HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 19, 2005 Augusta Richmond County Commiss
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
APRIL 19, 2005
Augusta-Richmond County Commission convened at 2:05 p.m., Tuesday, April
19, 2005, the Hons. Marion Williams, Mayor Pro Tem, and Bob Young, Mayor,
presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Hankerson, Smith, Grantham, Colclough, Mays, Cheek,
Beard, Sims, Williams and Boyles, members of Augusta-Richmond County Commission.
Also Present: Steve Shepard, Attorney; Fred Russell, Administrator; Lena
Bonner, Clerk of Commission.
The invocation was given by Dr. Mark Harris.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Rev. Harris, on behalf of the Commission, we normally
give a plaque, but we don’t want to overcrowd your wall. We are truly grateful for your
standing the gap for us today to petition our God, our creator, who made it possible for all
of us to be here. But we want you to know, especially to you, that we certainly
appreciate all that you do for the city of Augusta and what you have done for us this day
and all the days of your life. Thank you very much.
Dr. Harris: Thank you.
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem? Prior to the meeting getting started, could I
have a moment of personal privilege, please?
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: All right, Mr. Colclough.
Mr. Colclough: I just want to take this opportunity to say that I appreciate all the
support that was given to me during the time of my surgery and recovery and also during
the time of my mother’s death. I just want to thank everybody for all the support you’ve
given me. I especially want to thank one of the best Clerks in the world, Ms. Bonner,
who attended my mom’s funeral. I just want to thank everybody for that.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, Mr. Colclough. Point well taken. Anybody got any
comments? Madame Clerk?
The Clerk:
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH AWARD:
Ms. Lori Videtto
Public Works-Engineering Department
1
The Clerk: Would you please join the Mayor Pro Tem? Ms. Smith from the
Engineering Division. [Reading] Dear Mayor Young: The Employee Recognition
Committee has selected Ms. Lori Videtto as the March, 2005 Employee of the Month for
the City of Augusta. She is an assistant environmental engineer with the Public Works-
Engineering Department. She has been employed for the City of Augusta for four years.
Ms. Videtto was nominated by fellow employee David Smith. Mr. Smith states in his
nomination that she established the standards for ground water, storm water, erosion and
sediment issues in our community. Her personality and people skills, along with the
expertise of her job knowledge, allows her to mediate well with the private sector. She’s
willing to give extra time to special projects. She has been recognized for being a
National Public Works Volunteer and Team Leader, as well as receiving special
recognition for organizing a national storm water pollution seminar in Augusta. The
committee felt that based on Mr. Smith’s recommendation and Ms. Videtto’s dedicated
and loyal service to the City of Augusta, she should be awarded the Employee of the
Month. We appreciate you joining us in awarding Lori Employee of the Month for the
month of March. Congratulations.
(A round of applause is given.)
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: [inaudible]
Mr. Cheek: Thank you for all the work you do. It’s so important [inaudible] and
we really appreciate your dedication.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Have we got a delegation, Ms. Bonner?
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS:
A. Final results of the Destination 20/20 project.
Adopt Resolution of Support of Destination 20/20
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Who is going to address that? Mr. Tarver, under the rules
of the Commission, you have five minutes. If you’d give us your name and address and I
think you know the procedures, but for the record we need those things.
Mr. Tarver: Okay. My name is Ed Tarver. My address, 3118 Natalie Circle,
Augusta 30909. Good afternoon, we were here once before on behalf of Destination
20/20. During that time we presented the draft of the final vision prepared by the
Destination 20/20 program. And during that meeting of the Commission, you were
gracious enough to adopt the draft vision as a vision of the city pending finalization of
that draft. We have put it in final form and are back to ask that, to see if you would be
willing to adopt the final version, consistent with your earlier resolution.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Cheek?
2
Mr. Cheek:
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, to follow on with the work that has been done
on Destination 20/20 and to note that many of the current items listed by line in the
recommended SPLOST package from our administrator and the bonding package, we
So Mr. Mayor
have the opportunity to realize this dream in the next fifteen or so years.
Pro Tem, I make a motion that it be resolved by this Commission that we adopted
Destination 20/20 and support it fully that it may be taken out to the world and
realized in this city.
Ms. Sims: Second.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and seconded. Is there any question, any response,
any – Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: Yes, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I had the opportunity to serve on one
of the committees for Destination 20/20 and I think it’s a great program and I think a lot
of work went into this project, and I think it’s well worth our adopting it.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any other comments from any of the other Commissioners?
Commissioner Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: Yes, I just have a question about it. It may kind of sound silly.
But as adopting it, what does that mean to us, to adopt this program?
Mr. Cheek: The intention of the maker of the motion is that this is the vision
that’s been lacking for Augusta since I’ve been a child – what we want to be when we
grow up. That we as a Commission do everything we can to support the realization of
this package.
Mr. Hankerson: Okay. I just only asked because a lot of good plans like this
come before us and we say we’re going to adopt it, but sometime we seem to be going in
a different direction and a lot of visions come before us so we want a master vision to
follow. That’s what I was asking, whether we –
Mr. Cheek: This package also includes, from my understanding, an
implementation plan that will be followed through with the same body.
Mr. Tarver: We’re scheduled to launch the implementation phase tonight,
beginning at 5:30 at the Board of Education chambers. I certainly encourage each of the
Commissioners to attend, if you’re able to.
Mr. Cheek: If it weren’t a meeting night, we’d probably be there.
Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, maybe I should have asked them what is
expected of us as far as this plan is concerned?
3
Mr. Tarver: I think what we’d like to see is that the Commission use this as part
of our planning for the future, that we look to this document. This document has input
from the community. Community-wide input as to the direction of the issues that are
important to the citizens of Augusta. And as we plan for our future, we would ask that the
Commission use this as a guide. We don’t think that this is in stone and certainly
recognize that there will be some modifications and changes over time, but certainly it
lays out an outline that we can use as a guide to use to plan for the future of the city of
Augusta.
Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any other comments? Anybody? I do agree that this
should be a guide and not anything in stone. It’s not, as elected officials, as people who
were elected to implement the 20/20 plan, is this official board here, do give great credit
to the work and the hours that has been put in with this plan, and I think it’s a very good
guide. I had an opportunity to look through it, even the earlier one that was presented. I
think a lot of work went into this one to, to revise some things. It does look really bright
for the future of Augusta. But I’ll say again that it should not be etched in stone, it
should be a guide, a road map for us to try to live by. If there are no other comments –
Ms. Beard: I had one.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Ms. Beard?
Ms. Beard: The first time this came before us, and I listened. I was very
enthusiastic about it. And I’m looking forward to making most of this a reality in
Augusta.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: All those in favor of adopting this, let it be known by the
normal sign of voting.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Next delegation, Madame Clerk?
The Clerk:
B. James Brown Metroplex at Regency Mall (Requested by Commissioner
Andy Cheek)
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I’ve asked the founder of the Citizens Action to
come with a marvelous proposal to put before the Commission today. If he would, I’d
like to give the traditional five minutes to Mr. Woody Merry, please.
Mr. Merry: I’m Woody Merry, I live at 822 Aumond Place East, Augusta,
Georgia 30909. I have gotten to know most of y’all very well over the last six months to
4
a year, and I’m chairman of the Citizens Action Committee and we prepared a proposal
to build a lifestyle entertainment center in the heart of Augusta, and it’s going to cost
about $95 million. We want it to be built in the heart of Augusta where every business in
Augusta will have a shot at those tourism dollars that are coming in. The project is going
to be called the James Brown Metroplex. And you ask, what is a metroplex? Well, if
anybody here has ever been to Greenville, South Carolina, and seen the Bi-Lo Center,
this is going to resemble the Bi-Lo Center, except it’s going to be a little bit bigger. We
want to build it large enough to attract name branch entertainment. When a promoter is
sitting there looking for cities for their entertainers to go to, they usually look at the
number of seats first. Our research has shown there is not a 15,000 seat arena outside of
Atlanta, Georgia. We have the entertainment corridor that goes from Birmingham,
Atlanta, now Augusta, Columbia and Charlotte. Then we have the eastern seaboard,
where they work up the eastern seaboard. We are in the perfect position to attract top
notch, name brand entertainment. If everybody was excited today, I mean really excited
today [inaudible] bikes after bikes after bikes and the ambulances, the police came, we
can do that eight to ten times a year with name brand entertainment. We’re going to call
it the James Brown Metroplex for one reason, and one reason only. We have a great
citizen from our community. He’s internationally famous all over the world. He needs
the kind of recognition that comes with more than just a statue. As a community, I feel
this is a major bridge-building tool that we can use. The James Brown Metroplex. He
gives turkeys and hams and food away to hungry children at Christmas. The man has
risen from literally nothing to multi, multi, mega star. We need to recognize him in our
community. We feel we have the population to support this, we feel we have the venue
to support this, we feel by putting this in the heart of Augusta that we can have access –
people hate to go to Columbia because guess what, they get lost trying to leave. We have
easy access in and out of our proposed area. And the sad thing is in my heart, I’m late
doing this, and I apologize sincerely for being late doing this. But I did not realize how
far along Columbia County was with their proposals. But it takes some guys very dead
serious about doing this, they’ve had ten or twelve committee meetings, they’ve made
five separate trips to different cities looking at their lifestyles and entertainment
complexes. All I’m asking for is a chance to sell this to the community. You know in
your heart I have no political aspirations. None whatsoever.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: You’ve got two minutes, Mr. Merry.
Mr. Merry: I love this place, I want to do what I can to help it. I’m asking that
st
this be placed on the June 21 referendum to be considered by the public. I’d like to see
it funded half with general obligation bonds, half with SPLOST, but my committee is
hard at work, working on it, [inaudible] those actual hard costs down so we do not put as
much on the bonds or we do not put as much on SPLOST. We are proposing retail
condominium area that will be sold, where the retail businesses will have an equity
interest in the partnership. We are looking at revenue bonds such as funding the parking.
My five minutes are up. I appreciate it. Thank you so much.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any Commissioners? Mr. Cheek?
5
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I’ve been blessed to hear more of the plan. It is
exciting, it addresses a lot of the issues that we have spoken of on the floor about size,
and more than just an arena. I’m going to make a motion at this time that we allow this
to be taken to the public by being added to the ballot as part of the ballot initiative in June
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion dies for lack of a second. Let me make one
comment. I didn’t second it because the other constituents, other people in the city of
Augusta may have a plan, as well. Now we keep adding plans and adding plans, we
going overload our ship, I think, end up the ship is going to sink before it get out of the
dock. I got a couple of questions. You talking about James Brown. I probably been the
biggest proponent of doing something for James Brown not because he is a great singer
and cause he picked his self up and mad Augusta famous, it’s because I knew the impact
that James Brown could make on the city of Augusta as far as the dollars that come
through here. But there is so much red tape that goes along with James Brown and to get
his permission to put his name on anything is something I think would be the first thing
that I would want to know. Before I voted for anything else, to know that we do have his
authority to use his name to put on any building, even the statute that we erected had to
get permission from him in order to do that. I’m a little bit concerned about the stuff we
add to the sales tax, whether it be for James Brown or use that name or anything else.
Now we heard and I questioned our attorneys, I think, about naming a facility before the
voters approve a facility. I mean there is some problem with that, I think, Commissioner,
that I see. But those are my comments. I wanted to make those. I don’t know if anybody
else have any comments or not. Commissioner Mays?
Mr. Mays: Yes. Let me –
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Mays, I’m sorry, but Mr. Boyles had his hand up, and I
saw him but –
Mr. Mays: I yield to Tommy.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay.
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mays. Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I see Ms.
Bailey back there, and I thought the deadline had passed for us to put anything on the
June ballot.
Ms. Bailey: There is a deadline that would have passed, and that would be – or
th
close to passed. April 22 will be the 60 day before that June 21 election. And if you’ll
recall, we were trying to get this submission to the United States Department of Justice in
a timely manner to get that approved. There is a State deadline of 29 days before the
election, and that’s the really hard and firm rule that we must stick with. And I see Mr.
Attorney might have something to add.
6
Mr. Boyles: I thought that was the purpose of us having the called meeting a
couple of weeks ago, to go ahead and take care of the other three issues I believe we
needed to put on that ballot. I yield, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Shepard: That’s correct, Mr. Boyles, and we have made that submission of
the three resolutions that we passed heretofore in the called meeting. By submitting them
now, we for sure get the preclearance decision in a timely manner, and I know, Lynn, I
think I approved that late last week, if I recall, when the submission went out.
Ms. Bailey: That is correct. It went in the mail last Friday.
Mr. Shepard: If you pass something, you’d have to make a supplementary
submission, which may cause the Justice Department to deem that as a new submission
with the 60 day [inaudible]. The other matter that we have to address is that you have to
address the GO piece of it with more detail than is capable of being dictated right now.
You have to set forth your bond maturity schedules. And I worked on one night’s notice
to do the other three. Actually, just the other two, the piece for the $100 million public
safety package and then the $60 million for the Regency Complex. As I understand it,
this is in addition to what we’ve already approved, Mr. Mayor. So I don’t see that we can
make the 60 day deadline. We might could still make the State deadline, but you run the
risk, I think, of having it deemed a new submission and then we don’t have preclearance
for the three that we’ve already sent in. I don’t mind trying to get with Mr. Merry and
share those concerns with him privately, but I certainly don’t want to jeopardize what
we’ve already done. And the SPLOST, you’re talking about funding it half with
SPLOST – the SPLOST half would have to come forward in November. So since that
has to come forward in November, there wouldn’t be any reason or any conclusion to
bring this other GO piece forward in November. So those are some possibilities. We are
right on these deadlines right now as far as the 60 days.
Mr. Merry: I apologize, but like I say, Columbia County is right around the
corner.
Mr. Shepard: Well, here again, with – I’ll do something as fast as possible, but
today, Mr. Mayor, I don’t see that we can do that.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Mays had his hand up.
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I was not here because of a previous engagement
and I think announced that day when we went into sales tax meeting that I would not be
here on the particular day that you all put the items that you did put on the proposed
agenda to do. I want to clear up something. I think maybe the reason why that particular
motion didn’t get a second would be for probably two reasons. One, I think if we could
get – and this doesn’t have to be in any order of what I’m getting ready to say – it’s
received as information and probably, Woody, a copy of those particular plans, just on
the particulars of the legality and some other things that are in there, give [inaudible]
chance to peruse that and then I think that gives the Attorney the opportunity to deal with
7
that. And I’m not even so sure, and I’m just saying this, and I know I’m in an extreme
minority when I say this, that I was a little concerned that when we decided to deal with
the bond situation, and I have been a proponent all along that something else was going
to have to be done if we built some of these other things that we were talking about
building. It wasn’t going to be answered just in dealing with sales tax. It’s not enough
money to do it, and the political fight is not worth having to a point that you know you’re
not going to be able to do it out of one situation. What does concern me, though, is
maybe the fact that there are some serious things that are not being addressed, even with
what has been put together. Now I wasn’t here, so I’m not going to [inaudible] over the
fact of saying [inaudible] you snooze and then you lose when you hesitate. So I wasn’t
here. So you can chalk that up a little bit to hesitating. But I think if we can look at what
– whether it’s this particular project or whether it’s others – if something else is coming
to the table, then we may have to say get an opportunity to look on one hand, and then
look at what happens within the 29 day situation. I know Ms. Bailey is, is a real stickler
and the board cooperated with us in such a extreme, professional way when we through
things the last time, and the date times that we put them through, and of getting that done,
but I think if we have, whatever it is that we put in a final plan, if we have it done
properly, it will make their job a lot easier in terms of the fact that if there are challenges,
and I’m not saying and not counting any eggs of any project in there, but I think that may
have been why you, there was not necessarily a motion to add on today per se, because I
do think there may be some that want to look and then look and see where we need to
deal with within a time frame of what’s there. And Tommy, I’m glad I yielded to you
because of that date deadline in there, I think needed to be explained to a point in there,
and I think whether you’re, you’re for a particular project or whether you’re not for it, my
thing has been, and I don’t think you were here that day, Woody. I said I was concerned
about the fact that we needed to open the process to hear, quite frankly, as many people
as we could, if we were going to open it and we were going to deal with that. But I think
there is still room to look and I think that competition is a beautiful thing. I think the
more people [inaudible] and that’s not saying that it goes up, not saying it goes down. But
I think it keeps it open from the standpoint if we receive it, get an opportunity to look at
what’s there and then be able to interact with both you and the committee, whether it’s
questions on legality or just on plain substance of what’s there. And so I think, Andy, it
wasn’t so much in terms of where that would be going in terms of that motion, but I do
think there is some legitimate unreadiness, but at the same time I know you’ve got a
clock ticking if this goes anywhere [inaudible] some of those things have to be done.
And I have no problem with it from an interest standpoint of wanting to, to, to read and to
converse on where that’s going.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Can I get a motion to receive as information,
then,
since --
Mr. Cheek: So move.
Ms. Sims: Second.
8
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: The motion is properly seconded. All those in favor, let it
be known by the normal sign of voting.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, just a moment of personal privilege. This
hasn’t officially made the record yet, so I wanted to place upon the record thanks from
th
the people of the 6 District to Woody Merry and the group he put together to put
financing to and create over 400 jobs at the newly, to-be-opened Augusta Tissue factory.
This marks the largest single growth in employment in this area in years. This was done
in their spare time, with no financial gain but for the love of the city. And I don’t think
you’ve been fully recognized, your team been fully recognized for what you’ve done. I
will add to the record that there are many economic development entities who have done
far less and taken far more of our tax dollars and wasted them. To you, sir, and to your
th
team, thank you on behalf of the citizens of the 6 District.
(A round of applause is given)
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Next delegation, Madame Clerk?
The Clerk:
C. Georgia-Carolina Horse Racing Committee
Mr. James A. Young, III, President
RE: Gaming Industry
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Young, under the rules of the Commission, you have
five minutes. Give us your name and your address for our Clerk’s records.
