a facility that only have one way in and one way out. There was some emergency equipment out that area. Had there been some other excitement, I’m, I’m, I’m, I’m, I’m thinking we could have been in some serious trouble. I asked the question in committee meeting who would be responsible? Well, last year we asked that this body be notified if there is going to be 5,000 people or more gathering at a particular location. We got an answer. It wasn’t a good answer, but we got an answer about how many people on Broad Street or something of that nature, but this year it happened the same way. Nobody came to Public Safety to share this is a event that we got, this is a event that we [inaudible], this is a event that we took care of everything, this is a event that you don’t have to worry, this is a event that we don’t have any reason to be alarmed. It was just to me throw in our face. And there was some, some, some incidents to happen. I think they were maybe minor. Maybe one person go, went to the hospital, but it could have been a bad situation. We, we look at around the world and what’s happened. We talk about homeland security. We talking about people gathering together. The airports and all, every place you go now they checking you when you walk in. We put young people in what, in my mind, in harm’s way to herd them into a location, and they really didn’t care. They really wasn’t thinking. We got a facility. We talk about Diamond Lakes and all the money we spent. I think we should have put that function in Diamond Lakes and I think we should have been supportive of whatever happened. But there is no way that we could say to any, any constituents in this community that we have done what is right by this board by allowing that to happen. And I see Mr. Beck here. If he’s got an explanation or if he’s got reason for that, as chairman of Public Safety I would love to hear it. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I yield to my Rec director. Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem and members of the Commission, if I could take a little personal point of professional privilege, I would like to thank the Sheriff’s Department, the Augusta Fire Department, and Rural Metro Ambulance, all of our staff and Clear Channel for putting on an absolutely professional and wonderful event. As Commissioner Williams did mention, there were approximately 12,000 to 14,000 that were out there. We did have very few incidents. There were no arrests made with that kind of body. The biggest problem we had, it was 90 degrees and a lot of folks weren’t 48 ready for that, so we did have a few folks that did suffer from heat exhaustion. They were treated on the scene and on site by our medical staff. All of the – and there were a couple that were transported to the hospital, in which we obviously had a lane for them to be able to get out for any emergency access. Again, the Fire Department took control of the emergency preparedness for the event and did a wonderful job. And so that’s [inaudible]. I guess to respond to the notification, you did bring that up, Commissioner Williams, at the -- last year when this came up we were instructed to notify on not just this event, for events over 5,000, but for all of our events that had magnitude. In fact, in January I did send you a list of all of our events. I sent each Commissioner a list of all of our events that were happening for 2004. So we have notified you. We’ve got big events coming up this weekend. We’ve got the Garden City Music Festival coming up. nd Probably will have a good crowd there. State [inaudible] this weekend, our 22 consecutive year. So we’ve got big events coming up. We’ve got the MayFest coming up the weekend after that. So part of our mission is to put on events for the community, and I feel like our department does a good job. Mr. Williams: Mr. Beck, if I can respond, Mr. Mays. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Go ahead. Mr. Williams: Your, your, your, your notification that you mentioned that you sent out is something that you probably send out all over this government because of you know, the size of it. But we asked you point blank that when anything, any event of magnitude of this size should come to this body to let us know. We asked you, in fact I was very, I was very adamant about not putting on this event at Lock & Dam because of the impact that it would make. We had the same type facility. We got by. We had some, some incidents. But as Public Safety Chairman, Mr. Beck, I don’t think that’s your call to put on event and herd people into one exit, one way in and one way out. Had there been a fatality, had there been a, a, a serious situation, would you have took the blame or would this board, this body be hear to answer to the father or the mother about their child that was herded into that event? Maybe we, maybe I need to get some direction from six votes here to say what we do and what we don’t do. I don’t, I don’t think Recreation ought to come and ask this body about everything they going put on. But when you got something that serious, something that we have already addressed with you before, then you, your staff, along with you, set up the same magnitude of event again, putting people in a very dangerous situation. And these are young kids. If these was an older group, I probably wouldn’t have anything to say. The only other thing I think happened at Lock & Dam was the Lock & Dam Jam or whatever, it’s a older crowd. We didn’t have no 12,000 to 14,000 youth out there and, and no, they wasn’t Sunday school youth. These was youth. They was, they was doing and will do anything they was big enough and bad enough to do. We was blessed to not have a situation where somebody got hurt. But I asked the Public Safety, who will be responsible? Nobody could answer. As long as I’m Public Safety Chairman, Mr. Beck, I would appreciate it, and I’m asking you again this year, if that event is going to come up, and if I have to get some legislation through this body to say that we need to either ratify here through Public Safety or through this 49 Commission, then I need to do that. But I really think we put those young people in a serious situation with one way in and one way out. The river on one side, the woods on the other and the exit. And you got to wait till one car gets by before another can come in. I mean it just, it’s not even a two lane out there. It’s one lane. Even if it had been two lane it would have been bad, but that was a one lane situation and I think we, we was very neglective when we allowed that many youth to get in a situation like that when it could have been a real bad situation. And I’m grateful to say we had some trouble, but not to the magnitude that I thought it was, and I’m grateful for that. But I certainly hope that this body will take in consideration that if we got a park such as Diamond Lakes, such as anywhere else, we ought to be able to use that facility for what it’s built for. I heard several comments that the neighborhood didn’t want it. Well, if the neighborhood want the park, they’ve got to take what goes along with the park. You can’t have your cake and eat it, too. Either you going to put on events or you not going to put on events. Lock & Dam is not the place for that. There is no other event besides that one put on in that area but for those kids, and I think that this body need to be really mindful of that for next year so we won’t eventually end up with a death of somebody’s child for whatever reason. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The Administrator was trying to get in the conversation on this. The Chair recognizes him. Mr. Kolb: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, members of the Commission, last year this discussion came up and the Commission directed that we do provide them with the information about events over 5,000, but we did it in the way that we normally do events, and that is through our calendar of events, because we never know how many people are going to be here in terms of a softball festival, in terms of the Georgia Games, those kinds of events. That’s the first thing. So we did comply with what the Commission asked us to do last year. Second, if I may, another question came up as to why we don’t th use Diamond Lakes. As I recall, Tom, this is the 11 year of PowerFest? rd Mr. Beck: No, this is actually the 3 year of PowerFest. Mr. Kolb: Okay. But we used it, the first year, Diamond Lakes. And it was a traffic nightmare and there were many, many complaints that came through. We chose -- or Lock & Dam was chosen because of its isolation from residential areas, from commercial areas, and it is a large area that can accommodate this kind of crowd, and we feel fortunate that this is available. There is no other area, at least at this time, that can accommodate that kind of event. