HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 18, 2005 ARC Commission meeting
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
October 18, 2005
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., Tuesday, October
18, 2005, the Honorable Willie Mays, III, Interim Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Hankerson, Smith, Colclough, Grantham, Handy, Williams,
Beard, Cheek, Sims and Rearden, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
The Invocation was given by the Rev. Mark S. Pierson.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Mr. Williams: Motion to approve.
Ms. Beard: Second.
PLANNING:
1. FINAL PLAT – CAMBRIDGE, SECTION 12, PHASE B – S-729 - A request
for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to
APPROVE a petition by Southern Partners Inc., on behalf of Nordahl & Co. Inc.,
requesting final plat approval for Cambridge Subdivision, Section 12, Phase B. This
residential subdivision is located on Essex Place adjacent to Cambridge, Section 9
and contains 18 lots.
2. Z-05-94 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Luc Ceyssens requesting a Special
Exception to establish a Family Personal Care Home per Section 26-1 (h) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property located at 2330 Ruby Drive and containing .37 acres. (Tax Map 97-4
Parcel 315) DISTRICT 6
3. Z-05-95 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Juanita Edouard requesting a
Special Exception to establish a Family Day Care Home per Section 26-1 (f) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property located at 2643 Carrington Drive and containing .37 acres. (Tax Map 152
Parcel 22) DISTRICT 4
4. Z-05-97 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that the facility be limited to
no more than 10 clients; a petition by Beatrice Olden, on behalf of Tina Sewell,
requesting a Special Exception to utilize an existing structure located in a P-1
(Professional) Zone for an adult day care home per Section 26-1 (e) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property located at 1058 Bertram Road and containing .19 acres. (Tax Map 12
Parcel 55.5) DISTRICT 7
1
5. Z-05-98 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that a site plan showing rear
yard parking, providing a forward exit onto Central Ave. and no parking in the
front yard be approved and developed before a Certificate of Occupancy be issued;
a petition by Perry Ritch requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1C (One-
family Residential) to Zone P-1 (Professional) with a Special Exception to utilize
property for residential purposes per Section 20-2 (b) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property located at 1816
Central Avenue and containing .16 acres. (Tax Map 45-3 Parcel 140) DISTRICT 1
6. Z-05-100 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that the equipment and
material storage be completely buffered from the road and adjacent properties; a
petition by Frank Stewart, on behalf of Frances Hamilton and Josephine Ferris,
requesting a change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone LI (Light
Industry) on property located at 4570 Mike Padgett Highway and containing
approximately 8 acres. (Tax Map 256 Parcel 18 and 19) DISTRICT 8
7. Z-05-101 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Johnson Laschober and
Associates, on behalf of Augusta Home Buyers Connection Inc., requesting a change
of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone P-1 (Professional) on
property located at 1908 Lumpkin Road and containing .24 acres. (Tax Map 110-2
Parcel 199) DISTRICT 6
8. Z-05-102 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that no day care be operated
at this property; a petition by Peter Brown, on behalf of Wilhemia McMahon and
JoAnn Jenkins, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family
Residential) to Zone B-2 (General Business) on property located at 2718
Milledgeville Road and containing 1.23 acres. (Tax Map 71-3 Parcel 44) DISTRICT
5
9. FINAL PLAT – CAMBRIDGE, SECTION 9 – S-680 – A request for
concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to
APPROVE a petition by Southern Partners Inc., on behalf of Nordahl & Co. Inc.,
requesting final plat approval for Cambridge Subdivision, Section 9. This
residential subdivision is located on Essex Place adjacent to Cambridge, Section 5
and contains 27 lots.
10. Z-05-103 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1) that the
unzoned portion of the property be retained as an undisturbed natural, 2) that a 100
foot natural buffer be left on the front of the property except for a 75 foot wide area
on the street front for ingress/egress and signage, 3) that a 50 foot natural buffer be
maintained on the side property lines and 4) that that only use of this property is a
truck/trailer parking lot or any other use allowed under the former zoning; a
petition by John Sampson, on behalf of Shon McKinnon, requesting a change of
zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) and Zone R-1 (One-family Residential) to Zone
LI (Light Industry) on property located on the southeast right-of-way line of Peach
2
Orchard Road, where the centerline of Willis Foreman Road extended intersects
and containing approximately 15.8 acres. (Tax map 195 Parcel 23.1) DISTRICT 8
12. Z-05-105 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that the developer/owner
maintain and grass the area between the parking and the public roadway and plant
a tree every 40 feet subject to the approval of the Engineering Department, a
petition by Southern Partners Inc., on behalf of Tobars A. Dobbs, requesting a
change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1E (One-
family Residential) on property located at 2223 Rosier Road and containing 1.46
acres. (Tax Map 121 Parcel 26) DISTRICT 6
13. Z-05-106 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the petition that all material and
equipment storage be completely buffered form the road and adjacent properties; a
petition by Robert Shearer, on
behalf of Warren A. Lewis, Sr. Estate, requesting a change of zoning from Zone B-2
(General Business) to Zone LI (Light Industry) on property located on 2338 Gordon
Highway and containing approximately 2.7 acres. (Part of Tax Map 67 Parcel 15)
DISTRICT 3
14. Z-05-107 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the following conditions: 1) that if the
wood mulching operation should cease the zoning shall revert to the former zoning,
2) that a 200 foot natural buffer between this property and the residents of Madrid
Drive North (the buffer would not be located within the area to be rezoned but shall
be binding so long as the wood mulching operation exists) 3) hours of operation
shall be daylight to dusk and 4) the only HI (Heavy Industry) Zone use of the
property shall be a wood mulching operation with no inert fill area; a petition by
Robert Shearer, on behalf of Warren. A. Lewis, Sr. Estate, requesting a change of
zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) and Zone B-2 (General Business) to Zone HI
(Heavy Industry) with a Special Exception to operate an inert fill area per Section
24-2 (16) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County
affecting property located on the rear portion of 2338 Gordon Highway and
containing approximately 7 acres. (Part of Tax Map 67 Parcel 15) DISTRICT 3
PUBLIC SERVICES:
15. Motion to approve a request by Tammy Nordahl for an on premise
consumption Liquor & Beer license to be used in connection with Ms. Carolyn's
located at 2416 Windsor Spring Rd. There will be Dance. District 6. Super District
10.(Approved by Public Services Committee October 10, 2005)
16. Motion to approve resolution to provide limited authority to approve change
orders up to the amount of $50,000. (Approved by Public Services Committee
October 10, 2005)
17. Motion to amend NVA, Inc. lease to add four 5-year options. (Approved by
Public Services Committee October 10, 2005)
18. Motion to approve assignment of professional services agreement from
Ricondo & Associates to Michael G. Moroney & Associates for General Airport
Consulting Services. (Approved by Public Services Committee October 10, 2005)
3
19. Motion to approve the hourly rate for the Rural (Richmond Transit) part-
time van operators from $7.00 per hour up to $10.00 per hour. (Approved by Public
Services and Administrative Committees October 10, 2005)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
20. Motion to approve Year 2006 Proposed Action Plan for CDBG, ESG, HOME
and HOPWA funds. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee October 10,
2005)
21. Motion to approve recommendation from the attorney to allow government
employees running for elected office to use vacation time instead of taking leave of
absence from the government with an effective date of September 12, 2005.
(Approved by Administrative Services Committee October 10, 2005)
22. Motion to authorize the Housing and Economic Development Department
staff to develop an action plan with a date established to have CDBG funds
expended and also develop a list of projects to help with the expenditure of the
balance. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee October 10, 2005)
23. Motion to rescind the previous action of the Commission and allow all
contracts that are not included in the CDBG, ESG, HOME and HOPWA Action
Plan come back to the full Commission for approval. (Approved by Administrative
Services Committee October 10, 2005)
24. Motion to approve contracts for Program Expenses of Community Housing
Development Organizations (“CHDO”) FY 2005 Promise Land Community
Development Corporation, Sand Hills Neighborhood Association, Inc., Antioch
Ministries, Inc., East Augusta CDC in the amount of $92,128.50 each; and the
Laney-Walker CDC subject to the approval of staff and the attorney. (Approved by
the Administrative Services Committee October 10, 2005) (Approved by
Administrative Services Committee October 10, 2005)
25. Motion to authorize the execution of an Intergovernmental Agreement
between Augusta, Georgia and the State of Georgia regarding taking receipt of the
ExpressPoll electronic poll books. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee
October 10, 2005)
26. Motion to authorize the Attorney to associate a contract attorney for the
remainder of this year to get the legal work moving on the Land Bank Authority
cases at a cost of $5,000 per month and begin the process for the hiring of a full time
staff attorney. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee October 10, 2005)
27. Motion to approve execution of one-year Renewal SHP Grant Agreement
between the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) and
Augusta-Richmond County. (Approved by the Administrative Services Committee
October 10, 2005)
28. Motion to approve the transfer of one mapping staff member from the Tax
Assessor’s Office to Information Technology. (Approved by Administrative Services
& Public Safety Committees October 18, 2005)
ENGINEERING SERVICES:
45. Authorize the Engineering Department to fill the new Code Enforcement
Officer II position (NPDES Inspector - Pay Grade 43) at a salary of $30,000 per
4
year. The position is funded by NPDES fees and fines collected for violations in
Magistrate Court.
46. Receive as information an update from the Engineering Department on the
status of the Neely Road Improvements Project (CPB #324-04-201824055).
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
50. A resolution honoring James “Jimmy” Lester, Jr.
Mr. Mayor: All those in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: We will come back to those that are either on regular or those that
are being pulled. Madame Clerk, if we could go back to the top of the agenda. If I could,
let’s start at, let’s start at item C and come back to A. I’ve got a young man who needs to
assume his position as Mayor for the Day that’s listed in that group in Item C, so that I
won’t rob him of his rightful duty. We’ll go ahead and take our delegation first.
Leadership Academy from East Augusta Middle and I’m going to join you down there. I
would like for Commissioner Beard to join me as well, the Commissioner from that
District, and also because of the love that her husband, our friend, Commissioner Lee
Beard who is now deceased, and Commissioner Beard is now occupying that seat, if she
would join us at this time.
DELEGATIONS:
C. East Augusta Middle School RE: Leadership Academy Mr. Julius
Rodriquez
The Clerk: At this time the Mayor and members of the Commission would like to
recognize the East Augusta Middle School. And I will read a portion of a letter that was
written to the Commission from Dr. Marcia J. Morman. Thank you for allowing the
Leadership Academy students from East Augusta Middle School to observe a City
Commission meeting. Through this ten session academy we hope to install in these
fifteen students the importance of self awareness, relationships and role models. The
Mayor and Commission would like to honor these graduates of this Leadership Academy
with a certificate of recognition. Once your name is called would you please join the
Mayor here to receive your certificate and stand, start formation of a line near
Commissioner Hankerson? Sidney Carter. I will read the recognition. Certificate of
recognition, for your outstanding contribution and participation in the inaugural East
Augusta Middle School Leadership Academy, the City of Augusta recognizes and
applauds your commitment to academic and civic excellence. Mr. Brandon Jones.
Cortez Hankerson. Vincent Williams. Mr. Eusef Cothran. Julius Rodriquez. Mr.
Darrell Fining. Soweto Moody. Tonya Landers. Johnny Fining. Melanie Clare. Zaquel
Lambert. At this time we’d like to recognize the advisor. Marian Greene. Madeline
Bowers, the advisor. And then we would like to recognize Dr. Marcia J. Morman, the
facilitator of this Leadership Academy. Dr. Morman, if you please accept the recognition
given to the East Augusta Middle School on the occasion of the implementation of the
5
inaugural Leadership Academy, which spotlights the importance of self awareness,
relationships and role models, the City of Augusta recognizes and applauds your
commitment to academic and civic excellence. Congratulations.
[A round of applause is given.]
The Clerk: At this time we would like to ask Mr. Rodriquez, Julius Rodriquez—
he’s the spokesperson for the group.
Mr. Rodriquez: Good afternoon, Mayor Mays and the City Commission.
Through the Leadership Academy at East Augusta Middle School we are learning more
about ourselves, others, and seeking positive role models. We realize many qualities that
come with being a leader and aspire to such ourselves. On behalf of the Leadership
Academy at East Augusta Middle School we are appreciative of this opportunity to
observe and learn from the leaders of our city. Thank you.
[A round of applause is given.]
Mr. Mayor: This morning I told [unintelligible] she threw me off a little bit but
she got the seat anyway. It’s great to have our young people present with us on every
week and I think it’s important that we hear so many times, and it’s a saying that if it’s
not bad then it doesn’t always make news. And I think it’s important that we strike a
balance with our young people in the community, that the overwhelming, vast majority of
them do good and great things each and every day. And I think that they should be able
to not only see positive role models but also the positive things that they do themselves,
and it’s important that we as adults highlight those things so that we are able to give them
encouragement each and every day. And they will be our leaders who will be running the
cities, states, serving on the Congressional level, and then somebody out of some of those
groupings will end up leading this country as President. So I think it’s just a small part
that we can play in local government in giving them a chance to observe, to participate,
and as Art Linkletter used to say, kids say the darndest things. They still do but they also
ask some very interesting questions because they are concerned about the present state of
affairs that go on in this country and around the world and I think it’s great that they have
that type of enthusiasm, and let us keep up the example of opening the door for them and
of sharing in government each and every opportunity that we can. Thank you all from
East Augusta for being present with us today. Thank you for having the real courage and
determination to go outside of the bounds of what is just required in a job in providing
that leadership for these young people. Congratulate you, too, the East Augusta family.
Thank you so much.
The Clerk: By His Honor, Willie H. Mays, III, Interim Mayor, to Johnny Fining:
Greetings, by virtue of the power and authority vested in me by the constitution
and laws of this state and in pursuance of your appointment, I do hereby commission you
said Mayor of the Day.
6
[A round of applause is given.]
Mr. Mayor: Start back from the top.
The Clerk: Under our presentations portion of the agenda:
PRESENTATION(S):
A. Greater Augusta Arts Council
RE: Thank You Ms. Brenda Durant, Executive Director
Ms. Durant: Interim Mayor Willie Mays, Mayor of the Day Fining,
Commissioners and Administrator Fred Russell, on behalf of the Greater Augusta Arts
Council and the Arts in the Heart of Augusta Steering Committee I appear to thank you
for your support of Arts in the Heart of Augusta this year. This year with your support
the Arts in the Heart festival surpassed attendance figures on Friday and Saturday. We
doubled the number of fine arts and crafters from 35 to 70. We advertised the festival out
of town utilizing a grant from the CVB for tourism efforts for motel/hotel tax. We won
the Augusta Champions Award from the CVB for hotel rooms booked. The crafters and
technical team added these numbers. We moved all four stages to the festival site, aiding
accessibility. We added additional homeland security officers to strategic points at the
festival. We were named Best Thing to Happen to Augusta by readers of Augusta
th
Magazine. We added an international bazaar on 8 Street. We added an authors’ pen to
promote our local writers. On Friday night we featured the Augusta Chronicle’s singer-
th
songwriter competition on 8 Street. The Metro Spirit hosted local artists painting for all
54 hours of the festival, allowing festival goers on the Common to interact with the
artists. We donated tickets to survivors of the hurricane and graduates of the VA Center
[unintelligible] blind training school. There were many parts of the community who
participated. The volunteer steering committee of 22 dedicated, hard working members
who planned and executed this event; over 400 community volunteers from local
businesses, schools, Fort Gordon, and the Richmond County Youth Leadership class, and
I’m sure we’ll be seeing some members of the East Augusta Middle School in that class
in their junior year. Local non-profits and businesses who set up three interactive booths
in the children’s area, including many local arts organizations. Southeastern Natural
Sciences Academy, Georgia Golf Hall of Fame, the Augusta Chronicle, American Pride
through Education, Fort Discovery, the Family Y, Augusta Chapter of American Institute
of Architects, the Augusta Museum of History, Davidson Fine Arts Magnet School who
worked with the Gertrude Herbert Institute of Art, and the Morris Museum of Art. Our
artistic community—due to the local performers who donated their time and talent to
showcase a diverse, artistic community to the Arts in the Heart attendees. This list
includes many local schools that provide training to our future musicians, artists, singers
and dancers. Over 90 performance slots were filled during the weekend by numerous
artists and performing organizations, including the Augusta Mini Theatre, [unintelligible]
Studio, from Indian the Hindu Temple Society, Creative Impressions, Augusta Concert
Band, Garden City Chorus, Bethel Community Apostolic Church Youth Choir, Suzuki
Strings, Chinese Chorus and Dancers, Quiet Storm, [unintelligible] African Dancers, and
more. Your support of the Greater Augusta Arts Council allows us to work in this
7
community. We continue to provide the arts [unintelligible] program in twelve
Richmond County schools, a program that is run by volunteers and media specialists. We
collaborate with the Boys and Girls Clubs to produce Artscape Camp, a camp within a
camp teaching area youth visual art, drama, dance, drumming and violin. In fact, this
th
September one student who took our violin classes on 15 Avenue last summer is now
continuing her violin classes at Jenkins White Charter School. The Arts Council loaned a
music teacher, Ms. Harris, fifteen violins for the year so students could experience the
violin. Perhaps these students will be performing at the festival next September. We also
act as a coordinator and evaluator for the Richmond County Challenge grant. This grant
brings some arts programming to ten rural schools in Richmond County. We produce an
online arts calendar at www.augustaarts.com. It’s also printed four times a year in our
newsletter. We collaborated with the Morris Museum to organize four free media
sessions for local arts organizations and arts presenters, helping them learn how to
maximize their limited funds for the most media coverage. We’re working on the first
wine festival to be held next spring in conjunction with First Friday weekend in May,
including a very attractive hotel package to entice tourists to attend. As a major sponsor
the City of Augusta name and logo were included in our $177,000 media campaign for
the festival. Did I say in-kind media campaign? Your name was on the global stage. It
was named the City of Augusta global stage on the Augusta Common. The City local
and the Recreation and Parks logo were on the back of our volunteer tee shirts. Your
logo was also included in our advertising on WAGT-TV, the Augusta Chronicle, all the
Beasley radio stations and Radio One stations, the Metro Spirit and Skirt magazine.