Mr. Young: My name is James A. Young, III. This is one of our committee
members, Mr. [inaudible]. Mayor Pro Tem Marion Williams, the Richmond County
Commissioners, as well as other unmentioned city county officials, on behalf of the
Georgia-South Carolina Horse Racing Committee and its membership, we bring forth an
opportunity for Augusta and the CSRA that will benefit our entire state and will place
Augusta in the forefront of innovation in Georgia. First on the state level, we would be
proposing a statewide gaming commission which will regulate all revenue generated in
sporting and gaming events. The proposal is for a regulatory commission to develop and
assure proper regulation and rules govern all [inaudible] and the [inaudible] of revenues
to each county in the state. We would be proposing bringing all entities such as the state
lottery, major sporting events, and all other games or events that generate major revenues
statewide under one umbrella, a state gaming commission. Specifically our area, the
Augusta and the CSRA, is in the unique position to be a forerunner by sending a clear
and unanimous voice to our state legislators about our support for horse racing and horse
race wagering to the CSRA. Since 1991, our committee has advocated development of
9
horse racing in this community. [inaudible] reveals to our community an event known as
the Aiken Triple Crown, an event generating over $1 million in a community contiguous
to Augusta, but under a different state law. All over the country, horse racing is a sport
generating a tremendous amount of revenue per state. Additionally, simulcasting has
made horse racing an event for every city and county within the state. What we strongly
advocate for the CSRA is the site of the event that is a racetrack for the horse racing
industry. Horse racing means pari-mutuel mutual generate major revenue through ticket
sales, restaurant, simulcasting parlors, will add to a tremendous amount of secondary
revenue to Augusta and the state. A racetrack averaging 30,000 fans per day would
generate an average of $1 million per day, but that figure does not take into consideration
funds generated through simulcasting or off track betting. But first we must seek state
approval of pari-mutuel gaming in the state. To date, the Georgia Thoroughbred Owners
and Breeders Association, in cooperation, has introduced in the Georgia General
Assembly H.R. 519, seeking to establish a study committee, one which establish a factual
foundation for the consideration of the legalization of horse racing with pari-mutuel
gaming.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Got two minutes, Mr. Young.
Mr. Young: A late beginning as well as a time consuming route without a definite
duration. We believe that probably the most effective position to take is the direct
approach. The subject has been studied and review. Much information is presently
available. In the past, [inaudible] there were bills introduced in the House of
Representatives, H.B. 60, H.B. 1164. [inaudible] bills have been introduced in the state
of South Carolina which is leading Georgia in implementation of horse racing as a
statewide source of revenue. The Atlanta Constitution in January of this year published
an article highlighting the willingness of an investor offering seed money to establish
horse racing, as well as an [inaudible]. The sum mentioned was $500 by [inaudible], yet
it was never –
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Your time is up.
Mr. Young: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any Commissioner have any comments before Mr. Young
leaves the podium? Is there any questions or any comments? Mr. Mays?
Mr. Mays: Yeah, I’d like to just ask Mr. Young, in reference to that particular
bill, and I know you were asking in terms of [inaudible] full address of what you have
there, because obviously it’s longer than the five minutes. And I read some of the
correspondence that’s in there, but could you maybe share in reference to – and I know
we’re talking about another governmental body – as to what they have done on a state
level thus far in reference to that legislation or where that has been received, or has it
gotten to any particular committee or anything of that nature?
10
Mr. Young: Presently we have the director of racing – his name is Sam
[inaudible], he’s the director of racing at Delaware Park, and also a Mr. Billy Wright who
is a magnet in the racing industry. He’s from [inaudible], Georgia. Those are two of our
consultants, and also they are a major factor in the horse racing industry. They have
supported and endorsed us. What we would like for the [inaudible] is to send a clear
message to the legislators in Atlanta that you endorse and support our efforts in
[inaudible] racing. I think Mr. Hannah would also like to add something.
Mr. Hannah: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Hannah? Just hold tight one minute. Mr. Mays, are
you finished?
Mr. Mays: Basically I was trying to get an understanding with reference to –
since we’re talking about another governmental entity, kind of more or less just
information-wise as to where they might be at this point in terms of that level of
discussion. Because I know that if you are looking, and I know you’re looking primarily
at where your home town is right now, but if you’re actually talking about that from some
level of cities and counties, it might be something that you want to talk with us later
about it in reference to our membership in associations, which you have your whole
blanket of counties, you have your whole blanket of cities and I think that would kind of
be one place that you may want to look at, whether it’s pro or con. It’s like some things
in public safety where you address the Sheriffs Association and Chiefs Association in
terms of getting a collective area of where those particular local entities might come in
terms of their membership. But I was just asking that for information.
Mr. Hannah: [inaudible] House Bill, to answer your question, right now it’s in
committee, on [inaudible] H.B. 519. Mr. Young is more qualified to address anything
along this area. I’m just sharing as an advisor associate. But in addition to that, Augusta,
CSRA was the first area that we want to bring this to, even though it’s going to have
CSRA wide and state positive ramifications. We feel that Augusta, primarily south
Augusta and Hephzibah area, will be the prime location for such a venue.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any other Commissioners?
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: Hypothetically, you talk about pari-mutuel betting, horse racing,
horse tracks. I would like to know what kind of land would you need to do this track,
what kind of track you’re going to have, or is it going to be multiple tracks or one type of
track?
Mr. Young: We would require approximately 300 acres.
11
Mr. Colclough: Okay. Type of track?
Mr. Young: You mean the type of racing events?
Mr. Colclough: Yes.
Mr. Young: What they call the flats or perhaps the dogs or the trotters. Perhaps.
We have not determined at this point. That’s the options.
Mr. Colclough: I hear you saying horse racing.
Mr. Young: Yes, we’re saying horse racing but we could also couple dog racing
and what they call the trotter pacers, the –
Mr. Colclough: Now if you look at the major tracks throughout the country, the
Belmonts, the Aqueducts, the Hialeahs, they don’t couple horses with dogs and trotter
with horses. You have separate.
Mr. Young: Right. That’s why I was saying we have an option. That has not
been determined at this point. We have an option or we can just stay with the flats that
go around the oval track, and the option would be to include dog racing or either add the
trotters or pacers.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem:
I think, Mr. Colclough, before we get to that point, pari-
mutuel is the first hurdle you’re going to have to get over in the state. [inaudible] state
law, rather than what kind of racing. I know some people still [inaudible] I think that’s
Can I get a motion to receive as information and maybe talk with
the first hurdle.
Mr. Young?
Ms. Sims: So move.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Motion and proper second. All those in favor, let it be
known by the normal sign of voting.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Young, we thank you. We continue to talk with you try
to see what we can do on this side but I think the state effort is going to be the first, the
legislature is going to be first hurdle you’re going to have to cross for that.
Mr. Young: Thank you, Commissioner. I would also like to point out you have
been very receptive to the concept, and that says a lot of credit for the vision and the
leadership here for the city of Augusta. Thank you.
12
(Mayor Young enters the meeting)
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you, sir. Mr. Mayor is back, and I’m going to turn
the gavel over to him. We just finished, Mr. Mayor, the –
Mr. Mayor: Done all the delegations?
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Done all the delegations and we are ready for the consent
agenda now.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. We’ll take up now the consent agenda, items 1
through 53.
Madame Clerk, if you’ll read out the alcohol and the zoning, please.
The Clerk:Yes, sir. Under our planning portion of the agenda, if there are any
objectors to any of the planning petitions, would you please signify your objection by
raising your hand?
PLANNING:
1. Z-05 -27 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Tonda L. Booker, on behalf of
Patricia Jefferson, requesting a Special Exception from Section 26-1 (h) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County to establish a
Family Personal Care Home affecting property located at 1236 Twelfth Street and
containing .17 acres. (Tax Map 59-2 Parcel 1) DISTRICT 1
2. Z-05-28 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by C. L. Developers requesting a Special
Exception per Section 8-2 (e) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-
Richmond County to establish a sales trailer for Elderberry Subdivision affecting
property located at 4115 Elders Drive and containing .43 acres. (Tax Map 66 Part of
Parcel 56) DISTRICT 3
3. Z-05-29 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the condition that there be no traffic access
to Walton Way; a petition by Lauth Property Group, on behalf of Nora Pascarella,
requesting a Special Exception in a B-1 (Neighborhood Business) Zone per Section
21-2 (a) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County to
establish a building in excess of 15,000 gross square feet in area affecting property
located at 1537 Walton Way and containing 3.11 acres. (Tax map 35-4 Parcel 564)
DISTRICT 1
4. Z-05-30 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by J. Christopher Garrison and Indigo
Properties, on behalf of Healthmaster Home Health and Rose Hill Ltd., requesting a
Special Exception in a B-1 (Neighborhood Business) Zone for the construction of
two buildings that would have greater than 15,000 gross square feet in area per
Section 21-2 (a) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond
County affecting property located on the northeast right-of-way line of Stevens
13
Creek Road, 500 feet north of Claussen Road and containing approximately 12
acres. (Tax Map 12 Parcels 13.1 and 13.2) DISTRICT 7
5. Z-05-31 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by FJL, LLC requesting a change of
zoning from Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) to Zone B-2 (General Business)
affecting property located at 1602 Barton Chapel Road and 3500 Crescent Drive
and containing .27 acres. (Tax Map 41 Parcel 38 & 45) DISTRICT 3
6. Z-05-32 -A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the condition that the only permitted B-1 use
be a photographic studio or any permitted uses allowed in a P-1 (Professional)
Zone; a petition by Michael O’Byrne requesting a change of zoning from Zone P-1
(Professional) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) affecting property located at
930 Stevens Creek Road and containing 1.17 acres. (Tax Map 7 Parcel 19)
DISTRICT 7
7. Z-05-33 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Richard S. Fox requesting a change
of zoning from Zone LI (Light Industry) to Zone R-1E (One-family Residential)
affecting property located at 1487 Reynolds Street and containing .16 acres. (Tax
Map 36-1 Parcel 37.1) DISTRICT 1
8. Z-05-34 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Antonio Kuhn requesting a change
of zoning from Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) to Zone R-MH (Manufactured
Home Residential) affecting property located at 2327 Knox Avenue and containing
.17 acres. (Tax Map 99-1 Parcel 42) DISTRICT 2
9. Z-05-35 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Ed Oellerich, on behalf of High View
Development Corp., requesting a change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to
Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property located at 3930 Wrightsboro Road
and containing 2.33 acres. (Tax Map 39 Parcel 56.01) DISTRICT 3
10. Z-05-36 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by George P. Ryan requesting a change
of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1D (One-family
Residential) affecting property located at 2356 Devere Street and containing .38
acres. (Tax Map 57-1 Parcel 55) DISTRICT 2
11. Z-05-37 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the following conditions 1) that an 30’
undisturbed natural buffer be maintained on the rear property line adjacent to
Vineland Subdivision and 2) permitted uses be limited to general office use and all
uses allowed in a P-1 (Professional) Zone; a petition by David E. Jennings, on behalf
of Gloria E and Guy E. Jennings, requesting a change of zoning from Zone B-1
(Neighborhood Business with conditions) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business)
affecting property located at 2362 Washington Road and containing .37 acres. (Tax
map 19-4 Parcel 143) DISTRICT 7
12. Z-05-38 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by R & B Construction, on behalf of
Georgia Vitrified Brick & Clay and Fred Sims, requesting a change of zoning from
14
Zone LI (Light Industry) to Zone R-1B (One-family Residential) affecting property
located where the northwest right-of-way line of Gordon Highway intersects the
northwest right-of-way line of Old Gordon Highway and contains 124 acres. (Part of
Tax Map 64 Parcel 4.1) DISTRICT 3
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to those Planning petitions?
Mr. Mayor: Don’t see any hands up.
Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Just a moment. We have alcohol licenses.
The Clerk: Alcohol petitions. If there are any objectors, would you please signify
your objection by raising your hand?
PUBLIC SERVICES:
19. Motion to approve a request by Tenoia L. Powell for an on premises
consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with T. L. Powell
Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Club Nova located at 3602 Milledgeville Rd. There will be
dance. District 4. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee April
11, 2005)
20. Motion to approve a request by John Bryant for a retail package Beer &
Wine license to be used in connection with Get N Go located at 3011 Wheeler Rd.
District 7. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 11,
2005)
21. Motion to approve a request by Jonavon Y. Stephens for an on premise
consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Soultry
Sounds Café & Lounge located at 1035 Ellis St. There will be dance. District 1.
Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 11, 2005)
22. Motion to approve a request by Biren Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine
license to be used in connection with HVJ, LLC d/b/a First Stop Walton Way
located at 2013 Walton Way. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public
Services Committee April 11, 2005)
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to those alcohol petitions?
Mr. Mayor: Okay. None are noted. Ladies and gentlemen, what’s your respect
to the consent agenda?
Mr. Cheek: Move to approve.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Mayor?
15
Mr. Mayor: Just a moment, Mr. Hankerson. Let me ask if we could add to the
consent agenda, with the concurrence of the Commission, item numbers 61 and 62 under
the Attorney. Unless we have any questions, and we can hold those for discussion.
These are just a couple of routine –
ATTORNEY:
61. Approve Resolution reaffirming the necessity of the 911 and the wireless
enhanced 911 charges.
62. Motion to approve “Acknowledgement and Consent of Augusta, Georgia to
the First Amendment to the Loan Agreement Between Bank of America, NA,
Lender and Augusta Canal Authority, Borrower.”
Mr. Shepard: We need to do the 911 and enhanced 911 every April, so it’s
timely, and [inaudible] is presented by Mr. Wall in connection with the improvements on
the canal.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Is there any objection to adding those to the consent
agenda?
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: On the Attorney, is that something you need to show to us,
Steve? I mean that’s not a routine that we got – it wouldn’t been something under the
Attorney had it been something on the regular agenda versus – I thought it may be
something you need to enlighten us on that –
Mr. Shepard: We can pull it. Which one do you want to pull?
Mr. Williams: Well, I mean, I just need some information. I mean I know we do
the 911 wireless – is that been any changes? Is than an increase for us?
Mr. Shepard: No, sir. We need to reaffirm the necessity of that every April.
Mr. Mayor: That’s something the law requires us to do.
Mr. Shepard: Yes.
Mr. Williams: Okay. I mean, but there is no changes?
Mr. Shepard: No, sir. But we don’t want to fail to reaffirm it. Do you follow
me?
Mr. Williams: I understand. I mean I got no problem with that Mr. Mayor. And
62 is what? What’s that, Steve? You might need to clear that one like you did that one.
The canal?
Mr. Shepard: [inaudible]
16
Mr. Williams: Ain’t nothing slipping by.
Mr. Shepard: He’s not slipping anything by. I’m sure Mr. Wall –
Mr. Williams: What I meant was getting away quickly, Jim slipped by. That’s all
I meant.
Mr. Shepard: We’re trying to get him out of here so he doesn’t bill us.
Mr. Williams: Oh, don’t worry about that. He ain’t going to bill us. Go ahead,
Jim.
Mr. Wall: The loan agreements that were entered into insofar as the financing for
the construction of the third level canal improvements anticipated that that work would
be done over a ten month time period because of some issues with regard to the railroad
in particular. It has not been completed. Everything has been completed virtually with
the exception of that crossing. And it called for ten payouts, ten periodic payouts, and the
bottom line is the last invoice for the work cannot be paid because the tenth month
st
expired March 1. And so this would allow the remainder of the funds to be drawn down
by the Canal Authority, put into an investment so that the balance of the work can be
completed, primarily CSX work, but it would also allow the March invoice from
Williams to be paid, as it would in the normal course of things. And this is an
acknowledgment by the City that we are aware of that change being made and the
agreement between the Canal Authority and Bank of America, who is the lender.
Mr. Williams: I got no problem, Mr. Mayor. That was easy enough. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, then we’ll add these two, Madame Clerk, to the consent
agenda. We’ve got a motion to approve the consent agenda and it’s been seconded. Are
there any items you would like to pull from the consent agenda? Mr. Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: 8.
Mr. Mayor: Number 8. Any others? Mr. Williams, you want to pull some items?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull item 18, 26, 42, 50, and 52.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Anyone else?
Mr. Boyles: Would you cal those again?
Mr. Mayor: Item 18, 26, 42, 50 and 52. While you’re looking at the agenda, let
me ask the Attorney, item 18, Mr. Shepard, is that something we would want to waive the
second reading on, or does that need to come back since we’re dealing with an
ordinance?
17
Mr. Shepard: It would be in the body’s discretion to waive the second reading. It
is an ordinance, which I understand Mr. Williams wanted to discuss some of the
ramifications of that ordinance.
Mr. Mayor: We can take it up when we have the discussion then.
Mr. Williams: Okay. Okay.
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible].
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, 52 and 49 is similar. I need to ask a question about
those two so we can take 49 –
Mr. Mayor: 52 and 49.
Mr. Williams: Right. And well take them together. Just need to get some
clarification on.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to approve the consent agenda, minus items 8, 18,
26, 42, 50, and 52 and 49, and then to add to it items 61 and 62. Anybody want to make
any additional changes before we call the question? Ms. Sims?
Ms. Sims: I’d just like to go on record as abstaining on item 12.
Mr. Mayor: Item 12. The record will so reflect.
CONSENT AGENDA
PLANNING:
1. Z-05 -27 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Tonda L. Booker, on behalf of
Patricia Jefferson, requesting a Special Exception from Section 26-1 (h) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County to establish a
Family Personal Care Home affecting property located at 1236 Twelfth Street and
containing .17 acres. (Tax Map 59-2 Parcel 1) DISTRICT 1
2. Z-05-28 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by C. L. Developers requesting a Special
Exception per Section 8-2 (e) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-
Richmond County to establish a sales trailer for Elderberry Subdivision affecting
property located at 4115 Elders Drive and containing .43 acres. (Tax Map 66 Part of
Parcel 56) DISTRICT 3
3. Z-05-29 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the condition that there be no traffic access
to Walton Way; a petition by Lauth Property Group, on behalf of Nora Pascarella,
requesting a Special Exception in a B-1 (Neighborhood Business) Zone per Section
21-2 (a) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County to
18
establish a building in excess of 15,000 gross square feet in area affecting property
located at 1537 Walton Way and containing 3.11 acres. (Tax map 35-4 Parcel 564)
DISTRICT 1
4. Z-05-30 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by J. Christopher Garrison and Indigo
Properties, on behalf of Healthmaster Home Health and Rose Hill Ltd., requesting a
Special Exception in a B-1 (Neighborhood Business) Zone for the construction of
two buildings that would have greater than 15,000 gross square feet in area per
Section 21-2 (a) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond
County affecting property located on the northeast right-of-way line of Stevens
Creek Road, 500 feet north of Claussen Road and containing approximately 12
acres. (Tax Map 12 Parcels 13.1 and 13.2) DISTRICT 7
5. Z-05-31 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by FJL, LLC requesting a change of
zoning from Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) to Zone B-2 (General Business)
affecting property located at 1602 Barton Chapel Road and 3500 Crescent Drive
and containing .27 acres. (Tax Map 41 Parcel 38 & 45) DISTRICT 3
6. Z-05-32 -A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the condition that the only permitted B-1 use
be a photographic studio or any permitted uses allowed in a P-1 (Professional)
Zone; a petition by Michael O’Byrne requesting a change of zoning from Zone P-1
(Professional) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) affecting property located at
930 Stevens Creek Road and containing 1.17 acres. (Tax Map 7 Parcel 19)
DISTRICT 7
7. Z-05-33 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Richard S. Fox requesting a change
of zoning from Zone LI (Light Industry) to Zone R-1E (One-family Residential)
affecting property located at 1487 Reynolds Street and containing .16 acres. (Tax
Map 36-1 Parcel 37.1) DISTRICT 1
8. Deleted from the consent agenda.
9. Z-05-35 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Ed Oellerich, on behalf of High View
Development Corp., requesting a change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to
Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property located at 3930 Wrightsboro Road
and containing 2.33 acres. (Tax Map 39 Parcel 56.01) DISTRICT 3
10. Z-05-36 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by George P. Ryan requesting a change
of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1D (One-family
Residential) affecting property located at 2356 Devere Street and containing .38
acres. (Tax Map 57-1 Parcel 55) DISTRICT 2
11. Z-05-37 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve with the following conditions 1) that an 30’
undisturbed natural buffer be maintained on the rear property line adjacent to
Vineland Subdivision and 2) permitted uses be limited to general office use and all
uses allowed in a P-1 (Professional) Zone; a petition by David E. Jennings, on behalf
of Gloria E and Guy E. Jennings, requesting a change of zoning from Zone B-1
19
(Neighborhood Business with conditions) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business)
affecting property located at 2362 Washington Road and containing .37 acres. (Tax
map 19-4 Parcel 143) DISTRICT 7
12. Z-05-38 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by R & B Construction, on behalf of
Georgia Vitrified Brick & Clay and Fred Sims, requesting a change of zoning from
Zone LI (Light Industry) to Zone R-1B (One-family Residential) affecting property
located where the northwest right-of-way line of Gordon Highway intersects the
northwest right-of-way line of Old Gordon Highway and contains 124 acres. (Part of
Tax Map 64 Parcel 4.1) DISTRICT 3
13. ZA-R-170 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta- Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition to consider an amendment to the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to regulate the parking of large trucks in
Agricultural zones on lots smaller than one acre.
