HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 18, 2006 ARC Commission meeting minutes.
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
April 18, 2006
The Augusta Commission met on April 18, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., the Hon. Deke
Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Holland, Smith, Colclough, Grantham, Hatney, Williams,
Beard, Cheek, Bowles and Brigham, members of Augusta Richmond County
Commission.
The Invocation was given by the Reverend Gregory Young, Pastor, Thankful
Baptist Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States was recited.
Mr. Mayor: Pastor, we’ve got something for you before you leave.
The Clerk: Pastor Young, on behalf of the Mayor and members of the
Commission, we’d like to thank you for being with us today and imparting
[unintelligible] on our behalf. [unintelligible] with us and honor you by naming you our
Pastor of the Day. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you very much. Okay, we will now move on to our
recognitions, Employee of the Month Award.
RECOGNITION(S)
Employee of the Month Award
A. Ms. Dianne Lariscy, Program Coordinator, Augusta Aquatics Center,
Augusta Recreation Department
The Clerk: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, we’d like to recognize Ms.
Dianne Lariscy, the program coordinator, the Augusta Aquatics Center, the Augusta
Recreation Department. Would you please join the Mayor, along with Recreation staffers
who would like to be a part of this presentation? [reading] Dear Mayor Copenhaver:
The Employee Recognition Committee has selected Dianne Lariscy as the March, 2006
Employee of the Month for the City of Augusta. Ms. Lariscy has been an employee with
the City of Augusta for 19 months. She is currently a program coordinator for the
Aquatics Center under Augusta Recreation and Parks Department. Ms. Lariscy was
nominated by her supervisor, Roger Wexler. Ms. Lariscy was nominated for organizing
and overseeing the CSRA High School Championship Swim Meet while coordinating
several other events at the Augusta Aquatics Center. She has also become a certified life
guard and assisted with the suitcase drive for Georgia Safe Homes, which collected over
300 suitcases and book bags for foster children. Dianne’s ability to synchronize
swimmers, spectators, parking, concessions, and personnel in a professional manner
shows that she has matured as a program coordinator. Her energy and excitement
1
continue to reinforce that the Aquatics Center is a great place to work and will continue
to be a showplace for the City of Augusta. The Committee felt based on her supervisor’s
recommendation and Ms. Lariscy’s dedicated and loyal service to the City of Augusta,
we would appreciate you in joining us in awarding Ms. Dianne Lariscy Employee of the
Month for the month of March. Thank you. [ends reading]
Mr. Mayor: On behalf of the City of Augusta it is with great pleasure that I
congratulate you today, recognize you as Employee of the Month for March, 2006. Your
contribution to your organization, Augusta Richmond Count government, and the citizens
of Augusta has earned you this recognition. I appreciate your willingness to go far
beyond the call of duty and your outstanding work ethic. You are truly an asset to the
Augusta Recreation and Parks Department and the citizens of Augusta, Georgia. Please
accept my person congratulations on this wonderful award. You are truly deserving of
this recognition. Sincerely yours, Deke Copenhaver, Mayor.
Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, I, too, want to congratulate
Dianne. I also want to congratulate Roger Wexler and Joanie Smith, division manager,
for the job they’ve done with Dianne. Dianne is a young professional, but one of many
young professionals to go with us old timers that are making a great blend, and
employees like Dianne are the future of the Recreation Department, and my
congratulations are out to you, Dianne. Thank you.
Ms. Lariscy: I would like to say that I think you come far because of the
leadership that you have, and up here are three people that have led me and helped make
me, mold me into my professional position that I’m in. There are three people who have
made me who I am and [unintelligible] that’s my grandmother, my mother, and my
brother-in-law, so I’d like to recognize them and the leadership that I have here. Thank
you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’re now going to go to agenda item number 41.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
41. Approve Resolution designating the week of April 17-April 23, 2006 in
observance of National Community Development Week.
The Clerk: We’d ask that Mr. Paul DeCamp, along with the HED staff, please
th
join the Mayor here at the podium in recognition of designating April 17 through the
rd
23 as Community Development Week, along with a proclamation in recognition of Fair
Housing Month.
Mr. Mayor: We need to go ahead and approve that?
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioners?