Also, ten billboards. Again, I’d like to thank you for your support. During the 2-1/2 days
of the Arts in the Heart of Augusta festival we all see our home, Augusta, as a
wonderfully diverse community who lives, works, and plays together in perfect harmony.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Ms. Durant. Commissioner Sims, the Commissioner
Cheek. Any Commissioners on this end, if you have question or a comment.
Ms. Sims: Thank you, Mayor Mays. And it does appear to me that Augusta, this
body, made a tremendous choice in supporting the Greater Arts Council and thank you so
much for coming here to express your gratitude. I don’t know if that’s a first but we
certainly are grateful to you for coming. And it’s a wonderful thing to see everyone
partnering together. Thank you, Brenda.
Ms. Durant: Thank you, Commissioner Sims. Commissioner Sims is also a
volunteer for the Arts Council during the festival, and Betty Beard became Grandma
Beard, I believe, during the Arts in the Heart and I saw you there with your
grandchildren. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mayor: Andy?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, thank you. Brenda, I just wanted to offer thanks as a
Commissioner and as a citizen for the really good presentation that you did for the City of
Augusta, the Arts in the Heart, and how well it conveyed the diverse environment of the
8
city of Augusta, what we are and really showed the world how great we can be. You
guys did a tremendous job. Thank you.
Ms. Durant: Thank you very much.
Mr. Mayor: In case anyone missed going, it’s an event to put on your must do list
for next year. I had the opportunity in terms of bring greetings and being on the program.
The only drawback was, Brenda, I followed the dancers and I commented the fact that
even though I’m from James Brown Boulevard I could not even think about moving that
fast. So I had a lot to follow [unintelligible]. But it was great festivities and I think most
of all showed and displayed the diversity in this community. It’s a great affair.
Ms. Durant: Thank you very much. We actually thought the Hawaii theme
would mean that you all would be practiced up and ready to get right out there with our
dancers.
[Laughter]
Mr. Mayor: The Chair will entertain a motion to receive as information.
Mr. Cheek: So move.
Ms. Sims: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed,
not counting.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
RECOGNITION(S):
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
B. Ms. Ernestine Phelps - Augusta Public Services Department
The Clerk: Would you please join the Mayor, along with Mr. Mike Greene, Mr.
Andy Cheek, our Engineering Services Chairman? Dear Mayor Mays, the Employee
Recognition Committee has selected Ernestine Phelps as the September, 2005 Employee
of the Month for the City of Augusta. Ms. Phelps has been an employee with the City of
Augusta for five years as a secretary for the Public Services Department. Ms. Phelps was
nominated by fellow co-worker Catherine Worley. Ms. Worley’s nomination states Ms.
Phelps handles complaints from the citizens as well as dispatching calls to co-workers.
She handles every complaint as though it were her neighborhood. She takes time out of
her busy schedule to help co-workers in other departments. She always has a smile on
her face. The committee felt that based on Ms. Worley’s recommendation and Ms.
Phelps’ dedicated the loyal service to the City of Augusta she should be awarded
9
Employee of the Month. We appreciate you joining us in awarding her in your meeting
October 18.
[A round of applause is given.]
Mr. Mayor: Thank you so very much for the service you give the people in the
city and I’m going to yield to the hardworking Engineering Services Chairman. Andy?
Mr. Cheek: I’d just like to say I want to thank you for taking the initiative
[unintelligible]. This is a really good example for the [unintelligible]. Congratulations.
Mr. Greene: I just want to say that [unintelligible]. Talk about customer service,
she takes an interest in each and every call that she receives just like it’s her own family
calling. And [unintelligible] she always gets an answer. If she doesn’t know the answer
she won’t give them another to call. She will make the call for them. She exemplifies
customer service. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk, before you go to the next item, would there happen
to be a reporter or citizen that’s missing a notebook? If it’s a reporter I’m going to keep
it cause I might be in there.
[Laughter]
Mr. Mayor: I may need to tear our a portion that’s in there. Okay, I think I know
who it belongs to. It’s in safekeeping. I’ll keep it for a while. Maybe I’ll get a chance to
write my own story next week. Madame Clerk?
The Clerk:
D. Leo Charette, Jr.
Re: Proposed Augusta Dragway
Mr. Charette: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, for letting me speak on
behalf of the proposed Augusta Dragway. I have a business in Augusta and I’m very
interested in drag racing myself and I would like to present a stack of petitions, names, to
whoever I could present this to.
Mr. Mayor: The Clerk will take them for you, Mr. Charette.
Mr. Charette: There are 2,000 names on that petition in favor of the Augusta
Dragway, the proposed Augusta Dragway in south Augusta. Also, I’d like to thank the
people, the business people and citizens that showed up today in the room here for
support of the Augusta Dragway. Of course, I’m a racer and I’m in favor in the project
but I also understand that it’s supposed to bring around $50 million in money to the city
of Augusta, which I believe is a little better than what the Masters bring in each year.
And people could check on that.
10
Mr. Mayor: Could you hold for just a moment?
Mr. Charette: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: If I could, by show of hands, we have the petition that’s on record
there that will go in the Clerk’s office, but just a show of hands of the persons that are
here that have joined Mr. Charette in supporting the proposed Augusta drag strip.
[28 supporters noted]
Mr. Mayor: You can continue, Mr. Charette. That time won’t be counted against
you.
Mr. Charette: I understand. There was an issue, talking to people, you know, that
asked about the dragway, that asked about a traffic problem. I’m just reflecting on the
Augusta National each year it comes here. This is a national event facility we’re trying to
build and it’s going to have a once a week, just like the Masters in Augusta. There’s a lot
of people that don’t care for the Masters on account of the traffic issue and the people
from out of town and all the hoopla that goes with the Augusta National. But the city
apparently is letting the Masters and National be here for many years and the National is
going to continue to be here, I’m sure. With Washington Road being as crowded as it
issues. If anybody had any issues about traffic—the only traffic issue on Mike Padgett
Highway where the facility is going to be is going to be very minimal for the national
event. It’s going to be a similar situation, lots of people from out of town but it won’t be
a situation where, you know, like Washington Road, all congested. So that’s my views
on the traffic for some of the people that spoke with and might not wanted to sign
because of the traffic issues, that live in the neighborhood. But I did want to come and
voice my opinion in support of the track and on behalf of the citizens and business people
that I spoke to around Augusta and outside of Augusta as far as Columbia, South
Carolina, Allendale, Florida. All over the Southeast here is looking for this national
event. They are very excited about a quarter mile national event to happen in Augusta,
Georgia. That’s about all I have. I appreciate it.
Mr. Mayor: Any questions of Mr. Charette? The Chair recognizes Commissioner
Cheek first.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m not sure what day this is in the count of when this
was first brought before this body but ever since it came up, morning, noon and night,
whether I’m going down to the Circle K on 25 to get a gallon of milk or a cup of coffee
on the way to work, going to lunch, going to Lowe’s for a bag of nails, everybody I’ve
talked to, people are stopping me in the streets and at McDonald’s and everywhere else
saying they are in support of the drag strip. One of the things, I wanted to dispel two of
the myths that are being propagated at this point in time. One, I don’t think this body in
its deliberations would take any funding away from general fund projects. We are
looking towards revenue anticipation bonds and ways to fund this. Too, the impact of the
11
drag strip and its anticipated revenue would be a 2 mill—about a $6 million impact on the
dollars taken and the agreement to put toward museums and other things that do impact
the general fund to the positive. That is the impact of this drag strip. There is nothing
else we can bring to this city that would have that kind of positive impact in that short a
time to help us pay for our museums, Safe Homes and other qualifying agencies. This is
a good deal. This is a good thing and it is a very popular thing within the city of Augusta
and that is not just this Commissioner’s opinion, that is at least an average of 5-7 people a
day, ever since this issue came up. Strangers I don’t even know to people I see every
day. So I hope this Commission will move forward with finding the funding mechanism
to make it a reality.
Mr. Charette: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Commissioner Cheek. Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I don’t have any comment but I see my friend from
Atlanta Bread Company who is a businessman here and I would like him to come and
just speak for a minute to give his observation for this facility and I think it’s something
that would be very important. He took the time from his business to come, if you allow
him, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair will allow it, Commissioner. If you would—
[unintelligible] state your name and address for the record and if you would make your
comments.
Mr. Baggs: I’m Charlie Baggs out of Atlanta Bread Company. I live in Martinez.
[unintelligible]
Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] two minutes.
Mr. Baggs: I’ll make it quick. Of course I can’t wait to see it because like these
other two fellows here I’m a drag racer and enjoy racing. I have a business in town that
would, it would be great for us to get $50 million coming to Augusta, maybe we could
get some of that business for ourselves. It would help all the businesspeople in Augusta,
as well as the revenue that you spoke of just a minute ago, Mr. Cheek, about that the
track would generate. It is way out in south Augusta and I think that the event he’s
speaking of is a once-a-year deal. We would be using it probably every week or month
or whatever the agenda would be, but the big money would be in a once-a-year-race
which we can’t see in Augusta. Over in Jackson is a shorter track, in Jackson, South
Carolina, and you can’t get the big cars here to run the nitro-methane which is what
everybody likes to watch [unintelligible] TV. They had one in Atlanta. I think it’s no
longer there. I think it’s moved to Valdosta. Is that right?
Mr. Speaker: No, it’s still in Atlanta.
12
Mr. Baggs: But anyway, you have to go to Atlanta to see the track. It would be
nice here. That’s [unintelligible] I would like for it to be here and I hope you all vote to
let us do it. I can’t wait. Thanks.
Mr. Mayor: Thank both of you for coming. Any other questions to Mr. Charette?
Any other comments? The Chair will entertain a motion.
Mr. Cheek: Motion to receive as information.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? None being,
all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Go to item 11 and I’ll recognize Commissioner Colclough, off the
regular agenda.
The Clerk:
11. Z-05-104 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Nell B. Headley requesting a
change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business)
on property located at 2720 Mike Padgett Highway and containing .44 acres. (Tax
Map 111 Parcel 2.2) DISTRICT 2
Mr. Patty: This is a small tract on the east side of Mike Padgett Highway. It’s
just south of where Old Louisville Road comes in. It’s an area that is dominated by light
industrial and commercially-zoned properties. There are a number of businesses and
warehouse type developments in that area. This is the only property that is not zoned
either commercial or industrial for some distance and the applicant wanted to rezone it
for B-2, which is the zoning of the surrounding property. Consistent with the zoning of
surrounding properties. Actually, it’s B-1. Yes, it’s B-1, I’m sorry. And it’s consistent
with the land use pattern, the zoning pattern, and we recommend you approve it.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had this item pulled, George, because I
had a couple of calls about it and concern that the initial reason for being zoned was for
what?
Mr. Patty: Personal care home.
Mr. Williams: Personal care home. There was some conversation floating. You
know when conversation floats it changes but to make sure that it wasn’t going to be
13
anything other than a personal care home. This is what it’s being approved for and that’s
what it’s going to be? Right?
Mr. Patty: It wasn’t specific for a personal care home because the zoning pattern
would support the commercial zoning they are requesting. Now if the applicants are here
they need to step forth and address that, I think. But there was some concern it was going
to be a halfway house or something that would deal with incarcerated persons or people
that are serving a court sentence or something like that and that would require additional
zoning action. They could not do that under the B-1 zoning.
Mr. Williams: And that’s what I tried to explain to the constituents that I talked
with, that there was some guidelines [unintelligible] different things could come up under
that guideline. But [unintelligible] proposed could not happen just with changing the
zoning. But I think the applicant is behind you, George. And if this is going to be a
personal care home—is that what this zoning is for?
Ms. Headley: No, it’s a group home.
Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible]
Ms. Headley: I’m sorry.
Mr. Mayor: If you could state your name and address for the record where the
Clerk could—
Ms. Headley: My name is Nell Headley and I live at 2720 Mike Padgett
Highway. The State of Georgia, Georgia Regional Hospital wants to rent it for a group
home. The people there will be staying from sixty days to a—I mean six months to a
year and then they’ll be going back out into the mainstream.
Mr. Williams: How is that different—and I know it is—how is that different from
a halfway? I mean it’s a hospital, state hospital, is that what you’re saying?
Ms. Headley: Yes, it is the hospital.
Mr. Williams: State hospital agency. And [unintelligible] halfway transition type
center and I explained to them we have a transition center that’s already in existence and
they use that facility for people who in this region, in this area to be able to use. But
some was concerned it was going to be a different facility.
Ms. Headley: No. No. All I can tell you is what the State told me.
Mr. Williams: I understand. I’m just trying to get information.
14
Ms. Headley: There would be only six people there at one time. There will be
two staff members, 24 hours a day there. And it’s a group home. That’s what they called
it when they came.
Mr. Williams: Okay. I’ve got no problem, Mr. Mayor. Planning and Zoning
approved it. I just had to ask those questions. I had constituents to call me about it and I
would have done the same for you had you asked me. And I’m going to recommend
approval, Mr. Mayor. This position that Planning and Zoning has approved.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to that?
Mr. Cheek: I’ll second it, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Cheek and then Commissioner Colclough.
Mr. Cheek: On the—I guess group home will these be folks transitioning from
mental care or substance abuse? Will they have any criminal history? What kind of
monitoring will there be?
Ms. Headley: It’s my understanding that when they leave there their slate will be
clean. Now, I don’t know what that means. I don’t know what they do down there at
Georgia Regional. I just assumed they may have been people who had done drugs or
something and gotten caught and then they’re getting them back in society. I don’t really
know that.
Mr. Cheek: With the neighborhood associations in that area there is some deep
concern about some drug problems we have between Old Louisville Road and 56. Now,
the thing is we don’t to introduce to the area, one, is put people who are transitioning
away from that in a state of temptation because of existing problems, and two, we don’t
want to contribute people to the area who may further exacerbate the problem.
Ms. Headley: Well, it’s my understanding these people are going to be going out
to jobs every day and coming back in.
Mr. Cheek: But the thing is we’ve got to get beyond my understanding to a
commitment from you that these people will be monitored, and if they don’t show up
when they’re supposed to be back, if they’re under some type of state contract that there
will be calls made immediately to find out their location. If there is any type of activity
apart from their contracted transitional agreement that we will—that the owners of the
property, the operators will take every effort to help us police that activity if there is
wrong doing or people departing from their recovery.
Ms. Headley: Well, sir, all I can tell you is that I’m renting our house out to them
if all this goes through. My husband and I are going to move in a cottage right behind it
so I have no qualms whatsoever. They have brought a couple of the people over there
that would be staying there.
15
Mr. Cheek: Well, you know the problems I’m talking about, about the other
areas.
Ms. Headley: I have to tell you this. I’ve lived in south Augusta in that house for
almost thirty years. And you know people talk about south Augusta all the time. We
have never had any problems whatsoever where I live.
Mr. Cheek: We’ll drive you over to—and I can show you if you need to—Gay
Drive and some of the other areas we’re having some struggles with and are trying to
recover.
Ms. Headley: I’m totally unaware of that. I didn’t know that.
Mr. Cheek: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough, and we need to get wrapped up here.
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, one question. You’re contracting with the hospital
[unintelligible]. You’re contracting with the hospital and don’t know the type of patients
you’re getting?
Ms. Headley: I understand that they have some tiff with the law. I don’t know
what. And they are going to evidently—this is what the gentleman told me that came—
that they would be going back out into society, they’d be there from six months to a year
and they would be going back into the mainstream society with their slate clean.
Mr. Colclough: But you did not question the type of patients that you were
getting, whether it was MH, MR, SH or—
Ms. Headley: I don’t know what that—oh, he said I need to tell you that I’m not
running this. This is State run. The State is going to run it.
Mr. Colclough: You’re just renting the house?
Ms. Headley: I’m just renting the house. I mean one day we had our house up for
sale and they came by. And they approached us about it.
Mr. Colclough: Okay.