14. FINAL PLAT – AMLI WAY – S-621 – A request for concurrence with the
Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to approve a petition by W. R.
Toole Engineers requesting final plat approval for Amli Way, the Augusta VA
Credit Union and Stonegate Club Apartments.
15. FINAL PLAT – CAMBRIDGE, SECTION 10 – S-695-X – A request for
concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to approve
a petition by Southern Partners, Inc., on behalf of Nordahl & Co., requesting final
plat for Cambridge, Section 10. This residential subdivision is located on Thames
Place, adjacent to Cambridge, Section 9 and contains 31 lots.
16. FINAL PLAT – CAMERON, SECTION 2– S-681-II – A request for
concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to
APPROVE a petition by Southern Partners, Inc., on behalf of Nordahl & Co.,
requesting final plat for Cameron, Section 2. This residential subdivision is located
on Belair Road, west of Burdette Drive and contains 40 lots.
17. FINAL PLAT –PINEHURST, SECTION 6, PHASE 1 – S-688-I–A request
for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to
approve a petition by Southern Partners, Inc., on behalf of Nordahl & Co.,
requesting final plat for Pinehurst, Section 6, Phase 1. This residential subdivision is
located on Jasmine Way, adjacent to Pinehurst, Section 5, Phase 1 and contains 50
lots.
PUBLIC SERVICES:
18. Deleted from the consent agenda.
19. Motion to approve a request by Tenoia L. Powell for an on premises
consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with T. L. Powell
Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Club Nova located at 3602 Milledgeville Rd. There will be
dance. District 4. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee April
11, 2005)
20. Motion to approve a request by John Bryant for a retail package Beer &
Wine license to be used in connection with Get N Go located at 3011 Wheeler Rd.
District 7. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 11,
2005)
20
21. Motion to approve a request by Jonavon Y. Stephens for an on premise
consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Soultry
Sounds Café & Lounge located at 1035 Ellis St. There will be dance. District 1.
Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 11, 2005)
22. Motion to approve a request by Biren Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine
license to be used in connection with HVJ, LLC d/b/a First Stop Walton Way
located at 2013 Walton Way. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public
Services Committee April 11, 2005)
23. Motion to approve the purchase of a new radio system for the Augusta
Regional Airport to provide increased coverage and reliability. This is a factory
direct purchase. The total system cost will be $215,040.48. Frequency coordination
will be performed by McDermott Will and Emery LLP at an estimated cost of
$12,500.00. McDermott Will and Emery LLP is a frequency coordination specialist
and has handled the coordination of all Augusta frequencies currently utilized by
our existing 800 MHz radio system. (Approved by Public Services Committee April
11, 2005)
PUBLIC SAFETY:
24. Motion to accept Memorandum of Understanding with Cingular Wireless.
(Approved by Public Safety Committee April 11, 2005)
25. Motion to award the contract for renovation of Fire Station #13 to Turner
Mechanical as low bidder. (Approved by Public Safety Committee April 11, 2005)
26. Deleted from the consent agenda.
27. Motion to approve a contract for the inmate commissary with Oasis Inmate
Commissary Services for a term of three years. (Approved by Public Safety
Committee April 11, 2005)
FINANCE:
28. Motion to approve the purchase of Two (2) currently leased Moxy MT-40
Articulated Dump Trucks from Regions Bank Leasing of Montgomery, Alabama,
for $149,087.19 each and a 38-month extended drive train warranty from Moxy,
Inc. of Cincinnati, Ohio for $13,194.45 each. (Approved by Finance Committee
April 11, 2005)
29. Motion to approve the acquisition of One (1) Rubber Tire Backhoe/Loader
for the Utilities Department - Construction Division form ASE Construction
Equipment, Inc. of Augusta, Georgia for $49,900.00 (lowest bid offer on Bid 05-073).
(Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2005)
30. Motion to approve the acquisition of One (1) Six-Inch Centrifugal Pump for
the Utilities Department - Construction Division from Godwin Pumps of America,
Inc. of Charleston, South Carolina for $19,690.00 (lowest bid offer on Bid 05-077).
(Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2005)
31. Motion to approve the acquisition of Two (2) Portable Air Compressors for
the Utilities Department – Construction Division from U.S. Equipment, Inc. of
Augusta, Georgia for $10,885.32 each (lowest bid offer on Bid 05-078). (Approved
by Finance Committee April 11, 2005)
21
32. Motion to approve the acquisition of One (1) Eight-Inch Centrifugal Pump
for the Public Works Department – Solid Waste Division from Godwin Pumps of
America, Inc., of Charleston, South Carolina for $38,880.00 (lowest bid offer on Bid
05-083). (Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2005)
33. Motion to approve the acquisition of Two (2) Compact Pickup Trucks for the
Utilities Department – Customer Service Division from Bobby Jones Ford of
Augusta, Georgia for $14,775.25 each (lowest bid offer on Bid 04-120). (Approved
by Finance Committee April 11, 2005)
34. Motion to approve the abatement of 2001 taxes on property now owned by
the City. (Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2005)
35. Motion to approve renewal of contract with CONCERN: EAP (EMPLOYEE
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM) for a two year period May 2005 to May 2007.
(Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2005)
36. Motion to approve renewal of Public Official Liability coverage with current
carrier, Landmark American Insurance, for $95,000.00. (Approved by Finance
Committee April 11, 2005)
37. Motion to approve the acquisition of Two (2) Agricultural Tractors for the
Public Works Department – Maintenance Division from Jenkins Tractor Company
of Augusta, Georgia for $24,845.00 each (lowest bid offer on Bid 05-074A).
(Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2005)
38. Motion to approve the abatement of taxes on City property (Map 70-4,
Parcel 57). (Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2005)
39. Motion to authorize Budget Adjustment to set up all 2004 Bond CIP
Projects. (Approved by Finance and Engineering Services Committee April 11,
2005)
40. Motion to approve the abatement of 2001 taxes on City property (Map 34-1,
Parcel 308 and Map 14, Parcel 38). (Approved by Finance Committee April 11,
2005)
ENGINEERING SERVICES:
41. Motion to approve a proposal from the Southeastern Natural Sciences
Academy to conduct a tracer study of the constructed wetland treatment system
associated with the James B. Messerly Water Pollution Control Plant. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2005)
42. Deleted from the consent agenda.
43. Motion to authorize condemnation of sewer easement through property of
Kwajalein Muhammad, 3002 Georgia Road, Augusta, Georgia 30906 (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2005)
44. Motion to approve the wording for a commemorative plaque and approve
final deductive change order #1 for Chicago Bridge and Iron, Inc. in the amount of
($13,491.60) on the Brown Road 3 MG Elevated Storage Tank Project. (Approved
by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2005)
45. Motion to approve the change order for the Solid Waste Department to
decrease the Supplemental Agreement to Jordan, Jones & Goulding (JJ&G) from
$500,000 to $350,000. This Supplemental Agreement will provide professional
services for building design and site plans for the scale house, administration
22
building, convenience center, maintenance facility, access road, landfill entrance,
educational display and associated environmental permitting. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2005)
46. Motion to approve granting Columbia County a temporary easement to
construct the portion of Newmantown Road that is in Richmond County. (Approved
by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2005)
47. Motion to approve Construction Project Budget Change Number One (CPB
#323-04-203823372) in the amount of $200,000 for the Pointe West Drainage
Improvement Project to be funded from One Percent Sales Tax Phase III
Recapture. Also authorize the Engineering Department to have the design
completed for Phase IB, IIB and III as recommended by Cranston, Robertson &
Whitehurst and approve Supplemental Agreement Number One with Cranston,
Robertson & Whitehurst for $12,965.00 for the additional scope associated with the
aforementioned phases. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11,
2005)
48. Motion to authorize revising the scope of the Belair Road Project (CPB #323-
04-201823332) from a three lane road to a two lane as recommended by the design
consultant firm of Rochester & Associates reflecting a construction cost savings of
approximately $1.8M. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11,
2005)
49. Deleted from the consent agenda.
50. Deleted from the consent agenda.
51. Motion to receive as information the concept plan for the Walton Way
Extension Storm Drain Improvements Project (CPB #322-04-204822378) and
authorize the Engineering Department to proceed with developing construction
plans for Alternative Number Three. Also approve the construction project budget
in the amount of $445,000 to be funded from SPLOST Phase I Recapture and Phase
II ($55,000) Recapture Funds. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April
11, 2005)
52. Deleted from the consent agenda.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
53. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission
March 29, 2005 and Special Called meeting held April 11, 2005.
ATTORNEY:
61. Approve Resolution reaffirming the necessity of the 911 and the wireless
enhanced 911 charges.
62. Motion to approve “Acknowledgement and Consent of Augusta, Georgia to
the First Amendment to the Loan Agreement Between Bank of America, NA,
Lender and Augusta Canal Authority, Borrower.”
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the consent agenda as amended then please vote with
the usual sign.
Ms. Sims abstains.
23
Motion carries 9-1. [Item 12]
Motion 10-0. [Items 1-7, 9-17, 19-25, 27-41, 43-48, 51, 60-61]
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: If we may, I’d like to skip over to item number 54. Mr.
Kuhlke and Mr. Wall are here to give us a report on that item. So if we could go ahead
and take that and get Mr. Wall off the clock.
The Clerk:
JUDICIAL CENTER SUBCOMMITTEE:
54. Follow-up report from the subcommittee Chairman relative to its March
15th update to the Commission regarding the proposed Judicial Center.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Kuhlke, welcome. Glad to have you back.
Mr. Kuhlke:
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m Bill Kuhlke, chairman of the Judicial
Subcommittee. And I come before you today very similar to when I came before you on
th
March 8. And subsequent to that meeting the Commission has made some very
I would like to do is to ask the Commission to
positive steps, and at this time what
consider establishing a budget for the Judicial Center, which we are recommending
to be $80,122,100. We’re also asking Commission to amend the project definition to
reflect the budgeted amount and the change in the location of the Judicial Center
and the third thing that we are asking for you to do is to direct that the contract
amendment with the architect consistent with the approved budget be brought back
before this Commission at its second meeting in May for approval.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek:
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I think all of you probably heard me discuss a
budget ceiling and other issues, my concerns with this project. I’ve had discussions with
I would like to so move in accordance with his request
Commissioner Kuhlke, and
this day with the stipulation that this is dependent upon the bond issue passing and I
think that all of us know that we’ll have to reconfigure budget estimates on
everything if the bond does not pass. I’d like to make that motion.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: And that motion encompasses all three of Mr. Kuhlke’s
requests?
Mr. Cheek: That is correct.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Any further discussion? Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Hey, Bill.
24
Mr. Kuhlke: Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Williams: In the absence of Commissioner Beard, who was on that
committee, I was placed on that committee to serve and I’m just wondering the next
meeting, will somebody inform me to let me be present?
Mr. Kuhlke: I’m sorry. I thought you’d been informed, but yes, you will be.
Mr. Williams: I know y’all enjoy having me, but I just hadn’t had the privilege.
Mr. Kuhlke: It spices up the meeting.
Mr. Williams: Right. Right.
(Laughter)
Mr. Williams: And I just want to remind the committee that I am part and I
would love to participate, to be there, and maybe I could help out in some way.
Mr. Kuhlke: I understand.
Mr. Mayor: Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion, then please vote
with the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Kuhlke: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. I wish all your visits were this easy. Okay the next item,
Madame Clerk, is item number 8. Number 8.
The Clerk:
8. Z-05-34 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to approve a petition by Antonio Kuhn requesting a change
of zoning from Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) to Zone R-MH (Manufactured
Home Residential) affecting property located at 2327 Knox Avenue and containing
.17 acres. (Tax Map 99-1 Parcel 42) DISTRICT 2
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: Yes, I think that property is located in Virginia subdivision.
Mr. Patty: It’s actually Lombardy subdivision, but it’s right over there next to
Virginia subdivision.
25
Mr. Hankerson: Right. Lombardy. Mr. Patty, when did the zoning sign go up for
that?
Mr. Patty: It went up at least fifteen days prior to the meeting. This over off –
Mr. Hankerson: I know where it is.
Mr. Patty: -- Babcock & Wilcox, that area over there.
Mr. Hankerson: I’m just wondering, did a zoning sign go up?
Mr. Patty: The sign was up. I mean we went, we took a bus out and looked at the
cases a few days before the meeting. The sign was up. It had to go up at least 15 but not
more than 45 days prior to the meeting, and the sign was up.
Mr. Hankerson: So it really have to be approved before the manufactured home
be placed there; is that correct?
Mr. Patty: Yes, this is a situation where that area, if you’re familiar with it, is a
mixture of site built homes and mobile homes. And our policy in that area has been not
to allow any additional living units in that area, but to allow replacement of other homes
by mobile homes. And that policy is in place because over the years we tried to fight
placing mobile homes in that area. Frankly, what the staff did, and I talking about over
the years and I’m talking about going back over 20 years, we almost always lost and it
now is a mixture of about half mobile homes and half site built houses. This particular
case, there was a mobile home on this property, two young folks bought the property, the
mobile home was moved out, they moved another one in, they were running a water line
in there when they were stopped and realized that the property was not zoned for a
mobile home, even though it’s predominantly mobile homes in that immediate area and
they were stopped and they were told that they had to apply for zoning before they could
go any further. So they did. We held a hearing The sign was put up. Nobody showed
up to object to it, and the Planning Commission approved it.
Mr. Hankerson: Okay. But my question is, the manufactured home goes in after
it’s been approved.
Mr. Patty: That’s what should have happened, yes, sir. They didn’t know. I
don’t know what the circumstances are. Maybe this petitioner is here, but the mobile
home was put on the lot before they applied for the zoning.
Mr. Hankerson: And you mentioned something about a water line? I noticed
some, we had some trucks out there with the street tore up. Seem like it was going to that
property. I was wondering whether Public Works could address that, or someone, find out
what kind of utility work was going on there.
Mr. Mayor: Is Public Works here? Utilities?
26
Mr. Patty: The only thing I can tell you is when we went out there, they had a
trench exposed and I don’t know if it was water or sewer going [inaudible].
Mr. Mayor: Is the petitioner here?
Mr. Hankerson: I know we had a county truck parked over there and a big
machine out there. But employees couldn’t be found. I waited around over there. And
the home is already there in place and I know it hadn’t came before us. I know what area
it is. You’re correct about the mix. But I’m saying put the cart before the horse. I’d like
some more answers on this.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: It is a very heavily saturated area with trailer parks, and we been
trying to alleviate that by trying to get the [inaudible] to build rather than replacing those.
George, we had several times where people come before this body and we didn’t allow
them to go back in once they was moved out. That’s something that got by me,
Commissioner Hankerson. I didn’t understand – it said Knox Avenue and that’s a area
that’s still on septic tanks, in that area. That’s a area that’s still very much abandoned for
the creosote place that was there. What’s that, Piedmont area. Southern Wood.
Contamination in that area. People in that area are really suffering and they don’t need to
add to that by – we continue to let them go in there and think that it’s okay. I understand
this family may have not known, may have pulled the trailer in there. But the flag should
have went up when we saw that. I’m surprised that it’s been approved. I know George
said they didn’t have anybody to come down and petition against it. Really, the area is so
congested with very low income level that these people see a sign and think nothing
about it. There are a few good homeowners who want to see the community grow, but
they feel right now there’s no use of saying anything so they kind of just let that kind of
situation just ride. And it’s going to continue to get worse over there, rather than get
better.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Mayor, I think, you know, this area is a good place for
brown field project. You know, that’s one that’s been overlooked. And I think it’s a
perfect area for the brown field. So that’s why I was so concerned about it, and
especially seeing the mobile home there. And the work being done and seeing our city
trucks out there tearing up the streets and our property, trucks and tractors out there. I
still like to have some feedback on what’s going on, on the work that was ordered and
who ordered the work to be done, or whether there was a complaint called in.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek is out there. If Mr. Cheek could respond, maybe he
knows something from utilities, Mr. Hankerson. Doug, are you familiar with any of this
27
construction work? There’s Mr. Hicks back there. This construction work that Mr.
Hankerson is talking about?
Mr. Doug Cheek: I’m sorry, I was outside, Mr. Hankerson.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hicks?
Mr. Hicks: We can look into it, but right at this present time, I’m not [inaudible].
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we postpone this until two
weeks and give everybody a chance to bring some information back so we’ll know
where we are with it.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to that motion?
Mr. Hankerson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty, could we get the petitioner to come to that meeting, too?
Mr. Patty: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion to postpone for
two weeks then please vote with the usual sign.
Mr. Cheek and Mr. Mays out.
Motion carries 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: That takes us to item number 18.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I asked for this –
Mr. Mayor: Let her read the caption.
Mr. Williams: Okay.
The Clerk:
18. Motion to approve an amendment to Augusta Richmond County Code Title
4, Chapter 2, Section 74 to prohibit the outside storage of tires where water could
accumulate in such stored tires. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 11,
2005)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams:
Thank you, Mr. Williams. I had this pulled and hopefully to get
with the Attorney to look at it. We discussed this. This is something that we wanted
28
done. There are several businesses that are going to be affected by the state law and this
would not do what we needed to do. We just be making, we just be kind of spinning our
wheels. We need to get the Attorney to look at this again. There are some previous
businesses that’s out there that’s storing tires on the outside, that’s holding water,
creating a bed for mosquitoes to multiply in, and they wouldn’t have to be under any
shelter at all. We need to address this issue. It affects this whole city and we need to
. I
make sure that we got an ordinance that’s in place that’s going to affect those areas
make a motion that we postpone this and give the attorney time to get with License
& Inspection and come with something that is compatible with what we need.