2
Mr. Grantham: Motion to approve.
Mr. Holland: Second.
Mr. Mayor: There’s a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk: In observance of the National Community Development Week, the
resolution that the Commission just passed:
thrd
[reading] Whereas, the week of April 17 through the 23 has been designated as
National Community Development Week, and the City of Augusta is a participant in the
CDBG Program which funds a myriad of social service, economic development, and
housing programs in this community; and
Whereas, in this community and in communities throughout the nation 32 years of
Community Development Block Grant Programs have developed a strong working
network of relationships between the local government, residents of neighborhoods, and
many non-profit agencies, to provide services and help make possible our commitment to
those neighborhoods; and
Whereas, this community recognizes that the Community Development Block
Grant Program is a partnership of federal, state and local governments, businesses, non-
profits, and community and efforts, and that the services funded by the federal CDBG
Program administered by the local government and often delivered by local non-profit
organizations relies heavily on the dedication and good will of our combined efforts;
Therefore, but it resolved that during the National Community Development
Week in 2006 this community will give special thanks and recognition to participants
who work hard and devotion to low and moderate income residents to help ensure the
quality and effectiveness of the Community Development Block Grant Program. [ends
reading]
Mr. Holland, would you join the Mayor? He’d like for you to join him as
chairman of the Administrative Services Committee, which has oversight over the HED
Department.
In recognition of Fair Housing month:
th
[reading] Whereas, April, 2006 marks the 38 anniversary of the passage of the
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, commonly known as the Federal Fair Housing
Act; and
Whereas, the City of Augusta Richmond County has prohibited discrimination in
housing since 1968; and
3
Whereas, equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, color, religion, sex,
disability, familiar status, or national origin is a fundamental goal of our nation and state;
and
Whereas, access to the housing of an individual’s choice is an important
component of this goal, because housing is such a critical quality of life issue the right to
choose where we live is an important right to equal those of education and employment
opportunity; and
Whereas, where we live determines where our children go to school, where our
friends are, and the critical benefits we enjoy; and
Whereas, where we live determines the extent of our exposure to crime and drugs
and the quality of health care we receive in emergencies; and
Whereas, the laws of this nation and our state seeks to ensure such equality of
choice for all transactions involving housing; and
Whereas, only with cooperation, commitment and support of our residents of the
state can barriers to this and other aspects of equality of opportunity for all be removed;
and
Now, therefore, I, Deke Copenhaver, Mayor of the City of Augusta, do hereby
proclaim the month of April, 2006 as Fair Housing Month in Augusta, Georgia, and urge
every citizen of our great state to support and endorse the practice of Fair Housing and to
ask all to join in reaffirming the obligation and commitment of fair housing opportunity
for all.
In witness whereof, I have unto set my hand and caused the seal of Augusta,
Georgia to be affixed this day. [ends reading]
Mr. DeCamp: I just want to say thank you very much. On behalf of the hard
working staff of the HED Department I’d just like to say that we really appreciate the
continued support of the Mayor and this Commission and the community at large.
[unintelligible] individuals [unintelligible] throughout this community that have
supported and participated in the Block Grant Program over the years and it couldn’t
have been done without them. We’re very grateful for that and we thank you very much
for this.
Mr. Holland: As Chairman of Administrative Services Committee, on behalf of
the members of our committee, Mr. Colclough, Dr. Hatney, Mr. Cheek, we would like to
take this opportunity to also commend each and every one of you for the job that you are
doing [unintelligible] circumstances of this particular time and hope that in the future
[unintelligible] continue to do the job that you are doing. Congratulations to each and
every one of you [unintelligible]. Thank you so very much.
Mr. DeCamp: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Now moving on to the delegations.
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS
4
B. Ms. Elizabeth Vukovich
RE: Garbage Fees
Mr. Mayor: Could you please state your name and address for the record, ma’am,
and please keep it to five minutes.
Ms. Vukovich: Elizabeth Vukovich, 209 Belair Road, Belvedere, South Carolina.
I’m handing something out, try to make it quicker, because I knew the time would be
short. Basically, we own two properties, one on Kissingbower Road and one on –
Mr. Colclough: Would you talk in the mic, please? Thank you.
