Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 5, 2005 Augusta Richmond County Commi REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER December 5, 2005 Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., December 5, 2005, the Honorable Willie H. Mays, III, Interim Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Hankerson, Smith, Colclough, Grantham, Handy, Williams, Beard, Cheek, Sims, Rearden, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Also Present: Steve Shepard, Attorney; Fred Russell, Administrator; Lena Bonner, Clerk of Commission. The invocation was given by Rev. Dr. J. Andrew Menger, Assistant Rector, Church of the Good Shepherd. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. PRESENTATION(S) A. Mr. John Pearson, Sr., Georgia Forestry Commission Annual Report. Mr. Speaker: --provides is stewardship. The Georgia Forestry works with land owners to manage forests for clean air, clean water, and forest products to benefit all Georgians. Our reforestation program, the Georgia Forestry nursery provides quality seedlings seedlings to ensure future forests for Georgia. Urban and community forestry. The Georgia Forestry helps communicate safe, healthy and beneficial trees and forests. Now, the forest management is a big part of our division, too. [unintelligible] The drought that has persisted over the last five years has seemed to subside, as well as the rainfall deficit throughout the state of Georgia, including Richmond County. As a result, drought stressed pine trees have become less susceptible to pine beetle attack and are overall more healthy. Oak trees, for instance, do not always show immediate signs from stress. With the heavy rainfall of last year, this causes tree leaf blight disease. This is a direct result of too much rain and moisture in the air. This level of moisture creates excellent conditions for leaf fungi. This kind of disease primarily causes esthetic problems but does not kill the trees. Overall, no significant outbreaks of pine beetle or disease have been reported in Richmond County this year, which is a good thing. Augusta Richmond County and Fort Gordon were named Tree City USA again. Congratulations on that, guys. It takes a lot to be a Tree City US and you guys really put a lot of effort into that and we thank you very much. Both management information and education—numbers on management and education and fire protection. I’m just going to highlight a couple of things. We had the five parades reaching 1700 people. Our forestry programs were 107 and we’re reaching 947 people. So we’re getting the message out there about forestry and the benefits of forest and healthy forests and fire prevention. Some of the special projects that we reach—the Richmond County 911 day was Smokey Bear. The Gracewood Christmas Parade. The Forestry Youth Camp. [unintelligible] is involved with that. We have Arbor Days. We have the Fort Gordon—we get with Youth 1 Challenge Academy cadets and we job shadow those guys and hope we get those guys on the right track and maybe convince them that forestry would be a good route for their future life. I’d like to talk about new construction in the Richmond County forestry unit. We remodeled the office building. It was—everything from—we redesigned it to be a more effective work area and more efficient. From electrical wiring to new walls, being painted. We added a new administration desk with new counter top, new carpet. We spent a lot of our time with the Spirit Creek Educational [unintelligible]. We’re busy maintaining various pieces of equipment. Other activities at the site include working on the apartment and reconstructing those into two apartments for the interns at Spirit Creek. We also have ground maintenance, including mowing and maintaining. I’d like to talk about reforestation now. The number of seedlings that we sold to landowners in Richmond County was 57,429. We also picked a lot of seed this year. And we were limited on staff and personnel but we got five pounds of dogwood seed, 202 pounds of swamp chestnut oak, 26 pounds of water oak, and 15 pounds of white oak. Now these acorns that we pick, they go to our nurseries [unintelligible] plant them for the next generation of trees for the next generation of people and kids. So it’s a big part that we have to take in keeping our forests healthy and regenerated. Georgia forests—vital to the state’s economy environment. The forest industry generates $20 billion to the Georgia economy. Timber is still the number one cash crop in Georgia. Trees can increase home values and property by fifteen percent. Trees improve water quality and reduce storm water runoff. Trees improve air quality by filtering air pollutants, producing oxygen, and storing carbons. Trees reduce health care costs, too, believe it or not. In closing, as stated in our mission statement, the priority of the Richmond County Forestry Unit is to enhance the quality of life and provide leadership in the areas of protection for all forest resources for everyone in the county. I would like to express my appreciation for the help given to us this year by the Richmond County Commissioners. But I also thank the many others as well. I would like to state this for the record. The short time I’ve been here as chief ranger, and that’s been about one year, everyone I’ve met—Mayors, Commissioners, department heads, fire chiefs, employees—has been very helpful and friendly. That is a great asset. Keep up the good work and thank you very much. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: Let us thank you all for keeping up the good work. So many times when departments do such a great job and there is nothing going on that’s controversial, they don’t make a lot of news and I guess that’s because you continue to do a good job. We appreciate it so very much and in so many ways you’re kind of like one of those unknown departments. But if you were not there, the negative side of that we’d all know what that is. And we thank you so very much for a continued great report on your If not, the Chair will receive a motion to department there. Are there any questions? receive as information. Mr. Williams: So move. Mr. Cheek: Second. 2 Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. No further discussion. All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Thank you so very much. The Clerk: B. Ms. Mary Crawford, Hurricane Katrina Task Force Ms. Crawford: Good afternoon. I am director of communities and schools and I am here along with Dr. McKenzie from Augusta Community Partnership to ask for a sanctioning of our proposed Hurricane Katrina Task Force Committee. The mission of the task force is to collaborate with community agencies, government, businesses, faith based organizations, and private citizens in addressing the ongoing needs of the families that are here in Augusta. Many of our families have expressed their thank you and they’ve stressed our Augusta opened their hands and opened arms to greet them, but right now they are saying we want to stay in Augusta and we need assistance in getting integrated into the system. Our task force is comprised of agencies such as the Richmond County Department of Family and Children’s Services, [unintelligible] Connections, we have business both public and private and I will not list them all. But at a town hall meeting on Saturday we did hear many cries from some of the parents who are saying that we are still in hotels, we have children who need mentoring and tutoring and health needs. We have these needs in Augusta as well, but again, as I stated our parents here, the displaced families, do not know how to connect to these resources. As a task force our goal now is to prepare the next steps for these families. To acclimate them to Augusta, to the many resources that we have. I won’t take much of your time but our goal here today is to ask you as a Commission to sanction us as a task force so that we can now meet the needs of these families and also prepare for other disasters that may happen in Augusta. Are there any questions at all? Mr. Mayor: Not so much any questions. Thank you for coming. I don’t think we have any problem in doing that. I was glad to hear the named agencies that you mentioned and I’m sure there are others, as well. As I look out, I guess, across the room at Chief Willis, and probably working very closely with him and with Mr. Russell, as the Administrator, on those early days of preparation and of trying to make sure that we had our one-stop headquarters set up, that I think the persons involved with all of those departments and agencies certainly were a godsend and I think as we proved through the many cities where people who were affected from the Gulf Region period, that this was one of the first areas whereby there was a one-stop center period in the country to do that with. And we even found as we were dismantling some of them were trying to find out how to get theirs sets up and to do it. And I think that’s a tribute to working together and teamwork and being able to bring everybody together on one roof and to be able to do that. We are going to continue as those needs have to be addressed, to do this. The Commission, our agencies are ready and are going to be there in order to help to meet 3 those needs and I think it’s something that the Commission should sanction because it will be an ongoing process. It’s not a secret, many of those persons who come here definitely will have to be here, because as the federal government addresses some of those concerns that are there, Mississippi, Louisiana, it’s going to be months before some of those properties are even inspected or seen period by anybody on a federal level. And that was one of the reasons why when we formed the Augusta Helping Others. And that’s no knock on any other agencies, particularly with all the money that’s been going to Red Cross and I think this city came up to the plate like every other city did, probably even more so. But I think that it’s still a need and we recognized that very early that there were going to be things that were going to be outside of a national and a regional effort that we were still going to have to put together on this local level. So I’m glad that you are coming together to do that. There is an account that is already open. I have to give that a little plug [unintelligible] in there and I think that they will welcome that task force help in terms of coming aboard. Both Southern Company and First Bank have been very great in terms of opening that and of doing it, providing the auditing so that those things can be done strictly from the financial side. The servicing end of it, you all have that and are doing it and are going to do a great job with it and I feel confident that you will. Are there any questions from any of the Commissioners? Mr. Hankerson: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hankerson? Mr. Hankerson: Thank you. Will the task force be soliciting contributions? How does that work? Ms. Crawford: During the next phase or next step we have passed out surveys to the displaced families and based on their surveys, depending on their needs, there may be in-kind solicitations as well. Right now we have not formulated that specific task yet but if the need arises we may. Mr. Hankerson: Okay. So the task force will just be forwarding these individuals to other agencies in the city that can help meet that need? Ms. Crawford: Well right now, as I stated, we have not actually formulated a plan based on that. Our goal is to have agencies that can work as a one stop, with the entire family. When that family comes in they will be able to help them with housing, with utility bills, day care centers, in mentoring and tutoring as well. That is the goal but as of now we have not formulated that yet. Mr. Hankerson: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. I was just thinking, and maybe the Administrator and his office may be to get with the agency and [unintelligible] something 4 that could be formed. I think it’s a good gesture and I think it’s something that we need to support, naturally because we do want to help. But I mean I don’t know the pros, other cons, how [unintelligible] will do it, but if the Administrator can work something out, Mr. Mayor, I would love to see him do that, work with this group and try to get something that we would be comfortable with. Mr. Mayor: And I think that the Administrator will assist. I think we need to get try and get the different groups together, particularly since there is a name group from the standpoint of receiving financial funds that we have been a part of. We would like for that agency to meet with them first. Mr. Russell can very well facilitate that. I mentioned First Bank, with Mr. Blanchard, and Georgia Power with Walter Dukes, but I’m going to let you jump in here a minute, Mr. Russell, and then I think we can move on how we can get you all together. Mr. Russell: I think Commissioner Williams has a nice idea and I was going to ask for the opportunity to meet with the committee, come up with some more definitive mechanisms for moving there. I was able to be with them Saturday for just a few minutes and they had a good crowd there and great people doing great things. But I think we need to define the role a little bit deeper than what it is actually at the moment and I’d like the opportunity to meet with them over the next two weeks and come back to you at our next meeting with a recommendation on how we can continue to move forward. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Just a question. Does the task force include a component for I guess job retraining and job placement programs? Ms. Crawford: Yes, sir. We have several agencies in Augusta that are part of the task force. I just did not call their names, but yes. Mr. Cheek: I just think it’s so important that we not only provide them a place but also an opportunity to get back on their feet and maybe even improve their position. Ms. Crawford: Yes, sir. Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] motion? Mr. Mayor: Yes. Mr. Williams: I make it in the form of a motion, if I can get a second. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed the same. 5 Motion carries 10-0. RECOGNITION(S) The Clerk: At this time the Mayor would like to recognize one of our businesses and several of our eateries in Augusta who participated in providing meals for Katrina evacuees that are in our city. Once your name is called, would you please join the Mayor here at the podium, along with our Mayor of the Day, Ms. Miesha Loyd. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] are by no means everybody who participated and opened their arms [unintelligible] doing that every day. But [unintelligible] in terms of true [unintelligible] in terms of [unintelligible] and we just wanted to take a little time today to say thank you. [unintelligible] make sure [unintelligible] I think the general public should know that [unintelligible] and they may not [unintelligible] to do some things [unintelligible]. And we do thank you for that [unintelligible]. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: The Office of Mayor certificate of recognition given to—for your contributions to the Metro Augusta Helping Others Hurricane Relief—the City of Augusta recognize and applaud your commitment to helping others. First we’d like to recognize the Hank Aaron Jaguar of Augusta. Mr. Sid Barron. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: Mr. Rocky Olguin. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] The Clerk: And Mr. Ted Johnson. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: Next we will have Carabba’s Italian Grill. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: Mr. Bert Moralis. Mr. Barry Mead. And Ms. Catherine Loftin. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: Next we would like to recognize Famous Dave’s Legendary Pit Barbecue. Mitsi Gillespie. 6 [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: Fatz Café. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: Mr. Tom Clark. Tom Clark. Heavenly Ham. Oh, they’re not here. Hospitality Insight, Mr. Joe Zeller. Lone Star. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: Louis Elliott, Ellery Parker and Tony Lafavor. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: T-Bonz Steakhouse of Augusta. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: Karen Miller. The Gordon Group. Neil Gordon. Tony Roma’s, Famous for Ribs. Ms. Amanda Gary. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: TGI Friday’s. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: Mr. Scott Stencil. And Mr. David Rachel. Mr. Mayor: One of the most persistent individuals that I know in America [unintelligible]. Thank you so much [unintelligible] but [unintelligible] at least four to five times a day, doing everything that was there. And I was [unintelligible] and what I really loved about [unintelligible] is that [unintelligible] never an “I” thing or what I can do, but everybody was sharing in what they were doing, and of making sure that our office knew that it was a group [unintelligible] and not something that came out of one business. And we really thank you for it. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: There are some others [unintelligible]. The Clerk: Lori Davis. Mr. Jay Jeffries. Terry Kirkland. Cindy Lassiter. Laura Russo. And Ms. Marla Telfair. [A round of applause is given.] 7 Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] I’m going to let y’all work that out [unintelligible]. Mr. Speaker: I’ll take care of it. Mr. Mayor: Thank y’all for everything that you continue to do. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: I would like to say that [unintelligible] made me aware of and we were hoping he was going to be able to get here today, would be the presence of Hank Aaron. And his mother, who is very ill at this time—we ask you to keep her in your prayers. She’s been living there in Mobile and several of his properties, along with a lot of memorabilia was damaged and they have made sure that in every city where they have a dealership that they have given contributions and particularly to the Red Cross and our [unintelligible] ceremonial check that the dealership here gave in excess of $39,000, along with other contributions they’d already made. But they’ve been doing this with every dealership that Hank Aaron has. So in his absence I want us to give him as well a round of [A round of applause is given.]. [A round of applause is given.] Terri Turner E. Presentation Terri Turner achievement of Certified Floodplain Manager (CFM). The Clerk: We ask now that Ms. Terri Turner, along with the [unintelligible] Georgia Department of Natural Resources, will you please joins the Mayor here at the podium? Mr. Brown: Good afternoon. Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you and to acknowledge the achievement of Terri Turner of Augusta Richmond County Planning Commission. My name is Collis Brown. I’m the State Coordinator for Flood Plain Management with the Georgia Department of Natural Resources out of Atlanta. Since the late 70s and early 80s citizens of Augusta Richmond County have been able to purchase flood insurance coverage for their homes and businesses. This was made possible by the voluntary action at that time of the Augusta City Council and Richmond County Commissioners to join the National Flood Insurance Program. The National Flood Insurance Program is administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, and is based on an agreement that if a community will practice sound flood plain management the federal government will make flood insurance available. As Georgia’s flood plain management coordinator with the Department of Natural Resources, I am responsible for providing training, technical assistance, and guidance to the 447 communities, cities and counties in Georgia participating in the National Flood Insurance Program. Simply stated, Georgia Flood Plain Management Office maintains an ongoing, supportive working relationship for each local flood plain management 8 program. The role of the local flood plain manager is ever expanding due to increases in disaster losses. The Association of State Flood Plain Managers, which is the largest and most respected organization of flood plain professionals, created in 1999, [unintelligible] certified the Flood Plain Manager Program. The primary goal of the certified Flood Plain Manager Program is to promote wise use of the nation’s flood plains, help reduce the nation’s flood losses, and protect and enhance the natural resources and functions of flood plains by improving knowledge and ability of flood plain managers in the United States. A secondary goal is to increase the prominence of flood plain management in decision making by local officials and the public. To be granted the distinction of becoming a certified flood plain manager, CFM, the person must demonstrate knowledge of the basic national standards and programs of flood plain management by passing a three hour comprehensive exam. As vice president of the certification board of regents of the Association of State Flood Plain Managers, it is my pleasure to present to Terri Turner of the Augusta Richmond County Planning Commission this certificate signifying that she is a Certified Flood Plain Manager and is now one of more than 2800 CFMs nationwide and one of 32 CFMs employed by local governments in Georgia. Congratulations. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] tremendous job that you continue to do for us [unintelligible] meager resources that [unintelligible]. Mr. Speaker: I was born and raised in Augusta. I’m a graduate of T.W. Josey High School. [A round of applause is given.] The Clerk: I call your attention to our consent agenda, which consists of items 1 through 33. Items 1 through 33. For the benefit of any objectors to our alcohol petitions, once the petition is read, would you please signify your objection by raising your hand? PUBLIC SERVICES 2. Motion to approve a request by Kejal K. Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Sand Bar Ferry Super Market located at 232 Sand Bar Ferry Rd. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 3. Motion to approve a request by Dingyu Chi for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Fujiyama Japanese Steakhouse & Sushi Bar located at 3043 Washington Rd. There will be Sunday Sales. District 7. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 4. Motion to approve a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Kangaroo Express # 3737 located at 3539 Wheeler Rd. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 9 5. Motion to approve a request by Richard Cutler for a Sunday Sales License to be used in connection with Racquets Restaurant and Sports Bar at The Club at Raes Creek located at 3206 Wimbledon Dr. There will be Sunday Sales. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28m, 2005) 6. Motion to approve a request by Kyung R. Han for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Olive Supermarket located at 1671 Olive Rd. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 8. Motion to approve a request by the Augusta-Richmond County License & Inspection Department to renew all existing Alcohol Beverage Licenses in Augusta- Richmond County, including Adult Entertainment. There will be Dance. There will be Sunday Sales. Districts 1 thru 8. Super Districts 9 & 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) The Clerk: Are there any objectors to those alcohol petitions and renewals? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hankerson? Mr. Hankerson: Did we have one left off? The Clerk: Yes, it’s on the addendum agenda. Mr. Hankerson: Okay. The Clerk: We have one that was the Augusta Towers. Inadvertently excluded from our agenda, which approved by the Public Services Committee. 7. Motion to approve a request by Harinderjit Singh for an on-premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with the Augusta Towers Hotel located at 2651 Perimeter Pkwy. There will be Dance. There will be Sunday Sales. District 3. Super District 10. Mr. Mayor: Any objection to that one that was inadvertently left off being added over to consent? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I don’t know that I have any objection. I think that’s one that’s kind of popped up here. We talked about that at the last meeting. Is that the one that Administrative Service, the new agreement came back with additional or different group or different list than the first list? Is that what that stated? Mr. Mayor: I was not in that committee meeting. Mr. Russell, you want to address that or either the Chairman of that committee or the members of that committee? Mr. Colclough: No, that’s not it. Mr. Russell: That was [unintelligible]. 10 Mr. Williams: That was referred back to—and where—I’m not objecting to it but I don’t know what this one is. I need to know a little bit about it, I guess, Rob, before. Mr. Sherman: This was included on the committee agenda, item number 4 on the committee agenda. The Clerk: I’ll read it. 7. Motion to approve a request by Harinderjit Singh for an on-premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with the Augusta Towers Hotel located at 2651 Perimeter Pkwy. There will be Dance. There will be Sunday Sales. District 3. Super District 10. Mr. Williams: I got no problem with adding it on, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: It’s so added. That one comes on, Madame Clerk. The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Are there any items that are on the regular agenda that any Commissioners may want to ??. We’ll try [unintelligible] getting them added over. That may be on regular. Mr. Grantham: 39. Mr. Cheek: How about item 40? Mr. Mayor: 39 and 40 have been mentioned. Any problems with either 39 or 40? Either being held or moving? Ms. Beard: What about 37, 38 and 34? Mr. Mayor: 37, 38 and 34. There is a discussion in reference I think right now to those items under Finance, as well as 39 and 40. And I just need to get some direction on it. Do we need to move 39 or 40 or do we need to leave them where they are? Or do we need to move with the items on Finance or do they need to stay where they are? Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] 39 and 40, I mean I don’t have any objection to 39 and 40 myself. I don’t know about any other Commissioners. Mr. Mayor: Anybody else on 39 or 40, objections? Any objections on 39 or 40 on this one? 39 and 40 are so added, Madame Clerk. Now, those items under Finance. Do any of them need to be discussed? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. 11 Mr. Mayor: All of them, none of them, or some of them? Mr. Williams: All of them. Mr. Mayor: All of them. Then we don’t have unanimous consent on those. They remain on regular, the items in Finance, which will be 36, 37, 38. Mr. Colclough? Mr. Colclough: What about 34? Mr. Mayor: Came out of committee with no recommendation. Would anyone on that committee or [unintelligible] or stay on regular? Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Mayor, we can consent 34 and 35. Mr. Mayor: Consent 34 and 35? Any objections to consenting 34 and 35? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. I mean these were put on for discussion, Mr. Mayor. I don’t remember what the [unintelligible] but we didn’t—we had those [unintelligible] items put on there because we thought it did need some discussion. [unintelligible] 34. I just need a little bit more information. I’m not opposed to it but it was explained to us that, as I remember correctly, creating a position, creating a job would be one of the criteria for that grant versus neglect in that area. I just wanted that explained a little bit more. I think [unintelligible] explain 34. 35, and this just my personal opinion [unintelligible] Commissioners. Mr. Mayor: Well, let’s do this. It doesn’t have unanimous consent. Let’s move 39 and 40, Ms. Bonner. And we’ll discuss under regular 34 through 38. Leave them on regular, along with the others that we need to get through there on regular. 39 and 40 move over to consent. What we need now—are there any Commissioners that need to pull any of those items that are on the regular consent under 1-33? Commissioner Grantham, then Commissioner Handy? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor. Thank you. I just want some understanding on item number 21 [sic]. That is, I think we were talking about a total tax payment of $87,000 and $70,000 would be paid, with the balance to worked out on a collected monthly basis. The penalties and interest, if they were to work that out, what the balance, what they were unable to pay at the time. 21. Motion to approve accepting a payment of $70,000 in the settlement of past due taxes owed by Mr. Herman Jansen of McGowen Printing Company, abate the penalties and interest and as the attorney and Mr. Williamson to come up with a plan to help in this situation and any other similar situation. (Approved by Finance Committee November 28, 2005) Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? 12 Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. At the further direction of the Commission, my office and the Delinquent Tax Office have looked for a policy that would support this type of action and the State has such a policy. It was called the Tax Amnesty Program. And that program was in effect in the early 1990s. It appears still in the law and my suggestion to Mr. Williamson this morning was that this type of statute could be the basis of abating not only the penalty but some of the interest. I think there was a complaint that the interest—[unintelligible] Mr. Grantham— Mr. Grantham: Right. Mr. Shepard: But this code section could be a foundation for such a policy and I would recommend that we approach the Legislature for a local option variety of that amnesty program and basically that would give you a vehicle for dealing with all of these type cases. I know Mr. Williams mentioned it to me so we hastened to get our recommendation here and it would I think be an excellent way of treating hardship cases. We could write some criteria in there that would control the discretion of the Commission, such as job creation in the inner city would be one reason to do this. But I think that the State had this program but it was a one-time deal, Mr. Grantham, and I don’t see why we couldn’t use this as the basis of a local tax amnesty program. But I do think the best way to handle it would be to try it on a local option basis. That way other folks in the rest of the state wouldn’t necessarily complaining about it. If you wanted to do it, we could do it here for people like Mr. Jansen. So that’s our interim report on that. And if Mr. Jansen’s taxes were put in there, the amnesty program gives you a year to pay taxes and so that would split his. I think he would have taxes, he would have $17,000 less than just taxes [unintelligible] penalty and interest. Mr. Grantham: No. Mr. Shepard: This is a way, this is a way that we could approach all these type cases. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Handy and then Mr. Williams and anyone else on this end? Mr. Cheek. And they will probably cover what I need to ask. Mr. Handy: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don’t know, I was out of the room for a moment. I don’t know whether you talked about it or discussed it or not, but this addition to this agenda. This item 4 on here was a consent item, should have been carried over from our meeting on last week. So it should not be on, number 4 should not be on here. Mr. Mayor: Let me just jump to a point of order just a minute. Mr. Handy: Okay. Mr. Mayor: We are on the one item dealing with tax clarification. 13 Mr. Handy: Oh, I don’t have anything on that. Mr. Mayor: If you want to address that. Mr. Handy: I don’t have anything on that. No problem. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] Mr. Williams and then Mr. Cheek. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think Mr. North Williamson and the Attorney has gotten together to try to work with the business, to try to keep it open, try to keep it going. And whatever they suggest I think that [unintelligible] all the Commission wants to try to do that. They have made a special effort to try to resolve this and I’d like to see them start from square one and continue on with this. So whatever the Attorney and the—and Mr. North Williamson have come together I think will be acceptable. Do I need to make that in the form a motion or do we need to leave where it is, Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Let me just ask—well, Mr. Cheek [unintelligible]. Mr. Cheek: It’s on a different item [unintelligible], Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay. What I was going to ask Mr. Shepard, cause Mr. Williamson has come in the room on that item. The dialogue, everybody seem to be moving in the same direction, Mr. Williamson, on where this is kind of going? And is there a—I guess my question would be is there any time frame that we are waiting on that type of action because [unintelligible] get us with the clock rolling per se? If that’s the agreement when we move, do we move with a fixed set of numbers or do the numbers change until the answer that you’re looking for is received? Mr. Williamson: No, the number is fixed. And my understanding is that we are to accept the settlement figure as a down payment, so to speak. But the balance of the taxes due would be worked out between Mr. Shepard and myself and the taxpayer. And from that point on he is to keep his taxes current, which I believe, I believe he can do. Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mays, that was my point, is that the way the motion reads it does not include the balance of the taxes and I wanted to make sure that was included in our understanding of what we agreed on at our committee meeting last week. Mr. Williamson: That would be part of the agreement. Mr. Grantham: So that will be part of the agreement. Mr. Williamson: Yes. Mr. Grantham: That was my only point. 14 Mr. Williamson: And my suggestion would be that we make that payable prior to the time of the next tax bill. Mr. Grantham: Was that accepted under agenda item classification, Mr. Mays? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Rearden? Mr. Rearden: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Shepard, if we approve this item is that not setting up a precedent that would have to be followed in all cases if we approve this without a policy in place? Mr. Shepard: Well, the policy that I’m recommending is hardship sort of situation and I suggested to Mr. Williamson I think beforehand that we write in hardship- type criteria. And I think the safest thing would be to put in the record today that this particular taxpayer I think is providing six or seven jobs. He’s not taking any money out of it himself. And that would be, make his settlement consistent on what we would want to ask for for a general program. I know that one of the comments that remained in my head afterwards was that we treat others the same. So I am setting up—as a result of this case I am recommending the Commission set up a formalized policy so that these type hardship cases can be dealt with with a policy. And I’d say I’d give you the policy of the state law, but it’s still in the Code, Mr. Rearden, but it’s only applicable to tax years ending on or before December 31, 1993. So what I’d like you to do is have Mr. Williamson and I approve the hardship criteria, part of which would be taking Mr. Jansen’s criteria and guiding your discretion. I think it’s very important that cases now that do not have unfettered discretion but you have some criteria that guides the discretion. You have a lot better chance of that type ordinance succeeding at the court level. So I want to include in these policies the qualifications that Mr. Jansen has presented. So yes, you are setting a precedent and it would be a precedent which would be applicable to other hardship cases. Mr. Rearden: Regardless of any policy that’s adopted later? Mr. Shepard: Well, you can amend the policy. I’m suggesting that the criteria that he has, inner city job creation, be one of those factors that guide, that guide the decision making. And Mr. Williamson and I may have others but at least he would qualify under this one. Mr. Rearden: I believe in this case we might be putting the cart before the horse and we’re granting something just totally discretionary. I’m not against it. I just want to make sure we go forward with a sound and consistent policy that will withstand any challenge. I mean I know you can’t write such a thing but that the chances of defending it are greatly increased if we have this policy before we do any action. Mr. Shepard: That would make it better. I can see your point. So that this case could be held, you could hold it for the next meeting, certainly, and I could get an ordinance in here. And the only question I have now, this resolution or ordinance would 15 be pursuant to a statute that has a tax amnesty end before these became delinquent taxes. st In other words this statute says December 31. I have no problem with you holding it so I can get a little quicker handle on the—a better handle on the resolution. But I think the taxing authorities have looked for such a policy. We don’t want it abused but we want to have a policy in place when somebody presents with an obvious meritorious hardship case. Mr. Rearden: I think it would be better to have the policy and then take action myself. Mr. Shepard: I have no problem with that. Mr. Rearden: I would ask that either this be removed and discussed and voted on or whatever action, Mr. Mayor, we need to take at this point to implement that. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] Madame Clerk [unintelligible]? The Clerk: No. Mr. Mayor: There is not one on there at this point, Roy. Marion, you want to jump in this? Mr. Williams: I just wanted to ask North a question there. If we prolong this and st the end of the year is coming December 31, what will that do? Will that help [unintelligible] business? And we’re trying to help. We could close the business down and when you close the business down you are going to have less income coming in, another empty building standing here, and they are trying to do what is right. So I just want to know what effect would— Mr. Williamson: Well, I would like to see something done fairly quickly for the reason that we would like to of course get this payment in, and he’s having to borrow that money to make this payment. But I think he would hesitate to do so until we have approved this. Mr. Williams: And I wouldn’t blame him. Mr. Williamson: I wouldn’t blame him. That’s correct. Mr. Williams:Can I make a motion that we go ahead I wouldn’t blame him. and approve that, Mr. Mayor, as the way the Attorney and North Williamson has got so ordered to do? Mr. Grantham: I second. Mr. Mayor: Got a motion and a second. Did you want to make a substitute, Commissioner, in there? Commissioner Rearden? 16 Mr. Rearden: No, sir. I’ll go with— Mr. Mayor: I will say this. If the—and I’m assuming then really what we, what we are really extending in actuality is in terms of freezing the rolling interest and continuing the payment on the balance; am I correct? Mr. Williamson: In effect that [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: And so the City is still going to get its money. It’s not like we are, we are writing off the $17,000. Mr. Williamson: No, no, no, no, not writing off anything. Mr. Mayor: If we’re writing off, I think the danger in not accepting the money is the fact that if you jeopardize where it is and you’ve got $70,000 waiting and you’re going to collect $17,000 later than you’re putting on time, I think in the interest in terms of saving a small business is where you’re going, that the odds are far greater to a point if you are still holding the cards on the $17,000 that is left and you’re pocketing the $70,000. And [unintelligible] I don’t think you’re going to really [unintelligible] but this was at the time when the governments was separate an old city business and in terms of with the technology changes in that particular field, this is one of those businesses that we’ve inherited from prior consolidation, they were promised certain things on tax incentives that were not necessarily granted. And it came in where they did all the improvement and were basically told this is what you can get. Well, then that kind of went off the radar screen in terms of doing that. That’s not the type [unintelligible] tow different governments. And what was done in the city, there was a lot of language that was totally different than was there under county government. But that changed [unintelligible] falls in that [unintelligible] of nobody’s fault. But the point being that industry changed. It was not there. But I think if we got really technical it’s no different from those that have come through the Industrial Development Authority, where taxes have in some cases have been actually written off in lieu of job creation and of what we’ve got, and we didn’t find out about it until some of them were actually done. So I don’t think we are actually getting into the gratuity business by what we are doing. I think we may be getting into the high risk business to a point if we don’t necessarily go and get that $70,000 that’s out there and allowing that particular business to function and then do the rest of this collecting, which you still have the rights to go in and get. That would be my only comment. We have a motion and a second. There being no further discussion, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Mayor: What are we down to, Ms. Bonner? 