Ms. Headley: And I know they follow guidelines.
Mr. Cheek: Not necessarily. They have guidelines but they don’t follow them,
that’s the whole point.
16
Mr. Mayor: We’re going to stay with what’s germane, that’s on the floor, and
right now that’s zoning. Do we have anything to be brought question-wise in reference to
the zoning that’s there right now? Is it an objection or it—it’s an objection? Okay.
That’s what we were trying to get, if there were objectors to Number 11 [unintelligible]
one person to speak. Okay, if you would, state what the objection is at this time.
[2 objectors noted]
Ms. Walton: To the Mayor and the rest of the County Commissioner, my name is
Marie Walton. I live on Demetree Way, which is about four blocks from this
supposedly—we were under the understanding that it was going to be a personal care
home and that was the way it was put on the application. We don’t have any objection to
a personal care home. My objection is we did hear later that it is going to be a halfway
house and what I’m listening to now it seems that’s what it’s going to be, even if it run by
the State. So we need for them to specify exactly what it’s going to be, because if you’re
leasing your property and you’re still living on that property then you should know what
is going to be there. So that’s what I want an answer to. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Were your comments basically the same, sir?
Mr. Speaker: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: What we have is a motion on the floor to go ahead and to proceed
with the zoning. If there is going to be something else that’s done then there needs to be
a substitute motion made in order to, if there is going to be further clarity on where this is
going, if this is going to be from the State and to deal with our staff in order to get further
clarity on it, then that has to be done through a substitute motion. Right now the only
thing that’s on the floor—
Mr. Cheek: So move, Mr. Mayor, so move to a substitute motion to seek
further clarity on the types and rules and regulations governing this endeavor
before we inflict it upon the community.
Ms. Sims: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second on the substitute motion. Go ahead, petitioner.
Ms. Headley: Well, I live in this house right now and if it’s not going to be used
for that I want to still live there. I mean—
Mr. Mayor: What we’re doing now, it depends upon the vote, this is only strictly
dealing with whether the zoning goes or not. It would not affect your ownership or your
right to live in there or to do anything with it. This is strictly on zoning and I think what
the Commission will have to make a decision to do is to vote for it as is, let the zoning
go, which is the original motion, substitute motion will come first, which that is if we
want to get further clarification, even though you will not be the person who is doing it,
17
we want to get further clarification from our staff to what the State is going to be doing,
then that’s the crux of the substitute motion. Basically it delays and gives time for us to
find out and clarity. Those are the two choices that are before the Commission right now.
But that would not affect your being in the home per se, I would not think.
Mr. Cheek: For clarity, Mr. Mayor, brought back at the next meeting.
Mr. Mayor: And that would be within two weeks.
Ms. Headley: Okay. So do I need to get them to come and talk? I mean—
Mr. Mayor: What I would suggest so that we can move, once we take a vote on
this motion, and it’s the only Planning item Mr. Patty has, I’m going to ask you, Mr.
Patty, if you would confer with her, get her information, and that way Mr. Russell will
know and yourself, y’all can do that staff-wise administratively and then have that
prepared in two weeks to come back before us. The substitute motion—the Chair rules
there has been adequate discussion on it. The substitute motion is on top, first. All in
favor of the substitute motion will do so by the usual sign.
Mr. Handy abstains.
Motion carries 9-1.
Mr. Mayor: The substitute motion carries. What I’d like for you all to do, he will
go ahead and take you into another office and you all can get together on the information
in reference to how we’ll move over the period of the next two weeks. Madame Clerk, if
I could, the Chair will recognize a Commissioner for the purpose of the item that’s there
on regular to go ahead and make a motion on that. That’s on item number 38.
FINANCE
38. Consider entering Interest Rate Swap Agreement. This item was requested
by Commissioner Colclough.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough:
Mr. Colclough: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, with all due respect, I
would like to have item 38 pulled from the agenda. I make that as a motion.
Mr. Mayor: The Commissioner has made a motion on item number 38 that it be
pulled.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor of
the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same.
Motion carries 10-0.
18
Mr. Mayor: It comes off. Okay, if we can get back to our items, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk: For clarification, item 29 and 31 is a duplication, same planning
petition.
PLANNING:
29. Z-05-93 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta- Richmond County
Planning Commission to DENY a petition by John Williams requesting a Special
Exception to establish a Family Personal Care Home per Section 26-1 (h) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property located at 2435 Earl Street and containing .51 acres. (Tax map 34-1 Parcel
153) DISTRICT 1
31. Z-05-93 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to DENY a petition by John Williams requesting a Special
Exception to establish a Family Personal Care Home per Section 26-1 (h) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property located at 2435 Earl Street and containing .51 acres. (Tax map 34-1 Parcel
153) DISTRICT 1
Ms. Sims: Motion to deny.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion on that motion? None
being, all in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign.
Mr. John Williams: [unintelligible]
Mr. Mayor: I didn’t know anyone was present on 29.
Mr. John Williams: I didn’t hear the motion.
Mr. Mayor: It was to deny number 29. Are the petitioner on 29?
Mr. John Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair is going to allow at least for the discussion portion of it to
address. Go ahead.
Mr. John Williams: According to—I had the neighborhood chairmen and
chairpersons, to all of you, it’s been checked out by the Fire Department and the Police
Department. The objection was that it would be too much traffic. So we had the
professionals to check it out. And we’ve had—an officer from the north precinct also
checked it out that patrols the area. And they saw no problem. And they are
professionals. The people that will be there, one to six people, does not require anything
19
except what the Fire Department requires, but as it stands, according to the Fire
Department, that everything is good to go. And north precinct checked it out, officers
that patrol is, and also the commander that’s in charge will be doing also, he’s also aware.
Plus we have the adequate parking places. These pictures will show, without even going
to the street. And that’s basically my info concerning the petition and objections.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty? Out of respect to making sure everybody is on record for
this record. The recommendation that came from your committee and Planning &
Zoning was to deny?
Mr. Patty: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Could you so state the reason for that?
Mr. Patty: These are—Sand Hills is an area that I would see when I pass through
it on Mt. Auburn. As you go back toward the Augusta Country Club, the neighborhood
gets cleaner—I won’t say better but the houses are in better condition, more pride of
ownership is apparent, and this particular area is a really nice neighborhood. There is one
exception to that, and that is the streets are incredibly narrow. All the streets. This
particular street is one way. All the other streets probably ought to be. And that was the
main reason that the neighbors objected to the proposal. We had a petition with 50 to 100
signatures and we had a significant number of people at our meeting and they felt that the
neighborhood was already too cluttered, that it needed to be single-family residential.
There was concern that this might set some sort of precedent and those was the reasons
that it was rejected.
Mr. Mayor: A show of hands by the number of objectors to item number 29,
please.
[17 objectors noted]
Mr. Mayor: 17, for the record. Unless there is an objection, petition for the
record, there has already been a motion and a second for denial. The Chair is going to
rule we’ve had adequate discussion on it. Madame Clerk, would you go ahead and post
the vote, please?
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: The motion is denied. That concludes everything on item 29.
The Clerk: That included item 29 and 31.
PLANNING:
30. Z-05-99 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to DENY a petition by Amy Bernstein, on behalf of Amy
Bernstein and Milton Ruben, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1(One-
20
family Residential) to Zone B-2 (General Business) on property located at 116 and
118 Davant Street and containing approximately 1.1 acres. (Tax Map 10 Parcels 16,
17, and 19) DISTRICT 7
Mr. Mayor: Is the petitioner here for item number 30? Anyone here representing
item number 30? Mr. Patty, would you go ahead and then I’ll recognize [unintelligible].
Mr. Patty: Mr. Mays, this came to us as a request for B-2 zoning on two
residential properties, both of which have houses on them, on Davant Street, which is a
short street that runs into Columbia County, runs into Washington Road, that parallels
Pleasant Home Road behind the Catholic church on one side and behind Milton Ruben’s
auto complex on the other side. And Mr. Ruben to rezone the properties to add to his
properties for storage of vehicles. We were concerned because this area is in fact still a
pretty nice neighborhood. As you move into Columbia County you start getting a
mixture of uses. There are a couple of personal care homes, dog grooming establishment,
but it’s still a pretty solid neighborhood. And we were concerned about introducing the
commercial traffic into it, the illumination and other things that parking vehicles would
bring and also the illumination of the two homes. We did have objectors to it. I have
since met with Mr. Ruben and I think we’ve struck a deal. I’ve talked to the only
objector actually that we had and he can live with it, and that would be to only rezone the
rear yards of these properties. The 100 feet immediately adjacent to Mr. Ruben’s
property. He would not ask for access to the street, to Davant Street. He would come in
full compliance with the tree ordinance, putting a buffer around the properties. The
neighbor that had objected to it is in agreement with that and Mr. Ruben is here to answer
any questions you would have. Now, having said that I’m here representing the Planning
Commission. They did recommend denial. But if this had been put forward at our
meeting I feel like they’d have looked favorably on it.
Mr. Mayor: Any questions of Mr. Ruben, well, Mr. Patty first and then Mr.
Ruben? Mr. Handy?
Mr. Handy: No.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. George, based on this, with the
recommendation of denial then wouldn’t we have to put in a formal motion, Mr. Mayor,
that we would have to overturn this denial and then put in a formal request of what you
just stated? So we would have to either delete this request and restate the issue that you
just pointed out.
Mr. Patty: You could vote no on the denial and then approve it.
Mr. Mayor: Well, if you word it right—
The Clerk: [unintelligible]
21
Mr. Mayor: I really would accept the denial and go with the recommendation of
the [unintelligible].
Mr. Grantham: I make that as a motion, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Hankerson: Second.
Mr. Grantham: I make a motion that we accept the recommendation of Mr.
Patty based on the requirements that Mr. Ruben and the party that objected, what
he said.
Mr. Patty: So that would be the rear 100’ of the properties, no access to
Davant Street, and full compliance with the tree ordinance.
Mr. Grantham: Correct.
Mr. Hankerson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Mr. Handy: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Handy?
Mr. Handy: George, although we heard what was said was going to do, but you
going to put that in writing and get it back with us so that it would be done? Cause it’s
just as a motion right now.
Mr. Patty: When you approve this there will be a deed restriction written up and
he’ll sign and we’ll record it with the deed so that it will forever restrict the use of the
property until you change zoning.
Mr. Handy: Okay. That’s good.
Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: My question is you did say Mr. Ruben and the other parties,
they’re in agreement?
Mr. Patty: Yes, sir.
Mr. Hankerson: It serve the purpose of what he wanting to do, basically most of
it?
22
Mr. Patty: I spoke to the only objector and he was in agreement with that.
Mr. Hankerson: Okay. Very good.
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
32. Approve the request from Ms. Melinda Rider, Director of the Neighborhood
Improvement Project, Inc., to move the Healthy Kids Augusta tutorial and fitness
program from the Barton Village Community Center to the McDuffie Woods
Community Center.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hankerson, then Commissioner Colclough?
Mr. Hankerson:
I asked for this to be discussed today between the time of our
last Administrative Service meeting and this meeting. I have talked to Ms. Rider and also
with Weed and Seed director and they are in agreement. And I understand what is being,
A motion that it
taking place is for additional space so I don’t have any problem with it.
be approved.
Mr. Handy: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any further discussion? Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, would you allow [unintelligible] director to give us
some oversight on it?
Mr. Mayor: If he’s able.
Mr. Colclough: If he can walk. [unintelligible]
Mr. Speaker: Commissioner, Mayor, after consideration of what was going on
with the program, their program is a [unintelligible] program where they incorporate
education with health. That includes physical fitness and other things that go along with
testing of sugars and things like that in the students. Our facility is a small facility that
basically is an office that we allowed them to use in the past. The McDuffie Center
would be better for them to run their program, what they’re doing, since we’re already
running a similar program without the physical fitness portion.
Mr. Colclough: Thank you, sir.
23
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: [unintelligible]
Mr. Mayor: Let me just ask this, since the two chairpersons were having a
discussion on this. I think it’s great and have no problem with it, but [unintelligible]
Public Services I’m assuming, correct?
Mr. Colclough: Yes. Okay. No problem. But I just didn’t want it to bump there
and [unintelligible] one committee. That’s all I wanted. I wanted to make sure.
Mr. Colclough: I’m okay with it.
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
FINANCE:
33. Approve funding to establish satellite sites for advanced voting week (Oct. 31
- Nov. 4, 2005) for the November 8, 2005 General Election.
Mr. Handy: Move for approval.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? I think it’s—Ms.
Bailey, let me say this on her behalf in terms of trying to work very diligently to make
sure that we have maximum voting with all of our elections. I think that office does a
tremendous job there. I think she went beyond the call of duty. She and staff and the
board, in terms of making sure that during early voting that we had more than one place
[unintelligible] Municipal Building in order to do this, which gives us a downtown
location, gives us a location in south Augusta, it also gives us a location in west Augusta,
as well. I think that office should be commended for in terms of pursuing this, because
particularly with all the changes that we’ve got in Georgia this year, with voter ID, and
all the things they have to deal with, I think they have been very aggressive in a positive
way to make sure that the elections have stayed not only up to standard by law but of
making it user friendly and being in a situation where people are encouraged to vote
rather than being discouraged to vote. So I think they should be commended for that. I
think y’all have done a tremendous job.
Ms. Bailey: If I might add quickly you mentioned the voter ID bill. We just
received word a couple of hours ago that the federal court has enjoined that provision of
th
the law so what that means is that for the November 8 election we’ll revert back to the
th
old forms of ID and we won’t be using photo ID for the November 8 election. Now,
24
what the future will hold in that regard we have no way of knowing, but that is what will
th
be for November, is revert to the old 17 forms of ID that we used prior to September 20.
Just for your information. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] All in favor of that motion will do so by the usual
sign.
Mr. Handy: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: I yield, sir. I didn’t see your hand.
The Clerk: Mr. Smith, are you going to vote? Are you voting? Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Handy: There also was an item that Lynn was discussing earlier about she
may be coming back wanting more money for the election, and I’d like to make a motion
to join it all in one, if it’s possible. If she explain it to you and then we accept what she
had to say. Lynn, your other item, that you’re coming back to us?
Ms. Bailey: Yes, sir, Mr. Handy. I put a second agenda item on the committee,
on the Finance Committee agenda for next Monday in the amount of $25,300 to provide
th
additional expenses for the November 8 election due to added temporary employees and
an increase in the number of poll workers that we’re going to put at the polls in
anticipation of a larger turnout, since we have the Mayor’s office on the ballot. So that is
th
coming up on the Finance Committee agenda for October 24, yes, sir, that is true.
Mr. Handy: I’d like to put that in the form of substitute to receive as information
or either to accept—
Mr. Mayor: Let me say this. If it’s coming up on the committee and I really
don’t have any problem with it. In fact, I’ve talked to our Director about it. If there, we
are going to have to end up having to do it, handled the expenses. If there are no
objections it can be added to the motion that is there but it would have to be in terms of
an add-on, because you’re dealing with two different things. One is involving money, one
is involving dates. But if you want to go ahead and get it through today, if there are no
objections to that, it can be so added.
Mr. Colclough: So move, Mr. Mayor, to add it on.
Ms. Sims: Second.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’m calling an objection. I need some clarification.
Mr. Mayor: It is to deal, Commissioner, with providing the monies to fund the
election with and also for the expenses in terms of the locations which we would have for
the satellite offices for voting, for Warren Road and for Henry Brigham Center.
25
Mr. Williams: I support our Director and I think they are doing a good job. My
question is the process has been one way, now we going start to do that, then let’s do
everything. I been saying it all the time, now. If this going to hurt you, Lynn, if this
going to hold you back, if you need to do this today then I think we can make an
exception and go on and do it. But if it’s on the Finance Committee to be brought up
next Monday at our regular committee, ain’t going to start jumping the fence when you
want to jump the fence, cause when everybody else want to jump the fence we don’t do
it. Let’s do it right. If that going hurt, if that going to hold you back, that’s going to
impede your process, then you need to let me know and I can support it. But if it’s not it
needs to go through the regular chain like everything else been going.
Ms. Bailey: It will not impede the process. The advance voting is the most
critical thing coming up, because if we’re going to do it then we need to go forward and
publicize it and carry on with that. I wouldn’t want to delay that. As far as the other
funding goes it will be necessary at some point, because we’re spending that money right
now. If it goes through today it would raise the total amount from $12,000 that we had
asked for just for advance sites to a grand total of $37,300. The total cost, the additional
cost for the November election, just for your information.
Mr. Williams: And I think, Mr. Mayor, my question was if it’s not going—if it
something that need to be done today, I can understand why we’re bringing it forward.
But if that’s not the case, I mean we don’t want to set up a practice up here where we are
not going to follow through with it. We got procedures in place and Madame Clerk,
while I’m thinking, I need to have the animal shelter process being brought to committee.
Because we do think differently some times. And if this is something that’s needed to be
done and Lynn need it, I’ve got no problem doing it. But if it can wait until the necessary
process come through, I got objection to putting it on.