This
is almost the same thing we got.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to that motion to postpone this item?
Ms. Beard: I’ll second it.
Mr. Mayor: We’re open for discussion then. Postpone. Mr. Shepard, [inaudible]
send that back to you to look at it?
Mr. Shepard: I’ll talk to Mr. Williams about the changes that are in here from last
week. There are some of those, Mr. Williams. There’s no particular urgency to address
this. We can address it over the next few weeks. But I have made the changes that you
referred to in committee, not in terms of just scrap tires, but you asked for it to be applied
to any sort of storage of tires.
Mr. Williams: Exactly. In my discussion, I did some research myself. Not any
attorney work, Steve, but some other work.
Mr. Shepard: I’d be happy to hear from your, Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: And if we can, I mean it’s no urgency, but if we can postpone it
for two weeks and then bring it back and then hopefully approve it.
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir. I’d be happy to look at the wording. It has been amended
in part on your concerns, but if there are additional concerns I’d be happy to hear from
you.
Mr. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I think that’s important. I was
going to ask Mr. Shepard had any of the people in the type of business that we’re talking
about, have they been talked to about what the ordinance will consist of, such as we do
other type businesses? Not necessarily get them to come and help write our ordinance,
but be a part of it, as to what we expect to go beyond the state ordinance.
29
Mr. Shepard: I had not had any conversations with any of them, Mr. Grantham.
If you’d like me to, I can.
Mr. Grantham: I think it would be a good idea since we do have several large tire
companies and we were talking about how they were, some of them are rotated out and
they may not be governed as severely as others but they should still have protection of
what we’re talking about. I think they should be given a consideration of at least being
involved somewhat, based on an ordinance that’s going to govern their business.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can, I’d like to respond. Don, I kind of hear what
you’re saying and I got no problem with that. But as policy makers and we make other
policies all the time, that if we going to call a business in and ask them is this okay with
you, then maybe – no, no, no. I didn’t say that you said it. I said if we going do that.
I’m saying we got small businesses who have to abide by the rules and regulations that
this governing body has set in place. I got people all over my district that accumulating
used and new tires sitting out in the weather. There is no protection over them. The
people that I serve, and that’s the entire city of Augusta, who suffer with the pain and
aggravation of mosquitoes that we can’t even get a truck from the Health Department to
go down the street once a month. And here it is the spring, the summer is coming, it’s
fast approaching. If it’s an ordinance, it ought to affect everybody. It ought to be fair to
everybody. So I don’t want any – I’m not putting any due hardship on any specific size
tire or any specific company. I want an ordinance in place that will have these things put
up so they won’t be exposed, won’t be laying out, and other people are trying their best to
abide by the law and two blocks away other people just don’t care. So I think it ought to
be a law that’s going fit and not a law that punishes anybody, but punish those that break
the law. If we can send it back and talk to the Attorney, I see Mr. Sherman over there
and maybe he can address some of these issues. I mean we got people [inaudible] it’s not
fair to let some go and then others have to abide. A mosquito don’t know a new tire from
a used tire. He just knows it’s a tire and he gets in and the larva forms and the next thing
you know you’ve got problems.
Ms. Beard: West Nile virus.
Mr. Williams: West Nile virus is right.
Mr. Mayor: Anything further? We have a motion to postpone. Two weeks. All
in favor of that motion, please vote with the usual sign.
Mr. Mays out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: All right, the next item is number 26, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
30
26. Motion to approve acceptance of grant funding of $353,000.00. (Approved by
Public Safety Committee April 11, 2005)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. This grant came under Public Safety, Mr. Mayor,
through our committee and I approved it. I’m still in support of it. But I want to get some
clarification as to what the grant will be used for. Exactly. We approve grants, and then
we approve those grants and the money comes in. I need to know what this grant is
designated for and what the money is going to be used for.
Mr. Mayor: Is the Fire Chief here? Someone from the fire service? He’s
coming. All right. Chief, the Commissioner is asking questions about the homeland
security grant and what it’s going to be used for.
Mr. Willis: That was granted to us through the Alzheimer’s Council which we
have in the state of Georgia. Here in the city of Augusta we applied for this grant to add
additional equipment to our resources here, such as light plant, additional air plant for
replenishing breathing air at fire scenes, and [inaudible]. In addition to that, it will give
us some capabilities that we do not have in this area, in the city of Augusta and the 13
counties that we support [inaudible].
Mr. Williams: Okay, Chief Willis, I had no problem. It came through Public
Safety. I just wanted to get it on record as to what the grant would be used for. That’s
$353,000. And a lot of times, not in your department, but in other departments we
approve grants and not even know what the money be used for when it comes in. The
money comes in and it just used. So I tend to ask those questions so we will have an
understanding, it be on the record as to what the money is supposed to be designated to.
Mr. Willis: I understand.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve.
Ms. Sims: Second.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
All in favor then please vote with the usual sign.
Mr. Boyles and Mr. Grantham out.
Motion carries 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: The next item is item number 42.
The Clerk:
31
42. Motion to approve execution of Georgia Power Company’s Governmental
Encroachment Agreement No. 30776 (DumJon-Evans 115 kv Transmission Line
Right-of-Way). (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2005)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had this one pulled because I need some
clarification from Georgia Power, from maybe Utilities. We had a big discussion about
who was here first, whether the poles were here or the streets here. Georgia Power is
claiming that they had the right-of-way on a lot of our poles, I think about the Barton
Chapel area out there. We had a big discussion as to they was saying that they had the
right-of-way and the poles that they had out, we had to pay for the movement of them.
We said the road was there first and they had to come after we came. So are we allowing
Georgia Power now to determine who has, who is on the right-of-way, who is on first and
what’s on second? I mean I’m just trying to get some clarification.
Mr. Hicks: Commissioner Williams, in this instance it’s not one of those
situations.
Mr. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Hicks: It’s one where we have a line going to the Butler Creek area, upper
Butler Creek sanitary sewer extension. And this is nowhere [inaudible] Belair Hills area
or anywhere like that where you’ve got roads that are maybe –
Mr. Williams: But you do remember the incident we had when we was trying to
claim the right-of-way and Georgia Power said they were there first?
Mr. Hicks: Yes, sir.
Mr. Williams: And wanted the city to pay for the moving of the poles. And I
tend to say how could they put a pole there when there wasn’t no street? So the street
had to be there first. Had to be on our right-of-way, and I just wanted to make sure this
wasn’t the same or similar thing we was voting on. That’s all.
Mr. Hicks: No, sir, this is out in – it’s really [inaudible] toward Grovetown, and
we’re crossing one of their 115 kv transmission lines.
Mr. Williams: I so move.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second?
Mr. Boyles: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Further discussion? All in favor, please vote with the usual sign.
32
Mr. Grantham out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: The next item will be item number 50.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Hicks?
Mr. Mayor: Just a moment, Mr. Williams. Let her read the caption, Mr.
Williams. You’re too anxious here today.
The Clerk:
50. Motion to approve award of construction contract in the amount of
$764,322.37 to Blair Construction for the Olive Rd. Sewer Improvements. Bid Item:
05-072. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2005)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, you want to hear from Mr. Hicks?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. Mr. Hicks, thank you for getting this to this point, to go
ahead and award this contract. My question is, though, if this contract is awarded to Blair
Construction, the constituents, the people from Gordon Highway/Olive Road to MLK
have been on septic tanks forever. I mean this will be the first time they had sewer in that
area to be able to change. People have been on septic tanks. I got several businesses
that’s trying to operate with that. This would not include any sidewalks, any other
amenity except putting in this sewer line that ties into Milledgeville Road; is that right?
Mr. Hicks: That’s all. If we, of course, disturb or tear up anything, if there are
sidewalks there, which I gather from your comment maybe there’s not, but anything we
tear up we’d have to replace. But it doesn’t include any of that.
Mr. Williams: And construction will begin, if this is approved today and I feel
like it will, but construction will begin when?
Mr. Hicks: We will have a pre-award or pre-construction meeting rather
[inaudible] and we’ll have to get the contract documents signed. It will be probably
another four weeks before construction would begin, four weeks from today at least to
pull this together. I’d say four to six weeks before you’d see equipment out there
digging.
Mr. Williams:
Okay, Mr. Hicks. Thank you very much. It’s been a long time
coming. One of the oldest parts of this community. We have not had the pleasure of
Mr. Mayor, I
having to connect to the city’s facilities and they will have that now.
make a motion we approve.
Ms. Sims: Second.
33
Mr. Mayor: Did you make a motion?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: And we have a second. Any discussion? All in favor them please
vote with the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: We need to back up, if we could, to item number 49. Mr. Williams
had pulled that one.
Mr. Williams: 52 and 49 could be taken together, Mr. Mayor, I just had a
question on those.
Mr. Mayor: Are they the same item?
Mr. Williams: No. They’re similar – Phase IV and –
Mr. Mayor: Let’s take them separately.
Mr. Williams: Okay.
The Clerk: Item 49?
Mr. Mayor: 49.
The Clerk:
49. Motion to approve Capital Project Budget Change Number One (CPB #324-
04-201824117) in the amount of $5,511,000 on the Belair Hills Estates Improvements
Project to be funded from Phase IV SPLOST Paving Dirt Roads ($3,500,000), Phase
IV SPLOST County Forces Grading & Drainage ($500,000), Phase IV SPLOST
County Forces Resurfacing ($1,101,000) and Augusta Utilities Phase IV SPLOST
Paving Dirt Roads ($410,000). (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April
11, 2005)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: I know the areas [inaudible] waiting again for a long time, but we
combine a lot of stuff together here now. Phase IV and V SPLOST monies. That’s a lot
of money there. But we got a paved road list and I want to know have this, have these
streets, have this area meet the guidelines or the criteria on that list to be paved? Mr.
Smith had some probably – he was looking at it at one time and I questioned the same
thing. I just want to make sure that they are meeting the guidelines of the mandatory list
that we put together for paving roads and make sure that we’re not going around, we’re
34
not circumventing, we’re not leaving anybody else behind, doing it as the guidelines have
said.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Smith, you want to respond to that?
Ms. Smith: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, this particular project is
comprised of streets that were on the dirt road list. As you will recall, there was quite
some time that passed where we did not have a contract to go out on the dirt roads
program because we were having difficulty acquiring right-of-way. We came back to the
Commission and said these are streets that we already have the right-of-way on and
requested that we package those into a single-project and move forward. And that’s why
a majority of the work for these streets is coming from a majority of the funding, is
coming from the paving dirt road account.[inaudible] and said these are streets that we
already have the right-of-way on and requested that we package those into a single-
project and move forward. And that’s why a majority of the work for these streets is
coming from a majority of the funding, is coming from the paving dirt road account. In
addition to that, there is some drainage work and a detention pond that is also needed to
be done at the same time the streets were being done. So we’re utilizing some
resurfacing, as well as grading and drainage from county forces. And in Phase IV
SPLOST, the Utilities Department had funds set aside for either water or storm water that
needed to be installed at the same time we were paving the road so we wouldn’t have to
come back and dig them up later.
Mr. Williams: So I guess you’re saying they are on the list?
Ms. Smith: Are on the list.
Mr. Williams: Okay. The way it supposed to be. Mr. Shepard worked on this
some time back and not as an attorney but as a Commissioner I think back then. I just
wanted to make sure we are still playing the same ball. That’s all.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Sims?
Ms. Sims: Yes, believe me, this is the same ball. And we definitely are looking
at the items we were promised and this is in order. And so I would urge everyone to
please pass this.
Mr. Mayor: You want to do that in form of a motion?
Ms. Sims: Yes, I do.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and second. Further discussion? Mr. Smith and then Mr.
Hankerson?
35
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The money that is in this number 49 and then
the roads that we are previously working on. Holcomb Hill, Youngblood Drive and
Whisnant, as well as Neely Road – and my question is after all of these are done, what
balance would we have in dirt roads to do anything further this year?
Ms. Smith: There are currently, in accordance with a report issued by the Finance
Department, is $4,820,739 in the paving dirt roads account. We requested $281,547 be
added for item number 52, and $3.5 million be added for item number 49, which is this,
the Belair Hills Estates project, which would leave over $1 million in that account.
Mr. Smith: That’s after all these other projects have been done?
Ms. Smith: Unless there’s been some money approved somewhere that I am not
familiar with, the indication that I have indicates that there would be $1 million left.
Mr. Smith: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The Belair Hills Estates has been
waiting for a long, long time. It’s a lot of development that’s going on there and I hope
that we would support this. It’s good for them to get the sewer and drainage in those
huge houses they have up there. They invest a lot, lots of tax money in there. When you
go in and look in that area and you’d be surprised that they’re on septic tanks. We should
really support this today. I think it’s good and I’m glad to see we found some money for
Belair Hills Estates.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been seconded. Any further discussion?
All in favor please vote with the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: That takes us to item 52.
The Clerk:
52. Motion to approve the Paving Various Roads, Phase VIII Project CPB
Change Number One (323-04-200823808) in the amount of $281,547 to be funded
from the One Percent Sales Tax Paving Dirt Roads, Phase IV Account which adds
funding for Sherrod, Deen, Saxton and Emmit Street Lane. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2005)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, did you have any additional questions?
36
Mr. Williams: Same question, Mr. Mayor. Various roads [inaudible] meet the
guidelines that we set in place as far as the paved road list. Is there anything different
there than we did anywhere else?
Ms. Smith: All of these roads are a part of the list that was presented to the
Commission to be included in Phase VIII except for Dean. Dean intersects with Sherrod,
and we felt that if the contractor was going to be out working on Sherrod, then it would
be logical to have him to also do Dean. Other than that, all of these roads were identified.
However, when the list was presented there was no money. So we’re asking for
additional funds out of Phase IV to fund construction of Youngblood, Holcomb Hill,
Whisnant, Sherrod, Dean, Saxon and Emmit Street Lane.
Mr. Williams: Two questions, Ms. Smith. Dean or whatever road that crosses
there, crosses another road somewhere. How much of that we going to do? And then
when it cross the next road, what – I’m just trying to make sure that everybody who gave
up the right-of-way, who agreed to have the road paved, who still waiting on that to
happen, that we don’t circumvent what they have been patiently waiting on, to do other
roads that folks wouldn’t give up the right-of-way on.
Ms. Smith: It’s just a one block road. One block street.
Mr. Williams:I so move, Mr. Mayor.
Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second?
Mr. Colclough: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Further discussion? All in favor then please vote yes.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: That takes us to item 54A.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
54A. Approve retirement of Mr. Rabon Saxon under the 1977 Pension Plan.
Mr. Mayor: I didn’t see any backup in here for that. What’s your pleasure with
this, ladies and gentlemen?
Mr. Williams: I so move, Mr. Mayor,
unless HR has got some reason.
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
37
Ms. Pelaez: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. In the
committee meeting, as it relates to Mr. Rabon Saxon’s retirement, I mentioned that I
specifically wanted to speak with him to make sure that he was aware of the potential
changes that we are making as it relates to the 1977 pension plan and the 1998 defined
contribution plan. And he is aware of those changes and still wishes to proceed with his
retirement.
Mr. Mayor: Did we have a motion?
Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, Mr. Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, sir. Questions are being asked about the changes in
the defined pension plan and we wanted to make sure that Mr. Saxon – we mentioned
that in the committee meeting and we want the employees to know that we are still
working on that defined pension plan and we should have something come forward in the
near future, in a couple of weeks, to really conclude the changes and improvements in the
pension plan, ’77 plan and also the ’98 plan. We’ve been working very hard on that. So
it’s still well and alive.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I suggested to Ms. Pelaez that the it be noted in his file and he
agreed. And it’s noted on this record as well
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we need a motion to approve this. You made a motion to
approve? Was there a second?
Mr. Colclough: I have a question.
Mr. Mayor: We’re trying to perfect the record here. Did we get a second?
Mr. Hankerson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Now we have a second. Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: Is the gentlemen, Mr. Saxon here today?
Mr. Speaker: He’s working.
Mr. Colclough: He’s working.
Mr. Mayor: He’s getting ready to retire.
Mr. Colclough: All right.
38
Mr. Mayor: All in favor then vote with the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Next item is number 55.
The Clerk:
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
55. Discuss Empire Tree Service request for a variance relative to a building
permit. (Requested by Commissioner Don Grantham)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had asked – Mr. [inaudible] asked me
to, Henry [inaudible] with Empire Tree Service asked me to pout this on the agenda so
that he could come and state his case in regards to what he had been rejected for at the
last meeting that he had not only with Planning & Zoning, but I think through the Fire
Department permit. I don’t know if he’s in the audience. There he is. Henry, come on up
here. And while he’s coming up, during the investigation that he had, and I know that
our ordinance and Fire Department has certain rights of what they need to do, but he had
checked with the state requirements as well. And as I mentioned before, we have issued
variances based on building that would be constructed at a site where hopefully we would
be putting water out in the area in the near future. I’m going to let Mr. [inaudible] you
what he’s found, and I’ve discussed this not only with Chief Willis, Chief Scott and the
others, and I felt like that this case needed to be presented to the body so that we’d know
what he’s up against, the person who is trying to expand his business and to get things in
the proper order, as to serving not only this community, but those others around here. So
I’d like Mr. [inaudible] to give you his thoughts.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham, let me say this before you start, I appreciate you
bringing this matter forward and that you’ve invited your constituent to come in here and
speak, but the Commission has already made a decision with respect to this case. I’m
going to ask the parliamentarian, if I may, do we consider this as an appeal of that
decision by the Commission? I’m just trying to establish our ground rules here where we
are.
Mr. Grantham: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Because the Commission has considered the request and made a
decision on it. And you’ve brought it back before us today. Shall we just hear this as an
appeal, Mr. Shepard, and proceed in that manner?
Mr. Shepard: I quite frankly had forgotten that it had come forward [inaudible]
and that being the case –
39
Mr. Mayor: Well, I want to give him a chance to be heard, but I want to do it the
way we’re supposed to do it.
Mr. Shepard: Yes. Yes, I think that’s the only way I think we can do it, is in the
form of an appeal. I had talked with the Fire Department about handling some other
matters by a conditional agreement. I know that there was a condition out on some
rd
property out near the Augusta Raceway, which is at the far end of the 3 District that I
was involved in, and I’d like them to have the opportunity to talk about that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. So we’ll allow you to proceed. We’ll consider this an appeal
hearing for purposes of the record today. Go ahead.
Mr. Speaker: Thank you. My name is Henry [inaudible] from Empire Tree &
Turf. 2704 Gordon Highway. Can I got ahead and give you –
Mr. Mayor: Give those to the Clerk. She’ll distribute those for you. You need to
speak directly into the microphone to be heard.