17 The Clerk: We need to dispense of the consent agenda, which consists of items 1 through 33, adding 39 and 40 from the regular agenda. We’ve already taken care of item 21. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull item 14 for discussion, please. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Anything else other than 14? Anything else other than 14? Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pass out a policy that was suggested at the committee with reference to student fares. I had an opportunity to meet after the agenda book closed with members of the Transit Department and I was tasked to develop a policy for other institutions similarly situated to Savannah River College, and I have that and this relates to agenda item 9 [sic]. If I could just pass that out, I would commend that policy. It was not available to you when the agenda book was put together because the Transit Department and I could not meet until Friday last. So if I could have that—take a look at that. Mr. Mayor: I have no problem with it being passed out. I happened to [unintelligible] there myself and [unintelligible] last person that would opposed the Transit Department becoming creative in terms of getting those fees in there without [unintelligible] hardship but my question is, I notice that it got initiated from the standpoint of where you had the one school, had that been a situation whereby both Augusta State and Paine have been included in those talks in terms of what you’re doing. Because I’m seeing it as a student fee. And three colleges were mentioned but I only saw one that was in the discussion. I’m not saying that was not good at all; I’m just asking the question as to whether or not it’s a total student [unintelligible] from all three schools that are in there in terms of where [unintelligible]. Mr. Shepard: The first two you mentioned, Augusta State and Paine already have contracts with this—similar of this nature so the model for the Savannah River College was those agreements. And these agreements are info. I simply wanted a method for Savannah River to get in place consistent with how we’re treating Paine and Augusta State, and I believe Augusta Tech is also a party to one of these agreements. The idea was that when another school presented an identical agreement it would qualify for approval. So I remember, I believe Commissioner Hankerson being particularly interested in a policy that would handle these type of future requests. Mr. Mayor: And [unintelligible] other agreements, but when I saw their names I saw initially where it was coming from and I just wanted to make sure that what we were doing was actually adding on to what we had and that we were not reforming to a point where we needed to involve the other three in the discussion. So if it’s added on to make a fourth in that compact I don’t think that presents us with any problem at all. That clarifies my only question on it that I would ask. Is there anything else to be pulled for 18 discussion? Madame Clerk, have you got those numbers? Does anybody need—I’m sorry, Commissioner Hankerson? Mr. Hankerson: On the consent, what were the numbers? The Clerk: Items 1 through 33, adding items 39 and 40 from the regular agenda. Mr. Hankerson: So what number is the Augusta College? The Clerk: We dispensed of item 21 [sic], sir. Mr. Hankerson: What number is Augusta College? The Clerk: Well, it theoretically would be 10A. Mr. Hankerson: Okay, so that’s included in the motion? The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Rearden: And the ones that are pulled? The Clerk: Item 14. Mr. Rearden: Just that one? The Clerk: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner? Mr. Grantham: Thank you. If I can address the Clerk, in the additions that you have to the agenda, item number 2 was also involved in Finance, based on consent, and if we do that, if we put it on consent I’m going to pull it anyway. The Clerk: And item 4, Mr. Handy is right, that item should be under our Engineering Service portion of the agenda under consent. It was approved by the If you want to make a motion that that be added in. Committee. Mr. Handy: So move, if it’s in order, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Let me just say this— The Clerk: Is that for the entire agenda, Mr. Handy? Mr. Handy: No, item number 4. [unintelligible] we look at the whole entire agenda. Where are we now? 19 Mr. Mayor: Life is either fixing to get easier or hard. Let me just say that. Y’all got an addendum list here. You’ve got four thing on here. And if we, we can go to where we are [unintelligible] particularly if there is consensual agreement to something that may be there that should already be on, that’s one thing. And we can either have or have not that debate if there is not any objection to dealing with it. And they can be added. If not, then [unintelligible] kind of, it’s kind of where the membership of this body wants to go with that. But I think [unintelligible] recognize something that should be there in place. And if it’s inadvertently had to go to the addendum list then that’s something that I think we can hopefully quickly dispose of. Chairs? Mr. Handy: I don’t mind leaving it where it is but it’s already been approved so it could be voted on as a single item and still approved, it’s fine with me. Mr. Mayor: I’m saying you’ve got four. Might as well go on and deal with this. Mr. Handy: Oh, you’re talking about that whole sheet now? Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] agenda. If we’re saying we’ve got something on there that was inadvertently left off, then we need to go on and deal with that one way or the other. It either needs to be by consent that they some, all or none jump over or if they’re [unintelligible] don’t have a fight, ain’t no need to start one. But if you got, if you’ve got [unintelligible] fly let’s talk about that, let’s go on and pass what we can and put these on the come back to list. Commissioner Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, in the interest of moving forward and not having a fight, I’m going to go ahead and make a motion to add number 4 and add it to the agenda and then add it to the consent agenda, from the addendum. Addendum Item 4. Approve concept of Cost Sharing Agreement for construction of sewer line along Doug Barnard Parkway to Dixon Airline Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) Mr. Mayor: Any objection to that item being so added? No objections. Four goes on. Anything else out of that list? Anybody want to take that chance and jump from one page to another? Go ahead. I’m all ears. [unintelligible] Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’ve got one I need to pull, too. Just to get some clarification. Number 15, if I can. Mr. Mayor: 15 comes off. Mr. Williams: Just want to get some clarification. Mr. Mayor: 15 comes off. Mr. Williams: 14 and 15. 20 Mr. Mayor: Yes, 14 and 15. Got those new numbers there? The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Do we have anything other than 4 that has been moved? Anything other than 4? Been moved. Got 1, 2 and 3. Y’all make this seem like it’s my wake or something. Y’all are might quiet. Any other time we got a fuss about something. [unintelligible] where we got. Mr. Cheek: I’ll try to provide some relief here. Mr. Mayor: I am getting kind of scare. I am thinking [unintelligible]. Mr. Cheek: Just to provide some relief, since we can or cannot get these on, added to the agenda, and it may not receive unanimous consent, I just make a motion to add number 1 to the agenda. And I’ll move on to 2 and 3 after these votes if that will help expedite things. Mr. Williams: You don’t have unanimous consent for 1. Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir? Mr. Grantham: I’m going to speak to that. At the request of myself, this item was nd submitted on the 22 of November and it was mistakenly left off in the Clerk’s Office and so I see that this is in addition to the agenda. It’s one that should have been included from the beginning and therefore I request that this body adhere to the Commissioner’s request and that this item be included on the regular agenda. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] and that’s why I kept saying that [unintelligible]. Mr. Grantham: I have the documentation to back that up and I have talked to the Clerk about this and the Clerk indicated that they received but they were left off by mistake and certainly I think that request, that she had put it on as far as an agenda item it should have been listed as an agenda item, not as an addition to the agenda. So here we have another mistake. Mr. Mayor: Let me ask this. Whether it’s added or not added, I can participate in the discussion. My concern is in the—it may not be on the additions portion of it but is there any backup to go with this, either the book or the addition or something that gives a guiding light as where we are going with it and what we’re planning to discuss? It would make it a lot easier for me to try and help you to sell it and get it on over here without a dog fight. 21 Mr. Grantham: I understand that, Mr. Mayor, but I have noticed in the past and I’m sure we will see in the future that there are many items that are put on the agenda for discussion and then certain motions are made with that discussion and it’s left up to this body to vote for or against whatever that motion comes out to be. Mr. Mayor: That’s absolutely true. But I think the more unknowns that there are the less likely you are to deal with the fights. The only thing I’m saying is if we—in fact, what I’m going to do as the Chair, I’m going to come back to this, Madame Clerk, because we are going to have to deal with a parliamentary situation on how to do it. I want to go on and relieve these other numbers in case there are persons that we have as guests. Let’s go on and take the 1 through 33, if that’s okay with everybody. Let’s move what we’ve got listed. Let’s get those removed first. I’m going to come back. [unintelligible] be the first one to be addressed, Commissioner Williams will have the floor. But I want to go on and clear these numbers out where they get down to the three or four numbers in this deal, then we know what we have to end up dealing with. There are persons here on some of these other items and there is no need of them sitting until we go through where we’re going with this item number 1 on the additions list. Mr. Williams: So move. Mr. Handy: Second. CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC SERVICES 1. Motion to approve a request by Augusta-Richmond County License & Inspections Department to discuss the possibility of allowing wine tastings in Augusta Richmond County by qualified eating establishments, retail wine stores, non-profits and certain other licensed & non-licensed entities as prescribed by section 560-2-5-.05 of Georgia State Code amendment governing wine tastings. Districts 1 thru 8. Super Districts 9 & 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 2. Motion to approve a request by Kejal K. Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Sand Bar Ferry Super Market located at 232 Sand Bar Ferry Rd. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 3. Motion to approve a request by Dingyu Chi for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Fujiyama Japenese Steakhouse & Sushi Bar located at 3043 Washington Rd. There will be Sunday Sales. District 7. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 4. Motion to approve a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Kangaroo Express # 3737 located at 3539 Wheeler Rd. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 5. Motion to approve a request by Richard Cutler for a Sunday Sales License to be used in connection with Racquets Restaurant and Sports Bar at The Club at 22 Raes Creek located at 3206 Wimbledon Dr. There will be Sunday Sales. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28m, 2005) 6. Motion to approve a request by Kyung R. Han for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Olive Supermarket located at 1671 Olive Rd. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 7. Motion to approve a request by Harinderjit Singh for an on-premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with the Augusta Towers Hotel located at 2651 Perimeter Pkwy. There will be Dance. There will be Sunday Sales. District 3. Super District 10. 8. Motion to approve a request by the Augusta-Richmond County License & Inspection Department to renew all existing Alcohol Beverage Licenses in Augusta- Richmond County, including Adult Entertainment. There will be Dance. There will be Sunday Sales. Districts 1 thru 8. Super Districts 9 & 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 9. Motion to Approve Bid Item #05-130A, new fencing for Hickman Park to Maner Builders in the amount of $19,894. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 10. Motion to approve a resolution authorizing a transit fee of $2.00 per student per quarter for all colleges subject to their accreditation being recognized by the U.S. Department of Education to receive unlimited rides to and from campus with valid student identification cards issued by the college at no direct charge to the student as presently being done with other area colleges. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2005) 11. Motion to approve the execution of the attached ‘Release and Assignment’ forms pertaining to forfeiture of the Surety Bond for Christian Home Improvement. (Approved by Public Service Committee November 28, 2005) ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 12. Motion to approve contract renewal with The Standard Insurance Company to provide Life Insurance/Long Term Disability and AD&D benefits effective January 1, 2006. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee November 28, 2005) 13. Motion to approve a Three (3) Year Contract with ING Employee Benefits to provide voluntary Universal Life Insurance benefits to Augusta’s employees effective January 1, 2006. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee November 28, 2005) PUBLIC SAFETY 14. Deleted from the consent agenda. 15. Deleted from the consent agenda. FINANCE 16. Motion to approve the acquisition of one storm drain/sewer vaccum truck for the Public Services Department – Maintenance Division from Tractor and 23 Equipment Company of Augusta for $228,378.00 (lowest bid offer on Bid 05-149). (Approved by Finance Committee November 28, 2005) 17. Motion to approve the acquisition of one mechanical street sweeper for the Public Services Department-Maintenance Division from Tractor and Equipment Company of Augusta for $117,230.00 (lowest bid offer on bid 05-147). (Approved by Finance Committee November 28, 2005) 18. Motion to approve the acquisition of three tandem axle dump trucks for the Public Services Department Maintenance Division from Freightliner Trucks of Augusta for $72,350.00 each (lowest bid offer on bid 05-151). (Approved by Finance Committee November 28, 2005) 19. Motion to approve the acquisition of one backhoe tractor from Metrac, Inc. of Augusta, Georgia for $143.800 (lowest bid offer on bid 05-156) for the Solid Waste Facility. (Approved by Finance Committee November 28, 2005) 20. Motion to approve the acquisition of two tractor trucks from Mays International Trucks of Augusta, Georgia for $86,338.46 each (lowest bid offer on bid 05-157) and six trash transfer trailers from Travis Body and Trailer Sales, Inc., of Atlanta, Georgia for $54,145.00 each (lowest bid offer on Bid 05-144). (Approved by Finance Committee November 28, 2005) 21. Deleted from the consent agenda. 22. Motion to approve and accept a grant agreement between Augusta Richmond County District Attorney's Office and the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council. (Approved by Finance Committee November 28, 2005) ENGINEERING SERVICES 23. Motion to approve and authorize execution of an agreement between Augusta and the University of Georgia Research Foundation, Inc. Savannah River Ecology Laboratory (SREL) for the continuation of research and data collection related to bird activity around the constructed wetland treatment system. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2006) 24. Motion to execute the Georgia Department of Transportation’s Contract for Acquisition of Right-of-Way on the Alexander Drive Project (CPB# 323-04- 296823215), where Augusta Agrees to comply with the provisions for Federal requirements. Also, approve Construction Project Budget Change Number Three to transfer funds in the amount of $1,050,000.00 from project construction account (323041110-5414110/296823215-5414110) to project right-of-way ($900,000) and project utilities ($150,000) as requested by the Engineering Department. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) 25. Motion to approve a request from Ann L. Rainey regarding the installation of a buffer on her property at 2827 Harwood Street. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) 26. Motion to approve execution of Atlanta Gas Light Governmental Encroachment Agreement. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) 27. Motion to approve Engineering Services Agreement with Cranston, Robertson & Whitehurst, PC to provide surveying support requested by the US Army Corps of Engineers on No Name Creeks for the Augusta Regional Flood 24 Control Feasibility Project in amount of $19,500 subject to receipt of executed documents and review by the City Attorney. Also, approve capital project budget change number two (CPB# 323-04-299823999) in the amount of $19,500 to be funded from SPLOST Phase, I recapture funds as requested by Engineering Department. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) 28. Motion to approve execution of Georgia Power Company’s Governmental Encroachment Agreement No. 30812 (Augusta Newsprint Loop 230KV Transmission Line). (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) 29. Motion to approve the exchange of easements with International Paper. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) 30. Motion to approve execution of the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia (MEAG) Governmental Encroachment Agreement No. 30810 (Sylvania No. 3 115kv Tap Lines). (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) 31. Motion to approve the purchase of Stream Credits to allow the construction of the Spirit Creek Force Main and Pump Station to proceed. These credits are to be purchased from Georgia Land Trust Service Center of Athens, Georgia at a total cost of $10,394. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) 32. Motion to approve the extension of The Consultant Service Agreement with EMC Engineering Services to provide Engineering Support to perform site plan reviews for The Engineering Department in an amount not to exceed $34,000 to be funded from account 101-04-1110 subject to receipt of executed documents. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) 33. Motion to approve the purchase of wetland mitigation credits to allow the construction of the Spirit Creek Force Main and Pump Station to proceed. These credits are to be purchased from MerryLand Properties of Augusta, Georgia at a total cost of $30,500. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) APPOINTMENT(S) 39. Motion to approve the appointment of Mr. Augustus C. Thurmond to the unexpired term of Mr. Melvin Parkman. ATTORNEY 40. Discuss/Approve Service Delivery Agreement with the City of Hephzibah. Addendum Item 4. Approve concept of Cost Sharing Agreement for construction of sewer line along Doug Barnard Parkway to Dixon Airline Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2005) Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second for the consent, with all the related numbers to be pulled or added. Is there any discussion? Commissioner Colclough? Mr. Colclough: I was going to let it be known that I vote no on Sunday sales. 