Mr. Mayor: Well, the objection automatically takes is over to the committee, but
I would say that I think it could be handled at any time and I think as a forward step I
personally would have liked to—I think it’s a forward step in terms of what this county
has had to face in dealing with the expense of $100,000 that was thrown on us for an
election to turn out 24%, have an aggressive Board of Elections and a director and staff
that made sure that things were adequate, to bring in today and to announce the ruling of
the federal court in terms of what it’s been enjoined and in terms of trying to press the
state to get us during the period that we were under this old problem of getting mobile
facilities over here to make sure that people could have the proper ID, it’s going to have
to be done anyway, but technically speaking if they are going into early voting almost at
the same time that you’re doing it, when you ratify fully, it will actually be in November.
So if you’re talking about the process being correct, you actually will be granted
something in committee that you will not be voting on until after it is actually done. And
you will already have the early voting to basically occur. So I don’t think it’s out of
order that we’ve done it but the objection has been so stated, it will be handled that way,
but I just think that it wouldn’t have caused a problem in order to do it, and I think it
would have shown a forward step for this county since we have been used as the test case
and somewhat the guinea pig to be jerked around by this law and of everything else that’s
26
happened with these elections. So I just think that we do need to approve it when we get
the opportunity to approve it. So we will go back—let’s not add it as a part of that
motion. We’ll go with what’s original, and Madame Clerk, if you could count that votes
that is there.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk, I would ask this, that once that vote is taken out of
committee in order to make sure that it is proper, that if the Attorney would circulate, and
I will [unintelligible] process through it, I would hope that after the committee votes on
that, to do it, that we would circulate a letter to have it in place so that where we do that it
will be proper and at the proper time. And obtain the proper signatures in order to do it.
The Clerk:
34. Approve the acquisition of 3 specialty utility vehicles for the Solid Waste
Department from Polaris of America, Inc. of Augusta, Georgia for $12,361.94 each
(lowest bid offer on bid 05-133).
Mr. Grantham: So move.
Mr. Handy: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? All in favor of the
motion will do so by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
35. Approve a Budget Amendment in the General Fund for $25,000 for
donation.
Mr. Mayor: Who is handling that from staff? Who is handling that from staff?
Mr. Attorney?
Mr. Shepard: I can offer legal advice here, Mr. Mayor. I had asked this matter be
removed from the agenda but I think there are several considerations that need to be
addressed here. I can address them after legal, if that would be the pleasure of the body,
or I can address them at this time, if that would be the pleasure of the body.
Mr. Mayor: Well, do we have something that goes to legal?
Mr. Shepard: Do I have—
27
Mr. Mayor: I mean if we got something that goes to legal that may be a time to
do it, but as far as I know if we ain’t got nothing to go to legal we may not have legal, so
we might better take our chances. I provided a spot for that to be done in terms of
dealing with legal. Y’all may have legal today but I know who y’all are going to have it
without, because we’ve got a lot to deal with today, to finish, and I think it’s a lot on a lot
of different Commissioners’ agenda that’s not going to be here. So I think you need to
give whatever opinion, Finance, the Administrator, you [unintelligible] worked out, give
us not a set of opinions, give us one opinion on what we going to do and let’s be through
with this thing. This is not the first time money has been donated. Let’s just get one
proper way to deal with it and not try and create a Supreme Court case with it. Let’s do
what we are going to need to do and let’s get through with it. The floor is yours. Go
ahead.
Mr. Shepard: [unintelligible]
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. Shepard: In investigating the matter the funds have not come from Ms. Beard
personally and they have—and I have seen the check. They are from the Maxwell House
LLC which had a matter before the Commission some time ago. It was the approval of
the bonds at the Maxwell House renovation. And there are certainly two—you asked for
one recommendation. Well, the recommendation I think has two valid option choices
and I will recommend one of those to make it for the record. Consulting the ethics
ordinance, we are not to accept a gift. If we do accept a gift it is to be returned to the
donor or transferred to a charitable organization. And the funds, part of these funds, it’s
my understanding, have been disbursed to the Augusta Youth Center and option number
one would be to return all the funds to the donor and let that donor take care of his or her
charitable interest. The funds, like I say in the memo I saw, those donated funds did not
come from Ms. Beard personally. They are from the LLC. So the second alternative, and
it is equally valid, would be to ratify the action last time, which was the donation through
presentation of $5,000 to the Augusta Youth Center, and then the further disbursements
of this should be to charities, purely charitable purpose. It would have to be voted on by
the Commission. It’s Commission monies. And I think that my recommendation is that
all the monies be returned. That takes away any perceptions that might be drawn
adversely to the Commissioner. I have no doubt that Ms. Beard has no impropriety in her
mind and I think that it just would be a first recommendation that the donations be
handled totally outside this body. But then here again, to handle it through this body, it is
appropriate to have a vote on the whole disposition of the funds, which would include the
$5,000 last disbursed. And any further disbursements would have to be in the form of a
motion. And to any recipient, the Code says that we can do such an action if we do it as a
contract for services. We’ve done that before and I have suggested whenever these have
come up that the donation as a term always triggers analysis as to whether or not there
has been a gratuity. We don’t give away the Commission’s money, the County’s money.
We don’t give it away individually. We use it to fund contracts for services and I would
ask the body to choose one of those two items because they are equally legal.
28
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to make a motion that we ask that this
money be refunded and encourage the donors to reimburse, pay for the group that
we funded the other day and other charities of a similar nature. I’m going to make
that in the form of a motion
and if I need to elaborate on this further, I wish to revise
and extend my remarks at a future time.
Ms. Sims: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second?
The Clerk: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: Let me ask—and I’ll call on Commissioner Hankerson. I just want
to ask one question. A little clarity on the motion, Andy. When we’re talking about the
whole amount going back on the amount that’s remaining there.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I understand the challenging nature of this comment. I’ll
have to answer that this way, is that in my experience as a Commissioner there have been
many donations made in the name of the Commission to Toys for Tots, schools and other
things. OMI is a good example. As you know, I’m well documented on record as being
supportive of those measures. I, however, am not in favor of people we do business with
donating money to this Commission, it being put in the general fund, then a public check
cut to a charity without coming to a full vote by this Commission. I know that it’s a mess
at this point and again I’m going to refrain and request to extend my remarks as
necessary, but that we refund the entire amount and allow—this is a dangerous precedent,
Mr. Mayor, and I just have no doubt that there is nothing but pure motives at heart here
but it’s just ground that I fear we should not tread upon. I’m not sure of the logistics as
far as staff being to work through the partial refund or total refund. I guess however we
can get out of this and still accomplish the intent of what was done, which the intent was
a grand and noble thing. That is what the motion is intended to do, and how staff can
work through that and get us apart from this porcupine. I’m open to suggestion but we
need to get out of this and allow the contributors to contribute to the charities, but it
doesn’t need to come through the public coffers. I know I’m somewhat speaking in code
on this, Mr. Mayor. I apologize to the body for that. But I’m doing my best to maintain
decorum, because as I said the intents behind this are nothing but pure. Not a bad thing,
but a good thing. I just don’t agree with the process.
Mr. Mayor: I think what’s—if we’re trying to bring this to a conclusion, if that’s
where we’re going—and I don’t have a vote in this situation. But I’m just thinking if
we’re trying to bring this to a conclusion, if all the intentions are clear to everybody, this
Commission, the general public by way of media, attorney that’s there, staff to a point
that this City being used as a pass-through conduit, to facilitate that, whether that should
have been done or not, I’m thinking to a point that if you’re trying to get conclusion to if,
if the remaining portion is in there, if the parties are in agreement from the standpoint that
29
the contributor [unintelligible] charity that’s it gone to, I think the easiest thing would be
to do would be to redirect the balance of the money that’s there. I’m thinking, you know,
to a point do we need to penalize at this point the charity where it has gone that probably
is in dire straits anyway and is totally spinning, to, to, to receive a gift, give it because the
process is flawed, find a way to put them under that gun to get it back in place, take the
$20,000 that’s there and move it, send it back to the benefactor and give him a list of
whoever it needs to go to. And eliminate the $5,000 where it is. Let’s see—I see more
problems involving the $5,000, trying to get it back, refund it, get it back [unintelligible]
to get it back. That’s my only thing in there if we’re trying to clear it.
Mr. Cheek: That sounds like clarification in mind, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: And just move the $20,000 and to do and then I think we need to—if
we’re going to go further down the road then we maybe need to at some point in time
define what we receive as a government as a pass-through and what we don’t receive. So
if there is a private donation that comes to the government to be passed to the charity, if
that’s a no-no, that we emphasize that and we state it, or if it comes from another
agencies and we receive it and we’re responsible for it, that with somebody else getting it
that we need to maybe beef up or distinguish between the two. What’s clear and what’s
not clear, cause I don’t think we do that when it comes down from the State. We’ve done
with [unintelligible], we’ve done it with other grants, we’ve done it where at one time
every legislator—well, I won’t say every one, but a lot of them were sending up stuff that
would come through this body, to pass through to give to a non-profit that actually was
State funds, and that’s why I think we need to, if there is a distinction between the two of
a government pass-through being different from a private pass-through then we need to at
some other point in time, I think write that in or emphasize that and do it. But I think the
easiest way is to put that remainder back to its source, then allow the Commissioner to
direct those to those charities where they were intended to go and still intended to go and
I think that the part that I think is very unfortunate is that from day one months and
months ago the company so stated that they wanted to do charitable work in this
community and to do it. If there’s a problem with the process and where that went then I
don’t think everybody in there ought to be penalized to deal with that, and particularly if
we’ve got a non-profit that’s trying to keep its doors open and to do it. I yield to
Commissioner Hankerson with that.
Mr. Hankerson:
I think you pretty well said, Mr. Mayor, what I was going to
say. Because I remember when this contract was approved. It was stated in there that the
developer would send money to charitable organizations in District 1 according to as the
Commissioner desired. So we did approve that contract upon that. With that in mind, the
check was written to Augusta-Richmond County Commission. It wasn’t written to Ms.
Beard. And she did what she would have done and forward it over. I agree with what
you’ve said. I think that the donor could just only—just get the list and send it directly to
I’d like to put that in the form of a
the organizations as the Commissioner desire.
motion and then also that we allow the contribution that we already made—it was
made to the Youth Center anyway—that we made that contribution so let that
30
remain the same and just send it back and ask them to redistribute the checks and
with the list from the Commissioner. That’s the motion, the substitute motion.
Mr. Mayor: Substitute motion?
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: I’ve got a motion and a substitute motion. The substitute motion will
be voted on first. Did anybody second the substitute?
Mr. Hankerson: Ms. Beard, did you second that?
Mr. Mayor: If there is no second, then there is no substitute.
Mr. Grantham: I’ll second it to get it out there.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, there is a second to get it out here. And to do that. I just hope
that whatever we do, we just get it cleared up and move and—
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, did we get a second for the substitute?
The Clerk: yes.
Mr. Mayor: A second for the substitute. That’s two motions that’s out there.
Mr. Grantham: I think we need to clarify everything.
Mr. Mayor: to clarify both motions out, Madame Clerk, on the reading of both of
them.
The Clerk: Mr. Hankerson’s motion was to ratify the previous action of the
$5,000 contribution to the Augusta Youth Center and refund the remainder portion back
to the donor to be distributed in accordance with non-profit list from the Commissioner.
Mr. Mayor: That clear, Mr. Hankerson?
The Clerk: And Mr. Cheek’s motion—
Mr. Mayor: She was reading your motion.
Mr. Hankerson: Right.
The Clerk: Mr. Cheek’s motion was to refund the total amount back to the donor.
Mr. Mayor: Minus that that has been spent.
31
Mr. Grantham: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: Here’s what I’m hearing in both motions, then, that it’s refunded
back. Commissioner Rearden?
Mr. Rearden: I believe Mr. Cheek’s motion was to refund the entire $25,000.
Mr. Mayor: It was. That’s what she read there. And what I didn’t hear in the
substitute, from the Clerk, and that’s why I was asking Mr. Hankerson was he in
agreement there with was the refunding back to the donor as part of it.
The Clerk: The contribution already made and then refund the remainder back.
Redistribute it from a list from the Commission.
Mr. Mayor: It gets it back into that donor’s hands. Commissioner Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Mr. old title. I would ask that the maker of the substitute motion
that it just be refunded, the balance refunded and the Commission or Commissioners not
as part of this official action furnish any list but certainly as individuals they can do that.
I think the—
Mr. Mayor: Let me ask this. If we’ve sent and they’ve spent the check and we
[unintelligible] we can’t as individuals assume that unless we do something else with the
$5,000.
Mr. Shepard: I—
Mr. Mayor: I have to challenge that from the standpoint that we either have to
give the [unintelligible] that we have [unintelligible] the way it’s supposed to go or we
need to back up and do what Andy says in terms of [unintelligible]. I think we are trying
to clear it up to a point and [unintelligible] problem of where of went, it didn’t go to a
Commissioner, it didn’t go to something private, and it’s gone, then you know I’m
[unintelligible] no official action of what was taken with the $5,000. And we know that it
was sent and it’s gone. And spent. Now, if we going to retrieve it that is a different
story. If you going to retrieve it, that is going to be like catching the Easter Bunny and
Santa Clause on the same day. So I mean we’re trying to get clear and move—I mean I
don’t intend today to rewrite out a Supreme Court decision. We either get it clear, cause
I’m saying if the motion is illegal then I think Mr. Attorney,, you should state why it’s
illegal.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mays, Mr. Mayor, it’s part of my suggestion to the
substitute motion that did not approach changing the ratification of the previous
action. That was part of my second recommendation, that the previous action be
ratified. In other words, the $5,000 is recognized as officially donated by this
Commission to the Augusta Youth Center and then the balance of the money be
returned.
That was my suggestion.
32
Mr. Mayor: Well, in his motion wouldn’t it be better that we serve simply as a
pass-through as we’ve done about 1,000 other times? My only argument is where the
sources are on these pass-throughs and I think if it’s stated that it’s a pass-through then it
at least for the record puts in where the source of the money came from and it’s not a
direct contribution of the government to the entity. That it pass through from the
[unintelligible]. And I don’t see where that thrown us into a major quandary. Cause it’s
gone. It went. I mean any words [unintelligible] we don’t have it. It’s gone. What I’m
saying is if we sent it I think his motion at least explains where it came from on a source,
from a private donorship, went through the government, and to a point you are correcting
it by sending the rest of it back and then that’s [unintelligible] private basis. But I
thinking we can’t just ignore the fact that it came through and we do it on the basis of a
pass-through [unintelligible]. I would think—now y’all are the ones who are going to
end up voting on it unless y’all do something very strange and tie it up. Commissioner
Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, if we’re clear on the motions, I’m afraid I’m approaching
the point where I’m going to extend my remarks and I don’t think we want to go there at
this point. I just think if we’ve had enough clarification and discussion that we call the
question and take a vote on this issue, please.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Handy?
Mr. Handy: I call for the question.
Mr. Mayor: Got two, one on each end. That’s pretty good. All in favor of the
substitute motion which will be voted on first, that’s the motion made by Commissioner
Hankerson. Does anyone need a restating on that motion? If not, we move to vote on
that particular motion first.
Ms. Sims and Mr. Cheek vote No.
Ms. Beard and Mr. Williams abstain.
Motion carries 6-2-2.
The Clerk:
36. Consider a request from the CSRA RDC regarding the purchase of tickets
for the 44th Annual Conference.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: I make a motion that we approve purchase of tickets for those
Commissioners that wish to attend, as has been the policy in the past.
33
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion? If not, all in favor of the
motion will do so by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
37. Motion to approve the Public Services Trees and Landscape Department in
receipt of the Grant from the Convention and Business Bureau in the amount of
$1800.00 for educational enhancement and awareness.
The Clerk: That amount should be revised to $1,600.00.
Mr. Handy: Move for approval.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? All in favor of the
motion will do so by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
39. Authorize to fund completion of the Revision of the Jury Boxes FY2005.
Mr. Mayor: You got that one, Fred?
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, at the beginning of the year there was, as we reduced
our budgets, the jury clerk brought to my attention the necessity of a bi-annual revision of
the jury boxes, the jury pool basically. We had asked her to wait until the end of the year
to determine whether or not we’d actually need that funding. She has brought to my
attention again that they do need that funding to complete the mandated duty of her office
and that money is available in contingency and we would encourage you to vote for that
move.
Mr. Handy: Move for approval.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion? If not, all in favor of the
motion will do so by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
34
The Clerk:
40. To authorize use of Administrative Cost savings to purchase additional office
space and other needed supplies for the Public Defender’s Office in the amount of
$444,800.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, as you may know the Public Defender’s Office over the
past two years has been an evolving process. We’ve committed ourselves to going forth
with the State in doing that. The office space is available that is necessary, is made
necessary by the increased staff that they have. The funding for that comes through
savings that Mr. Sibley has been able to accumulate through our contract with the State.
There are no additional funds being allocated for this operation and those savings are a
result of the savings generated by the State contract and his judicious use of the staffing
that’s available to him at this particular point in time. We are mandated to provide space
and we’ve ask Mr. Sibley to find funds to do that and he’s been able to do so.