Mr. Speaker: Okay. When I first started investigating the process to get different
permits and what-not, I was informed that there was some kind of difficulty as far as
getting permits if you do not have a fire hydrant within 500 feet of your building or that
you wanted to build on. I was told at that point informally that it was a state regulation.
At that point, I contacted the State and spoke to the Fire Marshal’s Department, Ms.
Blackstone. As it appears, the regulations that our current codes are based on first start
off on a national basis, then they go down to a state basis, and then we actually, even
though we did have to as a community, but we adopted these codes as a community. One
of them is the fire hydrant issue. Okay. According to Ms. Blackstone, they understand
that we have areas like we have here, that our community is constantly expanding. We’re
trying to push the envelope, if you would, and we’re going into areas where I’m located
the community cannot afford thousands of dollars to put water lines in to us right away.
The state realizes that. So normally they will take and speak to the local fire department
and ascertain if they have pumper trucks and what-not that could respond to it, which we
do, and they ask that I sign, you know, I basically make up a letter saying that once it
comes though that I will hook up on these [inaudible] as far as fire hydrant goes. We put
those letters together, we submit those on a state level to the fire marshal department, and
there was a sample letter that was supplied by the state that they supplied me for a sample
of standard variance. And they grant hundreds of these per year. All right. After the
fact, I found out that being that we had established a local code onto it, it comes down to
you to grant variances. And the whole issue of the thing is that you supply – the state
would supply variances so an area can develop money and get maybe five or ten
businesses or whatever, put up buildings, realize more money for the community, at
which time the local government does have enough money to put water lines in. At that
point, once [inaudible] water lines in, no more variances are granted until the water lines
are put in. It’s like a series of checks and balances. So what I’m asking you is if you
guys could possibly adopt this variance, a local community, so that we can not depreciate
40
our property values, which this does. Who would buy a piece of property if you cannot
build on it? Why would you buy that? You buy it and then you find out you hit this
variance. I mean this fire hydrant issue. That’s pretty much what I’m asking you to do.
Are there are any questions as far as my research or anything?
Mr. Mayor: Does anyone have any questions? We do have the Fire Department
here. Chief, do you all want to respond?
Mr. Speaker: Can I say one more thing?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. Speaker: I’m not asking these gentlemen to go around our codes, to waive
any codes that we have. I’m just asking that we take and use what is existing in place on a
statewide basis.
Mr. Mayor: All right. We’re governed by the ordinances that are adopted by this
Commission in that case, and the discussion, the thrust of the discussion we had last time
was that you cannot grant a variance of an ordinance. What you have to do is amend the
ordinance. And this ordinance can be amended to allow for variances to be granted, but
those variances are not specifically authorized by the ordinance as it’s current written.
Mr. Speaker: The ordinance is [inaudible] the took – the local ordinance is the
exact copy of what the State has, and this is the other variance that they use on a
temporary basis where water lines go in.
Mr. Mayor: Well, that’s a procedure that the State uses. We have to by what the
ordinance here says. We’ll let the Chief to speak to that, or your inspector. Whoever.
Mr. Willis: I understand and appreciate this man wanting to have growth in that
particular area, but according to the state ordinances and all, we’re going to adhere to
those ordinances at this time unless as a Commission so designates us to look at that
ordinance and make a change. Chief James, which is over fire prevention and fire
protection, he has spoken with Ms. Blackstone, and I’ll let you hear what he has to say.
He spoke with her in reference to all of this [inaudible]. If I can yield to Chief James.
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. James: I spoke with Ms. Blackstone, as well, from the State Fire Marshal’s
office. She said that they would only give a variance if we say or if the government here
says okay. She said in giving this variance we would have to show them a plan on how
we would extinguish a fire if it was at that location. Because we don’t have any hydrants
in that area, how will we – use tanker trucks or whatever? In our county, the tanker
trucks that we have are all in the south of Augusta The closest tanker truck to this area,
which is out Gordon Highway, is on Willis Foreman Road. We have three tanker trucks
and they’re all – one is on Willis Foreman, one is on Brown Road, and the other one is on
41
Hephzibah-McBean Road. Because those areas don’t have a lot of hydrants as well. So
we would have to submit there would be a delay in response time to get a truck to this
location. And she said that they would only give the variance if the local government
said that it was okay. When I talked to Mr. [inaudible], I told him that it had already been
decided by Commission and we could not as a fire department override what the
Commission has already said, that we’d have to bring it back to the Commission for your
decision.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, I recall some cases, as I said.
Mr. Mayor: Speak into your microphone.
Mr. Shepard: I said I recall some cases where we did work with these parties that
are in the outlying areas. If we can take this up after legal, I can confer with the parties
and see if we can present a consent resolution of this matter. I just hadn’t had a chance to
speak to Mr. [inaudible] yet.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we can do that.
Mr. Shepard: We’re about to go into legal. If we could just keep this – I’d just
ask for a motion to postpone it and I think I can make a suggestion to the parties.
Mr. Mayor: All right. We have a few hands up. Let me see. Mr. Boyles?
Mr. Boyles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was going to ask the fire chief, Chief
Willis, how close is this business to the city of Grovetown? When we talked about
moving equipment there from south Richmond County, do not we have reciprocal
agreements with the City of Grovetown or Columbia County or something like that? And
because this is a temporary thing until that water line is run out there – am I not right, Mr.
Hicks, that that water line is due to be run almost to Grovetown? I was just curious as to
what kind of agreement we may have.
Mr. Willis: We do have mutual aid agreements with those surrounding cities and
counties. It’s about a mile, a mile-and-a-half to Grovetown. Probably to their nearest fire
station would probably be about two-and-a-quarter miles or something like that.
Mr. Boyles: What kind of response time is that, Chief? I’m not a fireman, sir.
Mr. Willis: That would be probably three to five minutes, depending on if that
unit is actually in the house, then we’d have to request mutual aid agreements or
[inaudible] mutual aid requests to them through Dispatch and [inaudible]. So you’re
looking possibly three to five minutes or more.
Mr. Boyles: And if we caught it, we’d catch it from Station 15, wouldn’t we?
42
Mr. Willis: Station 15 would be the first responding company.
Mr. Boyles: And that’s quite a distance further; right?
Mr. Willis: Yes, it is. Station 15, the new station now is being built there at
Flowing Wells and Wrightsboro Road. So we would have to go out Wrightsboro to
Dyess Parkway to Gordon Highway out that way.
Mr. Boyles: So Grovetown actually could catch it quicker than we could?
Mr. Willis: It’s possible that they could be there.
Mr. Boyles: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. As chairman of Public Safety and being a
fireman, I’m looking at [inaudible] hair grayer than mine now, and I remember when his
was black all over, too. But there’s a bunch of firemen that’s sitting out there that can
attest to what happens when a fire breaks out. Even though Grovetown may be able to
get their quicker, but if there is no fire plug for them to attach to, to allow water, it would
be a fire truck standing there watching a building burn. I sympathize with this customer
who wants to put a building there, and we ought to be pleased that he wants to do that.
But if – I don’t think it’s worth it. There may not ever be a fire there. I mean you may
have the water next door and may not ever need it. But if you needed it one time and it’s
not there, then I mean it’s nothing you can do, for a tanker truck or anything else. I
support the Fire Department. I support their decision. I know it’s rough to make tough
decisions. Sometimes people don’t understand it. But it’s not, it’s not being mean. It’s
the rules. We have allowed other people at one point, and I remember one, Mr. Mayor,
we had a convenience store that wanted to open up. Didn’t have no fire protection
around it, they was going to accept responsibility if something happened. Well, that
sounds good today, but after a fire breaks out and after somebody gets hurt or lose their
life, then it all falls back on us [inaudible] we okayed it. Now had the building been up
and they opened up and we didn’t know nothing about it or whatever, that may have been
a horse of a different color. But I am supporting the Fire Department. I know they would
love to have the water facilities there and know they would love to have the business
there. But I can’t vote for that, Mr. Mayor, because of those conditions. And if you
never experienced a fire, never seen what fire can do to not just a building, but to people.
And I just think it’s something I have to stick with because of the importance of it, Mr.
Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Let me ask the fire chief this, if I may. It appears to me from the
backup information what he wants to do is build something to park his vehicles in. Is
there a type structure that could be built that he could put there that wouldn’t necessarily
need to meet the fire code?
43
Mr. Speaker: [inaudible] structure with steel [inaudible].
Mr. Mayor: I understand that. But is there something you could build that is less
permanent that would comply, that would not be covered by the fire code? And then at
such time that water is run out there, then you could block it in and improve it to make it
a permanent building.
Mr. Willis: At this time I’m not aware of anything. Not only are we concerned
about the structure, it’s whatever is placed in that building at that time. If you’ve got
equipment in there with fuels and things like that, you could have a fire inside the
building, and the building could be a metal structure that’s fireproof per se, but we have
to put our firefighters on the line to go in there and fight the fire until we can get control
of it and everything. We’re putting out people out there in harm’s way for that period of
time. I don’t know exactly what kind of equipment he’s going to store in there. We’re
talking about hydraulic fluids possibly and hydraulic equipment dealing with tree
removal and things like that, as well, too.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays, is your hand up?
Mr. Mays: It is, but I’ll yield to Mr. Smith.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Jimmy?
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Was there not already a building there and
you tore it down to build a new one?
Mr. Speaker: There was an existing [inaudible] I appreciate how much we do
need water out there. My father was a farmer [inaudible]. [inaudible] eleven years old,
so I know about that. But across the street, we do have water coming in. You just
approved it today. Mr. Fred Sims and [inaudible] is going to be putting 300-400 single
family homes directly across the street. Mr. Hicks that you’re bringing water up right in
the near future [inaudible] November, so I’m asking for a temporary type of thing. We
did have a structure there before. It was an old pizza place.
Mr. Smith: [inaudible]
Mr. Speaker: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: Please address your comments to the chair.
Mr. Speaker: Oh, I’m sorry. The construction company said that they would be
starting construction, tentative date of November. I’m assuming that they [inaudible] six
months after that, a year [inaudible] construction. But I definitely want water there. I’m
[inaudible] my main building is all [inaudible] but right now we have a lot of equipment
we want to maintain [inaudible] and I just want to [inaudible].
44
Mr. Mayor: And how long have you owned this property?
Mr. Speaker: Ten years. Well, we owned – first we [inaudible], subject
[inaudible] and just about six years ago we bought the other building. The other
property.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays:
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor, let me say this. As a small business owner, I sympathize
with the gentleman, but I’m going to make the same comments I made in committee
meeting. I wasn’t on Commissioner Williams’ committee in public safety, but as senior
member of this Commission I have had the opportunity over the years to work under
seven different fire chiefs. Two in the county and one in this city and four in this
consolidated government. One of the things I think, that not only with the chiefs, but
with the rank and file people, we start to set the precedent – and I don’t know, I’m not
going to object to y’all going in legal here, but I’m going to go ahead on and say it while
I’m on the floor now. And it’s not being anti-business and I wanted the gentleman to
understand that. But I have, I have to be consistent in where I’ve voted. I’ve not voted
against one fire code to deal with a variance in it in twenty-six years, and today it’s not
going to change. And that’s not being against your particular business. But I think where
our fight needs to be, if we’re going to talk about [inaudible] something, I know that
sometimes we say the water man can be like the weather man, can’t put a date. But I’ve
long advocated the fact that we got a lot of money there in utilities, Mr. Mayor, that
[inaudible] this area to be served where you’ve kind of got in a dry area per se. If we are
going to do some excessive speeding up of lines [inaudible] I would be more in favor in
terms of getting the utilities out of the robust monies that it has, the right to move and to
deal with those lines and of getting that in as opposed to setting the dangerous precedent
of starting to deal with variances. What I see happening is that folks start to line up
where it’s going to be temporary, but they get in line and start citing cases, they bring in
attorneys to represent them, and say this is what you did on such-and-such a date, 2005,
on this particular piece of property. And then you’ve set that precedent down the road for
different Commissioners and Mayors to have to follow. It’s not good. I think one of the
best – worst cases, rather, of statewide fire service news we made when we had Chief
Bernard Mack here. And that was the only variance that was given and we were written
up as a sounding bell throughout the entire [inaudible] across the state for being crazy to
grant that variance and to do it. And I was happy to cast the only dissenting vote that did
that. So I don’t know where this is going. I expressed that to Mr. Shepard that the
lawyer who [inaudible] I don’t even think to a point that when you put in hold harmless
agreements they do not exempt us from the fact of lawsuits. When these things are done
with variances they are not put in to where you deal with exempting a property owner.
They deal with folk who sue governments. They sue the biggest one that’s in line. That
happens to be us. And I think one of the best cases in the area of it is when we look
down at 401 Walton Way and I’m still proud of the fact that the City fire chief at that
time, and also our [inaudible] engineer didn’t sign off on one of the worst buildings that’s
ever been built in this whole community. They had the integrity not to do it [inaudible]
45
wouldn’t do it and [inaudible] wouldn’t do it. And so I take pride [inaudible] and it’s not
against this business owner. I think our fight needs to be in Engineering Services. Get
the lines in, put them in so [inaudible] and I think the Fire Department for the
committee’s record also stated that the previous building, I believe, Chief, [inaudible] the
reason why that one is there is that the other one that burned down to the ground. Well,
you need to consider that. And if you’re going to take it in legal and you’re going to do
that, then that’s a decision you all can make with it, but mine is the same if we go in to
legal, it’s going to be the same when we come out. And I don’t know where that count is
going to go and I’m not going to solicit any votes. But this one is going to be consistent
and it’s going to fall in line the same I’ve been with three different governments
[inaudible] fire variance on that, whether it’s for one year, or whether it’s for one day, it’s
going to stay the same.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: I’d like to make a motion that we deny this appeal from this
constituent.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to that motion? Motion to deny the appeal?
Mr. Mays: I’ll second it, but I’m going to ask – I thought this had already been
done by the Commission and we had voted on this. I think the Commission is already on
record. This is a done deal. This is almost in the form of reconsideration, unless there
are votes to override what has been done. I just want to protect it by seconding it, but I
think it has to be done. This has already been done.
Mr. Williams: Well, my motion is to deny because we have already made a
decision, Mr. Mays, and not –
Mr. Mays: And I’m seconding you, Reverend, to back it up. But I’m saying for
parliamentary procedure you don’t have to cross that mule twice, and if you can ask that,
I think unless there’s one to approve it, then it’s a moot issue. It’s dead. It’s been done.
Mr. Mayor: That’s why I asked the attorney if this was an appeal when we
started.
Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Shepard: That’s correct. If we have the minutes. Mr. Mayor, do we have the
previous action minutes of it being denied?
Mr. Mayor: I don’t have it here in front of me. I remember the discussion.
Mr. Williams: It was denied.
46
Mr. Mayor: I think everybody remembers it.
Mr. Shepard: Then if there’s not a motion to reverse the present decision, then I
would say that it stands.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Boyles?
Mr. Boyles: Mr. Mayor, before we vote, I see Mr. Hicks has his hand up back
there. He may give us some additional information.
Mr. Hicks: It really won’t affect your vote this afternoon, but it will let you know
that with the approval of that change in zoning that does give a 124 acres that will be
used to develop single-family residences. And we had already been talking to the group
that’s going to develop that and looked at a way we could swing water around to that
particular area. Unfortunately, this gentleman is across Gordon Highway. That’s not
quite like being across just an ordinary street. But he’s across Gordon Highway from
that. But we’ll be looking very closely at how we can get water to the other side of the
highway, also, inasmuch as we’re going to be coming there. And what I had told him
earlier this morning was that give us a week and I can give him a time frame. Now I
can’t give him a time frame. But we will be extending water lines out that way, not only
on the side of the street where the subdivision is going, but also on the other side. But I
can’t give you that time frame right now.
Mr. Mayor: Well, is there a motion for the Commission to change its decision
from the previous meeting?
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, I brought this up, and I was in favor of doing this
with Mr. [inaudible]. I’m going to yield to the Attorney and then I’ll make a comment.
Mr. Shepard: I was wanting to use the time, Mr. Mayor, while you were going
into legal, to talk to the fire chief. They indicated to me that when the property owner
could demonstrate an adequate fire flow from some other course that we had granted
those, and I believe that’s in previous Commission action. So I wanted to present it as an
alternative to the denial of the appeal. If he’s willing to have an adequate fire flow from
another source, that might be introduce some new facts in the situation. It would not
make it just a straight appeal, it would make it somewhat of a modification of a previous
action now. That’s why I wanted that time. To discuss it in legal.
Mr. Mayor: I thought Fire Department didn’t have it, an alternative for adequate
flow. Said the pumper trucks were there.
Mr. Shepard: No, I’m talking about the property owner developing that. I believe
we’ve allowed that when the property owner developed an adequate flow on his own.
47
Mr. Mayor: I think it’s his responsibility to bring it to us, not us to get that out of
him. He’s the one who came in with the appeal today.
Mr. Shepard: I don’t know, I don’t know that he –
Mr. Mayor: If you want to table it –
Mr. Shepard: That’s what I asked for a few minutes ago.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Is there motion.
Mr. Shepard: If the Commission considers it, if that’s [inaudible], I did ask for it
to be postponed until after legal, not to delay the matter here but to [inaudible] with that
possible solution.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a motion to table?
Mr. Grantham: So move.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second?
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: There is a motion to table. It’s been seconded. A table to motion is
non-debatable, so we’ll call the question.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, before we call the question, I’d like to get some
direction here.
Mr. Mayor: Under the rules and procedure, once a motion to table is made, then
you vote on that motion.
Mr. Williams: Okay, we can go on and vote on it, but I need some clarification
after we get through, on the rules, because we just established another rule today, I think.
And we can go ahead and I’ll wait till the vote and then we can discuss that.
Mr. Mayor: All right. All in favor of the motion to table, please vote with the
usual sign.
Mr. Mays, Mr. Williams and Mr. Colclough vote No.
Motion carries 7-3.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, you’ve got some questions about the rules?
48
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. Clarification.
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. Williams: There was a motion on the floor.
Mr. Mayor: That’s right.
Mr. Williams: I made a motion to deny this appeal, and it was an appeal. And I
thought the agenda item would be dead from that. Now you asked for a motion to table,
and then there was one given. But I need to know from I guess the Attorney who
suggested we go into legal and he can suggest anything he wants to. He don’t make any
rules, he just makes suggestions. We didn’t follow that. And I need to understand the
procedure. Now if we going, we going to do it, then y’all know I ain’t going to forget it.
We going to stick with it, we are going to do it the same way every time, or we going to
dance around every time.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Williams, my request was to table it until after legal. That was
the first request.
Mr. Williams: That was the first request. And you didn’t get that. You didn’t get
that.
Mr. Shepard: I thought I understood the motion. The motion was made and then
that would supercede your motion.
Mr. Mayor: You motion is still pending.
Mr. Shepard: Your motion is very much alive in this meeting today, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Your motion is not dead, Marion.