Ms. Vukovich: We own two properties, one on Kissingbower Road, one on
Minor Place in Augusta. And in September when we received our tax bill I noticed that
we were charged for garbage service fees, that the properties were empty and vacant.
th
And I paid the taxes. And immediately on October the 11 I sent a notice to Avis Brown
at the Solid Waste Collections Department requesting that those two properties be
investigated and the fees be taken away, that the properties were vacant. In December I
still hadn’t had any response and so I called and they said that they had had a lot of
requests and that it would be taken in the order that it was received. In February I
received two [unintelligible] notices from Jerry Saul’s office, which was getting read to
ruin my credit, and so I called the office and they told me that I would have to speak with
Ms. Brown and they made an appointment for me and she called me back and she said
that she would look into it. She called me a day later telling me that they were sorry, that
it had been overlooked, she didn’t know what the problem was but they would get a
resolution to it. Then she called me back and said there was nothing she could do, I
would have to speak to Mark Johnson. I left a message; he didn’t return my calls. Then I
called [unintelligible] to find out what I should do. He told me to call Martha King at
Augusta Cares, which I did. Augusta Cares, she was very nice, she did everything she
could. Again, Mark Johnson never returned my call. I finally called back in March and I
told them if I didn’t get a response I was going to call the Mayor and get a resolution to
it. That very afternoon I got two calls, one from Glenda something or other, Glover. Ms.
Glover, Mr. Johnson’s assistant. And then I got a call a few minutes later from Mr.
Johnson himself. And then after that, he called me two days later and told me that there
was really nothing that he could do, to call my Commissioner, which was Mr. Holland.
And I did get in touch with Mr. Holland. He was very nice to speak with me but I found
out he’d only been a Commissioner for three months. So it went back. I called Augusta
Cares again. It went back again to Mr. Johnson. So I called Mr. Johnson because Mr.
Holland said that he would speak Mr. Johnson, so I called to see what had progressed on
that conversation and Mr. Johnson said that he had never spoke to him, it wouldn’t do
any good, it would take the vote of six Commissioners in order to change the situation.
The idea is—Kissingbower—the Minor Place is taken care of. The Kissingbower, they
took one year [unintelligible] still charging for one year. That property, we bought at the
tax sale. You have to wait several years before you want to put any money into it.
We’ve now put about $20,000 into that property, starting as of a year ago. And we have
to have the electric and water on in order to do the repairs to fix the property. And they
5
never supplied us with the service but yet they what to charge for it. And that’s what I
feel is the injustice and that it should be taken away. In July of this year we’re going to
go ahead and have the property rented and then it’ll be all resolved. But I feel that the
garbage fees should be taken away. There’s an exception to every rule. That’s it.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson?
th
Mr. Johnson: I would agree the complaint came in on the 11 of October. I
th
approved one adjustment and we denied one adjustment on the 24. So—and in speaking
with Ms. Vukovich, I’d already apologized for the time lag. We dropped the ball in
communicating that to her. And so, you know, just in our conversations I believe I was
apologetic in the fact that it took that long.
Ms. Vukovich: Yes, you were. That’s in my notes.
Mr. Johnson: So the end result is the way that this system was set up originally
by the Commission five years ago, which actually rolled forward into this contract,
was—and this is this history. The Commission wanted single-family dwellings to have
garbage service, to help keep the community clean. The way that the resolution was
drafted five years ago and it rolled forward was that if a single-family dwelling has
electricity and/or water and it’s a—quote—livable dwelling, then it gets charged for
service. And that’s been the past practice over the last six years. So with one property
we talked to Georgia Power, it did not have power since ’99 so therefore she got bills she
shouldn’t have. We corrected that. The other one, we talked to Gloria at Georgia Power,
and they had power. So the discussions, while it appeared that it was very direct, I don’t
have the authority to change the resolution that was voted on by this Commission. And it
would take an act of this body to change that. So I directed her, you know, which got us
here today. So the end result being the way the resolution is for all citizens, if they have
power, if they have water, and it’s a livable dwelling, they get billed. And if this group
wants to redirect some of that, then that’s the direction. I don’t have the authority, based
on what we’ve already said.