Mr. Handy: Move for approval.
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams and then Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Williams: Is there any provision being made to get some permanent grant for
the temporary situation we using now, renting facilities? We got a lot of facilities we are
renting and we talked about cutting back on that. What are we doing to get out of that?
The process?
Mr. Russell: In this particular case we had some lengthy discussions with Mr.
Sibley about renting space instead of putting in the temporary office space. We decided
that because long term he would actually be in the courthouse that a temporary space
would be the most reasonable thing to do, that we could move other offices in and out of
as we do whatever renovation is necessary to this building and/or the courthouse as it
went along. So we are looking at that as an investment in what we’re doing. His long-
term position would be the courthouse if that comes to pass. If not, this should keep him
satisfied until we move forward with that and gives us the option to move people out of
rented space into these facilities. I don’t know if you had a chance to look at them, but
while they’re temporary facilities, they’re very, very nice temporary facilities, and
probably a lot of people would consider them long-term facilities. Does that answer your
question?
Mr. Williams: That’s all, Mr. Mayor.
35
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is just basically a reprogramming of the
budgeted amount, not an increase, of $444,000?
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. Those funds have been budgeted in his administrative
account. Because of savings there we’re reprogramming that to a capital account to do
the facility.
Mr. Cheek: One question, to follow up on. Are we seeing any savings from the
improvements on scheduling and so forth for juries and courts and hearings as a result of
the mandate from the State to local courts?
Mr. Russell: We’re beginning to see some of that. As you look at some of the—
as you look at some of the jail numbers, as you look at some of the process that’s going
through I think you’re beginning to see some of that. It would be hard for me to quantify
that at that moment because I haven’t looked at it specifically. But I think we’re at the
beginning of seeing the improvements that are going to be there.
Mr. Cheek: One last question. This isn’t an attempt to spend the remainder of
budgeted amount for the fiscal year, this is an actual need?
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. He currently has people doubled up in several offices and
will be anticipating some additional things. It is an additional need. It’s not just an
opportunity get rid of the dollars.
Mr. Cheek: I’ll follow by one comment, Mr. Mayor, if I may. Doubling up in
offices is going to be the way it is in the future with energy costs and space costs and so
forth, so the idea of everybody having an office may not be a sign of things to come. So I
hope that the city will consider that in the future when it looks at space for individuals
and not grow office space. We have enough trouble heating and cooling what we have.
Mr. Smith: Mr. Cheek, we can’t hear you down here. Would you talk in the
microphone, please?
Mr. Cheek: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed,
the same.
Mr. Colclough out.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
36
41. Approve the acquisition of 2 dome top crew trucks (F-450) for the Utilities
Department - Construction Division from Bobby Jones Ford of Augusta, Georgia
for $40,339.00 each (lowest bid offer on Bid 05-127)
Mr. Handy: Move for approval.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion?
Mr. Williams: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner?
Mr. Williams: These trucks came through committee, Mr. Mayor, but I’m a little
worried about we’re not taking advantage of some of the stuff that we get rid of to keep
working. These are work trucks, I think, and we trying to find money, but we spend
money on equipment because we have the money. And in some cases we don’t have the
money and we can’t buy the equipment but I’m not, I’m not against this but I would love
to see where we have taken something out of the fleet and doing something else with it,
rather than putting it on the auction block every year. Somebody else take it and get
another 150,000 miles out of and they do that all the time. So I just think when you
talking about work trucks—I mean, it ain’t got to be new. It’s got to work. And that’s
what’s wrong now. Folks drive in air conditioning, power steering [unintelligible] but
still I’d just like to see us take advantage of some of the stuff that we’ve got and put it in
the [unintelligible] instead of buying new stuff every time.
Mr. Mayor: Any other discussion? Any other questions? If not, all in favor of
the motion will do so by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
42. Approve the acquisition of 2 cargo vans for the Utilities Department
Customer Service Division from Bobby Jones Ford of Augusta, Georgia for
$18,084.00 each (lowest bid offer on bid 05-128).
Mr. Handy: Move for approval.
Mr. Rearden: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir.
37
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Crowden is here. Maybe he can tell me about the cargo van
and what’s difference in a cargo van we’re buying versus another van we may have.
Ron?
Mr. Crowden: Right now, first off this division handles the meter repair, both
commercial and residential. They’ve been operating out of the back of pickup trucks and
utility body trucks, which have the side panels. Over the last two years Ms. Alma
Stevenson and myself have been working on what is the proper resource for their meter
repair service and the truck with the side panels, although they’re acceptable, are not the
best combination. They have a security issue. The side panels—the first thing that goes
was the side locks and so forth so there is a lot of pilfering out of the sides of them. So
they have to off-load those pickup trucks every time at the end of the day. The cargo van
allows for security and it actually is a better work configuration, resource configuration
for their actual requirements. They’ve got parts bins and cabinets and so forth. So it’s
actually a better type truck, more appropriate to what they’re doing with meter repairs.
Mr. Williams: We don’t have anything in our fleet that we can use for that?
Mr. Crowden: We have vans, as you well know, but most of those vans are
passenger carrying vans. Actually, work detail vans. We’re starting to buy more cargo
vans. We only have actually in the whole fleet six cargo vans. And we’re starting to
move into that more professional resource as appropriate to the mission.
Mr. Williams: And the side body trucks which will haul equipment inside and
[unintelligible] outside being broken into so much that—
Mr. Crowden: Her vehicles don’t have the canopy over the top so they’re not
fully enclosed. They just have the side panel. Just like a plumber’s truck, if you will.
And what she is asking for is to go the cargo van which is more appropriate to meet her
repair requirements.
Mr. Williams: All right, Mr. Mays. Ms. Stevenson might need to talk to
somebody else. I mean she might know about water bills but I can’t see her expertise on
what kind of [unintelligible] van [unintelligible].
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign.
Mr. Williams abstains.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
43. Approve the transfer of one mapping staff member from the Tax Assessor’s
Office to Information Technology.
38
Mr. Handy: Move for approval.
Ms. Sims: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead, Commissioner.
Mr. Williams: Technology is something that I really need to get some
information on. Can you explain exactly what this agenda item is going to do?
Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir. This agenda item is going to take one of the backup
personnel—they have three in the Tax Assessor’s Office—and transfer them to
Information Technology. They’ll be in the GIS, the Geographic Information Systems
division in IT, that’s responsible for all the mapping for the entire county, all the
computerized mappings. So really it’s taking one person from a situation where they’re
doing a lot of different duties in the Tax Assessor’s Office and moving them to a place
where they’ve got closer access to technical resources, because the tax mapping has
become a very technical operation. So there are efficiencies to be gained in this.
Mr. Williams: It came through committee and I’m in support but I’ve got a
serious issue with some of the equipment, some of the stuff that we supposed to be—here
are in 2005, our technology I thought in this entire county out to be state-of-the art and
find out recently—and [unintelligible]—we can’t even print off of the computer a list of
anything on the computer. So technology is something that I’m very much interested in
and I wanted to know exactly what this was going to do. I probably need to talk to Ms.
Allen after this meeting to find out about what we can do for the Animal Shelter cause
there is a serious issue, when here we are at 2005 and we can’t even print off a copy of
anything at a state-of-the-art facility. We spent over $3 million on that facility and I
remember that very well and we don’t have—but anyway, so move, Mr. Mayor. Second.
Mr. Speaker: If I might say so, the Animal Shelter is getting new software next
week.
Mr. Williams: Getting new software next week. A day late and a dog short, but
that’s all right.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. All in favor of the motion will do so by the
usual sign.
Mr. Cheek out.
Motion carries 9-0.
39
The Clerk:
44. Approve the acquisition of 1 compact pickup truck for the Utilities
Department - Administration Division from Bobby Jones Ford of Augusta, Georgia
for $14,227.00 (lowest bid offer on Bid 05-128).
Mr. Handy: Move for approval.
Ms. Sims: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and no second.
Mr. Handy: Barbara seconded it.
Mr. Mayor: I didn’t hear. I’m sorry. Getting like Jimmy. All in favor of the
motion will do so by the usual sign.
Mr. Williams abstains.
Mr. Cheek out.
Motion carries 8-1.
The Clerk:
47. Approve a request from the Engineering Department to award bid item #05-
121 in the amount of $57,016.00 to GE Supply for street light poles and fixtures for
replacements/ repairs in the Augusta Richmond County urban areas for a period of
one year. This is effective upon date of adoption of this item. Funds are available in
the street light budget account number 276-04-1610-5414410.
Mr. Handy: Move for approval.
Ms. Sims: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. I had, I asked for this item to remain on the
regular agenda to find out from disadvantage business side of this thing to find out was
Ms. Gentry satisfied with the bid selection, the process. [unintelligible] everything else
that we been trying to implement in this county.
Ms. Gentry: Yes, sir, it did. It went through the DBE Office. I worked with Ms.
Smith. We also did some solicitation just from the Disadvantaged Business Office to
ensure inclusion of a lot of small vendors. They chose not to come to the table in terms
of providing the pricing.
Mr. Williams: Okay. Move approval.
40
Mr. Mayor: Further discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion will do by the
usual sign.
Mr. Cheek out.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
48. Receive a report from the Engineering Department on the status of the
Walton Way Extension/Davis Road Project.
Ms. Smith: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, the purpose of this agenda
item was to make you aware that the Georgia Department of Transportation—and this is
nd
a GDOT project—received bids on the Walton Way Extension project on July 22. I
think everyone is familiar with the fact that this project is going to widen Walton Way
from Robert C. Daniel back to Washington Road in both Richmond and Columbia
Counties and will add two off ramps to the I-20 interstate. However, the contract was
awarded. It’s a $22 million contract. There are some utility conflicts associates with the
project. They will start working on the project and address as many of those issues as
they can, moving forward with construction. However, there is a major transformer pole
out at Walton Way Extension, Pleasant Home and Scott Nixon. That pole will not be
able to relocated until fall of 2006, so there is a possibility that the construction on this
project will be extensive. As of just before this agenda item was put together they were
actually considering canceling this project altogether because of the coordination issues
associated with utilities. But I wanted to make you aware, because I’m sure you will
receive phone calls, I’m sure I will receive phone calls, as will the Georgia Department of
Transportation, that there are some utility issues on this project that are beyond, I’m
assuming, the control of the Georgia Department of Transportation and they’re going to
be working very closely with the utilities and with Georgia Power, but that one of the
main utilities that has to be addressed will not be moved until fall of 2006. We have
almost $800,000 in sales tax money in this project that also will not be expended until
after the utilities have been relocated.
Mr. Mayor: Chairman Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And one of the reasons the Director and I
wanted this pulled is to highlight this to the Commission in that this is similar to things
we’ve run into before with utility relocation. That it is in fact not the fault of our
Engineering Department, nor the City. That there are issues that have come out of this
project and you would think as—I’m trying to be politically correct, Mr. Mayor—you
would think that GDOT could work through these issues and make the project happen in
a timely manner, especially in light of all the public hearings and other gyrations we put
the public and our departments through, for this to come up this late in the game is kind
of embarrassing actually, Mr. Mayor, and I hope that GDOT will persevere and see this
project through and I know the City is committed and we’ve done our part and I just hate
41
to see this much-needed project languish on the vine and then see some cost overrun that
is going to have us searching for additional money because GDOT didn’t get their act
together. Motion to receive as information.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Handy: Mr. Mayor, I just want to make a comment on it. Unless they’re
doing another job in that area they already started on this job, right there at I-20 and
Jackson Road, or Davis Road. They’re clearing some land for something.
Ms. Smith: The property owner has the option to remove their own trees and
that’s what I believe has been occurring in that area up till now. The actual notice to
proceed was not issued to Reeves Construction until September 8 of 2005, and I know
there were some activities going on out there before that timeframe.
Mr. Handy: Okay. I went through there the other day and they’re already cutting
out and I was glad to see it.
Ms. Smith: They are anticipating it’s going to take five months for Georgia
Power to get the initial work done, not including the transmission line that we just spoke
of, and the other utility companies will come along and do their work after that five
months has occurred and they’re able to move the remaining lines.
Mr. Handy: That’s all I have, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Rearden?
Mr. Rearden: I believe Reeves has started their work on the ramps to I-20 and
this is the same company that is doing the infamous Fury’s Ferry Road?
Ms. Smith: That is correct.
Mr. Cheek: And 56 at Bobby Jones.
Ms. Smith: That is correct.
Mr. Rearden: So what assurances do we have from the State that they are going
to ride herd on this company this time?
Ms. Smith: We have not currently received any assurances from the State as to
how closely this schedule will be adhered to. It is certainly something that we can
discuss in our next breakfast meeting, the monthly breakfast meeting that we have with
the Georgia Department of Transportation. It was noted that it is the same company.
However, it is my understanding that in accordance with their procurement rules and the
procurement regulations that they have to comply with that they were required—in
42
compliance with those rules—to award it to the low bidder. And Reeves was the low
bidder.
Mr. Rearden: Well [unintelligible] going to take a 3-1/2 year project and turn it
into a ten-year project, and my constituents aren’t going to stand for another delay, delay,
delay. So somebody is going to have to do something.
Ms. Smith: And I can certainly put that on the GDOT breakfast agenda for us to
discuss with the Tennille office, who will be overseeing that project, and invite you to
come out and share your constituents’ concerns at that meeting.
Mr. Rearden: I’ll be there.
Ms. Smith: Thank you.
Mr. Smith: Is this quarterly, will that be with Mike Thomas?
Ms. Smith: Mike Thomas. The quarterly meeting for November I believe is
being held the early part of December. This is October, so yes, there will be a meeting
this month. That is correct.
Mr. Mayor: What I was going to [unintelligible] for just a moment,
Commissioner Rearden, I know from where staff has to work in reference to that
particular breakfast meeting. But it might be a good idea, and I think this is one of the
reasons why we on occasion, and maybe don’t do it as often as we should, but in terms of
meeting, whether it’s with the GDOT board, which is going to be in town tomorrow, also
got to deal with our neighboring county on the next day, that they—the staff and them
work on many things but I’m kind of like you, I like to start at the top with some things
that we have to deal with, and there may be some conversation that wee need to have
because it’s not, it’s not necessarily, I don’t think that problem has occurred in Richmond
County. It’s not one that staff can necessarily make that argument to them. Sometimes
even when we make them it doesn’t but I think that that might be part of a conversation
that needs to be heard from folk—no offense to the people who [unintelligible] but I
think the people who gather in Atlanta are the ones that maybe need to hear that part of
the conversation from us, whether it’s in Atlanta or it’s in Augusta. It doesn’t change in
terms of the conversation. I think you’re absolutely correct.
Mr. Rearden: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek and then Mr. Grantham.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to follow up, and I’m aware that this is the
same contractors that are doing various [unintelligible] bobby Jones and 56, but I can
attest driving Bobby Jones and 56 an average of three times a day, [unintelligible] work
very hard. Mr. Mayor, I just want to say from this chair that I for one, as a citizen and a
Commissioner, am very dissatisfied with the performance of that contractor. I know that
43
they were in their fifth contract overrun or extension based on weather, and I’ve seen
nobody there working on clear, dry days. I’ve seen that with my own eyes. I’m at this
point very disappointed in the I guess response to the people who pay the bills for GDOT
to address this certainly non-conformance or non-performance in a timely manner.
Ought to be a reason to deny a contract, even if it is the low bid. But it’s gone on for too
long with these people in particular. I have [unintelligible] concrete [unintelligible] on
Windsor Spring Road that have been there for six months from [unintelligible] access
they cut, never cleaned up. I have debris from the paving of the side streets that they did
two years ago that is still there, and I still have 56 at Bobby Jones and Fury’s Ferry to
deal with that they haven’t completed in how many years, and what does it take to
disqualify somebody from GDOT? And I guess that’s a question we will take up with
them but I wanted to put that on the record that I for one have seen with my own eyes
them not working on clear days and claiming rain delays and weather delays. And again
the three guys that I see working on average for the last two years work very hard when
they’re there.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham?
Mr. Grantham:
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The comments have been well taken, I
think, and well said. But we can make as many overtures toward the DOT people this
week as we want to, but they’re down here on more of a social event than they are
anything else and I think you’re exactly right, though, getting their ear when we can is
going to be important but I think we should go a step further and call for a special
meeting with them in Atlanta again as soon as possible and go up there with this in mind
and let’s take a resolution from this Commission that would be forceful to some degree,
asking and requesting that they put the pressure on Reeves. Because they sitting in
Atlanta do not have to experience the things that we do in Augusta. And I feel like that
would be important and I know Commissioner Kuhlke would welcome that opportunity
So I’m going to ask that we do that and we put that in the
and help us in that regard.
form of a resolution that we request DOT to adhere very strongly toward the
request of what we’re asking of Reeves.
Mr. Mayor: Is that a motion?
Mr. Grantham: I’ll put that in the form of a motion.