Mr. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Shepard: I’m using legal as a request in order to talk to these parties, if I
could have that indulgence.
Mr. Williams: I understand. That was your first request.
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir.
Mr. Williams: If I’m not mistaken.
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir.
49
Mr. Williams: That did not, did not happen. The Mayor asked if this be
considered as an appeal. We, we, we said yes. He appealed it. We made a motion to
deny the appeal. Then Mr. Mays said that we was receiving that as a motion and it
shouldn’t be, it should be a moot issue and die for the lack of anything else, we heard it
one time before. We turned back around and got the appeal you asked for the first time.
Now I –
Mr. Shepard: I think the only – you passed a motion to table, though. And so
we’ll pick it up – if I have no consent resolution we’ll pick it up at that point. It could
well die. But I, I need to bring – it wasn’t a legal continuance, Mr. Williams. It was an
attempt to work with this individual within these rules if he’s, if he’s willing to spend
some of his own money. I think that’s what the Fire Department is saying.
Mr. Williams: I just want to make sure.
Mr. Shepard: So I go back to the original priority of the motion to table.
Mr. Mayor: The motion is on the table and we will now move on to item number
56, Madame Clerk.
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, Mr. Mays?
Mr. Mays: Let me ask a point of clarification.
Mr. Mayor: Please go ahead.
Mr. Mays: Just some clarification on that. And I’m not – the vote’s been taken
and that’s over with and I’m, I’m all for particularly making sure that every citizen gets
their due. But I know where the rules are in reference to the non-debate of a motion to
table. But I’m a little concerned about the legitimacy or the illegitimacy of the item
being on the floor from the very beginning, if it has already been disapproved by this
Commission, how then do you table an item that does not have a place on the setting of
what you’re doing? It’s already gone, it’s been approved, and in one [inaudible] the
Attorney rules then that it is a moot issue. I thought by following a moot issue that you
moved to the order of the day, not to accept a tabling on something that has already been
voted on. To me that should have been dead and ready for any undertaker that would
take it. But in order to get [inaudible] it’s 8-2, y’all have done it. But I’d want that
stated. I want to put that in for the record because I think that when you deal with a
reversal and it should be in proper order that the only way that it clears out to be
discussed in the first place is to allow it on a reversal motion to do it. There was no
reversal motion out there to deal with anything, and it dealt with tabling. So if it was
dead and moot, then what were you making an item to table on? That would be my only
comment to the Attorney. But since it passed 8-2, and I’m a very friendly fellow today,
I’m not going to argue about it. But I’m kind of like Marion, I’m going to remember it,
50
cause y’all making some decisions that get to be a little bit new around here. And they
get to be moot. If it’s moot, it ought to be moot.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays, there is one rule that is in the rules and procedures of this
Commission, that this Commission adopted, and that is that any Commissioner may put
any item on the agenda any time that Commissioner wishes. And this item was place on
the agenda not by the citizen, but by a Commissioner. So it’s lawfully under the agenda
today under the rules of this Commission.
Mr. Mays: But it was to reverse a previous action and there was no motion to
reverse and there is a standing decision that a majority of this Commission made and that
a unanimous vote, I believe, that Public Safety made, and we had attorneys present at
both of those meetings. Mr. Shepard was not in the committee meeting. I don’t know
whether he was in the one that was out here, but we had a city attorney bringing that
action then and representing the city to move us forward. The Fire Department also so
stated and what I didn’t want to see us do, and I [inaudible] the number of the [inaudible]
was so high to be placed on the citizen to do this I really thought was unfair to impose it
on that gentleman to do it. That’s why I said I think that the fight should be in terms of
dealing with utilities [inaudible] I’d even be in favor of a motion that comes back out
here that actually starts those lines, even though it’s got to go to your side of the highway.
I would be in favor of starting to lay the lines on the side where they’ve got to run them
to to get them to your property, to ensure the fact that it’s over there on that side of
Gordon Highway. And I think that’s the issue that we ought to be talking about, is
getting those citizens and property owners water over there and doing it, rather than us
striking and changing rules around here and putting this government into the liability of
changing what’s there in valid fire codes, and I think that’s the danger that I see. You’re
placed in harm’s way of trying to [inaudible] around this issue and to change it, when the
Commission has already done it, did it in committee, and did it on this Commission floor.
But you voted 8-2 to go ahead on and do it. It’s a bright, pretty day. So do what you need
to do.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Bonner, would you read item 56, please?
The Clerk:
APPOINTMENT:
56. Consider the reappointments and/or appointments to the Sheriff’s
Merit Board.
Mr. Mayor: In the backup, there’s some confusion here. There are two lists of
people appointed by the Commission apparently. Under the members, it would indicate
that Stanley Hawes and David Hicks have been appointed by the Commission. There
does not seem to be a source of appointment for Marion Tappan. When you go down
below that, under appointed by the Commission, you have Carmie Bryant in addition to
Stanley Hawes and David Hicks, and Carmie Bryant is not listed as a member [inaudible]
51
Commission. So which is correct? Is it Marion Tappan or Carmie Bryant as the third
Commission appointee?
The Clerk: Mr. Tappan, I believe. I corrected that. I can go into my office if you
want a corrected list. You’re right.
Mr. Shepard: And I’ve asked – if I could, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Shepard: I had Ms. Pelaez, who was keeping up with this, to bring me a list
and she has. I’d like to pass that out.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. As long as we’re working off the correct list.
Mr. Shepard: We’re trying to all work off the same list.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Smith, you had a question?
Mr. Shepard: She had furnished me a list and the three that are expired, Mr.
Mayor, are Mr. Tappan , Mr. Hawes and Mr. Hicks.
Mr. Mayor: So Ms. Bryant is not a member?
The Clerk: Ms. Bryant [inaudible], it’s Mr. Tappan.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Shepard: Any my understanding from Ms. Pelaez is these three individuals
are eligible for reappointment.
The Clerk: Reappointment. Yes.
Mr. Mayor: Does everybody understand the discrepancy and what the correct
three names are? Mr. Smith?
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This committee, and me speaking, one of the
members whose name is on here, said that they have not met in some time, maybe over a
year. So I called the Sheriff and talked to him. And of course he said they probably
wouldn’t meet unless they had a reason to. So – but he said they were supposed to meet
on a regular basis and that’s not the case now. So he is sending, he said the Attorney
would send me a copy of the rules and regulations of that committee, and I think that
until we get that, maybe we ought to hold off on this.
Mr. Mayor: Do you want to make a motion to postpone this for two weeks?
52
Mr. Smith: I would like to postpone it until the next Commission meeting if
we could.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to that motion?
Ms. Sims: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Any discussion?
Mr. Williams: If we got the names here and there is no problem, they may not
meet, Jimmy, but why are we holding for two weeks? I mean I just need some
clarification as to why we wait two weeks to do what we do today and get it on out of the
way? Will we have a new list or we have some more names you want to bring forth? If
that’s not the case – we can’t do anything about the Sheriff, now. You know, he’s elected
official and he runs the Sheriff’s Department. So we can’t make them meet. But I just
want to know why we be waiting for –
Mr. Smith: I’m not waiting on the Sheriff. He explained that he had nothing to
do with it, unless he had dismissed somebody, and it would go before this committee.
But they are not meeting, and the rules and regulations of the committee is not alive and
well. They’re not meeting. It’s not functioning. And I would like to know what the
rules are and then maybe we can look into it and they would meet on a regular basis and
then that’s the reason. It don’t have to be held up. But I still would like to know what
the rules are for these meeting.
Mr. Williams: I understand. I mean I was just thinking while we got these names
in front of us, if they are sufficient – now if there’s something wrong, maybe we should
the Clerk to get [inaudible]. But these names are current then we can [inaudible] on the
agenda to talk about the committee and their function.
Mr. Smith: Well, I had talked to one of the men on it in my district about staying
on it, and he said I don’t see any need in it, we’re not meeting. We’re not doing
anything. Why would you want to continue on with it? So I was just trying to find out
what the qualifications was and what needed to be done.
Ms. Pelaez: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, if I may. The purpose of
the Sheriff’s Merit Board is indeed to review appeals by the Sheriff’s Department
employees of disciplinary actions that the sheriff has imposed against those employees.
However, if those employees are not appealing to the board then there is not a need for
the board to meet. So essentially we have not had any appeals from the Sheriff’s
Department employees to those board members. So for us to bring those individuals
together when there is not any action before the board actually constitutes a waste of
those individuals’ time.
Mr. Smith: I understand. But I think they should be notified to say we’re not
having any meetings until. You know, keep them up to speed on what’s going on, or
53
what’s not going on. Because this individual didn’t know. He hadn’t heard from
anybody in the past two or three years, he said.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a motion, Madame Clerk, to postpone?
The Clerk: Yes, to postpone. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I can furnish these members, prospective members with a set of the
three statutes of H.B. 449, which was passed I think in 1983, and there are ’85 and ’89
amendments. So I can gather all that and send it to them.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Anything further? We’ll vote on the motion to postpone it
for two weeks. All in favor of that motion, please vote with the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Item number 57.
The Clerk:
FINANCE:
57. Report from the Finance Director regarding local financial institutions that
house city monies and their local contribution to the City of Augusta based on the
Community Reinvestment Act. (CRA). (Deferred from the April 11, 2005 committee
meeting)
Mr. Mayor: We’ve been furnished with a written copy of a report from Mr.
Persaud. Is he here to add anything to that?
Mr. Williams: [inaudible] Finance Department [inaudible], Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Are you here for David today?
Mr. Carlton: [inaudible]
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Carlton: My name is [inaudible]. I’m assistant finance director. Mr. Persaud
had health issues in his family today.
Mr. Mayor: Would you speak right into the microphone, please?
Mr. Carlton: Sorry. Mr. Persaud had health issues today and couldn’t make it.
He has submitted the report, which includes copies of the responses from various
54
institutions regarding your request. And he has expressed his desire to seek any further
information that the Commissioners would like him to request from the different
institutions.
Mr. Williams: This is the item that I asked to get a financial report from all of the
financial institutions that housing the city’s money as to the community reinvestment that
they are doing with the city of Augusta. We hear about what they do in Charlotte, we
hear about what they do in Atlanta, but the amount of money that they are housing for the
city of Augusta. I need to know what they are putting back in to our community. We’ve
got neglected parks, we’ve got neglected homes, we’ve got neglected roads, streets. And
hey house a lot of money that belongs to the city and they use that money. It don’t just
sit there in the vault. And we have been very adamant about trying to get them to come
to the table to help the city of Augusta do some things that’s going to be positive. And
I’m suggesting that those banks are doing something, or trying to do something to – we
ought to be investing more with them and less with the others just holding our money. I
remember the statement when we put a program together and put some $2 million or $3
million in these banks or put it up for banks to bid on, to come to the table to see about
housing, and only two banks came to the table. And rest of them kind of – I guess turned
their nose up. They really wasn’t interested. But if they interested in keeping our money,
they ought to be interested in partnering with this government to do some things for our
community, for reinvestment back. We got people that trying to do business with the city
that the banks have not come to the table and done all that they could do. Now when you
go to Charlotte, Greenville, go to other places, you see all kind of projects that the banks
are doing, along with the city. We’re not asking to give anything. But we ask them to
invest back in to the city of Augusta and I, I have not seen that. And I just got this report.
It’s been at our committee meeting. Mr. Persaud brought us some figures. A great
amount of money as the money we’re doing, dealing with the banks, but I hadn’t seen
anything yet what those banks that we deposit with and house our money doing back for
the city of Augusta. Now maybe you can enlighten us on some things and highlight some
things that y’all may know about that I hadn’t been privileged to yet, but if there are some
things that are being done, I would love to hear from them, and not things done outside
the city of Augusta, but inside the city of Augusta.
Mr. Carlton: Yes, sir, I understand your question but I don’t feel qualified to try
to interpret what the banks’ response has been.
Mr. Williams: I understand that perfectly. I guarantee you. I understand that.
Living in this town, I think, Mr. Mayor, we wouldn’t have to ask that question, we would
probably be able to see that for ourselves, wouldn’t nobody have to tell us. They would
be patting their selves on the back with signs and other entities that show what they’re
reinvesting back in our city, and I think we ought to be really careful about who we
banking with. We need to maybe move some monies and I think that will get
somebody’s attention. [inaudible] we deposit money with people who are going to
deposit back into the city.
Mr. Mayor: Do you want to receive this as information today?
55
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, I could make a motion that we receive as information, but
I would like to hear something from Finance, either from their opinion or something.
Receive as information don’t do me any good, Mr. Mayor. This same information was
brought back at committee. Now it’s brought to the full Commission. If I’m out of line,
if there is nothing that we think they need to do, we need to leave well enough alone and
somebody need to say that and we won’t address it. But we put a lot of money into the
local banks, and it goes out of town. I see all my friends here from the pension fund.
The largest local bank money goes out of town. It don’t just sit down there on Broad,
Greene, whatever street it’s on. So I think if we’re going to hold people accountable we
need to hold them accountable. When I travel, when we go, we get criticized for
traveling, but when we go to other cities we see the reinvestment, community
reinvestments that banks are doing in other cities. But then we sit here and let people take
the money that we collect through our sales tax, our bond issues and everything else and
don’t do anything for them. And I think that’s unfair. I think [inaudible] willing to come
to the table and willing to do something for the city, not just, not give anything away, but
to invest back into some of the dilapidated home structures, to help people to get on their
feet to make Augusta look like the bright city it ought to be, rather than ride around it or
ride through it and never stop to do anything. And I think it’s time [inaudible] for that.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, in all fairness to the Commissioners, we just received
this report today.
Mr. Williams: I understand.
Mr. Mayor: Might want to have an opportunity to digest it and then develop a
course of action as a result of receiving that. And likewise, the report from Wachovia is
not included in here. They haven’t responded.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I’m in order, I make a motion that we receive
this as information and take it back to the Finance Committee.
Mr. Mayor: Finance meets Friday.
Mr. Boyles: I don’t think that gives us enough time, to Friday. Can we go to the
next one?
Mr. Williams: Okay. I make that motion that we go to the next Finance meeting,
to have this on there to be discussed and if we can, bring some of those bankers in here.
And let’s meet with them face-to-face. Let’s share with them what our concerns are.
Mr. Boyles: I’ll second that.
Mr. Mayor: You had your hand up, Mr. Boyles?
Mr. Boyles: No, sir, I was just going to make the same motion he just made.
56
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We’ll go around here. Mr. Hankerson and then Mr. Mays?
Mr. Hankerson: I agree with Commissioner Williams’ motion, about bringing the
bankers in. I think when we receive it in Finance Department, if it’s something that we
want to do and changes that we want to make, we ought to just go ahead and make the
changes, by the information that we have. If we want to address these things, I think that
we can just do that and make a Commission decision to do whatever we want according
to the information that has been forwarded to us. I just wanted to make those comments.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mays?
Mr. Mays: Yes, Mr. Mayor, while we’re in the discussion period of it, I’d be
remiss if we did not thank you as a Commission. I think that you chairing, and I’m going
to talk about you for about thirty seconds, so if you don’t rule me out of order, it’s
germane to what we’re talking about. I think that the Mayor has provided a great
leadership role in just yesterday where we were meeting with neighborhood groups,
where we were meeting with HUD, where we meeting with our department, and it ended
up, I think reaching a happy medium, to start a new beginning of working on some
things. I say that to say this. That leadership from the Mayor’s office has been
concerned about how these things take place, because the city cannot do everything,
cannot do all of these things that we need to do without private partnerships. That means
the private partnership either have to have money or they either have to have access to
getting it. And I think that’s where the information and the documents come in. I would
hope that the Commissioners would read the information intensely and then by the time
that it gets to that two week period in Finance is to do exactly what Commissioner
Hankerson is talking about, in trying to make some suggestions and in looking at those
institutions that, quite frankly, are looking at the growth and the rebirth of doing things in
this city. And I think that the sooner we get serious about that, I think he’s been serious
about it for two [inaudible]. I think, quite frankly, it’s been the Commission that has not
had the political will to seriously deal with this issue other than on one or two occasions
where we were dealing with our checking situation. But we, we bank a lot of money, not
just with sales tax, but in terms of our reserve money, in terms of other money and
investments that we got. There’s a lot of money that’s in this city, and I think it’s a game
of finding those friends who will help the city to be able to do those partnerships that
we’re interested in and I think those things can be built better with a lot of relationships
that are good. Sometimes good relationships are better than good laws. The law is what
you’re trying to make folks do, but I think if you establish good relationships and to make
them work, I think there is room out there to do it. I looked just on glancing, I see some
very glaring numbers in there that are different, and one thing that is surprising is the fact
that some of these numbers in here are not the biggest of numbers who house our money.
They also not the biggest holders who have money in terms of resources. And that sticks
out very intently. So I hope that you all will do this. Y’all know where I’ve been on this
issue for close to a decade with it, and I praise the Mayor in terms of trying to get this
initiative in a serious vein and to get it done. The little federal money we got, if we took
all of it and put it into one neighborhood, it still wouldn’t be enough to do it without
57
partnerships from institutions that we need to deal with their money. And that’s been one
of the biggest hurts. As we drive around this community and this city, it’s got to be
rebuilt. And it’s going to take money in order to do it. And we got to have the leverage
to do it, and when he steps out on a limb, we got to be men and women enough to support
those initiatives when those things are done. If not, [inaudible] will just continue to keep
it, they’ll continue to house it, and they’ll send you a bit of lip service about what they’ve
done, quite frankly, in some other community. And I’m not really interested in what any
of them have done in any other community. I’m interested, quite frankly, in what they do
in the city of Augusta, Georgia, and I think that’s the main thing that we should be
concerned about. It’s our money that goes into those institutions and we should be seeing
in terms of what they’re doing. And that doesn’t mean we give support to everybody
who has their hand out and everybody who comes in with a project. But those that are
legitimate, those that are sound, those that just need a little bit of help so that we can help
to really turn this city around in a lot of areas, and the Mayor has been very vital in terms
of working with that. This Commission just needs to step up to the plate and give him a
little bit better hand in helping to push this issue.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Mays. I appreciate that. Ms. Sims?
Ms. Sims: Mr. Mayor, yes, thank you. Maybe it’s time that some of us stepped up
and go and visit the people that do house our money, and I’ll be more than willing to be
on any committee, that we go and approach these institutions and sit down and talk with
them and see if there is help that they can offer this city. I think that’s a great idea and I
think we are the ones that should be making these entrances to the bank.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Ms. Sims. Anything further? We’ll go ahead and call
the question on the motion from the Mayor Pro Tem. All in favor, please vote with the
usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: At this time, we will take a five minute break and then we will come
back and take up the other discussion items and have our legal agenda.