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The Chair will recognize Commissioner Cheek, but let me, let me say this before the Commissioner speaks, and this is not to tout one particular project over another one, but I’m going to say this. One of my insistences and we got a chance to get into it very deeply at our last work session for sales tax was the concern of all the Commissioner, and particularly those that may represent the deep south on the status of Windsor Spring Road, [inaudible] widening [inaudible] getting done [inaudible] 50 making sure that we’ve got funding. Now that does not answer the question of the one lane road and the Lock & Dam situation that you brought forth, Commissioner Williams, but what I think it does get us into the mode of talking about is that whether Diamond Lakes is expanded or not, and it’s my dream and hope that it is. I was here when we originated that project and guess I’ll probably be a “has been” when y’all finally do break some [inaudible] to get into it. But I’m going to still be persistent, not only for the park, but for the surrounding other parks, and I hope to see that four lane go from Tobacco Road, Jimmy, all the way out into Hephzibah, in its two parts. And I say that to say this, that if that’s done and if the groundwork is laid to do that, there are some preliminary plans that might wipe out that outdoor argument, because one of those things, that if the community chooses to do, that they have an opportunity to do, and that is from the standpoint at Diamond Lakes is to be able to deal with a permanent 7,000 seat amphitheater that can very well into Diamond Lake, that can be outside there with a four lane highway, and expand it to a point of 22,000 seats for outdoor activities. That’s on the block for us to talk about at some particular time. You mentioned emergencies. Also, even in that developer’s plans and which has been discussed with Recreation is enough space, and I know medical people will be glad to hear it, while the four lane is good, there’s enough excess clearance in there where trees will not be a visible problem to a point that even if you had to do air evacuation from that area and [inaudible] there, so there’s a lot that’s still before us, and I hope to stay on earth long enough to a point that I hope that’s a part of what’s permanently done on the south side of this county and that’s why I’ve been so [inaudible] that that infrastructure work get done. And I know nobody will be more pleased than this one particular department, that if the roadwork gets done, if the four lane is completed, and to a point if, if the citizens so see fit, there’s an opportunity to do something where the closest one going in one direction is Atlanta, Georgia and the other one going in the next direction is Charlotte, North Carolina. We have a chance to do that and we have the perfect climate to deal with the outdoor events, not just in terms of dealing with, with entertainment, but dealing with religious crusades and anything else that might come for an outdoor event and of having the ground facilities to be able to take care of them. And I just wanted to get a chance to plug that in, throw it in today, and so that’s the only remark I’m going to make while I’m chairing. I yield it back to Commissioner Cheek and then to Commissioner Williams. Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I guess a couple of things for the record. One is the decision not to reutilize Diamond Lakes was based on the fact that there were 28,000+ people there and the life safety issues reflected by the traffic jam and the off road parking were deemed to be untenable, and therefore other sites were basically demanded by this Commission until we are able to get the road finished, which we hope will begin in ’06. As far as going on the record, too, for PowerFest at the Lock & Dam, I do agree with Commissioner Williams that the narrow roadway presents a very real concern. What the board needs to be aware of is events like these are not just put on, they’re planned. That during these events, and Tom, correct me if I’m wrong, that as many as six or seven months’ worth of meetings will occur coordinating worst-case, most likely scenarios for accidents, illnesses, medical emergencies, fire, crime, traffic, crowd control. These are all taken into consideration, and at these meetings people responsible 51 for those particular entities are in attendance at those meetings. They are given “go do’s,” they come back prepared, with a plan that’s coordinated together for the day of the events. These events are well thought out. I’m sure while it was not an optimum situation the one-lane road was considered and ingress, egress, evacuation plan was prepared, just like it is for Arts in the Heart and Garden City Music Festival, which is coming up. But we have professionals there and I’m sure the most likely case would have been an injury situation that would have included five or six individuals for that number for heat stress or other medical emergencies, and I’m sure they accommodated those needs by having onsite medical personnel, which they did. Now while I agree about the problem with the road, I’m very concerned about these events in that they generate a lot of revenue for this city and this Commission does not get into the position of stifling that growth. We want it to come back to Diamond Lakes. We want to grow these events. I guess on this board I’m somewhat uniquely qualified in having served as field officer for emergency management, operations officer, and also I’m coordinating events for the Garden City Music Festival for all the logistics of the festival. So I get to see firsthand the amount of effort put in by these departments and by the local volunteer groups that serve this city so well. I think there is some concern about the road, but the Lock & Dam, remember, is uniquely suited for this type of activity. It’s one of the most aesthetically pleasing areas in the city. It would be a nice place to have an amphitheater if we don’t put it at Diamond Lakes. But the roadway does need to be improved. We learned that through SkyFest, we learned that through the other PowerFest that was out there, but that’s a dollar item that this Commission is going to have to decide on, and it’s several million dollars to improve that road. I just wanted the board to know that there’s a lot more than goes into these things than just showing up and having it. There’s months of planning, and it does include all the emergency personnel and they do take into consideration all the problems that could occur and try to mitigate those. Now could they have mitigated an aircraft crash? A missile? Or a tornado? No. But that’s going to cause life safety issues anywhere, whether it’s at the mall, at a football game or in neighborhoods. So I think they’re doing the very best with what we’re giving them. I just urge us to -- we’d like to know when these occur. Hopefully everybody will get a chance to get in on the planning and see what’s done at some point in the future with these events, but I’m very concerned that we don’t stifle this type of event in Augusta by becoming too involved in the process. We do have a right to know and need to know as a government and as officials of this city, and I hope staff will make efforts to improve that communication and make sure we bring everybody up to speed on what’s going on. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you. Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you. Commissioner Cheek brought a couple of points I want to bring out. First of all is that the fire, ambulance, police and the people that was there, it’s just such a great place to hold a event. Why hasn’t, why hasn’t this government held other events? The stuff that we hold on the river, I’m trying to think of the name. Tom, you just mentioned a little while ago, the -- Mr. Beck: Garden City Music Festival? 