Mr. Rearden: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion
will do so by the usual sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
44
49. Motion to approve CPB # 323-04-296823314 change number three
transferring $2,000 from project contingency to project construction on the Warren
Road Improvements Project. Also approve change order number seven with Mabus
Brothers Construction in the amount of $86,170.53 to be funded from project
construction with funds from the one percent sales Phase III.
Mr. Handy: Move for approval.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. See the hands fly up on that one. I’m going to
start at the end. Commissioner Rearden, Commissioner Williams, and for now that’s
where we’ll go.
Mr. Rearden: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I would ask that the Clerk pass out a visual
aid that I have here. These are some pictures that were taken of this project yesterday at
approximately 11:00 a.m. And I would like for you to look at these and to tell me if you
see traffic control, general maintenance, and aesthetic items that have been addressed in
this request for a change order. We have a cracked wall between the walking track at
Warren Road Community Center and Warren Road. We have silt fences that have not
been maintained per DOT standards. We have concrete pipe laying out in the park. We
have a sidewalk that has an orange barrel sticking between it where the sidewalk has not
been completed, or the utility work has been done and the sidewalk has not been
complete. We have weeds approximately 2-12/ to 3 feet tall growing out of gravel pile
that is not aesthetically pleasing to the person whose house that gravel pile is in front of.
We have traffic control signs that were covered with plastic garbage can liners and not
heavy duty material that are just blowing in the wind. And I don’t believe that this
company is entitled to $83,000 and I intend to vote no and no and no as many times as I
can to keep them from receiving this money. They have failed to perform and I’ve heard
all I want to hear about utility relocation. If we couldn’t relocate it when the project
started we should have never started. It should have been the first thing that was done. It
hasn’t been done. And the people of this area are sick and tired of this eyesore day after
day after day. And to come in here and ask for $133 a day to maintain traffic control and
erosion control and then to add another, ask for another $5,136 for sign rentals, which
should be part of the $133 a day in any construction delay claim, they want extra money
to remove silt fencing, they want extra money to put in sign covers, they want extra
money to mow the grass. And you can see from the pictures here the grass hasn’t been
cut, the weeds haven’t been eliminated, the gravel is not there. And I had to call the
Public Works Department during a hard rain, or at least my wife did, to have them come
cut holes in the asphalt that they had just laid to get the water off Warren Road and into
the storm sewers because the gutter was too high for the water on the road. This is just a
total mismanagement. That’s all I’ve got to say. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
45
Mr. Williams: I was waiting for the preacher to finish cause I was about to join
the church. He was doing a good job, Mr. Mayor. I’m glad he pointed out those things
but I got a problem. This Warren Road project has been a nightmare for a long time.
The wall that’s up there and all the money we spent and it amazes me that the same
company that’s been doing work for this government for a long time—I started to say
200 years—but for a long time and still doing the same work for us—
Mr. Cheek: Feels like it.
Mr. Williams: And we sit here and keep doing change order after change order
after change order. And we talk about doing things in town and using local businesses.
But when local businesses don’t appreciate the business we give them and as much as we
give them, then we need to go outside somewhere. Public Works has been ridiculed, has
been slam dunked about just this one road. All the stuff that’s been done. I’m upset still
about the wall that was put up. Nobody wanted to address that, Mr. Rearden. Before you
got here, we put a wall up, cost us some—I say $30,000. I don’t know what the price
was but whatever it cost to put up, it cost the same amount to take it down and they still
haven’t took it down. It’s still up there? Or is it down, Ms. Smith?
Ms. Smith: You are correct. It has not been taken down.
Mr. Williams: But here we are, we’re taking taxpayers’ money and we spend it
like we have plenty. And we don’t have plenty. Money was designed—it probably
wasn’t designed—money was appropriated for it, but we have not—the stand to take, to
make people do what they get paid to do. And I’m like Mr. Rearden. I voted no several
times and I’ll vote no several more times. I just think it’s unfair to continue to pay folks
to do nothing and that’s what this government has done and I think that we need to get
aggressive and let them know that for a day’s pay you ought to do a day’s work. And if
you hadn’t done that then you won’t get paid. That’s my comment, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Chairman Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to make a substitute that we move this
back to Engineering Services and that we have basically a status report and
[unintelligible] strategy developed at the next Engineering Services meeting for
Warren Road and then we’ll give the Commissioner from District 7 the chance to
further expound on deficiencies within that project.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Handy?
Mr. Handy: Yes, sir, Mr. Mays, Mr. Mayor—
Mr. Cheek: Did we get a second on that?
Mr. Williams: Second. Yes, you’ve got a second. That’s automatic.
46
Mr. Mayor: Y’all are remarried?
[Laughter]
Mr. Cheek: [unintelligible]
Mr. Mayor: Twinship?
Mr. Cheek: Twinship.
Mr. Handy: This came through your department and this letter I read came from
you, that you signed, recommend this be paid. Now that they saying all this stuff haven’t
been done, if this hasn’t been done why did you submit this to be paid?
The Clerk: Actually, Commissioner Handy, what has happened is the grass has
actually continued to grow, the grass has been cut over the course of the time frame that
the utility relocations have been underway. In accordance with the contract that was
issued to Mabus Brothers if by chance the City puts a halt on the project then they are not
obligated to perform certain activities on the project. However, traffic controls need to be
maintained. There was maintenance-related items that needed to continue to be
addressed. If by chance we got our maintenance department or someone else to come in
and address that, then we risk the opportunity for Mabus to come back and say that as we
attempted to put our warranty in place at the end of the project, that they were not liable
or would not be held liable for certain items that may have been disturbed if we had
someone else to come out do work within the boundaries of the contract. And so Mabus
continued to—well, we also had no idea that the utility relocations were going to take that
long. The last information we received from BellSouth, and we had several meetings last
year and I think everyone is aware that the project actually started—we put it out for bid
in fall of 2003—this was of course after we received confirmation from former staff.
And I say former because those staff members are no longer a part of the department that
all of the issues had been coordinated with the Utilities Department, including prior
rights. However, we put the project out to bid in fall of ’03 and a notice to proceed was
issued in January of 2005. Excuse me, 2004. We received notice from Georgia Power in
March of 2004 that there were some possible prior rights issues. That information was
sent to the Attorney’s Office in March of 2004. Those issues were resolved in August of
2004 with this Commission approving revised franchise agreements and implementing
new protocol with respect to how we would deal with utility relocations. Georgia Power
committed to move forward with their relocations and realignments in September. That
work was completed in December of ’05 [sic]. The other companies proceeded as they
also had committed and BellSouth started their relocations in February of 2005 with a
commitment to complete in six months. BellSouth has not completed their relocations at
this time. We have not received any information or confirmation from BellSouth as to
when they will be able to do that and those persons within the organization for which I’m
dealing are not the people that make those decisions. And so the information that I have
is that BellSouth has currently, is working with Katrina and has a major transformer that
work has to be done on before the lines can be moved from the Georgia Power poles. As
47
a matter of fact I received notice from Georgia Power that Georgia Power would not
remove the Georgia Power poles. Their work crews have moved on and BellSouth would
now have the responsibility to move those poles due to the extended time frame that they
have been waiting for BellSouth to complete. Any additional information or suggestions
as to how we can work with BellSouth to cause some of these things to happen is
certainly information that I would greatly appreciate, or any assistance that you could
provide along this manner would also be appreciated.
Mr. Mayor: Fred?
Mr. Russell: Just to add to that, the reason this is before you today is Teresa has
reviewed it, I’ve reviewed it, and basically it’s our feeling that Mabus has lived up to this
portion of their contract. Be that good, bad or indifferent at this particular point in time,
it’s our opinion that they should be paid these funds and that’s why it’s in front of you
today.
Mr. Handy: That’s the reason why I asked the question. I mean based on the
letters, based on the background, financial impact, it’s all here. And also you said that
th
you stopped them in July of 2004 and then from July of 2004 to August 5 there was no
activity done.
Ms. Smith: Other than the things that you’ve seen here that were primary
maintenance activities, major construction activities were not underway. And when this
item was approved we also were under the impression that BellSouth would be
completed such that when we got this change order approved, Mabus had indicated that
they were ready to go back to work and we received information, initial information from
BellSouth that they, too, would be completed, and we were anticipating an additional
sixty to ninety days to complete the work on Warren Road. However, as previously
stated, we’re in a position where we have to wait for BellSouth to continue their
relocation activities, and they’re the only utility company that we’re waiting on at this
point.
Mr. Handy: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Colclough, then Commissioner Williams, then
Commissioner Rearden.
Mr. Colclough: Why has it taken seven change orders on this project? This
project started off at what? [unintelligible] project was, but now it’s up to $1,880,000
with change orders.
Ms. Smith: Actually, Commissioner, the original project amount was—it’s in the
backup, but it’s about $1.7 million. Yes, sir. And we had some drainage problems out at
the utilities, at Warren Road Park, that we decided with the contractor in the vicinity and
because the water is coming off of Warren Road that we wanted to go ahead and get done
with this project. They haven’t all been things that were shortcomings associated with
48
the Warren Road project but were things that needed to be done while we had someone in
that general area or additional enhancements that needed to be taken care of while we
were out working on Warren Road.
Mr. Colclough: Looking at the backup, all I see is increases [unintelligible]
change order [unintelligible] goes on and on and on, up to seven here. And this one
you’re asking for a huge sum of money [unintelligible]. Whether they’re working or
whether they stop working or whether your stop [unintelligible] this whole project has
escalated.
Ms. Smith: It is escalated by $85,000. The original contract was $1,709,000 and
also although it says six previous change orders they’ve been relatively small items that
have been required to be done but we document each of those changes with a change
order, so the previous change orders prior to this one is a total of $85,000.
Mr. Colclough: If you look at the backup information it doesn’t say small change
order in there. I mean most of them have been 80-some-thousand, 70-some-thousand
dollars. How can that be small?
Ms. Smith: I’m not familiar with what you’re looking at, Commissioner, because
I have—
Mr. Colclough: Item 49.
Ms. Smith: Previous change orders, I have a total of $85,400.
Mr. Colclough: [unintelligible]
Ms. Smith: For six change orders.
Mr. Colclough: 9/22/05. 9/22/05 you have a list of original amount, then you
have previous change orders of $85,400; this change order, $86,170.53. Am I looking
at—
Ms. Smith: You’re correct. All of the six prior to this one total $85,000. And
then this one is for a total of $86,000.
Mr. Colclough: Ms. Smith, I’m looking at one, I’m looking at one change order,
previous change order of $85,413.
Ms. Smith: That’s all of them. That’s all six of them.
Mr. Colclough: [unintelligible]
Ms. Smith: No, no, that’s all six of them. And this is number 7. This is 1
through 6. That’s 7.
49
Mr. Colclough: So the total of change orders would be [unintelligible] about
$170,000 in change orders. [unintelligible]. Thank you, ma’am. Appreciate it.
Ms. Smith: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard, then Commissioner Williams, then back to Chairman
Cheek and back to you if we need to—
Mr. Rearden: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Smith, am I to understand from the
way you answered the previous question that sending a city crew to pick up a pile of
gravel and discarded concrete, reinforced pipe, would constitute voiding the warranty on
this project?
Ms. Smith: Not that item specifically necessarily.
Mr. Rearden: So therefore there was no reason to have this done by somebody?
Ms. Smith: To have what done?
Mr. Rearden: The gravel removed, the pipe removed.
Ms. Smith: The pipe and gravel are currently the property of Mabus Brothers
Construction.
Mr. Rearden: Then they ought to move them because they’ve not only
aesthetically unpleasing, they’re a safety hazard.
Ms. Smith: And there really isn’t a problem and I certainly can direct them to
remove every item from within the boundaries of the contract.
Mr. Rearden: Why haven’t you done that in a year-and-a-half?
Ms. Smith: Because we would also be required to pay them a remobilization fee
for removing it and bringing it back because those are not items that are within the
contract. And unfortunately I’m required to operate within the documentation and
information in the contract.
Mr. Rearden: There is no call in the construction contract in my knowledge, in
my experience, for a remobilization fee, is to remove a safety hazard that you’ve created.
If there is, and Mr. Shepard can read a contract and teach me some contract law that I
probably don’t know because I’m not a lawyer, but I deal with this stuff every day and
remobilization is not a chargeable expense when you remove a safety hazard.
Ms. Smith: Commissioner, I can take whatever action I’m directed to take by this
body. All I need is the direction and I’ll move forward with that.
50
Mr. Rearden: Well, let’s clean it up and at least make it presentable. We have
lived with that situation, with that pile of dirt at the corner of Washington Road and
Warren Road, that pile of gravel, with those pipe long enough. We are facing a
tremendous change order on this project, Mr. Colclough, if I might, because of the year’s
delay and the escalation of material cost. It may bed that the project is going to become
more expensive than the money we have, and that’s not something that the Engineering
Department or the City could have foreseen, is the rapid rise in gasoline and asphalt and
any kind of petroleum derivative. But that is a problem. So I just want it cleaned up.
My people want the thing finished and I’m open to any suggestions from anyone about
anything to get this done period. Tomorrow is too late. Yesterday was too late. July last
year was the right time. Thank you.
Mr. Handy: Amen.
Mr. Mayor: Williams, Cheek, Grantham.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My Attorney sits there and he teaches
everyday and he don’t even know who he’s teaching. But these contracts that’s put out,
and I question all of them, when you sign contracts and we approve stuff up here, Mr.
Rearden, and we don’t know a tenth of what’s in them, but because they’re contracts—
and I hear you loud and clear. But in defense of our Public Works Director, when we
sign these contracts, and I question a lot of them and you’ll learn, you will. Mr. Shepard
will teach you, not even knowing he teaching you. But he’ll teach you to be a lawyer and
to be able to decipher some of this stuff. But my question to the Public Works Director is
why hadn’t somebody brought to us as elected officials or the governing body those
denials from BellSouth, Georgia Power, whoever been holding us up? We should have
addressed that. Not you, not your department, maybe not even the Attorney. But
somebody, Mr. Russell, somebody should have brought that to us to say this is where we
held up and we been held up 30 days or 60 days or 90 days. Now, I know we had people
in that department giving out instructions on things, to do and not to do. We found that
and we solved that problem. They are no longer with this government. But why hadn’t
somebody brought it to this body so we could address it through whatever means
necessary, whether it be condemnation, whether it be taking our own forces and
removing the poles, or something could have been done had it been brought to us now.
Mr. Russell, Ms. Smith or Mr. Shepard? Anybody? Somebody tell me something.
Ms. Smith: As stated earlier when we started working on finalizing this change
order we were of the impression that BellSouth, even though they were running late,
would be completing their work activities and we would be able to have Mabus to move
forward. It was in attempting to receive confirmation that they would be finishing within
the next 15 or so days, which was our next commitment that we thought that that would
happen. This is part of the reason that there is not information in here that addresses
when Mabus would be specifically going back to work, because we weren’t able to get a
firm commitment from BellSouth before this document was completed.
51
Mr. Williams: My question still, want to know if BellSouth was 30 days late, was
not in compliance within six weeks, two years or whatever the time frame was, why
didn’t somebody bring it to the Administrator, why didn’t the Administrator bring it to
the Attorney, and why didn’t the Attorney bring it to us? So something could have been
at least addressed some kind of way for BellSouth to say earlier than this point? That’s
what I’m missing. Before we got to this point a signal, a flag, a light, something should
have went off in this government for us to address it. So? Mr. Mayor, Mr. Shepard got
his hand up. [unintelligible]
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, [unintelligible] range anywhere from
termination to something lesser than that. I will commit, I will commit to help Ms. Smith
find the appropriate target. We’ve not, I’ve not reviewed it lately and I will report back
to the next Engineering Services Committee on that is the only thing I can do.
Mr. Williams: And Mr. Shepard, Mr. Mayor, if I can continue. My question is
how long? Mr. Rearden has stated how long it’s been and I been here when the project
started and it hadn’t completed yet. But I don’t remember anybody coming to us and
saying to us that we been held up by Georgia Power for two months and we are not
moving, we need to keep moving. I know the wall was put up and I can tell you about
the wall and I can tell you about the lady [unintelligible] property and we had to tear the
wall down. I knew about Warren Road but I don’t know when the process stopped and
the bell went off or the light came on. Somebody should have told this body we can’t go
any further. Georgia Power and BellSouth is fighting in the middle of the street and we
just standing back watching. Whoever wins is going to go to work. Ain’t nobody said
anything. I need to know when that process got to the point that it held us up and who is
supposed to bring it, why didn’t somebody bring it. I ain’t heard that yet. That’s all I
want to know.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Williams, I think we’ve had a longstanding, continuing dialogue
about the problems with Georgia Power and the pole relocation and the stuff there that
has been ongoing for pretty much as long as I can remember the project. I would be
remiss if I didn’t say that. The discovery that BellSouth is running behind we’ve
discovered in the past 30 days and this has been our first opportunity to bring this forth to
you. I mean the conversation about the power poles is one that I remember having over
and over again and I thought everybody was aware of the issue there. If you weren’t I’m
sorry.