[RECESS]
Mr. Mayor: The chair will recognize Mr. Grantham with respect to item number
55. Do you want to make a motion to take it off the table?
55. Discuss Empire Tree Service request for a variance relative to a building
permit. (Requested by Commissioner Don Grantham)
Mr. Grantham: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we take item number
55, Empire Tree Service, off the table.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
58
Mr. Mayor: All in favor, please vote with the usual sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
(Discussion continues on item 55)
55. Discuss Empire Tree Service request for a variance relative to a building
permit. (Requested by Commissioner Don Grantham)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham?
Mr. Grantham:
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have had a moment to talk with Mr.
Shepard and Mr. [inaudible] and Chief Willis, and we discussed the situation. And I’m
going to make a recommendation, and they’re willing to work together to find out what
type of equipment that Mr. [inaudible] would not to install at his property in order to give
them the pressurized water capability on a temporary basis in order to do something for
the future until the water line is run. And then he would hook up to the water line. So if
I’m going to make a motion that we delete this item and let them work
you will,
together and come back at a later date and hopefully by that time Mr. Mays and I
can get something in order to get us a water line run out there.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion?
Mr. Mays: I have no real problem with that. My only question would be, is just
simply does construction begin or does it not?
Mr. Grantham: No, it does not. Does not.
Mr. Mays: So they are working the water side of what we are dealing with in
order to do it?
Mr. Grantham: Right.
Mr. Mays: I just wanted to get that for clarification.
Mr. Mayor: Further discussion? All in favor of the motion then please vote with
the usual sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Next item?
59
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES:
58. Discuss the reorganization of the Public Works Department. (Requested by
Mayor Pro Tem Marion Williams)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had this item put back on the agenda if
we have not come to any closure yet. I still do not know what that department consists
of. I still do not know what financial impact it’s going to impose on the citizens, the
taxpayers of Augusta. When we talk about splitting that department, we talk about two
other directors and assistants and other amenities that came along with that. I realize Mr.
Russell is not here. [inaudible] Allen would be able to entertain that. But I need some
clarification because we made that decision, and look like if we made that decision we
should have made provision to know which direction we was going. I think it’s wrong to
take advantage of the person, to have them in limbo or to use them at every beck and call
to straighten out, to help to carry through the work we said was too much for them. And
if it’s too much for them then, it’s still too much for them now. So if we, since we split
that department I still need some direction now as a Commissioner, so I know if I go to
micromanage in that, they in the wrong department or the right department. I been
accused of that a lot, and when I get accused I want to be accused right. I would hate to
be accused falsely for something that I don’t understand. So Ms. Allen, if anybody – if
you don’t have any comments, if you don’t have any response, I’d like to place it back on
the committee, Ms. Bonner, so we can get this thing finalized. I mean I’m not going to
let it just lay dormant.
Ms. Allen: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, we have been, administration has been
working with the various department heads [inaudible] and working with the job
descriptions, as well as the organization of the various departments.
Mr. Williams: I understand that, but I need to know from you or from somebody,
maybe HR, somebody need to share what their lines are, what their job duties are, are
they still being used in every capacity? There was a mass stampede to get something
right away, and since we done something right away we should have been some stuff in
place to know which way we are going. Now I hope we don’t operate the entire
government like we operating with that piece. Is there –
Ms. Allen: The job descriptions have actually been upgraded, but administration
is in the process of meeting with each of the directors to make sure there are not any
questions or concerns in regards to those job descriptions.
Mr. Williams:
What impact, financial impact it going to cost the city of Augusta
more than what we was paying before? Because I do know that the other departments,
when we divided, we had to have two more directors. That’s two more salaries, two
more grades, two more positions, along with other staff people. And Ms. Allen, I know
60
you just in the fill-in mode today, you just, you sitting in for Mr. Russell. But those are
impacting the city of Augusta. People are cautious, we are cautious, we been told not to
increase government, but to decrease government, and from what that have done so far is
merely nothing but increase it to my knowledge. And I’m not going to let it rest until we
reach some division set-up, knowing what it is, and knowing what the guidelines are, and
that person or those people will do their job and their jobs only. So Mr. Mayor, it’s no
I’m asking the Clerk to put it back on the
sense in talking. Mr. Russell’s out.
committee so we can discuss it then.
If it doesn’t get resolved – you stated earlier that
every Commissioner had the privilege of putting things on the agenda and I exercise that
privilege by doing it if we don’t get it solved in committee.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d just like to say from my position – I’ve
discussed this with the administrator. I, too, would like to see the organizational structure
and salary structures defined in a “as soon as possible” manner. The transition into the
department structure that we have now is something that does in fact take time to
develop. The point is to spread responsibilities, areas of responsibilities out in an
effective manner to help better address issues within the city. I’d like to say from this
seat, the expectation is that during the transition all the people assigned to the different
departments – my expectation that the ball doesn’t get dropped anywhere that teamwork
occurs, and I do know that in my place of business that when we have these types of
reorganizations, which we’re going through right now, people are expected to work
together as a condition of employment, to work and answer questions during transitional
periods. Certainly that doesn’t need to go on forever, but there needs to be some
teamwork and cooperation through this transitional period, and that is an expectation I
have. I’ve clearly communicated to the administrator and he assures me he’s
communicated that to the three department heads now and operating our maintenance and
operations sections and our engineering section.
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible]
Mr. Williams: I make that in the form of a motion.
Mr. Cheek: I’ll second that.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Further discussion? All in favor then vote
with the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Next item, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
61
59. Discuss the reclassifications of the rank-and-file employees of Augusta
Utilities Department. (Requested by Mayor Pro Tem Marion Williams)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem?
Mr. Williams: Thank you again, Mr. Mayor. We’ve been doing pretty good.
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible].
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. I had this item put on because of all of the monies that we
say we have accumulated and we have made, we have our bond and stuff to be done with
the water department. We had a survey done. We brought back some of the upper
positions for upgrading. I’m worried now about the little person who drive the trucks, the
one who read the meters, the one who answers the phone, the clerks and the people in the
water department who have had, who have not had a raise. Now we brought stuff before
us that we want [inaudible] IT and to fund a position in that area to help some other areas.
But I need to know from Mr. Hicks or from anybody who can address this, HR, what are
we going to do for those people that really keep the government afloat? If the top, upper
level people would leave this government, we would still operate. But if the water
meters, the clerks that answer the phone, the little people walk away and leave, then we
would fall on our face. These are the people that are really keeping us afloat. They have
not had a raise, we have not had any reclassifications, we’ve brought several upper level
people to the table, and I just want to know what are we going to do for those people who
are actually in the trenches working? 24 hours a day there’s somebody on call for your
water. Whether it’s freezing cold, whether it’s mid summer. I don’t care what the heat is,
there are people who will come out, get in the ditches, and work and dig and repair those
water, cause water is life. Those are people that we need to be considering. With all of
the money now we say we got. We pay firms, we pay different firms to help with our
water situation, millions of dollars. I [inaudible] those same millions of dollars into this
government, in the hands of the people doing the work, we could save a lot. But I need to
hear from Mr. Hicks, I guess, as to what’s the plan, how soon, when will it be
implemented for the little person to be able to make some money, to buy the same loaf of
bread that the next person pays for?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hicks, can you respond to the Commissioner?
Mr. Hicks: Let me, let me begin by saying this is certainly a welcome discussion
and conversation that we are having, in that we’re in the midst of reorganization and we
will bringing to you on Friday at the committees the reorganization item that I had
discussed with Commissioner Hankerson in regards to their committee. But the only
what we call rank-and-file employees that would be under that – well, I shouldn’t say
that, either. I would really like for us to be able to have a meeting or a get-together where
we could identify rank-and-file, because anybody who knows me knows that I’ve always
stuck up for our department. And I’d love nothing more than to do a raise just as much as
y’all would be willing to let us do. That’s the only way I know how to phrase it.
Because I had listened to other enterprise funds bring forward items for raises for a
62
number of folks, and I heard the discussion that you really didn’t want to consider any
more of those as far as just raises are concerned, and so consequently, the only thing we
felt free to bring to you were true reorganizations. And so this is what we have coming to
you Friday. But with that reorganization, there is that cluster of those meter readers. I’m
glad you mentioned those, because there are some true disparities in salaries, and we’re
going to try to equalize those salaries for the meter reader. We would love nothing more
than to be able to take that same kind of look at laborers and assistant crew leaders.
Those would be guys not in supervisory positions, and then any other clerks or others you
might want for us to consider that were not in supervisory positions, or [inaudible] rank-
and-file you meant even those who are in supervisory positions but in front line, I’d say.
Like crew chief on a truck, the guy that’s in charge of the truck, a crew of four. Or a
person in the office who is in charge of maybe four or five who do collections. But we
don’t have that reclassification plan as such right now except for those few that you’ll see
Friday. But I would be more than glad to bring forth as many as would be well received.
I wouldn’t want to stand up and cause a fuss with the Commission, but I’d be glad to get
as many through as we can.
Mr. Williams: Max, let me say this now. With this same money that the water
works been dealing with, we brought other departments – I mean we brought other upper
level people in. Not one time in the five years I been here that we brought the smaller –
and I say smaller, I’m talking about the actually ground workers, the field workers, the
people who work in the office, in the trenches, the secretaries, the meter readers. Those
are the people I’m speaking of. Several times we talked and several times I questioned
about how we changed pay grades and salaries for the upper level. Well, those are not
the people that really keep this government afloat. I’m not saying we don’t need them,
but I’m saying that the people who keep this government going, in your department,
especially in your department, in every department, the little man, the little woman who
does the leg work is the people that really keeps us going. We are hard on them. When
they make a mistake, we usually tell them you’re fired. We usually tell them go on down
the road. But folks upstairs, folks in the upper level seem to be able to say well, I made a
mistake. Well, that’s life. Things happen. But I have not heard yet and I don’t want to
confuse what you’re bringing Friday. I hope it’s nothing to do with anybody that’s
already been looked at and already been exposed to us to make changes. We asked for
the survey that was done, the study that was done, to bring some things back. All the
money now, this is an enterprise situation where the money is – the water works is
making money – we need to spend some of that money not just in water works and doing
it in our plants, but we need to spend some of that money. We got so much, we ought to
be sharing that with the people that’s working that’s keeping the government afloat. So I
hope your list coming to us will be those little people, the secretaries, the meter readers,
even the truck drivers we talked about. I hope that [inaudible] is going to work this time,
I hope there is going to be a big change in Augusta where [inaudible] upper level waits
and the little man comes along and be able to get something done and not include them
with everybody else cause they been often included and the little man been excluded. So
I’d like to see the reverse of that, if there is such a thing.
63
Mr. Hicks: I can certainly promise you, Commissioner Williams, and all the other
Commissioners, that we will indeed bring such before you. Friday, though, is one we’ve
already had prepared and I had already reviewed it, and it has to do with reorganization,
not with taking a wholesale, across-the-board approach of increases for our employees.
That approach had been – well, anyway, I didn’t even know that that approach would be
gladly received. But rest assured, I’ll be glad to bring it but it’s going to take, it’s going
to take a couple of weeks to pull that together. You’re talking about – we’ve got 200-
something employees and I’ll cover just as many of them as y’all will let me do, and it’s
going to take a little bit of time to come to you in an organized fashion and say this is
why we want to do this. Because what we’d really like to do, if I can address is the
situation – when consolidation occurred –
Mr. Williams: Max, let me stop you, cause two preachers, you know how two
preachers together –
Mr. Hicks: I can talk.
Mr. Williams: We can go on, we don’t believe in stopping. But what I’m asking
for is I don’t want to see a consolidation plan or a reorganization plan for the department.
I don’t want to see that. What I want to see is the lower level people who have been
supporting the water works all of these years come up to the table at least some. You may
not be able do to them all at one time but if you do 50, 100, or 75, or whatever, then the
other 75 ought to be right behind that. We have often took the upper level people and
changed their grade. You’ve come in here several times and want to change grade levels
and create another leadership position, and I’m saying, using that work for lack of
another word, but we have never talked about the little people. We have never talked
about the people that read the meters and the people that answer the telephone and the
people that they get somebody that hang up in their face when the water has been turned
off for whatever reason and they, they legitimately should have been turned off. But those
are people who take the abuse. And we have not done that. And I would love to see
whatever you bring Friday. Not to be a plan for reorganizing the department or
reclassifying the department. I want to see something done for the little people. And
that’s why I put it on, for the rank-and-file, for the little man, the little woman who really
keeps this government afloat. We have not done anything for them and I think it’s time
that we take the money that we done produced in the water department and put it back in
to some of those same people. That’s all, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Max, was or was not utilities included in the reclassification study we
did two years ago?
Mr. Hicks: Utilities was included in that reclassification. We had a number that
were going to come forward at that time, but it all got stopped.
64
Mr. Cheek: We remember – and twin brother, I’m so proud of you for bringing
this forward because I know the 11 guys that read 66,000 meters a month would probably
like a pay raise.
Mr. Hicks: Well, those are the ones that are included in the one Friday. You’re
looking at all of those, but all the rest of them, I’m kind of caught flat-footed on this
Commissioners, but rest assured, it won’t be on Friday’s, but the next Engineering
Services Committee after that and the next Administrative Services Committee after that,
the ones that have to consider it, you will find us presenting.
Mr. Cheek: The reclassification study is still on the shelf. Brenda, is it still on the
shelf, ready to go for utilities? Since utilities is an enterprise fund, and I think this is déjà
vu. This was mentioned about two years ago and we didn’t have the will to do it. Why
don’t we, one, while we are reorganizing, implement the reclassification study position
changes for the department, which would accomplish what Commissioner Williams is
talking about by and large, address any holes in the system, and then do the
reorganization for efficiency which you guys are in the process of doing?
Mr. Hicks: Right.
Mr. Cheek: I fully concur with you. It’s an enterprise fund. While we cannot
help the general fund employees due to the tax base of this city, we can reduce the pain to
those in the enterprise fund and assist them. Of course, that’s going to make your group a
preferred position. But while let everybody suffer when we can help those in your
department? I don’t know whether to hold or to go ahead and make the motion right now
to implement the reclassification study in utilities. I think we ought to go ahead and do it.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can, my problem with that, twin brother, is that
some have already been reclassified and already have some, some, some perks, and I say
perks, some increases. But the little people, why we have to – why we take the top and
massage it, but then the little people, we are going to massage the top and drag the little
people in and give them a little something?
Mr. Cheek: I’m saying we reclassified some of those positions. Let’s go ahead
and get the rest of them.
Mr. Williams: Let’s see what Max brings and then we’ll discuss it then.
Mr. Cheek: I don’t want to move too fast for you now. I’ve been working on this
one for about three years. Instead of letting everybody burn down in the building because
we can’t save them all, let’s go save the ones we can, help the ones we can. This is a
perfect opportunity. We have the funding. And you’re right. I’ve been out on the frost
[inaudible] mornings with the sleet blowing sideways, and they’re in the hole fixing our
water pipes.
65
Mr. Hicks: And again, please understand, I’m not at all contrary to what you’re
requesting. I’m 1000% in favor of it. It’s just that Friday we don’t have that particular
agenda item. Friday we’re looking at the reorganization for customer service and water
production, and [inaudible] we’re bringing up the meter reads but rest assured, we will –
Mr. Cheek: Just for clarify, and not to belabor this point, Mr. Mayor, but the
reorganization is a position alignment. The reclassification is dealing with employees’
grade levels.
Mr. Hicks: That’s what I mean. And we will get into that. We don’t have it
Friday, but give us two weeks from that and we’ll have it.
Mr. Cheek: Brenda, you’re [inaudible] quiet on that.
Ms. Pelaez: Don’t shoot the messenger, Mr. Commissioners. While I agree with
the concept that we have on the floor and we do want to make sure that we compensate
all employees at whatever grade level that they area, once again we are getting back to
what we spoke about a couple of weeks ago, is it relates to how do you truly distinguish
between a general fund employee and an enterprise employee. That’s really –
Mr. Cheek: I mean that’s pretty simple in this case. You have utilities and then
you have general fund categories.
Ms. Pelaez: True. However, in reality a truck driver is –
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible]
Ms. Pelaez: And we continue to increase the disparities every time we do that.
And I’m not saying that the employees in utilities don’t deserve a raise, so please don’t
go on record for that. But I think if we’re going to start focusing on increases and trying
to find funding, we need to do it across the board. Because a reclassification is because a
position is graded incorrectly. If you are wanting to compensate that – I use this word –
the “little person” because they’re doing a good job, then we need to systematically come
up with a way to compensate that “little person” for doing a good job. And we need to do
that across the board. And if we can’t do it across the board, at least come up with a way
that we will start to address it in the general fund, as well as in the enterprise.
Mr. Cheek: Well, the thing is, you don’t bite an elephant or eat an elephant all at
once. You eat it a bite at a time. And quite frankly, we’ve been standing back, not
addressing this issue for a couple of years now. Rather than helping people and coming
to solutions for the others that we can’t help at this time that are non-enterprise fund
personnel, we continue to just put it off and put it off. And really, quite frankly, physics
and everything else will dictate that you do what you can for those you can. You don’t
abandon the ship just because you can’t save everybody. And that’s my whole point.
We’ve chosen to, since we can’t save everybody, walk away from the problem until we
can come save them. Well, the point is, we’re losing good employees every day to other
66
cities. So I’m in favor – I hate to see anybody not get a pay raise, but certainly those that
we can help we should help, and I think I said that two years ago, and I’d be very much in
favor of going ahead and implementing the reclassification and the reorganization.
Mr. Mayor: We’ll go to Mr. Hankerson and then to Commissioner Beard.
Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Apparently somebody was absent when
this Commission voted on not reclassifying anyone else out of enterprise funds until we
are able to give all employee, all employees – most of them haven’t had a raise in a
couple of years – that all employees of the City of Augusta need to be reclassified. And
that’s what we are going to look strongly at next year. This year when we redo the
budget this year, I think that should be a number one priority. [inaudible] why the
Commission voted, that we were not going to reclassify enterprise zones, enterprise funds
any more. So I think we need to stick to that. Go back to what Commissioner Mays said
before, is we talking about reconsideration here? Cause the Commission already passed
that.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard?
Ms. Beard: I have quite a few concerns. I mean I actually do.
Mr. Mayor: Speak into your microphone, please.
Ms. Beard: I do feel when we do this type of thing we have to do it for all of the
employees. I haven’t been here very long, so I don’t know. My first question is how do
you determine what’s an enterprise fund and what is a general fund? How do they differ?
Why is it you cannot pull some of the funds from the enterprise to be used for other
things? Is it a state policy or what?
Mr. Hicks: Would you like me to address that as best I can, as to the difference?
Okay, enterprise funds, to give what I call a simple definition are those departments that
have sources of revenue other than taxation. We have fees that we collect for services
provided, and as such we don’t take monies from the general tax revenues. And we
operate as a business. And we try then to actually put money back into the general fund
rather than take money from the general fund. So as such, the general funds receives
money from us as an enterprise fund to the tune of about $3 million a year, we pay
payment in lieu of franchise payment, payment in lieu of taxes, and we also pay our share
of the general overhead and operation of the other city departments, government
departments. So in that instance, we operate more like a business under the auspices of
the Commission of the city of Augusta. And that’s why we’re called an enterprise fund.