25 Mr. Mayor: It’s so noted. Any person on this end? None on this end? All in favor of the motion for consent will vote by the usual sign. Mr. Colclough votes No on Sunday sales. Mr. Cheek out. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor: What do we have for the record, Madame Clerk, left? The Clerk: We have item 14 and 15 pulled from the consent agenda for discussion. And the regular agenda minus items 39 and 40. Mr. Mayor: 14 and 15? The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Let us move in that order. The Clerk: PUBLIC SAFETY 14. Motion to approve beginning the process for acquiring a specialized water rescue craft for the Augusta Fire Department Water Rescue Team. (Approved by Public Safety Committee November 28, 2005) Mr. Mayor: I’m sorry, Andy? Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The reason I asked this be brought up, I read the backup on it and have the situation that has occurred where people have been stranded downstream and so forth and I have no disagreement with the need and utilization of this craft. But if you read the backup it also said the [unintelligible] dive team boats would not crank. We had another boat previous to this that the engines burned up in. My concern about this boat and the other boats, some $30,000 worth of assets of this city, is they’ve been sitting in the rain for four years. Been working for four years to try to find a shelter for them, a home for our water rescue, water retrieval assets, So I’d like to make a which are both expensive and require maintenance and care. motion that we approve this and also at the same time begin moving forward on something that we started on four years ago, building a shelter for our dive team boats to where we can cover them up and get them out of the weather and certainly get them maintained where they can go retrieve the bodies or provide additional support. The shelter, we’ve been offered a site there at the 9-1-1 center to build the shelter. I just had a garage built that would house both of these, with a slab, it cost me $3800 so it should not be a major capital investment. But in any event it’s a shame to see—and I’m not sure where we plan on housing this particular craft. If it would hold 20 people it is going to have to be at least a 20’ boat. With two engines it’s going to have a draft of about 10’. So I just want to see us get some shelters and start taking care of our 26 So with that I’m going to make a motion that we approve this and follow assets. through with building a garage to house the dive team boats and possibly this craft as well at the 9-1-1 Center. Mr. Handy: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? [unintelligible] Mr. Speaker: I agree with Commissioner Cheek and all. We do need to get some housing for those boats that we use with the dive team and we utilize the dive team on a regular basis to retrieve bodies and all and to retrieve evidence for the Sheriff’s Department, as well. In addition to the [unintelligible] Fire Department we’re going to house it with our water rescue team at Engine Co. 1 at this time. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, we passed that in Public Safety but Sylvia told me it was just a boat, it wasn’t—you’re talking about a craft to throw us off on that legal term but we support the Fire Department and we support the equipment. We do think it need to have a place. Every morning the [unintelligible] is fired up, Chief Willis, I know you know about that. Our machine, our equipment is tested at least once week. We pull that [unintelligible] and that same thing need to be done even with the stuff that sits outside. Somebody have not done what they need to be doing, Mr. Cheek. And at least started that equipment once every so often—I don’t know what the time frame is, but that’s the [unintelligible] Fire Department. Maybe we got a little bit lax with that. But everything [unintelligible] Fire Department that can run, even the generators is fired up at least once in a certain period. But I do think we need to have a housing area that we can [unintelligible] at the water to build something to cover them but that craft [unintelligible] 20 passengers and carry some of the equipment but I think it’s needed so hope we’ll approve it. Mr. Mayor: There is a motion and a second that is on the floor. Any further discussion? None being, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. The Clerk: FINANCE 15. Motion to approve budget resolution increasing revenues and appropriations in the general fund for Animal Services. (Approved by Finance Committee November 28, 2005) Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? 27 Mr. Williams: Yes, I just wanted to get some information as to—and I saw the backup. But exactly what are we going to do with the increase, [unintelligible] Teasley, and what effect this going have? How much [unintelligible] Animal Services? Mr. Teasley: Actually it’s not an increase, Mr. Commissioner. It’s just a change in the way we do the accounting, the way that David’s people do the accounting. Mr. Williams: So the backup item, the agenda item reads budget resolution increasing, but it’s not an increase you said? Mr. Teasley: Actually the money is already there, sir. It’s changing the accounts that we’re tracking it in. Mr. Williams: Help me out, Fred, cause when you say something that’s what I look for now. If you changing something else, you need to say you’re changing something else. What are we doing? Mr. Russell: What this does is reflect the collections we’ve made on the rabies certificates, the animal control sterilizations, and contributions and donations that are not reflected in the past budget. We’ve collected some $58,610. With proper accounting procedures we do have the appropriations for that, we’re using $53,000 of that to pay for the veterinaries that are doing the sterilizations, education and training of $1800, and animal supplies and sterilizations at $2880. What that basically is is just a reflection of additional money coming in that we did not anticipate and the cost of that program that’s there is basically a wash. Or it is a wash. This money coming in is going back out the same program and as Mr. Teasley said, it’s just an accounting process to better clarify that. Mr. Williams: Well, when I hear increase I’m thinking it’s going to better the facility, we going change something, we going make something different because we looking at an increase. And since it’s not I understand. But I would have been expecting something different because of what the agenda said. And then now we hearing that it’s not going to be different. So I would have saw someone on the street and we giving an increase out there and they doing some things differently but it really not. Mr. Russell: Actually we technically gave an increase but there’s also an increase in the, on the appropriations plus the revenues. The revenue went up but so did the cost so it’s a wash. Mr. Williams: So move, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion do so by the usual sign. 28 Motion carries 10-0. The Clerk: Where are we going next? Mr. Mayor: Anything that’s on regular. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 34. Approval of the Façade Rehabilitation Grant Application for 2827 Deans Bridge Road. (No recommendation from Administrative Services Committee November 28, 2005) Mr. Speaker: The agenda item that was prepared requesting financial assistance to the commercial owner of the property who was running a bookstore at this present time, who is looking to make exterior and interior renovations to the bookstore. This is the first request that we have received that we wish to approve and recommend that this person receive this financial assistance using the façade program that we used to extend beyond the downtown area. Mr. Cheek: Move to approve. Mr. Hankerson: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. I just wanted to hear some information. The man was on a roll. He was doing pretty good. I want to hear what he was actually—how can other agencies and other businesses would love to know about [unintelligible] programs. And we can’t just sit here and approve them and nobody know why they approved. Now, I think there are some stipulations that I wanted to hear about and I think it was related to a job, creating a position of a job versus being blighted or being negative. So if I could hear, Mr. Mayor, the rest of it. I don’t have no problem, I’m not going, I’m not opposing it but I do want to know some of the details and I think they just—I think the general public would like to know some of the details. Said up to $30,000? Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir. Prior to the beginning last year the municipality did have a façade improvement program which basically was administered for a number of year. That program required—excuse me, that program offered up to $15,000. The department asked for an increase, which we received permission from you to extend it to $30,000, and that primarily focused on the essential downtown area and that was basically because the application went into HUD specifically to look at blighted communities, blighted areas. As such the downtown area at that time when the application was submitted fit the bill. With that, with that program there is a match and it’s a dollar by dollar match. And therefore for the money that is extended to the proprietor at that time for the exterior work, that person is to also do renovation work on the interior to the same dollar amount. 29 Now, beginning this year there was a concern from the Commission as it related to opening up and trying to find a way that we can extend that same program in terms of the services that program offered to owners outside of downtown and how best to do that. The CDBG program has specific requirements that are necessary for funding and could not—we looked at the different areas geographically and we could not use the blighted communities as a way of doing that. The only eligible activity that we could use to make the program work was through job creation and as such that is the match that is required to make that program work and make that program eligible. So the proprietor then will match the money that we are providing them with a full time position. There is a difference between the two. Mr. Williams: Did I hear you say we’re entering into an agreement with the owner of the property, the proprietor to hire someone? Mr. Speaker: Yes. Mr. Williams: From low to moderate income area to work in this facility in exchange for this grant that they received; right? Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir. Mr. Williams: And that can be applied to any other agency that fits the guidelines for that? Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir. Mr. Williams: Okay, I got no problem, Mr. Mayor. I think you got a motion to approve but I think it was really good information that we needed to know. And the general public need to know. It’s not just a program for blighted areas with matching funds but if you can, you can hire a low to moderate income person, which would put somebody on the payroll, it would help. How much money we got left, Doug, for that type of program? Mr. Speaker: For the south Augusta area— Mr. Williams: Hold it, hold it. If this one city, it’s one city. When you say south Augusta then that make it seems like to me— Mr. Speaker: Let me apologize, Commissioner, because we answered it that way. For the remaining areas outside of downtown, that’s the way I need to say that— Mr. Williams: That’s right. Mr. Speaker: So thank you for correction. It’s probably in the neighborhood of $200,000. And at this point in time for the downtown area we’ve done ten facades and at 30 that point in time we’ve expended the amount of money that we have for downtown up until we receive a new allocation for 2006. Mr. Williams: Okay, you mentioned 2006. Now, my last question, Mr. Mayor, is it—are we in any danger of losing any of this money because of the year ending versus the stuff we heard before about the end of the year and when it got to go back and we hadn’t spent the money, we hadn’t used the money? Mr. Speaker: Until we receive the letter that we’ve been speaking about and awaiting, I can’t answer that question until we find out exactly what the municipality is going to owe or pay back or what our expenditure is going to be. Mr. Williams: That’s all, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I just briefly want to applaud staff, Mr. Manning, for being creative in making this happen and I’m really tickled that we’re going to see some façade grant money go someone outside of the city proper, to the surrounding areas. And I look forward to seeing more of that occur. There’s areas out there that need help, to. Good job. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough? Mr. Colclough: My question was answered. Mr. Mayor: Being no further discussion, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. The Clerk: 35. Approve Micro-Loan Application - Freya Williams. (No recommendation from Administrative Services Committee November 28, 2005) Mr. Speaker: For this agenda we wish to provide financial assistance through the Micro-Loan Program to assist Ms. Williams with start-up expenses. She wishes to use $5,000 to address some rent expenses. She wishes to purchase some laptops. She wants to buy a telephone system, some computer software, projector, and some marketing items. Ms. Williams is a person who has gone through the appropriate educational trainings and as such as a graduate has supplied us with a business plan, which we have looked at. She wishes to open up a computer technical assistance business, offering computer applications and training to different companies. She had a list of companies that at the time she applied were interested in her service and if she receives funding 31 and/or other resources were able to contract. As such, we felt very strongly that she should be recommended to receive assistance through the program. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: My question, and this is a loan? Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir. Mr. Williams: Okay. That was my only question, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Just to extend that question a little further. Understanding that it is a loan and not a grant, is there a payback schedule that is applied to this loan? Mr. Speaker: We will use a payback schedule. We have a promissory note that is issued and she is to pay $161 commencing the first month after we approve, you approve the loan. Through a promissory note that’s recorded. Mr. Grantham: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hankerson? Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had some questions about this in Administrative Service. But from the knowledge that I have gained that will help other small businesses I don’t mind passing this today because I did find out that for small business to start up small businesses out there, that we have $100,000 that we have had ever since 2003. That they can get $5,000 by enrolling in this class I think for about 12 weeks and writing a very good plan and also HUD requires that for the $100,000 that we hire two low income individuals that meet that criteria for that $100,000, so this is a golden opportunity for some other entrepreneurs, wanna-bees, that start up and that meet this criteria. We have another $95,000 out there and I know I’ve had some businesses that wanted to start up and have started up and doing a great job, especially individuals that may have been incarcerated and got out and trying to reform their lives and doing a great job and already have a business started up but just need a little leg, you know, a little help. And I think this program would be very good when they meet the criteria to know that and for those small businesses that want to start up. So did we get a motion to If not, I move to approve it. approve this? Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion? Commissioner Smith? Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Doug, what kind of contribution does the applicant have to furnish to get this loan? 32 Mr. Speaker: The applicant has to go through the actual training and also the items, has to offer some [unintelligible] of collateral. The items that we’re talking about here will go the [unintelligible] schedule where in the event if there is a default that we will take ownership of the property in the event that does happen. That would be some sort of combination of the two. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Hankerson mentioned about some money since 2003. My question is who administering the program for the people to come to? I mean the money has been sitting there since 2003. I need to know who is running the program. Who is doing the classes on this? Is that something in-house [unintelligible] or is that something—where the classes being held or performed or where do they attend those classes? Mr. Speaker: For I believe two years, I think two of those years the training was held at Antioch. Antioch Ministries has a very good program and a number of people have gone through the program. This year we are using the Business League in order to provide the training. It’s a two prong situation that we’ve discovered. The first thing is that after Antioch and the Business League does do their work, and they do fantastic work in terms of providing the empirical information to people to learn how to do business, they need specific help afterwards in terms of their own specific situation going on. And as such we’re working now with Antioch, with Augusta Technical, Augusta State and some other people [unintelligible] doing the two prong situation [unintelligible] providing people with the sense, the good practical sense of being a business person, but also now if you wish to become a business person and do whatever you have to do within your own [unintelligible], let’s see what we have to do as far as counseling. And that’s what we’re working on right now, to help people do that and go forward. Mr. Williams: That’s all, Mr. Mayor. I’m just amazed at the money that been sitting there since 2003 when there is all this training and all this money available and we have not reached out and spent that. No danger now [unintelligible] we get— Mr. Speaker: The program was handed over to me, as you know, is 2004, late 2004 and as such we’ve been trying to make the different changes to make it work. We’ve had to get other people involved in the process. One of the problems that we had was that the application process that we had originally was too stringent and people were going to the bank as opposed to going to us. So that was a concern that we had to look at. So we had to tweak the program in order to make it more user friendly for applicants or for graduates of the program. And as such, we just kind of finished doing that. And then we’re looking doing the holistic approach to addressing business educational needs to the people who live in the municipality. And we’re working with Yvonne and other individuals for that purpose. Yvonne Gentry. Mr. Russell: that purpose. Mr. Mayor: That’s all, Mr. Mayor. 33 Mr. Mayor: Is there a motion already on the floor? Being no further discussion, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. Motion carries 10-0. The Clerk: FINANCE 36. Approve the auditing firm of Cherry, Bekaert & Holland for the audit for 2005. (No recommendation from Finance Committee November 28, 2005) Mr. Cheek: Move to approve. Ms. Sims: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there discussion? Mr. Grantham, you’re the only one on this end at this time. Then Commissioner Williams. Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This item was one that I had put on the agenda for the Finance Committee at our committee meeting last week and as Commissioner Williams likes to indicate sometimes we get our backs to the wall. I can’t agree with him any more than in this case to where we are looking to get an audit done th for the year 2005 and we are sitting on a date of December 5 without approving an auditing firm to come in and give us the type of working report that we need. In the last couple or three years we’ve had some delays in our audits, we’ve had some—not penalties but we’ve had some indications from the State that they didn’t like us having to ask for extensions on a continuous basis. I think that right now, even though we’re looking at possibly making some changes in the future, but with the firm of Cherry, Bekaert & Holland I know that they are experienced with our government, they know what our audit report should look like, I feel confident that they can come and give us the proper report that we need and to be in compliance with the State rules. And I don’t think we’d have to be asking for an extension and therefore I’m delighted to see a motion and a second made and I’m going to support this issue. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams and then Commissioner Cheek. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’ve got no problem with this firm. I can’t sit here and say anything negative about this firm but for the past eight years this firm has been doing business with this government. Our Finance director went out and did a request for proposal, RFP or whatever we sent him out to do. The Administrator sitting here. I don’t see Mr. Persaud. And we did a bid—if not bid—we did what we—they did what [unintelligible] to do. Another firm won this bid. And if the firm won the bid and did what we asked them to do, I just don’t see how we can give it to anybody. Now, I got no knocks with the firm. I’ve said that a hundred times. I think the firm is great. Nothing against them. But like anything else, we talking about accountability, holding 34 people accountable, doing what we supposed to do. We have went out—now Mr. Persaud, I see him in the corner, I need to ask him again, to get on the record. Did we do what we were required to do by law to go out for bids or RFP or request for proposal, whatever we need to do? And my final question, David, did another firm win the bid? I continue after that. My question is did we do what we supposed to do, did another firm win? If that didn’t happen then I got no problem supporting Cherry, Bekaert & Holland. Mr. Persaud: Commissioner Williams, in response to your question, [unintelligible] request for proposal for professional audit services, three firms responded to the RFP. Elliott Davis, ?? and Cherry, Bekaert & Holland. An audit committee consisting of Robert Leverett, Deputy Administrator; [unintelligible], assistant Finance director; myself; Yvonne Gentry, DBE Coordinator; and Geri Sams, Procurement director, sat on the committee and [unintelligible] the committee recommended Elliott Davis. Mr. Williams: Okay. Who was awarded, who won? Mr. Persaud: Elliott Davis. Mr. Williams: Elliott Davis? Mr. Persaud: Yes. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, that’s been my concern. We been talking about, we been trying to do what is right in this government. We had this firm to do some good work for us. The bid was lost. It was awarded to somebody else. I remember extensions, I remember other things that we had to deal with in the past six years that I been here. But I’m going to make a substitute motion that we award the contract to the company that won the bid. And that’s we went out. If we wasn’t going to do that then we wasted money and time and personnel going through the process if we just going to do what we wanted to do. We might as well not have not even went out in the first place. Now, I see the Attorney sitting there and I need a legal opinion. Are we opening the door—we got some suits already lined up. I can name at least about five of them. Is this another one we are going to add to the list that’s going to sue the taxpayers? Cause this ain’t my money. This ain’t your money. This going to be taxpayers’ money we are going to end up paying out. And we going to pay some out. If we not liable, if we did, if we off the chain, [unintelligible] rules, that’s fine. But, Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Thank you. I was waiting for the Mayor to recognize me. Thank you, Mr. Williams. Mr. Mayor: Go ahead. I do have two Commissioners but go ahead. Mr. Shepard: I’ll wait. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] not going to recognize him. 35 Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Go ahead. Mr. Shepard: In my opinion you could award the professional services contract legally to Cherry, Bekaert & Holland or you could award it to the other contenders. I think that the subcommittee of the staff was tasked to make a recommendation. I do not think the recommendation is binding on this full body. It was an effort to guide the decision making of the Commission, but I do not think you will have liability if you choose either provider. So you’re free to Cherry, Bekaert and you’re free to choose the other. Whatever one you think does the best job. And you may have a disagreement among yourselves as to who is the best. And the point system that they used is not going to control your discretion in my opinion. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can follow up. I mean for so long we have people who said that I didn’t get a fair chance, I wasn’t afforded the opportunity to do business with this government, so we set up a process through Purchasing, and Purchasing been drilled to the wall, behind the wall and anything else about not doing procurement the way it’s supposed to be done. Now, I’m hearing now that we have done all the things we supposed to be doing and it was done right. And somebody else won. And I hear our attorney saying that that didn’t make no difference. I hear our attorney saying that we didn’t have to do that, that we could do what in the heck we wanted to do and it fine with us. No, wait a minute [unintelligible] Mr. Shepard. Now, you didn’t say those words but that’s the same thing. You’re saying to me that either way [unintelligible] not going to matter. I don’t want to get this government in another lawsuit but I want to treat everybody in this government fair. But we got a bid profess, RFP, and somebody wins in, then we need to go with the person who was the low bidder or met the requirements or the points or whatever we done. And that wasn’t done by one person, that wasn’t done by our Finance director. That was a group. That was a united effort for our DBE person along with everything else. What the use of having those rules if we not going to follow them? Mr. Shepard: If I could speak again, Mr. Mayor? The rules are as I said a guide to decision making. I can cite you the example of the financial consultant for the [unintelligible] and they are, they were not the highest point gatherer or whatever under the system that we used then. Mr. Williams: That’s a good one. Mr. Shepard: And they were appointed and apparently the feeling of the body at that time was that they were more comfortable with those advisors than the out of town advisors who had a different point score, a higher point score or however you look at it. You talk about litigation—there has been none as a result of that decision. And then just a few weeks ago the body chose to go with the Gold Cross as the service provider for the ambulance contract, Mr. Williams. That was a company that apparently the body felt 36 could better provide the service than the other competitor, who was I think AMR and apparently the body was— Mr. Williams: I think you’re mixing some apples and oranges together. I’m going back to the firm that won the pension contract. The ambulance service was two different dogs. Two different animals. You can’t compare them. There was two contracts. Let me finish. Because I remember those distinctly, especially one that our pension auditors, who a firm out of Atlanta won the bid and we was going to award it to them until they showed up at the microphone here and this body, six votes changed their minds, put it back in the hands and even the pensioners came down and said we want to keep it where it is once we seen who was winning the bid, even the pensioners came down after some phone calls was made, and changed. And it was wrong. And the firm, who talked to me, said they didn’t want to sue the City because they wanted to do other business with the City, they didn’t’ want to make no enemies. But now right is still right. And you ain’t going to sit there and tell me that what we’ve done was wrong and we got the option to do whatever way we want to. Cause we wasted time with our Finance Director and everybody else doing it. And I’m not going to sit here and be a part of that. That’s crazy, Mr. Shepard. For you to even compare those. Now, let me go back to Gold Cross for just one minute. We went out for a proposal as to what they could perform for us. We didn’t go out for a bid process. They had other equipment and everything else that was added in to that equation and was more, even cheaper than the other service that was going to be provided for us for less money. So you can’t compare those two. Now those two contracts. But the one you cited first was the very one we need to cite. That’s the one that the company out of Atlanta won the proposal to handle the pension money and they came down and stood at that mic and when they found out the firm that was doing it phone calls was made all over this city. Folks crowded this Chambers out and said they wanted to keep it where they had it. They were the ones that called me and asked me not to stay with [unintelligible] until they found out who won the bid. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek and then Commissioner Rearden. Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, thank you. One of the things that concerns me, and I asked this question back when this first came up, was who on staff decided to use a Securities and Exchange Commission regulation to disallow or to discount Cherry, Bekaert & Holland from the process? To begin with, the committee was flawed in using that, which has nothing to do with auditing within the local government as a stipulation for review of any of the agencies. So the process was flawed from the beginning. This is a professional service. We are indeed behind the eight ball and need to get this audit under way. We have an experienced firm who has conformed with all the rules and regulations. I see no need in belaboring the point any further. I would still like to know who decided that the city finances and audits should have anything to do with a regulation from the SEC. And then how it found its way on the committee without somebody saying this is for the Securities and Exchange Commission, not local government. But that august body decided to overlook the fact and I for one am amazed that with that level of professionals on that committee that we didn’t uncover the fact that that was the Securities and Exchange Commission, not a federal regulation or state 37 regulation governing local government and audit. So that was a waste of time self- imposed by the committee. I, for one, as a Commissioner want to see this audit done and I, for one, as a Commissioner am tired of having to beg the State for extensions. Let’s move on. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Rearden? Mr. Rearden: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First, I’d like to say that this was a request for professional services. It was not a bid. They are two different animals. Price was not the indicative factor for this request. Secondly, I believe the committee that developed their recommendation was flawed in that we had the chickens being guarded by the foxes. The committee that selected this should not have been made up of the Finance Director and the Assistant Finance Director but should have drawn people from other areas of either the government or even the private sector. We have an internal auditor that could have helped in this situation. So therefore, I believe that the proposal and the recommendation made by this committee is not acceptable and it should not be voted on and carried out and the contract should be awarded to Cherry, Bekaert due to their experience working with us. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Beard, then Commissioner Handy. Ms. Beard: I guess my question is why is there such a difference in discrepancy between our lawyer and our Finance Director? And it just appears that we were looking at this as we looked at any others as a bid. I have spoken with the Finance Director and he said he still highly recommends the other firm. I don’t have a problem either with the one we have been using but we have been using it eight years and I do think you normally make changes there for safety. Just safety purposes. This is unusual. But a lot of people were involved in this and that is why it came to where it is and if we are not listening to them I guess we don’t need these committees. That’s basically what I have to say. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Handy? Ms. Handy: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to agree with Commissioner Cheek. If I’m not mistaken, I’m the one who asked the question about that regulation that was put in there. And the way I caught it was that it was faxed to this committee from the company who won the bid. The committee themselves did not have that information about that criteria. The company who won the bid faxed that information to us. That’s where I caught it. How can a company that want the job, and they tell us how it should be ran in order to get that job? Thank you. Mr. Cheek: Amen. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Colclough? 38 Mr. Colclough: Can we ask the Finance Director to come up and respond to the faxing of the information from the company? Mr. Persaud: Yes, sir. Thank you, Commissioner Colclough. The piece of document that is in question was provided to the Commission by myself. And I mean it’s quite clear. Simply, that document was never part of the [unintelligible]. Mr. Cheek: It was included in all the information. Mr. Persaud: The [unintelligible] we are subject to SEC disclosure, sir, for financial disclosure and accountability for the accuracy of the financial statement. That is the reason that document was given to you. Mr. Colclough: Appreciate it. Ms. Beard: Did we hear that? Mr. Colclough: Thank you very much. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams and then Commissioner Cheek and we’ve got two motions on the floor. We need to go somewhere. Mr. Williams: First of all, Mr. Mayor, regardless of whether it’s a bid, and Mr. Rearden was saying it wasn’t a bid and I understand a request for proposal or a bid process. This firm has been doing business with this city for eight years, if not more and I think they did a great job. But I think it’s time for a change. They are not the only firm that has been doing business. We got people putting pipes in the ground ever since the city been here and the same folks still putting pipes in the ground and still messing up and we still keep them though. And it’s time for a change. It’s time to let somebody else at least come in and compare what we got and what we don’t have. But we keep doing the same thing over and over and over and expect different results. I really, I really don’t understand how we can even sit here as men and women who said we elected to do what is right. Here we are in the year 2005, almost 2006, and we still doing the same thing we used to do in this government. [unintelligible] what’s wrong. We know exactly what’s wrong. We don’t want to give anybody else an opportunity. We don’t want to give anybody else a chance. Now, some of us up here, and I ain’t above calling names, first of all, got a personal relationship with some of the firms that we do [unintelligible] but we still vote on that. And I think that’s illegal and if anything else, Mr. Mayor, if I need to bring it to the attention, I’ll bring that to the attention. But we need to do what is right by the people of Augusta Richmond County and give the people that’s going do it—we hire a director, we have staff that we work, and if we not going to trust them—if they making $70,000 or $80,000, you may be making $90,000, but that’s money we’re throwing away. [unintelligible] pay him that kind of money if we not going to listen to him? If anybody up here smart enough to do it you need to have the job. You [unintelligible] went out and got a group and did a survey to get all of the ducks in a row and we sit here like he’s not even here. We just going to be blamed about this cause we going to do it anyway. This 39 is the third dog gone time this been put on this agenda and been turned down. But we going to push it anyway. It don’t make good sense now. I know how I’m going to vote and I know I’ll sleep well tonight. But I tell you what. All the stuff that been investigated around Augusta and this don’t get investigated, then nothing else ain’t got no business being investigated. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, just one comment and I’m going to call for the quest. But the regulation that I read stipulated or implied those that actually engaged in the selling of bonds, those that were involved in money markets and so forth—I don’t think I’ve yet seen any of our staff up on the floor on Wall Street selling anything. And that was the governance that that ordinance implied. Not local governments or people on the receiving in. Those actually engaged in the money market itself. I’ll be happy to review that code section, but again it’s my feeling that selection of this particular ordinance and applying it to anything dealing with this process was in error. Call for the question, please. Mr. Rearden: Point of order. Mr. Mayor: I’ll recognize you. Go ahead. Mr. Rearden: Was there a second to Commissioner Williams’ motion? Mr. Colclough: I’ll second it. Mr. Mayor: The Chair is going to rule we’ve had adequate discussion on both motions. And the substitute motion will be voted on first. Anybody need a reading on either one? I guess not. I see lights already going on. This is on the substitute. Mr. Cheek, Mr. Rearden, Mr. Handy, Mr. Smith, Mr. Grantham, Mr. Hankerson and Ms. Sims vote No. Motion fails 3-7. Mr. Mayor: Now the original motion. Mr. Williams: Madame Clerk? Point of clarification, Ms. Mayor. If we got a personal relationship with this firm can we vote, yes or no? Are we allowed to vote with a firm that do business for us or with us and vote in this government? Mr. Mayor: The conflict will have to be either challenged or established but we are in the process of voting. The Chair is going to rule that we will vote. However, that does not refrain a Commissioner from making that particular challenge that there may be a conflict or not. But in the process of where we’ve gone, one motion has already been defeated and I’ll have to rule that we need to continue to vote. 40 Mr. Williams: I understand, Mr. Mayor. I just want clarification. What’s the point of order after that if the vote passes with that vote? What’s the process for voting and there is a conflict? Mr. Mayor: That complaint can either be made, alleged by news conference, or presented to this particular body to discuss. Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Mayor: One of those. Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Go ahead. We’ve voting on the original motion. The Clerk: The original motion. Yes, sir. To award the auditing to Cherry, Bekaert & Holland. Ms. Beard, Mr. Williams and Mr. Colclough vote No. Motion carries 7-3. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir? Mr. Williams: If Mr. Grantham got a personal relationship with that firm, can he not vote? Mr. Mayor: The Chair has already ruled how that will be done. We’ll move to the next order of business. There is a procedure to do both. This will not be tonight to do it, but that will not restrict your right from putting it on the next agenda of this Commission, or if you decide to do it in a public manner. It can be done both ways. But we have to move, proceed now with the order of the day. [unintelligible] Next item, Madame Clerk. The Clerk: 37. Request for authorization for additional appropriations for attorney's fees for Paul Hastings, Janofsky & Walker. (No recommendation from Finance Committee November 28, 2005) Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Thank you. This is attorneys fees for tax counsel who have been working with this government for their qualification letters for the defined benefit plan, which was the one that was passed in 1945, 1949, and 1977. The defined benefit plan of 41 2006 had no account number; therefore when the invoices were submitted to my office for approval, I knew the work had been done, yet there was no way to pay these attorneys. The process is that they have been billing and they are achieving results in that the favorable letters are virtually available from the IRS subject to some submissions that would include some work that I have to do, as well as Paul Hastings. They are not going to recommend a 2006 Plan but rather they are going to reopen the 1977 Plan. That’s their recommendation, ladies and gentlemen. And that has changed recently. So my budget that I originally thought would be required of this firm to finish their work was $15,000. That is no longer an accurate estimate. The invoice they had outstanding was $7,651.97, which I have approved and forwarded to the Administrator because that work was related to that new plan, which it looks like we’re now not going to do. So it seems to me you should only pay them for what they’ve done. Their other fees have been allocated to each plan, the ’45, the ’49, and the 1977 Plan. So I would ask the body to approve what Paul Hastings has billed through this agenda item being composed. Ms. Sims: Motion to approve. Mr. Handy: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there discussion? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Let me jump one and I’ll recognize you. Am I hearing then we are doing a reduction in what we’re paying? Mr. Shepard: You’re hearing that the work is subject to reallocation to the other plans and the billing on the new plan, which has no account number, will stop. Mr. Mayor: Did we have then a proposal to allocate a certain amount [unintelligible]? Mr. Shepard: I was anticipating what they might bill through the end of the year. Trying to set up a budget, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: And what they are billing is less than what they anticipate? Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir, because the thinking of these attorneys is that it will not continue, it will not continue on the track of opening a new defined benefit plan but will reopen another one. Mr. Mayor: I know if they’re hired they’ve got to get paid. I guess what I’m just trying to get a little clarity on is whether or not they were going to get paid out of what you had proposed on the $15,000 or maybe better yet what source were they going to get paid out of? 42 Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mays— Mr. Mayor: Do we need to allocate one? That’s what I’m trying to get to the bottom on. Mr. Shepard: Yes. That’s what I was told in finance, that we needed an account code for this work. All the others had account codes and their portions of the bill was paid. This was not. Mr. Mayor: I’m just trying to work my way through that. I’m trying to figure out if we were going to pay and we were going to have to pay them through some means by taking them [unintelligible]. It would just seem like to me if there was a proposal to pay them out of—in other words, wherever we were going to pay them out of at the beginning it would seem like to me there should be a proposed amount that should go from that account fund to go into another account fund as opposed to creating another one and then we proposing another [unintelligible]. Maybe I’m not [unintelligible] on that. Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: That was my question, Mr. Mayor. I was trying to figure out where we proposed to pay them, how do we know where we are, not only with that one but the other one as well? Is there an open door? I mean in some instances there is an open door with the attorney fees but how could we have this fund and not know what we going be paying them and what service they going be doing? I mean if they going to be doing land acquisition, if they going to be going to court, or whatever, usually my involvement with my attorneys says they going to be in court for two weeks or for two days. But if there is no time limit in lawyer’s fee, like this government don’t have, you know, ain’t no telling what we liable to be paying, Mr. Mayor. So my question was and Mr. Shepard said he was trying to visualize or try to propose what their fee would have been; is that right? Mr. Shepard: I was trying to give you an accurate estimate through the end of the year so it could be finished. Mr. Williams: Well, Mr. Mayor, I think we’re [unintelligible] motion to approve it, we need to go ahead and approve it. I mean if we got to pay this firm anyway, we got one more coming up, we’re going to have the same kind of questions on it so I call for the question. Go ahead and vote on it. Mr. Mayor: Are there any other questions from this end? Any from this end? Mr. Hankerson: Before we vote I just want to make sure, add to that I know that we, in trying to get this plan passed there was a lot of [unintelligible] things we had to unveil and doing telephone conferences numerous times. And seem like we were resolving some things that we stumbled up on that should have been resolved a long, long time ago so it called for a lot of time in it. So I’m happy to know that. When I heard that we didn’t have to open up the [unintelligible] plan for employees to make sure they have 43 good insurance, I mean good benefits when they retire and I hope that that will continue to go on and that now we can go back and open up the ’77 Plan, which we tried to do the first time. So I think that’s good and an update on where we are with the defined benefit plan for all employees. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Mr. Williams abstains. Mr. Smith out. Motion carries 8-1. The Clerk: 38. Request for authorization for additional appropriations for attorney's fees for the office of the County Attorney. (No recommendation from the Finance Committee November 28, 2005) Mr. Mayor: The floor is yours. Mr. Shepard: Thank you, sir. Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, I have done some research in area of what budgets have been established for the office of County Attorney and in the Law Department. And in every year the County Attorney, actual expenditures have exceeded the budget. And there are—if you look at 2003, just so we can get personalities out of this discussion, a budget of $371,000 was established. It was exceeded. The actual billings were $508,040. In 2004 the same thing has happened. We increased the County Attorney’s budget. And in 2005 we are in the same position. We reached this point about September of last year, we reached this point September of this year. And I can offer two explanations that I think are relevant. The first is that the County Attorney’s budget bears the charging of the settlements which are made by this body and I’m pleased to say that it has been not that many settlements. But also it bears the burden of the former County Attorney’s work who has been directed or has had to continue simply because those cases included me as one of the parties and therefore in 2004 we had billings by Mr. Wall, we had settlements which were charged against my budget, and so absent the settlements and absent what’s charged to Mr. Wall, we would actually not be in here needing to ask for a full month’s additional appropriation. And my billing has run on the general fund account at the hourly rate that you were gracious enough to approve, it’s run about $40,000 a month. And the block, the budget block will hit in September and I looked at the bills and I estimated that to get us through the remainder of the year at the rates we were spending would require four months at $40,000 a month. I also have been apprised of some additional charges and I didn’t know how you would rule. I could adjust these downward some in that Paul Hastings, you have just agreed to pay, so that company can be removed from me budget. That would lower that. W.R. Toole had a number of plats which had been made up for several purposes, one of which was the working out of an escape on the river road industries and that was the main budget of that. W.R. Toole was $5,692. I suppose I could have taken this other, Fitzpatrick [unintelligible], our trademark attorneys, and I 44 could have presented that as a memo item but since I was out of funds I’m asking the Commission to grant me authority to pay them. They are the trademark counsel who were under—which we had a relationship with them when I came into this office and their principal work has been to service mark both the renewal of the Old Government House logo and the Augusta logo that you see on your documents today, more modern, I guess, logo. In addition, Mr. James has some additional bills which he has submitted through my office. He is also being paid a stipend for handling Magistrate Court, which is independent I believe of that. But also Burnside Wall had an invoice and still has an invoice which is unpaid. So I don’t know any other way with the budget being the situation that it is, is to ask for additional authority and I can subtract out Paul Hastings which would virtually reduce this amount to these other providers in half. So I would ask that you pay this statement so that we can continue to pay lawyers and can finish out the year and when we’re in this budget process that we’re in now that we look to a category that would finish off some work that I’m conflicted from doing. That’s the down side, I think, of me being on the Commission is that I was also named as a defendant in some of the cases as each of you were. And it’s—before I added, before I added these together, if you’ll notice the actual budget total, we are spending less in 2005 than in 2004 and we have been doing our best to terminate litigation short of jury trial. A series of motions which we have made in Federal Court which has terminated cases there. These are big numbers to you. I understand that. But I have had a lot of people working trying to move in several different venues for this city at the same time. And it was not a situation that I walked into that was all prospective work. There was a backlog of work, 2002, excuse me, 2003 to 2004, which I took over. And I have mostly worked off that. But in addition there have been new fees that have been incurred, just as a matter of representing this government which I couldn’t always foresee. And there have been a lot of work which has been all compressed into this time. And I think you all know that I have put in a great deal of time in this job. My partners have, as well, and so it’s not, this money not just for me personally but it is a request that my firm be adequately funded for the rest of the year. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Go ahead. Mr. Williams: Thank you, sir. I got a couple of questions here and that just goes back to what we said, this government has said, we are going to have an in-house law department where we have an attorney that works for this government for a salary and not an open door policy, open pocketbook, so we can kind of work it off. My question to Mr. Shepard is on this document you passed [unintelligible] Law Department and County Attorney. Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir? Mr. Williams: The Law Department in 2004, actual budget was $228,724. Then the attorney actually budget salary, I guess, will be paid in 2004 was $685,932. The Law Department—do we have a Law Department here? 45 Mr. Shepard: We do, sir. Mr. Williams: I know we got two people on staff now. I know we supposed to be creating a Law Department. And [unintelligible], I just need some understanding. Y’all throw so much stuff at me. I’m lost, I don’t know where I’m at, I’m just fishing, but if we got a Law Department and every year it’s over $200,000 for that department then the attorney’s salary—and that’s what you got here, you got County Attorney—in 2005 the budget was $501,000. The actual budget look like it come to $483,000. I think that’s with the additional stuff you trying to get now. Is that right? Mr. Shepard: That is the, that is the [unintelligible] was [unintelligible]. Mr. Williams: What do the Law Department do then, Mr. Shepard, if we got a Law Department in 2005 we done paid $220,931, what do the Law Department, who is our Law Department? Is that salaries for the two, the one person—only have one person, Ms. Flournoy. Is that the salary for the one person we got? Mr. Shepard: No, sir. That includes here salary. And includes a part-year salary for Mr. James. Mr. Williams: A part-year salary for Mr. James and the salary for Ms. Flournoy? Mr. Shepard: In total. Mr. Williams: In total. And that just their salaries, over $200,000— Mr. Shepard: No, sir. Their salaries are not at that level. That also includes the employees that support them. Both of them have— Mr. Williams: I thought that the employees that support them was in your office. Mr. Shepard: No, sir. They each have an administrative assistant that supports each of them. And now, right now with Mr. James having resigned, we’ve been working with Ms. Williams in that department to have her do work that would be more related to the Land Bank. Mr. Williams: Well, I guess you need to tell me what those salaries are for that person, Mr. James when he was here, and their assistants because I’m looking at [unintelligible] $300,000 for 2005 would be real good. So explain to me salaries do we pay those people and that staff person they got? And each one of them got a staff person, is that right? Mr. Shepard: They do, sir, and I think that they both need a staff assistant. 46 Mr. Williams: Okay, they got them. I just need to know what we pay them. They there. Mr. Shepard: And I’ll be happy to discuss that, Mr. Williams, but for their benefit, if we’re going to discuss their terms of employment— Mr. Williams: I just can’t see, Mr. Shepard, I don’t really want to discuss—I don’t really need their salaries. What I don’t understanding is how come the Law Department that you’ve got on this thing listed is almost $300,000 but then there is another $500,000—it’s $483,000—but keep it simple—almost $500,000 for just the County Attorney. So if—somebody, somebody is getting paid first of all to do nothing. That’s the first thing. But the second thing is we are paying too much. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Williams, your decision, it’s a subjective decision as to whether you’re being paid too much or paying too much. Mr. Williams: That’s right. Mr. Shepard: The rates of charge that we are making in our law firm are lower or competitive than what’s being charged in this city. Mr. Williams: Okay. My other question is all this money, the $200,000, the $300,000, makes $500,000, that $800,000 going through your office paying out the staff people. We cut the check? Do we? Who? Where that money go? That $800,000 and give or take a thousand or two and it’s $483,361 for the county attorney and for the Law Department it’s $220,331. So that money goes through your office. Mr. Shepard: Well, it goes—the ones that come to me—the pieces I’m handling go— Mr. Williams: What office that go through, Steve? I mean this simple Steve stuff. We ain’t in the courtroom. Mr. Shepard: Go through Finance. Mr. Williams: Go through Finance. And Finance pays those fees to those people, right? Mr. Shepard: Finance pays my office and then the—for example, the salaries of the Law Department, staff attorneys, goes through Payroll. And the rent at the 500 Building would go—that does not go through me. The utilities, telephone, that kind of thing, stationery, that does not go through me. Basically that is an entirely city department so all its expenditures are from this government directed to not just one source, they’re directed to employees, they’re directed— 47 Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, that’s another reason, that’s another reason we need to go ahead and do what the charter had asked for this government to do and to create a in- house situation where a attorney would be paid by this government and not keep draining the taxpayers with the kind of money we paying out now. You ain’t the first one, Mr. Shepard. The last attorney had the same role plan you got. It’s like a five year plan or a ten year plan, whatever it is. Same plan he had. Same plan you got now. But we need to change it. The charters states we will have an in-house situation. Other consolidated governments, Columbus Muscogee has an attorney, makes a salary. We pay the expense through the Finance person but it don’t go to the attorney, it don’t go to the staff people. It goes through the government like it should go. And your salary or whoever attorney be representing this government ought to be at a salary. You can’t have an open door policy. But that just proves my point with what you just gave us here, with the Law Department, then the attorney salary. The Law Department include the attorney in my thinking, Mr. Shepard. I know I’m different from everybody else. But if you got a Law Department, [unintelligible] and an attorney department. The Law Department ought to be the attorney department. All that ought to be under one. And Mr. Mayor, I’ve got no other comments. I’ve got a meeting I’ve got to get to. I just, I gave my comments, I just don’t see how we can continue to let the taxpayers be drained through the stuff we do up here on this government. Mr. Mayor: Let me—who else was next on this end? After Mr. Williams? Any other comments on this end? Let me say one thing. I stand to be corrected and this is [unintelligible] what [unintelligible] but in the course of the discussion a moment ago between the Commissioner and the Attorney, I do agree with both of them. I agree on the Attorney’s part that the breakdown of settlements is something that you have to deal with in a different way. But I agree with the Mayor Pro Tem from the standpoint that a salary that is there of an employee, even though it may be within the attorney’s office, a salaried employee is still a salaried employee. And that is for public disclosure. We cannot except that to a point of saying it is not to be disclosed. [unintelligible] salary of this county [unintelligible] works here [unintelligible] adhere to Open Records Act. And I just wanted to make that correction to this body as the presiding officer that that salary can be asked of and it does have to be provided. Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, do we have a motion on this item? The Clerk: No, we don’t. Mr. Grantham: I make a motion we approve. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second to approve. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Mr. Colclough out. Mr. Williams votes No. 48 Motion carries 8-1. The Clerk: 41. Discuss Fire Chief position. (Requested by Commissioner Andy Cheek) Mr. Mayor: Go ahead, Mr. Cheek. Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, not to I guess extend these discussions any longer than absolutely necessary, I’ve worked with the City Attorney and we’ve developed a resolution here that I will read and then I’ll have a motion, sir. Whereas, since the resignation of Chief Gillespie, the Augusta Commission has unsuccessfully attempt to appoint a permanent Fire Chief, and it is necessary to declare that process terminated—which it is; whereas, the Augusta Commission has an experienced fire fighter presently serving as Interim Fire Chief; now, therefore, let it be I move that we adopt a policy to Fire resolved—and the motion will be as follows: Chief appointments that recognizes four years of employment in the fire service position to be equivalent to one year of the four year college degree requirement presently in the Augusta Code and direct the attorney to prepare amendments to present to the present qualifications so as to authorize the appointment of Howard “Bubba” Willis as Fire Chief and that this appointment be voted on at the next Commission meeting in order to comply with the Georgia Open Meeting and Open Records Act. This day, Mr. Mayor, and that’s submitted as a motion. Ms. Sims: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there discussion? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Any more discussion, may or may not, on this end? Commissioner Williams is first. Anybody else on this end? Commissioner Hankerson. Mr. Williams: This is another one, Mr. Mayor, we’ve had plenty of dialogue on. I think Bubba Willis a fine officer and probably doing a great, great job as a fire chief. But we have set educational requirements in place. We have went out for employment, went out to find, to do a search for a fire chief. We had one man that was still standing who met all of the guidelines, all of the requirements that we have. If we going to waive the requirements, if we going to drop those requirements we would have to go out and at least give those people with the minimum requirements an opportunity to apply for the job. It would not be right, it is not right, it don’t even seem right to drop those educational requirements to have, to give it to anybody, [unintelligible] Mr. Willis. Mr. Willis not in question, he just happen to be the Interim Chief at this time. Just reading on yesterday found that a person with a GED make half the money a person with a high school diploma. And a person with a high school diploma makes half the money as the person makes with two years of college. And that rate continues to go on. We got people 49 we done sent to school, we got people we done asked to do special work on their off days for training, for other school activities. People have paid their own way through school. Some people work nights and went to school during the day. Some people work days and went to school at night to further their education, to try and be a professional. And a professional just ain’t somebody who knows the job. A fire chief don’t fight fire any more. Now, maybe back in the old days, maybe they had to pick up a hose because nobody else was there. A fire chief is an administrator. He carries out the administration portion of the job. He’s the person who sits and buy equipment and puts programs together. This is—this ain’t the good old boy system. This ain’t [unintelligible] jump off the back of the truck and catch the hose or catch a fire plug and do it right. This is professional job. We’re the second largest city in the state. We ought to have professional firemen doing a professional job. Now, Mr. Willis, if he wants to apply if we going to waive these educational requirements, that I don’t support, but we got to give everybody with the minimum requirements an opportunity to apply. And that’s anybody up here, anybody else. If you going to waive the requirements you can’t drop them to give to anybody. I don’t care who the person is. If you going to waive the requirements, we need to let those people with the minimum requirements have an opportunity to apply. What will be saying to people who we done told to go to school? What, what we be saying to our own children that we send off the college every day to further their education? You ain’t got to get an education, don’t worry about it, just wait till an opening comes and we’ll drop them again to you. And that’s what we been doing in this city for 2000 years. Oh, I see some faces looking, but let me say something. It’s time for me to take my Commissioner hat off and put another hat on because I see some faces now that really need to be looking in a mirror at your own selves. About what we trying to do up here. And we done done it twice already and I wouldn’t doubt if we do it two more times. But you still wrong. And you ought to suffer for it, too. It just don’t make good sense to sit here and act like you don’t know no better. It’s time out for that. That’s why some folks staying still up here right now because that same old kind of stuff. But still we going to sit around and act like we don’t know what’s going on. We going to try to waive the educational requirements and give them to anybody. This ain’t personal. I told Bubba, I been knowing him for a long time. I think he do a great job. But you can’t give this to nobody and be fair. So if you going to waive them, first of all we had a man standing. We had a man that met every qualification and came here and the Administrator said if we think he’s the kind of fire chief we want, we can hire him. And we [unintelligible] hire him. Now, Mr. Shepard, I need you to tell me this. Are we setting up for a lawsuit this time? Now, the last time we wasn’t up for no lawsuit because it was something we could do as we want to. If we had a person who met all of the guidelines, all the qualifications and still standing, are we setting up for a lawsuit now? In your opinion, which don’t mean much, but your opinion. Mr. Shepard: Well, thank you, Mr. Williams. I appreciate your letting me have the opportunity to speak to your question. I do not believe we are setting ourselves up for a lawsuit. There again, this is my opinion. I see this essentially like the situation we’ve had earlier where we made an interim appointment. And I was—I think it was said on this floor that if we do anything else [unintelligible] we would essentially be, essentially be engaged in [unintelligible]. The gentleman I’m referring to is Fred. He has come in 50 here and we recognized talent in the job. And I think that by, just by not necessarily coincidence, but just the way the facts evolved in the Fire Department [unintelligible] we have found a fire chief that is acceptable to this board. I have heard of his work over across the river. Why set up a process when the body’s mind is pretty much predetermined and I think this interim appointment—and I was asked to help draft this resolution. I said that the Commission has an experienced fire fighter presently serving as an interim fire chief. Mr. Williams: My question to you, Mr. Shepard was— Mr. Shepard: My answer was no. Mr. Williams: --were we setting up for a lawsuit. Let me go back to Mr. Russell for a minute because— Mr. Mayor: Hold on, hold on. Mr. Williams: Wait now, Mr. Mayor. [unintelligible] Mr. Cheek: Order of the day. Mr. Mayor: You will get your chance to get the floor back. What I just want to find out in clarification, you asked a question that he answered. Are you through with that particular line? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] Mr. Shepard, and if not then you can ask him on the rebuttal side of it. But both of you [unintelligible] talk at the same time. Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible]. Mr. Williams: I just want to clarify something can when we go back to Mr. Russell that’s another apple and [unintelligible] we comparing. We had nobody in here that had passed the requirements or made the grade, made the job when we chose Mr. Russell. We chose Mr. Russell from within, without even going out to get anybody else. So, and we did that. That’s how Mr. Russell get into the position he’s in. Never been in that position before. But this body decided to do that and we did it. But that’s not the same thing with the fire chief where we went out and had eight people I think, narrowed it down to three. One didn’t have what we need, one backed up, and had one man standing. One man who met all the guidelines that we asked them for. Met every one of them. And we still choose not to give him that job. Now, we going to wait three or four or six months and then turn around and waive them and give it to somebody. If we waive them, my question is if we waive them we’ve got to give anybody with those minimum 51 requirements the opportunity to apply for it. That’s not right. So, but six votes and this body can do anything they want to do. That’s been proven this day. Whether it’s right or wrong, six votes up here do what in the heck they want to do, when they want to do it. But it won’t be one of mine. Mr. Mayor: Any other questions to the attorney? Commissioner Beard? Ms. Beard: I believe we received a letter from Mrs. Byrd in reference to this. And I’d like to hear from her department at this point in reference to their recommendation. Ms. Byrd: Thank you, Commissioner Beard, members of the Commission, the memorandum that you are referencing was in regards to the educational requirements for the directors. And in that memorandum I pointed out that at the time of consolidation it was an administrative decision that all of the department directors would have a college education, a college degree, that as of consolidation it was a decision to allow the department directors that were directors at that time but did not have a degree at that time an opportunity to interview so we did select a couple of them but it was a decision going forward that each department head would have an educational—a bachelors degree, a bachelors of science, a bachelors of art or higher. So therefore since that was the administrative decision it was in my recommendation if we wanted to do something different that it would have to be the policy decision of this board that starts at the top to make the decision as to how we were going to start waiving educational requirements, and once we made the decision at a department director level we could then make decisions going therefore using that as a foundation. Mr. Mayor: Any other questions of her, Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: I don’t believe so. I’m not comfortable without having educational requirements here. I was just [unintelligible]. I think they are looking for a fire chief in Savannah at this time, too, and it’s a natural thing. It’s the most unnatural thing to be doing what we’re attempting to do now after ten years. Mr. Mayor: Anyone else on this end? Ms. Beard: May I add one other thing? Mr. Mayor: Sure. Go ahead. Ms. Beard: I would like to say, even if we decide to allow someone in that position, I think if that person is as good and as bright and has all the competencies that we say he has, then he should not mind going back to pick up those qualifications. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek? 52 Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, we only have to look as far as the electric lights above us that were provided to us by Thomas Edison and his staff who had no college degree. We have got to be a body that recognizes within ourselves the quality, the experience, the expertise, and yes the leadership in the field that emerged from this Fire Department. We have someone that is recognized, that is in fact the envy of other cities. We’ve debated this several times but we have someone that has been tried on the battlefield of truth in some of the most difficult conditions that this region has ever seen and has managed not only our department but about seven other agencies through that ordeal. If that’s not excellent manager, what is? And you can tell the wheat quickly separates from the chaff under fire, which was demonstrated by this man. We’ve also seen an emergency management agency that was in fact in shambles reinvigorated, reorganized and brought back to viable status under the management of this man. His experience in equivalent given is that of a Ph.D. His efforts in the field have demonstrated a knowledge of that level. We are not in fact stepping back but we are stepping forward, as leaders should, in recognizing the experience and the quality and the skills of those we have in our own staff. And there is another staff member I’m going to mention at this time who is being held back. Robert Oliver. He’s being held back right now because he doesn’t have a degree but he is doing the work of an engineer. Now, we need to be able to help the people that have the skills and knowledge and have, yes, in fact learned on the job and are as good as engineers and bachelors degreed people and so forth. This is the way you get ahead, by recognizing the talent. There is nobody that can do this job better if we went on a national or an international search. There is nobody that has proven themselves any better than the man that’s in the job right now. Today is the chance to recognize that. And yes, when you go to school you have a better chance of getting a better education and getting a better job. But that’s no guarantee. We shouldn’t be in the business of holding people back if they’ve demonstrated expertise above those who have happened to have gone and gotten a four year degree, nor should we limit the ability to access those position to people who have degrees who may not be as qualified. So if the things [unintelligible] applied for the job, one of them even said why are you interviewing me when you have Chief Willis here? He had a degree. Chief doesn’t. But he recognized the ability of the man sitting in that chair right there. It’s time for us to do the same thing. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I think I’ve had quite enough. We’ve had a lot of good people to come through here. You know, it’s amazing how we determine good people here in Richmond County. Now, I’m talking about the other fire chief we had. You know the one that finally went to Washington, D.C. You know the one where the three stooges went to lend their support because whatever the problems were here, the [unintelligible] problems followed him there and to every other job he attended, attempted to get. Now, you know, just—what, this past year I guess the thing that bothers me is I look at all of you and all of you tell me, well, there is something that was not quite right with him, he wasn’t quite right. Somehow or the other all kinds of problems were determined to the point that the GBI came in, to the point that all of the records were sent some place, to the point that determining the problem could not be 53 done in Augusta, the information had to go to Savannah, and then what happened when it was there? It stayed there for many years. For many years. Until we asked legislators if they would look into it. And when the letter was going to the Attorney General, the information was released. Now, I want you to know, and if I am wrong, I want to see some information that says I am wrong. Because I’m telling you he was young, he was gifted, and he was black. And it is amazing how he was treated in this community. And if we can do this for Chief Willis, Andy, then we can select him as Director of EMA, unless you know something about him that I don’t know. Mr. Cheek: He’s not qualified to be EMA director. Ms. Beard: Is he not qualified to be a fire chief? Mr. Cheek: He’s been a fire chief. Ms. Beard: Well, I just think we need to start balancing things and understand this is one community instead of two. But you go anywhere in the black community and you will see what people think of Chief Few. Now, we look at our papers, all negative, all the time. Nothing good about us. You look at what has been done with our Interim Mayor. Great knowledge. Great ability. Is up on everything that happens in this conference room. A great leader. But you would never believe it if you walked out of this door or if you looked at certain groups who were talking. Now, I’m saying this is not the proper way to do this. Now, we can do it, and I agree [unintelligible] a number of things have not been done properly. And I wonder what it is, what is causing this. But we’re not going to just sit here and allow it to happen. I think you all need to do this. We’re not against Augusta. We want what’s best for Augusta. What we want is to be a part of it. And if we are going to have to fight to become a part of it we will. Mr. Williams: [unintelligible], Ms. Beard. Mr. Mayor: Any discussion on this end? Any discussion on this end? Mr. Hankerson: [unintelligible] on this side. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Hankerson: Thank you. I guess it was about a month ago I asked HR to go and look at the jobs or positions rather that we could substitute education requirements for experience. We got a report back from just the director and that’s not what I asked for. What we are talking about is nothing new across the state of Georgia. Georgia Trend, papers have job descriptions in them and many times education and college is substituted experience. And college is substituted. And so that’s not anything unusual across the United States. I am one of the ones that—one of the three individuals that voted when we had a process in place, when we had an African American to come before with almost a doctorate degree, working on his doctorate, I voted for him but that process failed and it seem that we have been stagnated since. We haven’t moved forward with 54 that. I interviewed, I had meetings with the former fire chief, had some problems in the community that was brought to me as Administrative Service Chairman. I asked him about those things and got information from HR which proved that we had a low, very low minority hiring practice going on and asked what could be done about it and so forth. But shortly after Chief Gillespie resigned, I’m still concerned about that. I also have asked Interim Chief Willis about the hiring practices and so forth and I was impressed with the plan that he mentioned that he could resolve that problem by giving opportunities for training to prepare for a test, not to just give anybody a job and [unintelligible] not past the test but to prepare them for a test. And I think that’s what we need in order to bring numbers up and so forth. So I think it’s really time for us to move on with that. So I voted in one process and I’m ready to vote in another one. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: Mr. Mays, I do want the audience to know that I have never gone along—maybe I’m wrong but I’ve never gone along with Commissioner Hankerson or Commissioner Cheek in reference to this. And in my hand right now I have—they are looking for a fire chief in the city of Savannah and this went out in October. And their qualifications—and I’m just going to say in addition to the above-stated skills and abilities, the successful candidate must possess a bachelors degree in business administration, public administration or a related field, plus twelve to fifteen years of fire service management. And that makes sense to me. Mr. Mayor: Any other comments? Any other comments down here? There is one motion that’s on the floor. Madame Clerk, motion and a second. All in favor of that motion—there being no further discussion, all in favor of that motion will do so by the usual sign. Ms. Sims: Excuse me. Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am? Ms. Sims: Could we read the motion? Mr. Mayor: Sure. Ms. Sims: Thank you. The Clerk: The motion was to approve the resolution as read by Commissioner Cheek. Ms. Sims: Thank you. Mr. Williams out. Ms. Beard and Mr. Colclough vote No. Motion carries 7-2. 55 Mr. Mayor: Let me—Madame Clerk? The Clerk: Yes, sir? Mr. Mayor: Before we move on [unintelligible] because I had the opportunity work in the last five months closer with the chief than most have up here, and I would hope in addition to the resolution that has been read that the plan that the chief wants to do in reference to—and I say this particularly because I may be back here and I may not be back here. The chief and I have had a lot of conversations about programs and training and things, whether it be with Augusta Tech or other places. I would hope that this Commission would be as supportive on moving forward with those other plans that he has with advancement, education and training within that department, as we continue to move along, because that’s something that has been very close to him in terms of doing and I hope that we won’t just do a part of what he wants to deal with, that you will give him that support on where he wants to take this department [unintelligible] rest of those actions. I say that because I may be back here [unintelligible] make another decision and I may not be back here. But I was hoping this Commission would be supportive of doing that when you get to that point. The Clerk: 42. Discuss real estate matter. Mr. Grantham: I think this might be a duplication of what was discussed or approved, the service delivery agreement with the City of Hephzibah. Is that correct, Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: That would be my understanding, Mr. Grantham. I do have, I do have the [unintelligible] about the filing of that blank. I think that that would be appropriately done at this time. And that’s— Mr. Grantham: That being the case, Mr. Mayor, we [unintelligible] item [unintelligible] however you want to do. [unintelligible] Hephzibah service. After we did talk, Mr. Mayor, must to clarify everything. Based on the per gallon rate that was included in the agreement with the Hephzibah government, it was agreed upon that they would accept $1.15 instead of the original amount of $1.37. So that actually gave us 22 cents savings in regard to making that agreement work for their supplying water to us If a motion is in based on that project out at Hephzibah and 88 and 25. Highway 25. order I’ll make one that we accept, approve the $1.15 per 1000 gallons based on the agreement with the Hephzibah government. Ms. Sims: Second. Mr. Mayor: There is a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? I don’t have any discussion. I just have an observation. I guess because when I was considered 56 the old city boy on the county commission I made sure that when Hephzibah or Blythe had their objections to some things that we might do in this government and I used to make the comment that when you send them a tax bill they deserve the rights of protection like everybody else. So I have always supported helping them, and whether this is my last day or the start of a new one, I have no problem with doing [unintelligible]. But this is just a suggestion, ladies and gentlemen. Items like this, even though the Mayor may be voting or [unintelligible] whether it’s the Mayor you’ve got not or whether it’s somebody else, it would help a lot that y’all sharing information that you’re doing. This one floated around and floated around and I’m kind of like the big dummy, I sat around, I listened [unintelligible] past me and I don’t know whether somebody thought I might try to do something to oppose it or not. I don’t know. I’m glad that it was done. But I think when you put stuff on, this is what I was talking about, about Commissioners have the right to do it. [unintelligible] good stuff, go on and put something on here, please, ladies and gentlemen, where we can all understand what’s fixing to happen. Cause sometimes questions that we ask are brought about by the fact that we may not have adequate information in order to do that. And that’s just an observance but y’all were discussing a minute ago [unintelligible] had done and I for one really didn’t know where y’all were going on it. And I would have been just as supportive and [unintelligible] hope it pass unanimously but it does help when you [unintelligible] whole team know what is going on. It brings everybody on board to what you’re doing. But when you turn to the back of these books and it’s nothing there then those are the kind of things I think that are important enough that they be shared with everybody out here. It’s just an observance. And I hope everybody will vote for it. Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, the reason this has been in negotiation with staff for some time, the reason it was brought forward in this expedited manner is just due to I guess political environmental changes that have occurred with the other body we’re negotiating with. And so this was an effort to keep the parties together that had been in negotiation for the last year-and-a-half to go ahead and finalize the agreement. You’re quite correct, it has come forward without a lot of plethora of information and it’s come from staff to us fairly quickly without the Commission being fully briefed on that. I take responsibility for that. But it is in fact a deal, an arrangement that is beneficial for us and the City of Hephzibah that staff has done their due diligence [unintelligible] and it is really a win-win for both municipalities. Mr. Mayor: And I am sure that it is all correct, Mr. Chairman. I do [unintelligible] reason why I made that observation as the longest serving member of Engineering, Public Services, Public Works and if I did not know out of ignorance I could ask the question but I just think [unintelligible] that everybody doesn’t necessarily have to like old Willie but you know, where I sit at, at least for the next 24 hours, it could be shared and I just watched it. I watched it a week ago and I [unintelligible] great big secret. [unintelligible] and I just think to a point that if you are going to do it that way and you do it with somebody who has been here a quarter of a century, if you end up with somebody who hadn’t been here [unintelligible] day you’re going to have to share information. So that’s just something y’all need to pass on that we all I think can learn from. All in favor of that motion will do so by the usual sign. 57 Mr. Williams out. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Handy: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Are you— Mr. Handy: [unintelligible] item [unintelligible]. Okay. Mr. Mayor: What are down to [unintelligible], Madame Clerk? The Clerk: We’re on the addendum agenda now. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] The Clerk: Sir? Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] The Clerk: Item 4 on the addendum agenda was approved on the consent agenda, along with the addition of the Augusta Towers. Under D under recognition, Mr. Shepard asked that that item be deleted in concert with Ms. Sims. So that leaves items 1, 2 and 3. Mr. Mayor: We’re going to start at the bottom. Any objection to adding number 3? Ms. Beard: Where are we? Mr. Mayor: On the addendum sheet. The Clerk: Addendum agenda. Ms. Beard: What is number 3? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Go ahead. Mr. Shepard: Ms. Beard, when we moved the budget approval process forward one month, had it due by the second meeting in November, we also needed to change some references in the previous Code section from November to October so it would cycle in right. We have done it appropriately but I just wanted to get our ordinances correct with our timing under the state law. Ms. Beard: Okay. 58 Mr. Mayor: No objections to adding? Addendum Item 3. An Ordinance to amend Section 2-3-5 of the Augusta Richmond County Code regarding the date for submittal of budget to Commission; to delete Section 2-3-5 (b) in its entirety; to provide an effective date; to repeal conflicting ordinances; and for other purposes. (Deferred by Commission November 15, 2005) Mr. Mayor: The Chair will entertain a motion then to so add and approve, if there be no objection. Seem there are none. That’s on item 3. If there are still objections then it doesn’t go on. Mr. Grantham: Need a motion? Mr. Mayor: Need a motion to add and approve. There weren’t any objections. Mr. Grantham: If there weren’t any objections then I make a motion to approve. Ms. Beard: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion to add and approve. All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same. Ms. Sims and Mr. Williams out. Motion carries 8-0. Mr. Mayor: Item 2, if you would [unintelligible] Madame Clerk, if everybody has had enough time to look at item number 2 that’s on the addendum. Ms. Beard: [unintelligible] agenda? Mr. Mayor: It has to be either unanimously put on or not [unintelligible]. An addition. Ms. Beard: Wasn’t this on the agenda and just left off? Mr. Grantham: Yes. Right. Ms. Beard: So it should be like a regular item? Mr. Mayor: Let me just say where I am on that and this. I’m not going to carry [unintelligible]. I’m going to follow the rules that we’re under whether it was left off accidentally, on purpose, didn’t appear, whatever. Now, there is a procedure that y’all can move past that to overrule the Chair [unintelligible] no problem with that. But y’all 59 know how I am about rules so I’m not going to get into intentions. And I meant to earlier—there was a way this could be handled providing everybody is in agreement with that way. So that’s why I’m hitting this one in number 2, and if nobody has an objection then it’s on, the Chair accepts a motion to add and to approve. If there is an objection on number 2 then it does not go on. And you all can appeal to the parliamentarian and you can have a vote and you can overrule me and that gets me off the hook but I will not be carrying one that’s out of order. Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: And we do have rules of this Commission. Yes, sir, Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was the one that brought this up and I don’t mind adding it but I do not want to approve it. And my point is that I don’t think we should be under an addition to the agenda in this, and I hear what you’re saying, because these items were discussed, were requested to be put on the agenda from the beginning. And item number 2 was under the Finance Committee at our last committee meeting and that item was approved for recommendation to the Commission. However, I want to pull the item if we do add it. Same principle would apply to number 1. The request was made and I don’t think we need to be looking at added, as far as an added agenda item. It has been a requested item, as number 2 has been. Mr. Mayor: I’m handling them one at a time. Mr. Grantham: Yes, sir. I’ll take number 2. Mr. Mayor: You can make the motion to add it [unintelligible] discussion portion and then everybody can vote the way they want to vote, once it’s so added. Mr. Grantham: And I can— Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] Mr. Grantham: I understand that. But my point is I don’t see the necessity of having to add it when it has been discussed in committee. Mr. Mayor: What I’m still saying is that I don’t have a deciding factor when you all preside over your committees over that. I’m going by what is in front of me over here. I know what the rules of the Commission are, Mr. Grantham. I will abide by those rules because there will come a day and time when this will not be a one item agenda. It may be where there are several of them and then we need to follow them every time out by whatever the rules are. If there is no objection and everybody knows that then you are correct, there is no argument about it. We can just vote to go ahead and add. We’ll see right quickly, because I’m asking is there any objection. I mean I think that’s where you and I both agree on common sense. If it ain’t no objection then there’s nothing to argue about. We just add it and then everybody votes. But rules need to be followed. Cause I 60 don’t think we need to be ruling one way one week and then ruling another way another week. Mr. Grantham: That’s true, and I was just going through the agenda items and there is another item that has been also left off the agenda, which had to deal with the ombudsman that was in Administrative Service. And of course, you know, that’s another issue is not in the addition to be added on today, but it was overlooked, cause it was discussed at our last meeting about the ombudsman position in our committee meeting under Administrative Services. So my— Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] Mr. Grantham: I understand that. Mr. Mayor: I gave y’all two bites of that apple. We had a legal meeting this afternoon that contained a section on personnel and if it was that important at 1:00 o’clock it could have been brought on, brought up in personnel without being on an agenda, and you’d have had the opportunity to bring it out at that meeting and then vote on it. So there was ample opportunity to do that. Mr. Grantham: I agree with you. I don’t have a problem with that. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Grantham: But I do have a problem with having to add these last two items when they had been requested and approved. Mr. Mayor: Did you send them to the committee, I mean did you send them to the Clerk’s Office to put on there? Mr. Grantham: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Did you send them directly to the Clerk’s Office? Mr. Grantham: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: They did not pass through anybody else to go there? Mr. Grantham: They went to the Administrator. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] I’m just trying to get through the— Mr. Grantham: I understand. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] where you are because what’s out here on the agenda, I deal with it just like it is. I have no [unintelligible] rules. And there is a way to get two 61 bites of that apple again. But the way I’m going to conduct it is the way it’s supposed to be conducted. And that’s how I’m going to preside. Mr. Grantham: And I don’t— Mr. Mayor: And once I say that’s what it is, y’all have got the right to go ahead on and go to the parliamentarian and then I may disagree with him, I may agree with him. But there is a way in which you do it and I think [unintelligible] conducted. So I need to know between 2 and 1 what are we planning to do? And 2 is on the table right now. Are we going to add it and then go ahead and vote on it, up or down? We going to leave it alone? What are we going to do? [unintelligible] no objection to doing it and the path has been provided in order to get it on there, if you want to get it on there. Ms. Beard: Do you need a motion? Mr. Mayor: If there are no objections, the Chair will accept a motion to so add. Ms. Beard: So move. Mr. Mayor: To discuss it. There’s a motion. Is there a second? Ms. Sims: Second. Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second to so add. Addendum Item 2. Approve Award of Bid Item #06-067 to only responsive bidder for each bid section as follows: Section I Horne’s Pest Control $16,848.00 annually Section II Horne’s Pest Control $ 9,744.00 annually Section III Horne’s Pest Control $ 9,636.00 annually Section IV Horne’s Pest Control $ 3,888.00 annually The total annual cost of $40,116.00 is funded by the departments receiving the service under object code 52.13117. Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the motion to add will do so by the usual sign. Mr. Handy and Mr. Williams out. Motion carries 8-0. Mr. Mayor: It’s on the floor now. There is nothing [unintelligible] we got to deal with. And so therefore we’re just open now for discussion on that item, which is number 2, about the pest control. The Chair recognizes Commissioner Grantham. Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And the reason that I wanted to get this on the floor, so if we could discuss it, is that I understand that we did go out on bids and bids came in and three of the bids were turned down and there was one bid, this Horne’s bid was accepted and put on and with no explanation of why, and it’s costing us an additional $9,000 this year over last year based on the contract that we had with the 62 exterminating company for the year 2005. And so I feel like that what we need to do is put this back in the hands of our Procurement Department and ask them to go and get a bid from the other people within our community since this is outside our community also. The other point I’m making is that there was a request for people to attend a bid process and these people did attend the bid process and I understand that three of them were thrown out because of a flaw which was not understood by the three companies And so I’m just asking that this be resubmitted for a new bid under our submitting. pest control system for the building. I’ll put that in the form of a motion. Ms. Sims: Second. Mr. Mayor: There is a motion and a second to do just that that’s in your motion. Is that coming back through that particular committee in that process [unintelligible]? Mr. Grantham: Yes, it would be to come back through Purchasing Department and then back to the committee for approval. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Grantham: Normal process. Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Mr. Colclough votes No. Mr. Williams out. Motion carries 8-0. Mr. Mayor: Since we’re already in one, the Chair is going to declare a five minute recess. [Recess] Mr. Mayor: We can either deal with staying or—the floor is actually open. Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir? Mr. Colclough: I would make a motion that we recess until Monday. Ms. Beard: Is that a motion? Mr. Colclough: That’s a motion. Ms. Beard: Second. 63 Mr. Mayor: There is a motion and a second to recess until Monday. [unintelligible] Commissioner Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I don’t understand the I’m going to make a substitute motion that we carry on with purpose of recessing and the meeting. We have one item to finish and I think we need to discuss it and I think it’s time for us to call that item on the floor. Ms. Sims: I second that. Mr. Mayor: I think you got more than one item and that’s why I’m saying that. I know you have one that’s there and [unintelligible] budget issue. Mr. Grantham: Okay, we— Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] that, because you’ve got one that probably needs to be [unintelligible] in order to do [unintelligible]. Mr. Grantham: Why couldn’t we discuss this one item we’re talking about and then bring the subject matter of the budget up and then recess the meeting to another time? Mr. Mayor: That will be perfect on y’all but whatever y’all discuss you need to select a presiding officer. I’m going to have to leave. Mr. Grantham: I understand. Mr. Mayor: I have presided for four hours and something and I have got three places I need to be as we’re talking. So I am going to leave. And with that option, you all will have to select someone who will preside. The Mayor Pro Tem is gone. Ms. Sims: I’d like to make a motion. I’d like to nominate someone. Mr. Mayor: You’ve got two motions that’s out there first. Mr. Grantham: Right. Mr. Mayor: That we’ve got to dispose of. That’s two move one way or move another one. And the one, the substitute will be voted on first and that is to continue as we are. I’ll go on and accept both of them being out there where we have—go ahead and vote on. Vote on the substitute first to continue the course of the meeting. Ms. Beard, Mr. Handy and Mr. Colclough vote No. Mr. Williams out. Motion carries 6-3. 64 Ms. Sims: [unintelligible] next motion? Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. Go ahead. Ms. Sims: I was just going to nominate Commissioner Colclough to chair the meeting in your absence. Mr. Colclough: I have to be somewhere. I appreciate the nomination but I have to leave. Ms. Sims: Mr. Shepard, may I ask you a question? Mr. Shepard: Yes, you may. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] Mr. Shepard: Ms. Sims wishes to be heard. Mr. Mayor: Go ahead, I’m sorry, Ms. Sims. Ms. Sims: I’d like to nominate Commissioner Grantham. Mr. Grantham: I’ll accept based on you have to leave. I wish you would stay. Mr. Mayor: Well, I probably won’t, may not be back anyway, but to a point that’s not something I’m used to doing in terms of leaving. Usually I’m kind of the last one here standing. But inasmuch as I committed to two places, one at 6:00 o’clock, another one at 7:00 o’clock and another one with my own supporters about an hour ago, that was why I made the suggestion to a point that on election eve to a point that I’m just looking at us to a point of how we deal with [unintelligible]. Mr. Grantham: Let me ask a question, if you don’t mind, Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Sure. Mr. Grantham: Will we have a quorum if Mr. Mays leave? Mr. Shepard: If we have seven for a quorum— Mr. Grantham: At present. If Mr. Mays leaves we will not have but six. Mr. Shepard: We will not have but six. But I understood Mr. Handy was in the building. I don’t know. Mr. Grantham: I don’t know whether they are or not. 65 Mr. Shepard: If he leaves you will not have a quorum. Mr. Grantham: That’s what I understand. Mr. Shepard: There would be no business. Mr. Grantham: That’s why I wanted to ask that question. And I understand, his is a perfect reason for having to leave. Mr. Mays, you can make that decision. Whatever you want to do. Mr. Mayor: Well, y’all can—got a motion and second? Motion and a second to nominate Commissioner Grantham to be the presiding officer. All in favor of that motion will do so by the usual sign. Ms. Beard, Mr. Colclough, Mr. Handy and Mr. Williams out. Motion carries 6-0. Mr. Grantham: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: As no longer the presiding officer, I state for the record that you do not have unanimous consent to discuss number 1. Mr. Grantham: Is there any other discussion on the meeting? Mr. Russell? Mr. Russell: We would like to schedule a meeting on Monday to discuss the budget. I have the information available. I can pass that out now or wait until Monday, whichever you like. Mr. Grantham:Okay, there is a recommendation to have a special called th meeting on Monday, which would be December 12 and I think that’s the day we also have committee meetings. Is that correct, Ms. Bonner? And so we would have to call that meeting prior to committee meeting to discuss the budget.Is there a motion to do so? Ms. Sims: So move. Mr. Hankerson: Second. Mr. Grantham: Motion and a second. Any other discussion? There being no further discussion, let’s vote by the usual sign. Ms. Beard, Mr. Colclough, Mr. Handy and Mr. Williams out. Motion carries 6-0. 66 Mr. Grantham: Since we do not have consent to put the item number 1 on the addenda today—first of all, I’m going to raise the question of how, Mr. Mayor, can you make that decision? Mr. Mayor: I can make it clearer for you by leaving. Mr. Grantham: Right. Mr. Mayor: But I’m going to go ahead on and go. And now what you do, you figure out how to do it with six votes when I’m gone. Mr. Grantham: We don’t have a quorum— Mr. Mayor: I know why [unintelligible] and I asked you to be courteous enough to do it. You didn’t do it the proper way [unintelligible]. Y’all can sit here and play games the rest of the night. Mr. Grantham: Since we do not have a quorum then I’ll declare this meeting adjourned. We don’t need a motion. [Meeting adjourned] Lena 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 December 5, 2005. ________________________ Clerk of Commission 67