Mr. Williams: Well, last comment, Mr. Mayor. I know we got to get out of here
but let me say this. I remember when Georgia Power was claiming the right-of-way for
the poles and we claimed the right-of-way and the question came up how can you put a
pole on a street that wasn’t there? We put the street down and then Georgia Power put
the poles down. They didn’t put a pole and we followed them. So it came to clear that
we owned the right-of-way and they was in agreement of moving [unintelligible]. I go
back to Laney Walker, Mr. Mays, I need some help. When we was talking about
52
relocating the power lines to the [unintelligible] that’s not written down, that’s just what I
remember from sitting up here when we talked about who owned the right-of-way and
who should do what and who was going to do what. That was an understanding that
Georgia Power knew. Everybody else knew that the right-of-way belonged to the city
because we cut the street. We didn’t follow them. They followed us. So if we own the
right-of-way and they on our right-of-way—
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek, I’m going to recognize you and Commissioner Grantham
and then I’ve got a real suggestion and we’re going to wrap this up. Because the motion
is on the floor to send it back to committee, that’s where we need to have this discussion.
We’ve been the last 45 minutes with it and it’s not going to get settled today. But it is—I
think the criticism should be out there but go ahead, if you all will finish, let’s get it back
over there and when you’re sending it back I’ll give you my one comment that I think
you need to do, Mr. Russell, is that on this particular situation I think you need to call in
the parties that’s doing it and I think we need to get back like we were, Marion, you
mention [unintelligible] help about the Laney Walker, we need to get back
[unintelligible], bring them back down here, and we need to finish out and get some
clarification on all of it. That would be the fair way to do it. Get them in, get them into
committee, from the construction company, and then let’s get a final word on how that is
going to be done. Mr. Cheek and Mr. Grantham.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, you hit the nail on the head. I think we can further
debate this and all of us are concerned about it. I remember when I first came on the
Commission this was two years behind because the engineering firm “got sick” and so
it’s been delayed and been a red-headed stepchild every since. I see some warranty
items. It looks like the wall there is cracking from the bottom up and the crack is wider at
the bottom than at the time, which would indicate settling. Your fault, my fault, their
fault, everybody’s fault, it doesn’t solve the problem and get this fixed. This is a scab
during Masters Week, it was a problem the Masters before that, Masters is only six
months away, we’re going to have the same problem if we don’t come up with a plan of
action that is going to get this solved. I’m in all seriousness in favor of these utilities
hanging signs up, sticking signs in the right-of-way like our street signs that says this
project is delayed by Southern Bell. I mean if they can’t get out and recognize the needs
of their customers, who are the same as our constituents, then we need to give them due
credit for their slackness. So Mr. Mayor, I urge the Commission to move this back to
committee. We will have a meeting and I ask the Administrator to request of Southern
Bell, Mabus Brothers, Don the Dumptruck Man, whoever else is involved to be there for
this meeting and we will get a course of action with some dates and bring it back to the
Commission and hopefully approve that. If we are going to go in the future into station
keeping on projects that aren’t going to be completed, certainly the aesthetic appeal to a
very nice neighborhood ought to be considered before a walkway for concrete pipes,
cracks in the sidewalk, and all the other problems. So I just urge the Commission to send
this back to committee and we’ll get a schedule and a time frame for this and try to get it
solved.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Grantham?
53
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m going to wait for that meeting. I will
be in attendance and I’ll have my discussion then.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second already out there, Ms. Bonner. All
those in favor of the motion will do so by the usual sign. Any opposed, the same.
The Clerk: Substitute. Send it back to committee.
Mr. Grantham: Send it back to committee.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS:
51. Discuss proposed billing changes for solid waste collections. (Requested by
Mayor Pro Tem Marion Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, go ahead. This is the last item.
Mr. Williams: I’ve got several calls from constituents in my district and I
understand with the gas prices and price of fuel and everything else for automobiles and
equipment. The fee going up. But I think it’s very unfair the way it’s been proposed out
there and I need some clarification. I’ve got the inner city—well, not all the inner city
but I’ve got some of the inner city and some suburban areas. But people in the inner city
who are going to have to pay one price and somebody in another has got to pay another
price. I’ve got the area that hadn’t been serviced anyway in a long time. When the
service came they got a little better but it’s still not where it ought to be now. Now, we
asking people to pay more money for the same service or for the service they should have
gotten a long time ago that they haven’t really got. Now, whether that be from the
garbage hauler, from inspectors or landfill employees, whatever, but there is a big
problem when you’re talking about the amount of money that you are going to ask people
to pay versus other areas they are going to have to pay. And I just think we need to look
at this and try to come up with something else, a better way of doing it. When you’re
talking about a service as garbage and the city, it ought to be uniform. I mean if certain
folks on one side of town going put out lead and somebody else going to put out feathers
or something and the weight is going to be different, I can see charging different. But the
service ought to the same, ought to be a uniform service.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell or Mr. Johnson?
Mr. Cheek: Can I field this one, please? I’ve suffered through how many work
sessions in the last two years, just I think I can answer some of this.
54
Mr. Mayor: I don’t mind who fields it.
Mr. Cheek: Let me field it. The condition in the past, Mr. Mayor, was that there
were two separate rates. We are coming to uniformity where if you have trash collection
nd
you pay the same whether you’re on 2 Avenue or Richmond Hill Road. That is
consistent. What is at jeopardy, and I can say this without us going into a long debate, is
that we are in the process of renegotiating the contracts now. They’re in the haulers’
hands right now for signature and coming back to us. We start tinkering around with this
thing again. We are in jeopardy of having service interruptions. There is nothing
wrong—and there is a change for people in the city. They’ve been paying less, but there
are people in other areas that have been subsidizing the city’s collection. It’s been
running in the red. It is running in the red right now. This is the correction that we’ve
gone through over the last two years. Establish one fee which is consistent with
consolidating this government, giving everybody the same fee for the service. I don’t
think anybody on any side of town should pay less or more for a gallon of gas than I do
based on where I live. This addresses the same thing with trash collection. People in the
city pay the same thing I pay, which is fair. You can’t get any fairer than that. Services
are the same, the fee is the same. Whether service delivery is the same is something we
can deal with with the individual haulers. But if we continue to kick around this contract
we are going to be in trouble the first of the year. And I urge the Commission not to
change, stay the course. My people aren’t complaining because they paid the same thing
two years and they’re seeing a modest rate increase. The only people who are
complaining are the ones that have paid about half of what the people in south Richmond
County have paid for the same service, who have actually, by the way, had it much
longer. I think if there is a fairness to be had this day it will be that the people in the city
pay the same thing as the people in the country. And I don’t think you can get any fairer
than that, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Anybody else got any questions on that before I chime into it? I
been getting some complaints and they been east, north, south and west. And north isn’t
even on the map. But I will say this, I have been getting some complaints. I been getting
some of where those bill have drastically altered and that’s not to say that [unintelligible]
to run the service, but I think there have been some drastic alterations, particularly in
cases where you’ve got some people that are on fixed income and quite frankly it’s a
major change for them. If you got some that [unintelligible] on sanitation side
[unintelligible] then you going to hear from them. So I been hearing from some.
[unintelligible] but I’ve had some and I think the one thing we’ve got to look at is that—
and what I’d like to ask Mr. Russell and those, we’ve got [unintelligible] earlier in the
day, the fact that this whole thing of urban and suburban services but when there was a
millage in the other part of the city, in the suburban side, was on a privatization method
[unintelligible] and had its own pickup then at that point what was being done inside the
old urban services district was adequate in that millage to do it. Now, how are we
planning to deal now for that difference in terms of the equalization. Is it to go over into
their millage to make the difference, because that’s where it’s always been, in urban,
because it went from having a city sanitation department over then to one that was
55
privatized but it was still in the millage. So I mean are we to [unintelligible] increase on
on the same format or is it different? I’m not, I’m not disagreeing, Andy, but I think
we’ve got some different variables out here that we do need to talk about. And also, if
you are going to do that increase over there, remember none of you spoke [unintelligible]
locked in to a formula that they were paying for back when the misconception went out
that we were consolidated and everybody all of a sudden was going to get free trash
pickup. But trash pickup in the old city had never been free. It was always a taxed
service. And so therefore we finally went to it and it had to be one of costing out. and
how we do it, if this is now changing over that pattern [unintelligible] also are we going
to honor [unintelligible] be careful of all these exemptions that we were starting to hand
out. Now, I know the chairman has left the room right now. But [unintelligible] to a
point of asking to be exempt [unintelligible] various reasons because of fixed income,
because of low income, because of where they’re being [unintelligible]. We were not
getting that but yet we exempted a lot of folk who came in under this new format that we
put in to give the suburban areas those services. But yet after that was done many of
those folk came up for one reason or another, for where the property was located, what
they did, and we made considerations. And I thought, yes, many of them were
reasonable and we allowed them to be opted out. So now, are we going to deal with a
situation on many of these seniors that we have, to opt them out, too? Because I think
they can make some equal arguments in the situation of whether or not their lives have
been changed, too, in terms of those formulas. But they have been in situations,
regardless of where their property values are, they still [unintelligible] paying whatever
tax has been assessed and that included a millage that dealt with sanitation pickup. And
it’s been there I would imagine for the last umpteen years. And you’ve always had
variables within even that millage of sanitation, within urban services district, because
when Forest Hills and those areas were annexed part of that went in as to where those
areas had back door service pickup and parts of the old, old city had curb pickup. So
you’ve had variables now in terms of where you dealt with sanitation. So all of a sudden
[unintelligible] situation to do it [unintelligible] considering that [unintelligible] ought to
think about at least doing exemptions in another if you’ve got hardships that are being
created. Now, I just need to know where that difference was going to come in
[unintelligible] dealing with the [unintelligible]. If that gap is to be picked up, whether
we’re going to deal with it on increasing the millage or whether you going to deal with it
on a separate bill and using utility to deal with as a conduit to do it with.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, what we’ve done and what we’re moving forward with
is a plan to equalize the cost for service. In the urban area, as you know, there was a
millage attached or an amount of money attached to the transfer from the urban service
district to the trash fund, for a better word basically. The budget that I’ve presented
reflects a decrease in that millage to cover that transfer cost. So the people in the inner
city or the urban service area will receive a decrease in their millage that reflects the total
cost of the transfer that we’ve done for the last couple of years to help attempt to balance
the trash fund. The problem arises is that some people, because of the amount of taxes
they were actually paying due to exemptions or whatever, you’ve got a good portion, a
fairly substantial number of people who are actually paying less for taxes than what the
cost of picking up the garbage actually was, and we’ve actually tried to address at this
56
particular point in time. I see where you’re coming from and have no problem trying to
find some solutions for some of those specific populations exist that are going to have
some problems with that. But as we do that we are going to be decreasing the funding
level for the trash service itself, and what we attempted to do was to try to equalize the
cost for individuals for that particular service that they’ve got. And that was our best shot
at that particular opportunity there. It does bring with it other problems as you pointed
out. I think we probably need to continue to address those but that was what we thought
to be the best approach at that particular point in time.
Mr. Mayor: Well, you know, I won’t, I will just say this, that everybody that I’ve
talked to is not happy about the way that formula may work out.
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: And I think in terms of we’ve all agreed that changing from one,
from two tax districts is more than just a [unintelligible] of saying we are going
discontinue urban, we’re going to discontinue suburban, and we’re going to go to one. I
think that when you get to that then it ought to be done properly and in order to deal with
it, because I mean we talked about trash but we hadn’t begun yet to talk about fire. And
that’s not on the agenda today but you know we’re still running a situation of suburban
areas of this county [unintelligible] I addressed this and hollered real loud when
consolidation was first voted on, that to a point that needed to be dealt with in a way
other than having it set up like you’ve got a rural, old town fire situation. It scared every
fire chief that’s been chief. Every one of them because of that [unintelligible]. I mean
that’s something that you folk that have come on board have inherited to deal with, but
that’s a factor that’s out there. Now I just don’t think that when you change one formula
to make something work that it ought not, it ought not end up being punitive to those who
have been paying a tax and a millage to deal with sanitation in some case for 50 and 60
[unintelligible] and that formula that’s been in there. And you say all of a sudden well
then [unintelligible] created the other side of it. Then we ought to got some numbers that
would do it and not say we are going to turn around and grant every exemption that’s out
there because it’s something else on this side, there’s something else on this side, if we
are going to do that then we ought to go back and we ought to look at where it affects
seniors, we ought to look at where it affects those on fixed income and then maybe we
need to extend the exemption package and them I could be maybe in agreement with
what y’all are talking about. But to a point of saying everybody’s happy—no, everybody
is not happy. Maybe everybody’s phone is not ringing at the same time, but in those
neighborhoods that I’ve had to visit and to deal with that head on, they’ve not had much
discussion about tax and the possibility of dealing with that as they have in terms of
what’s going to happen with garbage. And the question they’ve asked me is Willie, how
could you get something that worked for so long and all of a sudden y’all fix it and screw
it up? Now that’s the question that I’m getting in a bunch of neighborhoods and they are
not of one color, they’re not of one territory. They are across different parts of this city.
And I’m just saying that I think together we got to find a way to deal with that but to a
point of just saying that all of a sudden that the folk who been living in one area are the
villains because they had a better system than what was prior to consolidation and all of a
57
sudden we put it in and I think the service [unintelligible] commended. It’s a good
service. In order to get that done. But to come out here now and to say you make these
drastic changes to a point in there where it does alter then I think we need to find some
different formulas of dealing with it. I think we need to look at whether you’re talking
about proration of those payments, dealing with them in a different way [unintelligible]
one time, and to look at different alternate methods and [unintelligible] different people
with different incomes in there, because I mean we still live in a time—I don’t think we
ought to get so high and mighty to forget there are still people in this town who make
choices about basic items, and particularly those that are elderly [unintelligible]
prescription drugs or whether they going to pay their [unintelligible] rents that be there or
what they are going to pay on garbage and tax and whether they are going to deal with
food choices or paying utilities. And I think to a point [unintelligible] work with some of
that and deal with it then if we make these drastic changes in trash, and I’m going to say
this and I’m going to shut up. I still have asked and have not gotten, that I’m still waiting
on, Commissioner Williams, I’ve asked to a point to give some alternative numbers,
cause we sent out this call and this great Herculean department that we are going to pick
up any and everything. And I told you young fellows be careful of what you pray for and
what you ask for. Now, there may need to be some in-between negotiations in here to
decide whether or not between ACCG and GMA, all the leasing programs that we got—
and I mentioned this to the Administrator today—would we be better off with some of
these areas to a point of where we are picking up a whole lot of this bulk stuff that’s out
there and then contract to pay [unintelligible] dollars to do it, would we not be better off
in the [unintelligible] world of unemployment, of going back and leasing, getting us some
old-fashioned dump trucks and some pitch forks, getting us our own crews and picking
up some of that stuff ourselves. We could better clean the city, we wouldn’t have to wait
around on work orders in order to get it done, and then go out when you pick up
something in the 1500 block, and because the person doesn’t have a work order they
leave all the stuff in the 1400 block. Rotate, float those crews, let them be able to get out
there and clean up this city like they used to clean it up, and that didn’t take everybody
with a Ph.D. and a masters to go out there and do it. It was to a point where
[unintelligible] deal with it. I think the sanitation side of [unintelligible] we need to
relook to a point whether or not it’s worked doing that or not [unintelligible] contract, get
some folk back out there to help clean up that process ourselves, and I think you’ll find a
line standing out there of some folk who want a job to help you to do that. And it might
be a whole lot cheaper but I haven’t heard yet, I haven’t heard yet alternative numbers
and I think several months ago the Commission asked that numbers be brought back that
were different. The only thing I brought back was a formula that y’all had, and y’all
were going to mix it in with the water bill and violate Georgia law. And I had to call
your hand on that because you can’t do it. So now, I’d like to hear something a little
different on another day [unintelligible] I’m not going to wait real long to get it. Or else
you’re going to hear from me in the next two weeks. And I don’t have no vote and
nothing [unintelligible] but I’ve still got a voice. I didn’t lose that by taking on another
job. Commissioner Hankerson?
Mr. Hankerson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Let me say this, that we need to be very
clear about what we are doing because when this issue, when I voted on this I wasn’t
58
clear, it wasn’t clear to me that we were talking about changing how we collect in the
urban district. I was under the impression that we were just addressing the suburban
plan, the [unintelligible] a month. Now, I don’t know of any time in government where
we took action that caused this kind of financial impact on some citizens. From my
understanding over 2,000 parcels that this will affect that are right now paying less than
$100 a year in taxes, property taxes, that it would affect that they would be paying an
increase of $276. And that’s a great increase, $276. If I was paying $50 in property
taxes and all of a sudden I get a bill for $276 plus the $50. That’s a great impact and it
not because the fact that just due to exemptions. It’s due to property values, too. When
you have a [unintelligible] some property values, some houses that does not cost as much
as anywhere, as others. So they’re not used to paying that kind of taxes. So I think this is
too much on a lot of our citizens, of increasing $276 where they wasn’t used to paying
that. I’d like to know, also, how are we going to collect this? I’m not clear of our
collection, how are we going to collect it. Who is going to be responsible for paying the
bill, the tenant or the property owner? I like to hear those answers. Who are going to be
responsible in the urban district to pay for the waste management, the tenant or the
property owner? I need to know that. Those are the things before we make a change,
like you said, changing something that’s been going on for years and years, I think all of
those questions should have been brought out, answered, we should really study what we
are doing cause I’m receiving a lot of calls, also, about that change. Who wouldn’t call?