We really don’t operate off the general taxes. Now in times past, it was not uncommon
for cities to use enterprise funds as a supplement to general funds instead of increasing
taxes. And in those instances, it could and did lead to bad situations in enterprise funds
and so consequently this Commission years ago voted not to take any more money from
enterprise funds other than what I’ve just stated. Payment in lieu of taxes, payment in
lieu of franchise fees, and paying our fair share. Because it does [inaudible] the Finance
67
Department, all of those departments actually contribute to our operation and support,
therefore it’s fair that we would pay money to those, to the general fund to support those.
But it was the Commission that voted not to do that back when we first began our bond
issues, Commissioner Beard, back in 1997, I mean in ’96 when the first bond issue was
done. A schedule was set forth which diminished the amount of money that was taken
from the enterprise fund going to the general fund, and then with the 2000 fund it was
reduced to zero to my knowledge, other than those that we mentioned. So that’s the
difference between an enterprise and a general fund. An enterprise operates as a business,
not using tax dollars from the city. We operate on fees collected for services performed.
And that’s why the airport and utilities are your two largest enterprise funds. Others
would be the solid waste service and the bus service. Those are both, I know, [inaudible]
enterprise funds and there might be others. Fire Department, I think they have another
source of income rather than taxation. I don’t know of any others, but that’s the
difference.
Ms. Beard: I appreciate that.
Mr. Hicks: Yes, ma’am.
Ms. Beard: So it seems to me with the concerns we have then that’s where the
problem may be and that may be what we need to do, the Commission go back and
review that.
Mr. Hicks: What we have done, though, with each of our bond issues that
condition has been a part of the covenants, the bond covenants. So consequently, we, the
City has now made covenants with these bond holders that it would not revert to its
former policy of taking money from – particularly the water and sewer enterprise fund
other than those that we’ve just mentioned. So those were actually written into the bond
covenants and we’ve been commended, the city has been commended for it, as the Mayor
will attest.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, let me try to do a little brief history on this right quick.
We did vote not to do any increases, to change anything. The study had been done in the
water department some couple of years ago, Max, and I’m just putting a number out
there. I asked for the study to come, so we can look at. Cause the study is showing us
some things we need to do ourselves, [inaudible] what the funds were doing and I wanted
to get an update. Well, the study came and you took part of that study and to reclassify
some of the upper level people, to bring them in, to change their grade. And I said it may
not be a dollar figure equated to it now, but change that grade eventually going to raise
their salary. Well, when that was done, and this Commission voted to do it – I didn’t
support it but the Commission voted to do it – well, that raised the attention of the “little
people” who are doing the leg work and keeping this government afloat. If we raise
them, we reclassify them, then why can’t we go now, cause there’s money that was
[inaudible] to help with IT from the enterprise funds, to help them acquire a position over
68
there, to help do some things. If we got that much money. If it’s a business in the
government that’s bringing money in, why are the “little people” still at the same level
and have not brought up versus the people who are “above that” being reclassified?
Commissioner Hankerson, I missed one meeting in five years. I’m proud of that fact. I
had a death in the family but I try to be here, and those meetings, we made it plain that
we wouldn’t do anything else because we couldn’t do everybody. But since that’s a
different fund, since we have done a few people, let’s do the rest of them. And I’m
thinking now we ought not to worry about those that’s doing pretty good. I can
remember, Max, when we [inaudible] gave them a raise when they came over. But the
“little people” still didn’t get anything. I don’t nobody, I don’t think bread is any cheaper
for one person than it is another one, and we have those monies, we are doing pretty good
in that department. I want to see the “little person,” the “small man,” the “small lady”
who will keep this government afloat at least be considered to be brought up to the table
like everybody else. Some of these people got 25 and 30 years on the job. When you
retire with a pay scale, a low pay scale, that’s what you draw your retirement on. And the
rate, the increases they might get, will help in their retirement. We got a lot of retirees
here now. And we need to what’s right now. I want to see the “little people” brought
back.
Mr. Hicks: I’ll have it.
Mr. Williams:I make a motion that we receive this as
All right, sir.
information and wait until we come back to Finance, I guess for Max to bring this
back to the committee meeting, Engineering Services, Administrative Services, one
of them, both of them.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to the motion?
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Further discussion? All in favor then please vote with the usual sign.
Mr. Mays out.
Mr. Boyles not voting.
Motion carries 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: The next item is number 60, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS:
60. Discuss unsolicited newspaper throws in residential neighborhoods.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, you had this pulled?
69
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, we have a situation in the city where the newspapers
are being thrown in yards with yellow wrappers on them that lay in people’s yards in the
rain, in the wind, the dogs, the cats get a hold to it. They are not solicited. You and I
have went around and took signs off the right-of-way because we want our city to look
good. You and I done that. But we can’t allow any business to throw papers [inaudible]
but we can’t allow any business to throw papers in people’s yards they have not solicited
and just lay there. When it gets wet, when it rains, they are in their yards every week.
Not just once a year, Mr. Mayor. I got a district that is in disarray right now and it looks
a lot better cause we done a lot of work. We have changed it a lot, but it’s very unsightly
to have those papers thrown up against your fence, in your hedges, in your driveway, and
just left there. Had people solicited that and paid for it, we couldn’t complain. But these
are papers that we don’t solicit. These are papers that we don’t ask for, and I think this
government ought to be in position to have something done about it. Also, the attorney,
we spoke on Monday about people on Sunday mornings, of going through traffic, trying
to buy a $1 newspaper and about to lose their life and [inaudible] being struck by an
automobile. There ought to be some kind of guidelines. Ought to be something to be
done, something to be said about that. I brought it to this Commission. Hopefully we
can get something today through our Legal Department to stop that kind of stuff that’s
being thrown all over the city of Augusta.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I understand where
you are coming from on the unsolicited, what you call the unsolicited throws. If the
Commission agrees, I think you could have a motion to task License & Inspection to see
if there is someone out there with a business license distributing these yellow
newspapers. It’s not the Chronicle, we know that’s solicited newspapers. If they don’t
have a category for that in the business license ordinance then I think we should legislate
one so that if they don’t clean this up then their license can be revoked. You asked also
about the people that are standing on the – selling the Sunday newspapers on the streets at
the corners of the streets. I did call the Chronicle because I believe that’s the only
newspaper sold in that manner, and that is handled by an independent contractor. And I
do not know if that’s, who that is, but I’ve been told that it would be furnished to my
office. We can determine what type of business license they have. If they don’t have an
license and there is no category for that, then I think there should be one, where it can
also be regulated. The streets are for traveling, Mr. Williams, and if there is to be any
commercial activity on it, I think it should be some form of licensing, if your colleagues
agree. And if they don’t comply with the terms of their license, then they could have
their license revoked and the activity will stop. The license could have some conditions
about public safety in it, to keep the, to keep these sellers at the corner in a safe situation
or you could – I suppose you could prohibit it, but I think it is [inaudible] that would be
my counsel.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I beg to differ about the name on the yellow papers
that are being throwed on the yards. I think it is the Augusta Chronicle. I’m not sure
about that. I had planned to bring one, but in my rush to travel I left that at home.
70
Mr. Shepard: I wanted to bring one, too.
Mr. Williams: And I didn’t have it. But we need to address that issue bad
because that is a issue. Now you say a license. I don’t want to give anybody a license to
throw unsolicited papers. If I come by your house, because I got a license, throw in your
front yard, I’m cluttering and really littering your property. If I don’t solicit it, if I don’t
want it, now I can let them all stay in my yard if I ask for them. But I don’t think you
ought to have the right to buy a license to come and throw them in my yard because you
in business. So there’s got to be something else rather than a license for those papers.
There’s got to be a litter law or something in place that if I go to the landfill, if I go to a
private place and dump, the Marshal’s Department will come out there and go through
the trash and get my mail, get my address, and come to my house and says, which they
have not seen me but because my name or ID is there, they know where it comes from.
Now it don’t take no brain surgeon to do that. We need to get something in place in order
to stop what has started in this city and been going on for some time.
Mr. Shepard: Well, if that’s the will of the body. [inaudible] if you’d rather have
them prosecuted for littering, you can go that route. [inaudible] I think when you
subscribe you solicit.
Mr. Williams: Okay, I’m going to leave that to the attorney. Whatever you
suggest. You the lawyer. I practice law, but I don’t get paid.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s hear from Commissioner Colclough.
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, the Sand Ridge Neighborhood Association had a big
fight with the, I think with the Chronicle, who prints these papers. And they had a time
to get those folks to stop throwing these papers. I have even asked them to stop throwing
them in my yard. If I’m sitting in the yard they pass by, but if I’m not they throw it right
in the middle of the yard and I got to walk all the way in the middle of the grass to get
these things. It is a nuisance. I mean a lot of people just don’t pick them up and the wind
blow them out in the streets and they all over the place. So I’ve asked them to stop
throwing them in my yard. It’s an advertisement. It’s not the newspaper. But I’ve even
asked them to stop throwing them in my yard, and I constantly get them. Sand Ridge, the
whole neighborhood association, had a big fight with the people who printed and throw
them out there, and they finally got them to stop coming in in that neighborhood. But it’s
a hassle [inaudible] picking up those things.
Mr. Mayor: How about we ask the attorney and License & Inspection
Departments to look at this –
Mr. Williams: I make that in the form of a motion.
Mr. Mayor: And a recommendation regarding an ordinance if necessary.
71
Mr. Williams: I so move, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Cheek: I second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor,
please vote with the usual sign.
Mr. Hankerson and Mr. Mays out.
Motion carries 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: Next item, Madame Clerk?
The Clerk:
60A. Discuss city contracts that are nearing expiration. (Requested by Mayor Pro
Tem Marion Williams)
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Williams:
I had this, asked this to be put on because we know we are ending
the, getting close to the fiscal year for the end for our ambulance service and we are out
for bids on that. We have other contracts that going to expire the end of this year. I
wanted to make sure that those contracts or those items be brought to the table early
enough for us to go out for bids and not wait for us to get up against the wall, waiting to
the last minute and say we got to go ahead and do this because we didn’t address it. So
Ms. Allen is here. I would appreciate it if we could get a list of all of those contracts that
expiring the end of this year and the procedures that we need to do and we need to handle
those so we be able to go out for bids, if that what we got to do or to change if that what
we got to do, rather than wait until four months before time and not have time to go out
and do the procure or the RFPs or whatever we needed. So please, ma’am, if you have
that list for our committee meeting, that we be able to have in our books so we be
able to look at that so we can look at it intelligently and discuss those things so we
won’t get up against the wall. I make that in the form of a motion to receive as
information, that the Administrator will have that in our package when we get to
committee, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Colclough: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Further discussion? All in favor, please vote
with the usual sign.
Ms. Sims, Mr. Mays and Mr. Hankerson out.
Motion carries 7-0.
Mr. Mayor: That brings us to our legal meeting. I have one, two real estate items
[inaudible].
72
63. LEGAL MEETING:
A. Pending and potential litigation.
B. Real Estate.
C. Personnel.
Mr. Shepard: I would ask that we have a legal meeting for pending and
potential litigation, real estate, personnel, as allowed under Open Meetings.
Mr. Colclough: So move.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, do I need to add personnel, since personnel is on
there?
Mr. Shepard: No, sir, generic subjects carry the day.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Boyles, did you have something?
Mr. Boyles: I just had a legal personnel matter I wanted to discuss, but if that’s
covered under the blanket –
Mr. Shepard: It is.
Mr. Boyles: It is.
Mr. Mayor: Is there any objection?
Ms. Sims, Mr. Mays and Mr. Hankerson out.
Motion carries 7-0.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if you would, I need to say to the pensioners we are
going into legal and we’ll be taking up your item when we come out. I think that’s why
these people are –
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible]
Mr. Williams: Yeah, but these people are still here and I don’t want them to think
that we have forgotten about it. We address that issue when we come back.
[LEGAL MEETING]
Mr. Mayor: We’ll come back to order. We’ll defer at this time asking for a
motion to sign the affidavit since we’ll be returning to our legal session, but we wanted to
come out and report to those who have very patiently waited this afternoon on one
73
particular item. The Chair will, the Chair will recognize the Finance Chairman for the
purpose of making a motion.
Mr. Boyles: It took me a while to
Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I appreciate that.
talk to the attorney. In regards to our pension matter that is before us today, I
make the following motion, that we withdraw the current RFP that has been placed
out and that we allow the current status to continue until further notice.
Mr. Mays: Second.
Mr. Mayor: There’s a second to that motion. Discussion? Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I didn’t hear in the motion – it also needs to be added to the
agenda. You didn’t say that.
Mr. Boyles: Okay, also to add.
Mr. Shepard: Add and approve.
Mr. Boyles: Correct.
Mr. Mayor: All right, all in favor of the motion then please vote with the usual
sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair once again will recognize the Finance Chairman for the
Here again, to add and approve.
purpose of a motion.
Mr. Boyles: Mr. Shepard, I think you’ve got my –
Mr. Mayor: You’ve got it, Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I think I do.
Mr. Boyles: This concerns the survivors in the 1945 pension plan.
Mr. Shepard: Would you like me to frame the motion?
Mr. Boyles: Would you frame the motion for me, Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I would ask for a motion that adds and
Yes, sir, I can.
approves with respect to the 1945 Act that the survivors of the pensioners who may
die continue to receive the increased benefit, which was voted early this year in the
amount of $150 a month.
That’s the end of the motion.
74
Mr. Boyles: That’s correct.
Mr. Shepard: My understanding is there has been no deaths of any of the
pensioners, so there is no need to make it retroactive.
Mr. Boyles: Well, I think in the situation, we approved it for the pensioners – we
should have said pensioners and survivors. Am I right, Ms. Pelaez? And we left out the
word survivors. In Mr. Long’s letter to us, we left that out, and we’re trying to add that
back.
Ms. Pelaez: Yes, sir. What we actually need the Commissioners to do is to
approve for the current survivors of the 1945 retirees to allow them to also receive the
$150 monthly increase. There are approximately nine survivors that did not get the
increase as the other nineteen retirees.
Mr. Hankerson: I second that motion.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we have a motion and a second to add and approve that
item. Any discussion?
Mr. Long: That is retroactive?
Mr. Mayor: It would be effective the same date as the earlier approval, Mr. Long.
All in favor of that motion, please vote with the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you very much. We will –
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor, before we return to legal, I need to ask a
question. I was asked by one of the retirees about – and I approached our Human
Resource director about it. What do we need to do if a pensioner passes and his wife or
the husband may be the survivor? They are not getting that fund, that is not transferred
over to them automatically; is that right, Ms. Pelaez?
Ms. Pelaez: Under the 1945 pension plan, if the retiree at the time of their
retirement did not choose to opt to have survivor benefits at the time of their retirement,
upon their death their survivor will not continue to receive pension benefits. The only
thing that they will receive will be the medical benefits. I’ve had a conversation with Mr.
[inaudible] and I explained to him we needed to bring that back before the Commission
so that we can discuss what it is we need to do about that specific instance. Because in
the other pension plans, for instance in the ’77 pension plan, you do decide at the time
that you retire whether you want it 100%, 50% or 75%, but for whatever administrative
reasons during the time of their retirement did not occur, for all of them.
75
Mr. Williams: But you are going to look into that to see what we can do for those
who didn’t sign up, to be able to have that [inaudible]?
Ms. Pelaez: Yes, sir.
Mr. Williams: All right. Okay. I just wanted to bring that out. The pensioners
been here all day. Been very patient and we want them to know we support them.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Commissioner. All right, we are moved back into the
meeting room. Yes?
Mr. Speaker: I want to say one thing. I want all the Commissioners to know that
the benefits that you have given [inaudible] pension, that we appreciate it very much.
And many of us think you’ve done [inaudible] through the years and we certainly
appreciate it. And we would ask each and every one of you to continue to let [inaudible]
and them handle our money. Because it will be local, it’s a place that we can go talk to
them, and we won’t have to through a thousand hoops to find out what everything is all
about. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you.
[LEGAL MEETING]
Mr. Mayor: The chair will entertain a motion to allow the Mayor to sign the
affidavit.
64. Motion to approve authorization for the Mayor to execute affidavit of
compliance with the Georgia’s Open Meeting Act.
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Any objection? None heard.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I would ask for authority to add and approve authority in my
office that is necessary to begin condemnation action of the equipment of Land Gas
at the landfill.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a motion to add and approve?
Mr. Boyles: I so move.
76
Mr. Hankerson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Discussion? All in favor, please vote with the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Shepard: In addition, I’d ask for authority to add and approve the
participation by the City of Augusta in a settlement of claims of the Augusta
Training Shop for the Handicapped in a not-to-exceed amount of $10,000.
Mr. Grantham: So move.
Mr. Colclough: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion to add and approve. Any discussion?
Mr. Mays: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, Mr. Mays?
Mr. Mays: I’m going to vote for it [inaudible] in reference to [inaudible] in there
in reference to [inaudible]?
Mr. Shepard: I have no problem in adding that in [inaudible] I have no problem.
Mr. Mays: [inaudible]
Mr. Shepard: No problem.
Mr. Mays: I just thought the waiver needs to be in there [inaudible].
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of that motion, please vote with the usual sign.
Mr. Williams votes No.
Motion carries 9-1.
Mr. Mayor: I recognize the attorney.
Mr. Shepard: Finally, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, I would ask
to add and approve additional authority in my office for the settlement of the fee
claims in the Campbell case
--
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible]
Mr. Shepard: [inaudible]
77
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible]
Mr. Mays: [inaudible] ten minutes [inaudible].
Mr. Mayor: The motion was to add and approve.
If you [inaudible]. So what
we need – we’ll move through this quickly. We need a motion to reconsider.
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor:. Now what we need is a motion to
Any objection? None heard
add that to the agenda.
No objection to reconsidering.
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Is there any objection to adding the item?
None heard. Okay,
now we go to [inaudible].
No objection to adding this item to the agenda.
Mr. Mayor: [inaudible]
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All in favor, please vote with the usual sign.
Mr. Williams votes No.
Motion carries 9-1.
Mr. Mayor: All right, here we go one more time.
Mr. Shepard: I’d like a motion to add, I’d like to add the issue of additional
authority, that I would be granted by this Commission for attorneys’ fees in the
Campbell case. To add.
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
78
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there any objection to adding that to the
agenda? There is no objection.
No objection to adding this item to the agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Proceed now with a motion?
Mr. Shepard: I need a motion that would authorize the additional authority
of $1,900 in attorneys’ fees in the Campbell case.
Mr. Colclough: I so move.
Mr. Mays: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. All in favor, please vote with the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Is there any further to come before this body? We are adjourned
without objection.
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Lena J. Bonner
Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and
correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of Augusta Richmond County
Commission held on April 19, 2005.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
79