Ms. Vukovich: May I say one more thing? It was not livable during 2005. The
house was in disrepair. It didn’t have heating, it didn’t have—we had to have all that,
and plus I took the garbage out to Gate 5 and they charged me for it because I didn’t have
any trash pickup. And the rest of it I had to take to North Augusta.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I guess my comments would be to Mark Johnson, first
of all, there has been exceptions to the rules done before, but somebody should have
brought it to this body. He has no power to change anything, I agree. But the power he
did have was to contact you earlier. The other power was to bring it to this body, through
committee, or even to the Commissioner that sits in that district that hadn’t been there
very long, but came in working, so that should have been—something should have
happened. But I’m just, I’ve got a problem when we have had an exception to the rules
6
before and there always going to be some. This resident, I think you are in South
Carolina but you own property in Augusta so you paying taxes on that property.
Ms. Vukovich: We have several properties in Augusta.
Mr. Williams: I guess what I’m saying, Mr. Mayor, I understand where the
[unintelligible] comes in but I think that our folks should have done their job a little bit
faster. I don’t think she had to threaten to call the Mayor’s office before somebody
finally called her back. And then when they called her back said there’s nothing I can do.
I think what should have been done was to address that issue. And I understand Mr.
Johnson got some headaches out there, but he ain’t the only one that got headaches.
Now, if you think that’s a headache, you ain’t touched it yet until you get up here, Mark.
There’s calls 24/7. So I’m thinking that, you know, it’s here now. We need to address it.
I think the constituent is right in what she’s saying but I think our people should have
responded a little bit better, a little bit more timely. [unintelligible] there’s a lot of time
period, Mr. Mayor. That’s all I want to comment on, the amount of time it happened and
what could have been done and didn’t get to be done. Do I need to make a motion to
approve that?
Mr. Mayor: I guess you would if you—ma’am, just to clarify, what are you
looking for the body to do in this situation?
th
Ms. Vukovich: March 16, that was my final day that I had to pay without
th
paying late penalties. I went down on March 16 and paid it and I just want that to be
refunded to me.
Mr. Mayor: The late penalty?
Ms. Vukovich: No, I didn’t pay late penalties. I put a copy of the bill in there. It
was—what I want is my collection fee that I paid. I want it refunded because I think it
should have been waived in the beginning. But I went ahead and paid it because I didn’t
want to have my credit [unintelligible].
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson?
Mr. Johnson: She wants an adjustment for one year’s service at $195 for 1921
Kissingbower Road.
Ms. Vukovich: It was a little bit more than 195, but that’s all right. I’ll be happy
with that.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Thank you. What is the recommendation from you, Mr. Johnson,
for the landfill? We have something in place that you have to go by and by you having to
abide by that resolution then I can’t see us coming in here and every meeting we have to
7
change a $195 bill on a situation that we have six years ago that a majority of us sitting
up here did not have anything to do with. So if that’s the case then I think what we
should do is have you come in with a recommendation and not us sit up here and have to
deliberate over such a minor issue.
Mr. Johnson: And I would concur. It was set up five years ago. It was
reaffirmed as of January 1 [unintelligible] new contract and it’s going to be very difficult
to come in with what you guys want consistently. I mean we need to establish a policy
and move forward and hold true so that we don’t consistently—we understand the
problem with trailer parks. Are you in or you out? Some we exempted and some we
didn’t. And it generated a lot of long term problems for us because the end result was if
we didn’t like the policy we came down, we shared our story, and then depending on who
was there, we either got exempted or we didn’t. And so I think collectively as a body we
need to come up with something that we can stand behind consistently through the next
contract.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney?
Mr. Hatney: My question is, is the facility still owned?
Ms. Vukovich: Yes, I still own it, yes.
Mr. Hatney: And my concern is that—
Ms. Vukovich: I’m not concerned with the taxes. It’s just the collection fee.
Mr. Hatney: As long as the water and sewer [unintelligible], I’m not sure
[unintelligible] rest of it. The ordinance call for [unintelligible]. We can’t violate our
own ordinance.
Ms. Vukovich: May I say why they didn’t provide the service but they knew how
to charge? And also back in 2001 I was charged on a piece of property—
Mr. Mayor: Ma’am, through the Chair, please. But go ahead.