If you’re talking about an increase of $276 a year, a lot of people going to call, a lot of
individuals is not—their income is not much more than that. Some of them are retired or
some of them that are on a fixed income, that’s all they receive per month. So I think
that’s too much. I need to know how are we going to collect, I need to know who going
to be responsible for paying the bill, the tenant or the landlord, and I hope you don’t say
the tenant because we are going to be in worse problem than we are now because we got
so many—we got a million dollars now due in collection so then that’s going to increase.
We’re going to have now urban debt that we are going to have to collect and I just don’t
where this is going to be better. And before it gets too far I think that I would like to see
us reconsider what we’re doing before we get down to the last days because I can’t, I
don’t see how I could support where we are now with this urban change. Why couldn’t it
not stay like it was until we work out something, a real good plan to do it? It was
working before, it’s been working ever since consolidation, it was working. Why could
not it continue? I think it’s too much on the taxpayers. We have reassessed property and
then we came back now and talked about increasing the fees and then we looking at other
increases [unintelligible]. I think it’s really too much. I think it really need to be some
compassion in here about our citizens with this kind of increase. Could I get an answer to
those questions?
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir, Mr. Commissioner. [unintelligible] looking for the people
to get the service and that’s what it’s all about. It’s having people pay for the service that
they get. We understand that there is a problem with people that can’t afford it. That’s
the problem we have with other services we provide. The issue is that while people say
it’s working our trash collection fund is $3 million in the hole. That’s money that we’re
talking out of the general fund [unintelligible] to cover in the fund balance. And for
reason when you are losing a million dollars a year, I’m not really too sure that it is
59
working. And that’s what we’ve attempted to try to rectify. I understand your concerns,
I understand the issues that each of you have brought forth. And I don’t disagree that
maybe we need to continue to look deeper and deeper and deeper to find things.
Obviously I don’t want to penalize anybody that’s living on a fixed income or elderly or
whatever and I think those are the kinds of things we need to continue to look at, just like
the power company or those other [unintelligible] that do that. But as the individual
that’s fiscally charged with trying to maintain the operation of the government we can’t
continue to move deeper and deeper and deeper in that hole without honestly looking at
some of the issues that we face. We put forth a program that helps with that. We put
forth a program that’s not perfect. We put forth a program that again addresses those
issues. There’s some problems there obviously. But I mean that’s fiscally what we felt
to be the most appropriate approach to take.
Mr. Handy: Do you know how many rental properties that it’s going to entail?
Mr. Russell: No, sir, not off the top of my head.
Mr. Handy: See, that’s one of my points. We saying that we are going to have
the tenants to be responsible. The tenants have not paid for garbage service. Never paid
for garbage service, but the property owner paid for the millage. The property owner is
not going to decrease the rent. So therefore these individuals, it’s like their rent is going
to increase but it’s not going to be like that because the landlord can evict them. We
cannot evict them if they don’t pay the trash bill because we do not have any kind of
collection in place to collect anything. And if we had collection in place I guarantee a
majority of the 2000 parcels that we talking about that we have in this city that this is
going to affect probably have no way, even if you turn them in to collection bureau. I
mean a lot of time we turn them in. If I’m not working or I’m on a fixed income, how are
we going to—I mean that this need to be reconsidered. I strongly think that and I just--
move for this to be reconsidered.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’ve heard—and you know, I think everybody in here has
been required at some in their career to have math. If you have fire and trash collection
and I think it’s street lights or something else coming out of $100 tax allocation to cover
those costs, it ain’t covering the costs. Simple math. Add it up. We need a sign right
outside the door that says waffle house because we’ve covered this how many times?
How many times? We need to reconsider. I’m not in favor of putting any burden on
anybody else, and naturally people that are going to have to pay for the cost of the
service—and I remind you, this isn’t Andy talking, this is the private sector that went out
and did the study on about 10,000 homes and came up with the cost per household, per
unit, to collect the trash in the same manner as done in the city and it came up to about
$196. So you’re telling me we’re covering the cost of fire and trash collection for less
that $100 a year? I don’t think so. Mr. Mayor, we’ve talked about this on a number of
occasions. We’ve covered everything we’re talking about today in more than one
session. More than once. Probably the fifth time on the rental/landlord thing, on the
60
billing thing. We are where we are at because this body has waffled on about four
different occasions on how it wanted to do this. It’s a difficult decision. It’s time to
either step up and correct a financial deficiency—and the truth of the matter is the
millage the City was charging to cover the cost for fire protection, garbage collection,
whatever else was under that category—I forget what they were—was not covering the
cost. So we want to run this like a business. My heart goes out—we have an exemption
policy for everybody. Less then 20 people have been exempted across this city who have
requested it since I have been a Commissioner and they conform to the same criteria. If
they’ve got a need they can bring the same criteria to us and we’ll address it case by case
like we always have. To say we haven’t got compassion isn’t true. To say it is our fiscal
responsibility to run this city in a financially responsible way is our responsibility. We
are not covering costs. We have covered this on a number of occasions. We’re in the
hole, we continue to want to rehash and redebate and come up with a perfect way. I’m
wide open for suggestions, but the bottom line on this is there have been scant few
suggestions and an awful lot of “we need to change this.” Well, the bottom line is—
there’s no ladies here—gentlemen, and Lena, lady, and ladies in the audience—I don’t
mean that—but the bottom line on all this is we’re not covering costs. We’re in a
contract for negotiation now. We’re unifying the service to charge everybody the same
per household. No, it’s not perfect. You were all asked these things months ago.
Months ago. And it’s documented. I’ve got the records at the house. You’ve been on
one side of the issue and then on the other and I’m fed up with it. Now, I will not be
responsible for running this city irresponsibly financially. I want to help every old and
poor person in this city, but the bottom line on running it is if you think that you can over
$150 worth of financial obligation of this city with $100 then you need to go back to
math class. We’re not covering the cost. That’s why the City was going bankrupt,
because we didn’t cover the cost. It didn’t work in the past. They had to consolidate to
cover the cost because the City was going bankrupt. It’s on the wall. The writing is
there. We’re doing the same thing. Mr. Mayor, I beg your leave, sir, and members of the
Commission. I’ve had enough today. I refuse to spend another additional about thirty
hours on this same subject—
[
End of tape 1/beginning of tape 2]
Mr. Mayor: And that’s fine. We can end all of it today and not do anything
about. But the reason why I brought it up, and I’m not disagreeing with you at all about
what it’s going to take to run that department. We’re on the same page, the money has
got to be paid. The only thing that I am saying is when you drastically alter citizens’
payments that the government charges without their knowing that there are going to be
drastic changes, you are going to get obviously response and calls. What I think could
have been done is the fact—and it may be hindsight—but the point is we asked to come
up with formulas. Now, I’ve not been one who has been. I’ve been crying in this
wilderness now about the fact that we were going to run into this hump in the road to a
point at some point. But I think when you make the drastic changes then at least there
ought to be some warning that it’s coming. That’s the only thing that I’ve said. It ought
to be a warning that it’s coming, that we deal with it. When you come up and you say—
cause I still have not heard yet as to how the difference is going to be billed and how
61
that’s going to get done. If there is a difference in what’s being paid then there needs to
be some statement as [unintelligible] the people asking those questions. Everybody is not
fortunate enough to live in the same situation. City messed up its deal when they lost and
had flight to deal with annexation and would not guarantee it to those who voted to come
in because they would not all come in at the same time. There were people who wanted
to help save the city. You lose 30-some-thousand people, then that’s really going to mess
you up. So that’s water over the dam. We understand what consolidation was about. It
was the only two businesses in the world ever been put together than an accounting
wasn’t done of other one of them, and put together. So we’re not in that disagreement.
Only thing I’m saying is I think some formula needs to be worked so that it does not
drastically alter in one year what you inflict upon citizens that are there, regardless of
where they live. And I think when you make that kind of change in there in a short
period of time people are going to react. People react. We found that out in June when
folk voted down a way to have tax incentives brought it [unintelligible]. But it had tax
attached to it and everything got voted down with one deal. So when we start talking
about assessing folk more to deal with it, it still means that there is money there to do it
and I don’t think that that explanation process is clear to a lot of people. It may be clear
to us cause we come down here in this three ring circus every week and deal with it. But
other people who only get something in the mail that says this is how much we got to
pay, that’s not clear to them in terms of how [unintelligible]. The only thing they know is
that I was paying this last year, now all of a sudden this is what you’re asking me to pay.
And that’s what they understand. I’m only saying that we bring some clarity to the
process and find a way of getting that done. That’s the only thing that I’m saying in
there. I asked one [unintelligible] may have been the person that asked that we come up
with the numbers in terms of how the millage rate equated with the city. Until that point
it had not even been asked. It wasn’t in the formula. We were just moving along. I
asked that question to go back and to get those numbers. We still would have been
moving along with a formula and an amount had the question never been asked. That
should have been the first deal that should have been asked as to whether or not
[unintelligible] whether we should have done it. And that’s why I keep asking again to a
point is it cheaper outside of the contract to go back and to deal with some of this stuff?
We sent a signal out almost like the Statue of Liberty, bring me all of your trash, come all
of you who have something to put out, and then we got into the collecting of
refrigerators, sofas, chairs, everything that we could bring out of the woodwork. So now
we at a point to a point and putting that in a contract, with it being less to do to a point of
how we pick it up and get it done. You got a many out there, Harry Hartley, been picking
up trash for as long as I can remember. Mr. Harry. That knows how to keep this city
clean. And one time, some point in time we going to go back to asking some people who
used to do some things right to come back and give us some advice. I’ve said that about
cemeteries. Retired Harold Frost. Retired Willie Washington. All those folk that left the
city on those little meager pensions that they got, they were not necessarily the most
gifted in terms of education, but they knew how to get a lot of stuff done. And the only
thing I’m tired of [unintelligible]. I think we need to get some different numbers on what
we get in there and I guarantee you we probably could lease some of that equipment, pick
up some of that trash, operate it when we want to so [unintelligible] house you got to pick
up, you don’t have to go back and wait to decide whether it’s a contractor’s day to do it.
62
Now, that ain’t nothing new, gentlemen and ladies, that I brought to the table. I said that
when we started. I also told you I also wasn’t going out on that crusade cause I knew at a
point that numbers that we put in was not going hold for what we were promising the
general public that we were going to deal with. And I’m willing to help as much as
anybody else to work it out and do with it. I just think, though, that we need to before we
spring this on folk at one time, have some alternatives as to how they can pay and to a
point of not putting that impact out in one deal. If they been paying a lot less, cause I
hear [unintelligible] and if you’ve got a balance of how that goes off, but you know I
can’t see how you had one situation regardless of how broke it might have been, if its
formula for running a government was better structure, why now screw up two trying to
make the other one work right? Cause that seems the direction we heading. And that’s
the only thing I’m going to say about that. And I think some way we need to find a way
of working in these adjustments to deal with it because I think it’s just causing a lot of
problems that’s out there.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, we can have a work session about this issue and discuss
[unintelligible].
Mr. Grantham: Motion to receive as information.
Mr. Mayor: I’d just like to see us, Mr. Chairman, come back with some
alternatives other than what are on the floor right now.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’ve come back with recommendations to reduce services
and therefore reduce costs. The Commission didn’t want that. To keep it on the millage
rate or to take it off, the Commission didn’t want to do that. To bring it in house, we
couldn’t get enough votes to do that. We went out—we were going to go out to bids, we
didn’t want to do that. Let’s keep and extend the existing contract. Mr. Mayor, we’ve
been all over the road on all of this stuff and I for one am very frustrated at the lack of
consistency from one month to the next and as I said this body, as a whole, has been on
both sides of the road and we’re about to get in the ditch and I’m frustrated as chairman
of this committee, who has seen this through for the last two years, who has incorporated
all the lessons learned from the past five years of operation, or four years of operation,
who didn’t have a rate increase in solid waste collection for four years. [unintelligible]
minor rate adjustment. And my citizens in District 6 who are seeing a minor adjustment
are still getting the best service in the area for about $100 a year less. They’re not
complaining. I’m very frustrated with the fact and I’m saying this to the Commission, if
we don’t make a decision soon, the contractors are going to balk and walk out, and we’re
going to interruption of service, and you think you’ve got problems now with people not
wanting to pay for trash collection, $100 less than the same people in one county over
pay for one day a week. When they don’t pick up the trash. [unintelligible] Commission
about vacant lots, charging a fee for that. We didn’t want to do that. That would have
covered the cost of clean-up on some of these properties. I agree with you, we can bring
something from outside, some of our forces to do the neighborhood cleanups and other
things, but we didn’t want to reduce the service—I am very frustrated [unintelligible] my
responsibility to see that services continue. Mine, as the chairman and oversight in
63
addition to this body’s, and I take a great deal of ownership in making sure that we see
this through, but I can’t see it through if we keep going all over the road. Now if
anybody wants to take this issue to the public about what we’ve talked about and not
talked about and debate it in public, I’ll be well and ready to do that, cause I have a clear
conscience. We covered all of this. I want to help these people in the community. The
bottom line is you cannot run a city taking in less money than it costs to operate it for
very long and [unintelligible] bankrupt. That’s exactly where we’re at and if we don’t
change the course we’re on somehow, with some formula, some way, and the formulas
have all been on the table, more than once—I want some guidance from this body cause
one man doesn’t make it. It takes six of us to make it happen. And so far we’ve been 5-
5, 3-3-3, all over the road, and I’m telling you as a faithful member of this body I serve
the will of this Commission. If we don’t make a decision on this and go forward we will
have interruption of service and the citizens of this city are going to be very disturbed
about that and that will reinforce their belief that we can’t get the job done or a make a
decision. I’m just asking this body to come to a decision and I’ll follow it through like a
faithful soldier. But I’m tired of seeing staff and I’m tired of being beat on both sides.
And this old red neck’s hair is standing up on his neck about this. I’ve had enough.
Mr. Mayor: Well, it’s taken the one that’s off the top that’s in there cause you
worked hard on it. And I agree with you. But the only thing I’m saying is I hope we’ll
be open minded enough to the fact that we can accept criticism on parts of a plan and try
and fine tune it. I’m not saying—I’m going to borrow that from Henry Brigham, I don’t
think we have to thrown the baby out with the bath water, Andy, but I do think that there
are some flaws that need to be corrected in what we are talking about and that’s why I
think it’s out here to a point that those things that we can adjust and deal with it. Now
this is the one I’ve seen that has been most drastic to a point [unintelligible]
hypothetically speaking, I just heard to a point that we were going to talk about dealing
with tenants. Now we think we got a problem of sending bills to some places to folk who
rent, and particularly maybe in dense populations you may change tenants from every so
many months and if they don’t pay and you’ve got trash to add up before you can collect
it, you cut it off and then it mounts up. That was not in the formula that we had talked
about. I didn’t know we were going to see that about changing the [unintelligible]. I’m
hearing that today.
Mr. Cheek: That wasn’t the change [unintelligible] and this body decided that.
Mr. Mayor: So I mean that was not one that I thought [unintelligible] bring back
their best plan. Their best workable plan now. And how we got to that, remember, was
when we shot down the co-mingling of that thing on those utility bills and to put all of it
in there on top of water. That’s how it got back over here, to bring back this best plan.
And if you are going shift that out to a point from people who were paying within the tax
bill, regardless of how low, at least you were collecting that when you collected taxes.
You fixing to go now to a whole different group of folks that you going to depend on to
pay that’s either renting a house or renting an apartment. And I think you asking for a
bigger risk on collections when you do that. The only thing I’m saying is we got to
collect it, I agree with you, but let’s at least fine tune what we got, go on and vote on it
64
and support it, get criticized. Anytime you increase you’re going to do that. I’m just
saying I think it does not need to be as drastic on some areas as it is cause I think you run
the risk then of not collecting some of it at all. And that’s what we don’t want to do. I’d
much rather have it on somebody’s tax bill who will pay it and those who have a
consistent history of paying it. Don’t remove that item from your collection process and
then give it to some folk that may not pay it at all. That’s the only thing I’m asking y’all
to look at. Those are risks. All I’m saying.
Mr. Cheek: I’m going to second that motion to receive as information.
Mr. Mayor: All in favor of that motion will do so by the usual sign.
Mr. Handy, Mr. Williams, Ms. Beard and Mr. Colclough out.
Motion carries 6-0.
Mr. Cheek: Move to adjourn.
Mr. Mayor: Second on that? That’s non-debatable.
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Lena J. Bonner
Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and
correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Augusta Richmond County
Commission held on October 18, 2005.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
65