52 Mr. Williams: Yeah, the Garden City Music Festival. Why don’t we hold, since it’s such a great place, now, cause it’s ideal, why don’t we hold the Garden City Music Festival out there and why don’t we hold some of the softball tournaments there? Why don’t -- we don’t have a baseball diamond set up, why is it that just one event that’s of this size is done out there every year? And all of the planning, the months -- Andy, I agree with you. This didn’t just pop up. I brought it to this committee and it was that Tuesday or Monday and the event was going to be that Saturday. But nobody brought it to Public Safety Committee to discuss or to share or to enlighten or even to, to, to say a word about. But all of the months of planning and all of the conversation we had about it before -- this is the third year, and I guess this is going to be a every year thing there, I mean, the way it’s looking. But if it’s so good, why hadn’t we held other events there as well and the city been a part of them? Everything else that we hold has been at a park or at a certain facility. Except this one PowerFest where all of these young people gathered together. Now I’m sure there was all kind of activities going on and [inaudible] wasn’t no serious situations to arise, to happen. But if it’s so good, then why hadn’t we hold the Music City Festival and all the other stuff we do, why hadn’t we done other things like that? Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, members of the Commission, the reason for that is simple. The Greater Augusta Arts Council actually puts on the Garden City Music Festival. We are a partner with them. They chose the Augusta Common for that kind of venue. The Augusta Common was built for these kind of events, as well. The -- Mr. Williams: That’s a good point. I mean you can stop right there. The Augusta Common was built for that kind of event, as well, but that wasn’t an issue that was brought to this table for this body to decide well, what you want to do, you want to go out here? You got all kind of entrance and exit around the Common. I mean if we can’t hold them on Broad Street or between Broad and Reynolds, we can’t hold them nowhere. But to put that situation out there and until we understand how serious that could have been to put those young people in that environment and just, just herd them in, and that’s the only way I can look at it, the way we herded them in, with all the other facilities, we don’t go out there, and all the other facilities we do have downtown. Now if we, if it’s making the money, the City didn’t sponsor it, the City was a part of it, it wasn’t something that we put on. It was something -- Mr. Beck: We were a partner in this. Mr. Williams: That’s right. So we didn’t do it by ourself, right? Mr. Beck: No, sir. Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Beck: Clear Channel radio was -- 53 Mr. Williams: Clear Channel radio. Mr. Beck: We were a partner. Mr. Williams: Should have came before this body to, to let us be a part of or have some input on what happens with that many people. You can’t take that many young people and just herd them into something and turn them loose. Now you know they brought everything [inaudible] inside the facility. We are truly blessed not to have a, a serious situation before us now that probably go before the judges. And if it’s that good, I’d like to see us move some of these other events from, from, from downtown to out there. If not, I’d like to see us find a day when this facility downtown is open and move it from out there to downtown. And I think we’ll be treating all the citizens of Richmond County the same way if we do that, Tom. But my last comment, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, is that I need to, I need to get something crafted that, that we’ll know that we’ll be included on all of the events such as the, the Festival in the Common and Diamond Lakes and the Lock & Dam situation. I’m sick and tired of people coming and asking me about stuff that I don’t know nothing about till it’s already done happened, and that’s my comment. That’s all. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any questions or comments regarding item number 20? Mr. Boyles: I move we receive as information. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second to receive as information. Any discussion on the motion? If not, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. The Chair votes Yes. Mr. Williams votes No. Motion carries 8-1. Mr. Williams: [inaudible] The Clerk: Sir? Mr. Williams: I ain’t getting information, that’s what I’m voting on. The Clerk: 35. Consider appropriation in an amount not to exceed $40,000 from SPLOST Phase IV Judicial Center account for professional fees for survey, environmental testing, and geotechnical testing and title examinations. 54 The Clerk: Mr. Shepard. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Go ahead. Mr. Shepard: This item [inaudible] my office because we did [inaudible] the site th at James Brown Boulevard, Walton Way, 10 and Fenwick Street in the meeting of April 20, subject to obtaining legal title and environmental clearance. I received a call from the Judicial Center chairman, who indicated that the last action before this body had been when we rescinded the motion to approve any monies to be expended for these type testings. So you have an authorization on the one hand that you’ve already done, and so I went back in the minutes and picked up where we were at the meeting of April 6 and request that you approve a budget so that this work can get done and this site could be evaluated and [inaudible], so we could proceed. You gave authorization to focus on that site, and now simply I ask for an appropriation for the professional fees that we going to have to be incurred and the budgetary number, the not to exceed amount, came from the previous items before this Commission. So I’d ask that this item, appropriation item be approved. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I haven’t been on this side in a good while. Commissioner Grantham and Commissioner Hankerson, going to my left, and then Commissioner Cheek and Commissioner Williams to my right. Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Shepard, I think if we recall the conversation regarding to rescinding those properties that we had approved in that meeting that night, it was late, the $40,000 was attached to testing of those properties, and that’s why we asked to rescind not only the remaining properties such as May Park, Regency Mall and the others, and that $40,000 was attached to the testing of those, and so I think now maybe what we need to do instead of saying that we didn’t have the proper funding in this new property is because it was not included in the motion when we unanimously approved the location of Walton Way and James Brown Boulevard. And so we need to put in the form of a motion the $40,000 to test that site and the SoI’m going to location that includes the properties that we’re talking about at that site. put it in the form of a motion that we allocate up to $40,000 for the testing and the necessary work, title search to be done on the properties at Walton Way and James Brown Boulevard. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: There’s a motion that’s on the floor. Mr. Cheek: I’m going to second that. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Seconded by Commissioner Cheek. The Chair recognizes Commissioner Hankerson, then we’ll swing back to the right for Commissioner Cheek and Commissioner Williams. 55 Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I had a question about the order of the professional services, the testing, the appraisal. At what point do we find out how much the owners of these properties are asking? And I imagine the appraisal, we do the appraisal first and then go to them? Before we do the testing, I just [inaudible] us to go into doing testing and have a hang-up on the cost of the property. Are we doing it in order? I’m with all of it, but are we doing it in the right order so we won’t waste any money? Mr. Shepard: Well, I intend to bring you in legal session not today but in subsequent legal session I’ll bring you what’s been negotiated, and there may be properties that we determine should be acquired by eminent domain because of a defect in the title. In other words, we can’t account for all of the interests due to deaths of individuals [inaudible] previously [inaudible] what we call in testate interests created. So the first thing would be your legal work and then I think before you close the deal you should have your environmental work. You don’t want to be buying condemned properties, but it was just a [inaudible] and an authorization made and there was no, no budget for these professional services. So it would be a tandem amount of legal services in connection with environment, environmental work. Mr. Hankerson: Okay, I think that answers my question, except the priority. So you are looking at doing step by step your professional service, the appraisal, all of that. Mr. Shepard: [inaudible] Mr. Hankerson: [inaudible] Mr. Shepard: I would supervise that. Actually we sent it back in that motion to the Judicial Center Committee to [inaudible] further with that, and that’s -- there would be a process where you would hear about it in the coming weeks in legal session, and then you could authorize -- if the amount of the asking price was too much in any given parcel and you, for example, found it, found it where no contracted sale would work, either because they won’t sell it to you or because the legal title is not appropriate, then you’d use the power of eminent domain. Mr. Hankerson: Are we going to immediately start with the testing first? That’s - - is that the order we should take, the testing first? Or the appraisal and the conversing with the property owners and then the testing? Mr. Shepard: Well, I think we ought, I think we ought to proceed with gaining, gaining right on entry. Basically along the steps we were moving. We’ve got to have everything really come together so that I can come in here and recommend or that the Judicial Center Committee can recommend that you’re buying a property for an appropriate price that doesn’t have contamination. So it will probably be a process that’s a parallel process. I don’t want to spend money of this government to acquire 56 contaminated property, and I have, that’s my assurance. What we call condition precedent, preceding acquisition of [inaudible] property. There is no way to do it any other way. Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, Mr. Shepard. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. My question is, last time we started this process, we were under the impression we were actually going to get some environmental data back on site contamination and what we essentially got was a copy of a records search on the property and any existing documents that were already on file. And I really hate to see us pay $10,000 or $15,000 for something that we could get a couple of legal clerks to do in a couple of days. My question is, and I understand rights of entry have to be obtained, and a property search has to be done using our own records here in this building, then a search and any reference to any prior cleanup or recognition of any environmental issues with State EPD, and then we’ll go in and do core samples and groundwater samples. Now is that part of this $40,000, that entire package? Will we be getting a report back that includes analytical data that shows clean or unclean [inaudible] metals and other contaminants in the soil? Or are we going to have to be pay another $40,000 for that at some point in the future? Mr. Shepard: Here again, Mr. Cheek, the budget was set based on what the Commission had previously done. I accompanied you and we went over and looked at some documents from a project. As a result of going to those records, we have ordered from Atlanta further tests, further test reports. We are going to try to save this government money so that if there is any, any way we can use matters that are of record, we will certainly use those to the extent they were. You know, the day after you and I went over to look at those documents, I sent a letter to the EPD, which also referred to an office in the Atlanta Gas Light Company, and that I am told will be forthcoming from them at no charge, but I was just looking for a way to begin the process. And I can’t say that that number, it might come in under that number, but I had to have some budget to begin. And here again, the Chairman of the Committee suggested that we use the previous number. If you feel the number is inadequate, tell me now. If you feel it’s too much, tell me now. All that has really been expended is that, is title work that’s been done. And here again, pending the receipt of that environmental report, I then will have some direction about how we will proceed. Mr. Cheek: My concern is what can happen is several of these things can run in parallel, and as soon as we get right of entry we can go ahead and pull soil samples. Those will take a couple of months to turn around. Mr. Shepard: I think they indicated they would go in parallel. Mr. Cheek: No further questions. Urge approval. 57 Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I was under the impression, Steve, that when we decided and looked at that site that you was going do this, this testing as far as title and examination from, from your standpoint. And here it’s talking about $40,000 as if somebody else is going to do this all over again. Now is, is, I mean, or is that -- this money would be to pay for what you done? Mr. Shepard: I haven’t -- no, sir. I’m sorry to cut you off. Mr. Williams: No, no, cause -- Mr. Shepard: No, it’s not, it’s not $40,000 for the lawyer’s work. Mr. Williams: I understand. But I was under the impression the lawyer was going and what you explained to us, you was going to inspect the title and see was there any -- Mr. Speaker: [inaudible] Mr. Williams: -- level I of contamination would be something written on file. Mr. Shepard: And all I had done is the examination and I’ve ordered the documents that we thought were appropriate and the day that I did that, I have in some record somewhere, but Mr. Cheek was interested enough to come with me to look at those documents over on file in the [inaudible], and I’m not going to do anything other than a document review in my office, and then I’ll report back to the [inaudible] and the committee of the Judicial Center because that was, that was part of the motion which tasked them to move forward but they don’t have any, they don’t really have any money appropriated to move forward. Mr. Williams: Can you tell me what level of testing and titles is going be done? Mr. Shepard: Well, we’re going -- the level, we’re going to start with Phase I, is understanding. That’s what you do before you do anything else. That indicates whether you have to go to Phase II. This body will be consulted before we go any way in that regard. The title examinations, we have, we have a way of having that as part of [inaudible] purchase price which I can explain to you in legal. Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Shepard: Because of who we found out who owns a majority of the site. And it’s -- that can be, that can be negotiated. But I’m not looking here for a $40,000 appropriation for my office. 58 Mr. Williams: Well, it be for your office or not, Mr. Attorney, the $40,000 I wanted to make sure if you, your office was doing it, the testing, we going come around and test behind you, paying somebody else or whatever. That’s all, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I call for the question if there are no other questions, we can go on and vote. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any other Commissioners have any other questions? [inaudible] discussion. There’s a motion and a second. All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: PETITIONS & COMMUNICATIONS: 36. Approve the rescheduling of the June 28th regular committee meetings to June 21st and the July 6th regular Commission meeting to Thursday July 1, 2004. Mr. Williams: So move. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: There’s a motion. Mr. Cheek: I’m going to second that. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. I recognize Commissioner Cheek, his hand is up first. Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I can’t speak to the germanity of my next comment, but I’m going to try to keep it consistent. As you note here, fellow members, we are rescheduling meetings on a regular basis here in the last few weeks. I will again, and I thought it would have been added to our communications, but request that the Clerk add and that we have discussion at some point in that the next meeting, that Masters week being a permanent week off for this board. We reschedule meetings for all events, but the biggest event to promote this city we come down here and sit in these chairs when we should be out courting those many business people and other guests that come to this city, trying to improve commerce and trade, as well as enjoy a week off with our family and friends who often gather at that time of year. I just request that that be added. I have no problem with this, but that we add for discussion at our next meeting adopting a measure that would have Masters week for us gather, meet and greet all the people in this city and not work. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I think you made it germane. There is a motion and a second. Is there any other discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. The Chair votes yes. 59 Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: 38. Discuss the Bus Stop on the side of the K-Mart Department Store on Deans Bridge Road. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams) Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Williams put it on, but both of us are concerned about it. Commissioner -- Mr. Johnson, if you could come on in, and I think, Commissioner, I’m going to yield to you to get started. We’ve discussed this and the Transit director is here. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I talked with Mr. Johnson briefly coming in. At K-Mart we moved a business stop from Regency Mall over to K- Mart, and I’ve got several complaints from the owners of McDonald’s, I’ve been by there myself, there is trash all over the area there, people are taking grocery carts, sitting on them because there is no, no seating space for them. There is one bench there. I talked to Mr. Johnson. He informed me that it is a State route, that they had to get with K-Mart and the State about adding to it. And it’s been a long time and I need to hear a little bit from him. I got a couple more comments. But in passing it yesterday, had I had my camera I would have took some pictures. People are standing around and, and grocery carts are everywhere and there is no trash container. We, we, we ask people to catch the bus, but we are not providing proper waiting spaces for them. Commissioner Mays, when we was in Savannah, we rode by and saw a long shelter, not a big one, just something to keep people out of the rain, even a place for handicapped people. And, and, and here we are now, we got a, a, a location that we moved from to another location. And I think Mr. Johnson may have some explanation of why the situation like it is. But I need to hear from him before I say anything else. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you, Commissioner. You covered most of what I was going to cover. I’ll yield to Mr. Johnson at this time, cause I do have some questions, probably, and some suggestions. But you may cover that in your talk, so I’ll yield to you, Mr. Director. Mr. Johnson: Good evening, everyone. As for -- let’s go back to Regency Mall. That was the transfer point that we had in south Richmond Count. When the mall shut down, we still held on to that space over there. I started to receiving complaints because as the mall, as the years went along, the mall started to turning out the lights. All of a sudden there was incidents where there were people that were down in that hole where the stop was that they felt unsafe. So the issue that was presented to me was an unsafe spot or to move somewhere. But the other issue is that you can’t just move a business around anywhere. They must have ample space there to turn a business around. So we looked and we talked to the K-Mart shopping center about the possibility of moving that stop to that, to that location at that point. That was -- the move was made for safety reasons, because there was no lights and we event went to the point where I made a 60 direction that no business would leave nobody down there in that hole no matter how much it cost, that the bus would wait until the next arriving bus came just to make sure people were safe down there. So that was the reason for the move. It was a safety concern for the riders of the transit system. We moved to the K-Mart shopping center. It was a fairly [inaudible] move to try to get out of that hole. Also, as you know, at the sales tax, one of the other options that was done at the sales tax as a part of the Special Local Option Sales Tax was to build a transfer facility in south Richmond County, either with sales tax money, associated with my federal transit and state grants, or that you use the local government general fund money to back the City’s share of it. Either way. But we went with the sales tax option for the time being and depending on whether or not that is approved, we can always move that forward. But the plan was that the K-Mart would be a temporary location until we could build a nicer facility in south Richmond County. As for the benched shelter, February the item was on Public Services Committee agenda. Mr. Williams wasn’t able to come but I still presented the information that him and I had already spoken about. I wrote a letter to the district manager of the K-Mart store. And in that letter, that I asked to lease from him a space of approximately 600 square feet. I have found a shelter which is a 12 x 30 feet shelter to try to put there, but it’s private property. The other problem is Highway 1 is a state route. And there are all different types of state regulations that must be approved before you can put anything on a state route. So that was the other thing. Plus, I had to deal with Lamar Advertising, which has first rights to put up shelters along any of the business routes. So I contacted K-Mart, I sent them a letter, 30 days later I contacted them again, we hadn’t heard a response. I sent the letter to the store manager, he said he could handle it. Sent him a letter, gave them about 30 days, contacted him again, he sent me back to the district manager. Resubmitted a letter to the district manager in April, and now he’s saying that K-Mart does not own the property and they lease it from a third party. So now he’s in contact, trying to contact the third party to get their permission for us to use private property. In the meantime, I have spoken with Lamar Advertising, and so that they contacted me this morning, they looked at the site, and they are going to place another shelter right behind the present shelter out there. So that basically that -- and I’ve contacted the state, I have the regulation as to what all we would have to do if we have to put a shelter on a state right-of-way. It’s a long, complicated process of finding out the center line, the right-of- way, how far we are from a mile marker. It’s a whole laundry list, but I do have a copy of those regulations and the rules that we would have to follow. As for the garbage out there, my transit staff, the K-Mart cleans it up. There is two garbage cans out there, but they stay full. We go to empty it, it’s beer bottles, beer cans, everything else, unless the passengers are getting on the bus drunk, that they are just out there. And we try to monitor that as much as we can. So -- I’ve even asked Public Works as a part of the next garbage contract to put dumping the cans there as a part of the contract so that we are on a regular schedule of trying to dump the cans, plus Lamar Advertising empties the cans. So that’s where we stand right now. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Johnson, let me, let me, let me do this for just a moment. I know this stop is on a state route. It was on a state round when we decided to do it. But you know, we went through the fanfare of a news conference and press and 61 everybody coming out to deal with a temporary shelter, and, and, while I applaud the department, and I’m going to say this, as being one of your bus stop holders, cause -- and that’s an issue for another day. You know, we talked about that one, too. Because the health department sits right behind me, and I’m not leaving Deans Bridge Road and Regency Mall alone, but you know, my facility has become a place where a lot of people use in front to stop for the bus, and I don’t have a problem with it, I don’t mind it at all. Make no litter problems, have no trouble, nothing come from bus riders. It’s just a place where they can sit until the bus comes. I think we have an overall problem period that we need to help the department with, because I think there is a serious lack of being able to sit for your patrons on major thoroughfare period. Not just Deans Bridge Road where you’ve got that situation. Now let me jump back there for just a moment. All the regulations, all that’s good, and I know you’re a stickler for the rules, you’ve been there and we should be, we should be grateful for that. But the dilemma we’re in right now is that we move that as a temporary situation. You, you’ve got a long time if you’re waiting on sales tax to help you flip that one around. And I’m for that, pushing that, you’ve got the best refunding mechanism in terms of getting money, to get back on, in terms of Transit, because you will get 80% to 90% of that money put back, and we can use that for other sales tax projects. But what we need in the short run, I guess the question I’m asking is that if it’s going to be that much of a hassle where we are, and I realize the plaza has it’s own business to run, and I’m grateful from the standpoint you’ve got a business that they want to help, but right now you’ve got, you’ve got an eyesore from the standpoint that you’ve got the one shelter that -- you mentioned Lamar was going to put the other, the other shelter there -- they could put four where you are and it still wouldn’t be enough at some points in time. Now the referenced shelter Marion and I were looking at, it wasn’t even -- it wasn’t a transfer station or anything like that. It was just one location that was across from Savannah Civic Center, of which you had the three shelter spots that were there. What I want to help you push through, and I think we need to be about trying to get the numbers through it, get with you Administrator on it, getting on to committee. I’m not on Public Services anymore, but I, but I’ve been there long enough to want to help you with, with this issue. If we need to move up the street from there and get some permission from somebody, the question I need to ask is I know it’s on a state route, how far back on anybody’s property that you get permission on can we get some semblance of being able to put something there so that you’ve got a comfortable situation for folk? Because I came by there and I just been doing some riding [inaudible], sometimes two or three times a day. It’s almost like musical chairs as to who is going sit. You’ve got folk leaning there, you’ve got sometimes four or five that’s under the canopy that’s there, and you’ve got another 20 that’s waiting. I looked at the place where we got a bus stop there on those, on those tire railings, and a cement block. One guy this morning had taken the cement block away from where you got it supporting the sign and made a seat out of the cement block. There was nowhere else to sit. Now we made a lot of fanfare about the fact that that was where we were moving to. What I’m looking at is can we maybe look at to a point that if it’s complicated for the business to be able to get some clear right or better passage on that? Can we look at maybe some other property along that corridor right now that’s vacant, doing nothing, to a point that we could get some permission to put some of that stuff on there? And also to some of those benches 62 that we found up here off Highland Avenue that we said we were going to get -- if we didn’t do anything else [inaudible]. I’m still kind of waiting to get something back on those. We had enough of those that we were going to sell for salvage to a point that we could put benches almost in a circle in K-Mart plaza, 15 or 20 of them to do. And if it’s a possible of [inaudible] from a funding standpoint, this Commissioner stands ready to help you, but I think you’ve got a problem out there, that we need to help y’all on, because this was touted as a temporary place, and what it’s becoming is an overgrown situation of being crowded, and to the point of potentially -- you’re lucky that somebody hadn’t wanted a seat better than somebody else. I think we can administratively handle through our own department. We got the crews out there to do it. Then we need to have some nailed-down trash situations that are permanently put and that the insides are changed so that somebody that we [inaudible] whether it’s the contract hauler or whether we do it from within, that they will give the assistance to getting that type of litter up. But what you’ve got is you’ve got people that’s pushing baskets to the area, to the street out there, and I know most of them turn over, some leaning, still sitting there. Cause folk are not going push -- I’d rather for it to be where it is cause that would give some convenience [inaudible]. But what I’m also looking at is that if that’s going to be a problem getting it done, there are some adjacent property a little further down, cause folk are not going to buy groceries or other items and everything else, pushing their way on the bus, and then sit the items down, you know, [inaudible] on the ground. They have to get the baskets there in order to hold some of the food items. So I want to know if you’ve thought about something else that we can help you on because, one, sales tax will not be here tomorrow. Secondly, it’s a temporary location but we need to get some better [inaudible]. Third, I think Lamar will be cooperative with us, cause they still want to do business and we want to do business with them. But I don’t think one more little place out there to hold four people at a major area for your system is going to work. So I’m willing to listen and maybe have to do it in committee, but I think something needs to be brought to us different in what we’re doing. We’ve got some people that’s looking to us to deal with some projects that are along Deans Bridge Road. You know, I’m even to a point, that’s why I said how far back do they have to be? It’s on a state route. You talk about turning the buses around. Maybe to a point that you could still turn around [inaudible] somewhere else. If that’s going to become a problem. Cause you’ve got one out there. And, and, and [inaudible], you, you, you were right to move them out there where they were. That was a safety issue. That was very good, sound thinking to do it. But I think to a point now with that one booth or two, it just not going work. We need something else brought out there. And if you’ve got some ideas today on it or if you need some time to think about it and bring it back to us, I’m willing to come on that committee. I can’t vote on it. To help you. But I think you need to propose some numbers to the Administrator, but y’all need to, y’all need to call somebody else to do something in that situation, cause right now, it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s just a mess. And I want to help you with it. I think the Commission wants to help you with it. But like it is right now and putting one more little booth out there, it ain’t going cut it. Not at all. And I’m receptive to anything you’ve got to say with it. Mr. Williams: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem? 63 Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I mean I’d like to know whether he’s got something in mind other than that one booth. I mean if it’s something else. That’s not going to carry a major station out there and I yield back to you. Mr. Johnson: As far as the benches, the benches have already been completed. We are looking at [inaudible], but again, historically in Augusta, Augusta does not have any set right-of-way as to where it’s city property versus private property. So at each location that we are having to do some research. But the benches are done, we have some federal money that will [inaudible] for the enhancement so that the benches are completed. So that that will be done and then -- but also you have to understand that we also aren’t only dealing with right-of-ways, we are dealing wit ADA issues. ADA says that a person by federal law must have four feet of walk space, such as as we discussed about your area. If I put a bench in front of certain businesses, there is not four feet for a person there to walk, so that no matter what all I would like to do, just that some locations in Augusta, based on the federal law, I do not have four feet of space to put a bench. The sales tax, as I said, we have the federal money that -- and that we [inaudible] committee, we can move up building the transfer facility in south Richmond County, that I have the money, the federal and the state, and we are in the grant process for a new grant for the next fiscal year, so that if it’s the wishes, we could move that process up, and for that one issue, just go with general funds to back up the federal and state money and we could move that one project up and then also deal with the sales tax. Let everything else stay on sales tax but move that project up with the money that is already [inaudible]. And I would have to look at some of the other areas because we also, gentlemen, we also are getting in low-floor vehicles. That means that that bus only has a few inches off of the ground to make it convenient for people to board, so that means that in some areas that we may not be able to go up on into a driveway or into a shopping center because of the height of the bus, so there are all kind of issues we have to look at. But if anyone knows any area, spot in that area, K-Mart would love for us to put a shelter up because they’re having the same problem and they would like to get back their carts. But for right now, I’m at a standstill. I’ve done everything other than go up to Greenville other than just grab the guy and bring him down him. Mr. Williams: Well -- Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. -- I’m going to yield back to you, Mr. Williams. The only thing that I think that the Commission wants you to do, Mr. Johnson, and it’s for you and the administration to get together, bring us something back that’s non-bureaucratic, that will not have to reinvent the wheel, and to get us a halfway solution on Deans Bridge Road right now. I realize you’ve got the other one. I’m aware of the four feet that you’ve got. It’s all over town. But somewhere to sit in some of these major locations would be a hell of a lot better than nowhere to sit. And, and it’s up to y’all where you put them in terms of lining up some of them. I’m going to help you. I want to do that. But to a point I can’t push for something to a point that if it needs some funding to deal with it. You need a solution out there right now, cause what I’m saying is while we 64 advertised, and I think you probably got the best item on sales tax, we made the fanfare of advertising and promoting that this was going to be the new site per se, and I think we ought to have a clear path on some of this to a point of where we were going before we did it, because I got folk asking me to a point is that your new station? No, we going to build a station. Well, is this where [inaudible] supposed to go? Why [inaudible] y’all have all these folk out here to do this to a point [inaudible] all of them up under one little roof? So I think we’re looking for something that does not have to get to that magnitude to, to simplify some of what you’ve got that’s going there. And I mention those other properties out there that maybe you may want to look at, that’s along that path, and, and turning your bus, maybe getting a little creative. You know, sometimes we get hung up about what [inaudible]. Maybe we need to unhistoric some of it. You know. And I don’t event want to get on that. I’m going to yield to you, Marion, cause I’m still ticked off about my trolleys being over in Myrtle Beach. And if they got a right to use them, and you know where I’m coming from on that, and I tried to help you on that deal, but I’m still hot as hell to a point that if Myrtle Beach can ride around on trolleys, then we said we couldn’t [inaudible] and you go on vacation and you go on a tourist situation over there and you ride the same ones that left Augusta, Georgia. That’s still hot in my craw about that. So I’m going to definitely yield to you on that and I’m going to shut up before I get real mad about it. Mr. Williams: Let me share something with Haywood. Haywood, it’s, it’s, it’s something need to be done. It’s been too long. I hear all of your excuses and I think they legitimate, but it’s been too long. We got people sitting on grocery carts and just sitting anywhere and everywhere. Had we put something on the right-of-way that we had to move would have been better than letting people bring grocery carts and turn them over and set them out there. The bus go into K-Mart parking lot and our [inaudible] is on the inside, not on the right-of-way. Our bus go into, if you looking at K-Mart from Deans Bridge Road where the auto mechanic shop used to be, where the curbing curves in there, our bus stops right inside the curve. There is no benches there. There is nothing there but a buss stop that the city of Augusta owns. And it’s a city of Augusta bus. We’ve got to get creative, we’ve got to do something to relieve that pressure. The lady, the one at McDonald’s, called me -- what’s her name -- called me. Ms. Crawford said that would get somebody to come over and empty the cans, whether they’re beer bottles, liquor bottles, milk carton bottles. If they full, if they belong to the city, we need to move it. We can’t, we can’t say who had and didn’t have it. We need to clean up and make that facility something that people won’t mind coming and using the bus. That’s what we trying to get, more rider ship. So Commissioner Mays, I agree. Something need to be done. Whether we put a bench, a shelter is fine. If we didn’t have no shelter. People sitting on grocery buggies now with no shelter. If there was some seats there. There is nothing there for the people to sit on but one bench and one little shelter. We need to do something right away, Haywood, to get those people off the ground and let them know that we care and if there is something we can work with, whether it be on to the right or to the left, we need to look at doing that, too. But I would rather put something down that we need to move because it was state route and the state [inaudible] move it. The state ain’t said nothing. The state ain’t complained. The state probably wouldn’t, don’t know 65 if we on their route or not unless we send a letter to them and tell them. So let’s get something out there for those people to sit on until we can get a, a, a, a, a facility built that, that’s going -- and this could have been [inaudible]. [inaudible] after all the talk, we been asking you to do something, you should have came to us and said hey, this is as far as I can go. We been getting these letters and people still throwing trash and still sitting on the carts. Something need to happen. Something need to happen soon. Okay? Mr. Johnson: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Boyles? Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mays. I was sitting here thinking that, you know, Recreation runs a regular trash route, pick up trash from all the outlying parks every day. They could go by and pick up those two barrels every day, except I guess Saturday and Sunday. And we’ve got community service workers that could probably do it on those days. They’ve also got these four-tier seat aluminum bleachers that are kind of heavy to move, and we could -- up at Lake Olmstead I see this vendor up there has some of these double carports, I think they’re $595, and they’re adjustable in height. If you want to do something on a temporary basis, you could put a set of those bleachers there and one of those carports over them, and if we ever do go in there and decide to build something permanent, then this carport could be used anywhere, I think, in city government. And if they picked up the trash. And normally trash at the parks is usually outside the can, so they’d have to take the sticks and pick it all up and put it in the cans. So I think you could probably do something before the week is out if you would just, just be creative about it. Just a suggestion. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The Chair is going to entertain a motion that we instruct the director and the administrator assigned to this particular area to bring us back to Public Services Committee, at least on the Deans Bridge location, a temporary solution that we can deal with this at the next committee meeting. Mr. Williams: So move. Mr. Colclough: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Is there any unclearness or unreadiness about the motion that’s on the floor? If not, and being none, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. The Chair votes yes. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: And that will put it in our court and I agree to help you with it, but we need something. The Clerk: 66 ATTORNEY: 39. Resolution to approve refinancing of Series 1996 A and 1997 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Steve? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, members of the Commission, you will recall that on the meeting of April 20, the concept of approving these refinancings of this 1996 A and 1997 water and sewer revenue bonds was approved in concept. What I did was attach to my agenda item request the previous memoranda which has been furnished by the Finance director and the fiscal agent. So I have today with us in the, in the audience Mr. Mark Widener and Mr. Matt Nichols, who want to address this bond resolution subject. They have brought with them a bond resolution and I would ask that the Commission entertain these two gentlemen in this presentation at this time. And they’re seated on the front road. Mark [inaudible]. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: You old enough to conduct business, young man? (Laughter) Mr. Widener: I’ll let you decide that. (Laughter) Mr. Widener: As Mr. Shepard said, Mark Widener with Merrill Lynch. Matt Nichols with Sutherland Asbill in your bond counsel. Sutherland has been your bond counsel for a long time. And he’s brought with him [inaudible] who is sitting in the back, who is on the team as well. As Mr. Shepard said, this is the formal part of what you all have already done in both committee and at the Commission level. This approves a refinancing of the 1996 A and 1997 bonds. There are still a lot of savings, though the savings aren’t as good as they were a month ago when we first came to you. The savings aren’t as good as they were a month ago, but I want to make an important point, and that is you are authorizing the Mayor and David Persaud to sign off on this if the savings are there when we get ready to do it, which is a couple of weeks away. We’ve got to move through a validation process which is going to take us a couple of weeks. Most of the documentation is already done, so we think we can get it done pretty quickly. Our goal is to try to get it done as quickly as possible. Right now the savings are about $3 million in today’s dollars. They’re about $5 million over the life of the bonds. When this was first presented, the savings were almost double that, they were about $6 million. So what you can see is how quickly the market can get away from you or we can get back to where we were. Our hope is that the market is going to come back a little bit. What you’re approving is to move forward on this if the market is there. You’re not automatically authorizing us to move forward regardless of what the market is. I’ll be happy to answer 67 any questions if y’all have any. Of course, you’ve got a lawyer here as well to answer questions. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Do we have a motion? You [inaudible] pretty good, young fellow. Mr. Cheek: I move to approve. Mr. Williams: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second? Any comment, Steve? Mr. Shepard: Yes. Let me just ask Mr. Widener and Mr. Nichols, I assume that the firm of [inaudible] will be [inaudible]? Mr. Widener: That has been discussed with David and I believe they’re satisfactory. Mr. Shepard: And subject to my approval as counsel, just to put that in the record. Mr. Nichols: I just want to reiterate, too, what Mark said. This [inaudible] the city is not yet obligated to do anything until the documents are actually executed. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay. Mr. Boyles? Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mays, would you introduce the gentleman sitting behind Mr. Widener? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The younger fellow? That, that, that young man, I know he might want to pose as his slightly older brother, but it’s good to see you, [inaudible], you keeping that young fellow straight? Well, he’s done a remarkable job for this city in working thus far, and I know that that had a little bit of something to do with your leadership, too. And it’s always good to see you. Motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. The Chair votes yes. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Some afternoons are worth waiting for. (Laughter) 40. OTHER BUSINESS. 68 41. LEGAL MEETING. ?? Pending and potential litigation. ?? Real Estate. ?? Personnel. ?? Discuss dog breeding incident at Animal Control. (Referred from the April 22nd Public Safety Committee Meeting.) ?? Discuss Administrator’s Contract. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, members of the Commission, I would ask the Commission go into legal session for the reasons stated in the agenda book, to include pending and potential litigation, real estate, personnel, discussion of the dog breeding incident at Animal Control, and administrator’s contract. Mr. Cheek: Does that include item one on the addendum agenda? Mr. Shepard: I’m sorry. Mr. Cheek: One and two? Mr. Shepard: One and two, yes, sir, and item number 16 on the Administrative Services. Mr. Mayor: [inaudible] everybody clear on those? Okay. Is there a motion? The Clerk: No, sir. Mr. Cheek: Motion to adjourn to legal session. Mr. Colclough: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Opposed the same. The Chair votes yes. Ms. Sims out. Motion carries 8-0. [LEGAL MEETING] Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Ladies and gentlemen, our meeting will come back to order. The Chair recognizes Attorney Shepard. Mr. Shepard: [inaudible] Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I would request a motion be made that the Chair be allowed to approve the closed meeting affidavit in which the topics of the closed meeting included pending and potential litigation, real estate, 69 personnel, including the incident at Animal Control, administrative contract, and that it be made in the form of a motion, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. 42. Motion to approve authorization for the Mayor to execute affidavit of compliance with Georgia’s Open Meeting Act. Mr. Colclough: So move. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I would ask that we have an add item to discuss the creation of two Deputy Marshal positions for the Augusta Regional Airport at Bush Field. Mr. Cheek: So move. Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Shepard: Discussion? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Wait, wait -- Mr. Shepard: [inaudible] add topics to the agenda, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Add the topic, that’s not, that’s not how that’s going to be worded though? No, but I’m talking about that’s not the motion that we are going to take to do that one, I hope. Mr. Speaker: The terminology? Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Yeah, that’s what I’m saying. Mr. Grantham: It was to [inaudible] Marshal’s Department to supply people to help fill the void that’s created out there and [inaudible] protection at the airport. And not actually create new positions. Mr. Shepard: [inaudible] 70 Mr. Grantham: [inaudible] Mr. Shepard: [inaudible] Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: I mean we have a motion to add. I thought we were just -- Mr. Grantham: [inaudible] add for discussion. Mr. Cheek: Motion to add for discussion. Mr. Williams: I don’t think you’ve got unanimous consent to add that. That was not a part -- and I left the legal session for a while. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: And you just returned. Mr. Williams: And I just returned. Exactly. But that was not in the motion to add with the other items we added. That item did not come through Public Safety. It’s, I think it’s a legitimate item, but I don’t understand the, the rush on it and how it got to be done overnight. I hear [inaudible] closing down and all that other stuff. But that’s, that’s -- they ain’t going to put that monkey on my back saying we did it when -- if that’s something that the, the, the powers that be knew about, that should have been brought to this body and discussed it. They ain’t going to throw that monkey on me. I’m not going to allow it to be added. Now if I’d left and y’all added [inaudible], no, sir. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: For the record of information, for the record of information, we have a situation of a security problem to do with that has to be dealt with by May 7, and that is an issue which to a certain extent in a security situation falls under the auspices of this Commission to deal with. We can call you, Madame Clerk, to deal with another meeting per se to deal with one item to do that we’re going to have to deal with under that auspices, or we can return to legal and fully explain it to you, Commissioner, and it’s not to turn the situation over to the Marshal’s Department, it is for another way of them being able to work a situation out of their payroll on a temporary situation and we can do it one of two ways. But this Commissioner has sat through the last 2-1/2 hours of it and we can make a quick decision to decide by consensus out here in public that we are going to allow the Clerk to deal with a 24 hour notification to the media to deal with this one item, or we can deal with it in the back for another five minutes. Whatever we going do. And it’s your shot to call. Mr. Williams: Don’t make no difference to me, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: No, it’s your shot to call. Cause you weren’t here for the last 2-1/2 hours to deal with it. We’re dealing with it now. You just go back. Now either say which one you want to do. You, you, you, you, you decide how it’s going to be done. 71 Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: So decide which one you want. Special called meeting or we go in the back and explain it to you. Mr. Williams: Let the Clerk do a special called meeting. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: And that’s exactly what we’ll do. The meeting’s adjourned. [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 May 4, 2004. ______________________________ Clerk of Commission 72