Ms. Vukovich: Okay. I was charged in 2001 on this very property when we first
acquired it and it had to be taken off and I had a headache getting it off then but I finally
got it off. It was an empty home. Doors busted out, everything. And then in 2001 we
had a piece of land on Boykin Road and we were charged also for that. And I had to
fight to get—I paid it and I had to fight to get my money back. And like I said, they
didn’t provide the service, the house was not livable, we had to have those services on in
order to do the repairs. We’re trying to beautify Augusta and here we’re getting
penalized for it.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson?
8
Mr. Johnson: I go back to—service was offered and she said please don’t deliver
a cart.
Ms. Vukovich: That was this year [unintelligible] March.
Mr. Johnson: But the other problem that I have is if we exempt now, she’s going
to come—not she, but just in general that same citizen would come back next year.
Because the power and utilities are still on. So that fee would still be reoccurring.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, thank you. To shine a little light on this, the reason that
we used the measuring stick of having utilities on in these buildings as an indication of
availability for occupancy was because of the high number of rental properties we have,
primarily in south Augusta, and if we allow exemptions—and while I feel for the
situation, when we start allowing exemptions because it’s not occupied we’re going to
have this situation occur to where—as it did in the past—many of the people that rent the
properties will not come and tell us that they are occupied and then trash will start
collecting on many of these properties, as they did in the past, and that is the very reason
why we said if the power and utilities are on, it is an [unintelligible] structure. Now,
there’s, I’m sure, some gray areas in your case where it’s in the process of being
renovated, but the City as a whole has a solid waste fund that need to be solvent, one, and
two, we will set a dangerous precedent by changing this because again, I’ll tell you, I had
a large number of rental properties in the Boykin-Travis Road area that have cleaned up
substantially because there’s no incentive now because it has to come out. You have to
pay it. And so that puts the burden back on the property owner to rent the property. And
the City has clean streets, nicer looking homes, and the renters are having to deal with
just renting their properties. So I’m concerning about any changes that would set a
precedent at this time.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, based on the information received today, I’m
going to make a motion we deny the request.
Mr. Brigham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: That goes back to my first statement. It should have been brought
by somebody from that department to this body. Mr. Grantham brought a good point.
9
We should have had this come through committee and had something done versus
coming now. I mean I think had we done that, we probably wouldn’t get to this point.
Ms. Vukovich: May I say one thing? Why did they not have to provide me
service but they know how to blanket everybody? They know how to blanket everybody.
They blanket everybody with the tax bill and then it’s up to the burden of the taxpayer to
go and see whether it’s actually had garbage or not. And how can you have garbage
service at a home where there’s no one living? And secondly, this property, it’s on my
taxes, I’m going to pay it every year. I told you I’ll have it rented in July. That’s half a
year garbage service which I would agree to have on my bill. It’s not going to have
anything to do with my tenant or renter. This is upon the taxpayer. And I would have it.
And the only reason I’m coming here now is, one, I didn’t get the service.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now
vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Holland and Mr. Williams abstain.
Motion carries 8-2.
Ms. Vukovich: Which means I have to pay the garbage service.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. Mr. Shepard, I believe you have an item that you
wanted added?
Mr. Shepard: Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission,
BellSouth has approached my office and asked that I ask you to add a matter on. This is
an easement which they are asking to have on City property on Peachtree Road.
ADDENDUM
72. Motion to approve an option for acquisition of easement to BellSouth.
Mr. Shepard: They want to put additional equipment on that site which will
enhance the phone service to the Hill area and west Augusta. They are asking for an
option to purchase. If they exercise the option they will pay the City $3,000. I would ask
that the matter be added and approved.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney?
Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor, to our Attorney. Is this a matter of life and death?
We’ve asked everybody else to stop bringing us stuff here the very day they want us to
act on it. I think all of us have to play by the same rules. Is it a matter of life and death?
Can they live to the next meeting?
Mr. Shepard: I’m sure they can.
Mr. Hatney: I move it be postponed until the next meeting.
10
Mr. Mayor: All right, sir.
Mr. Speaker: I second that motion.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion—
Mr. Cheek: Clarification.
Mr. Grantham: Don’t need for—
Mr. Cheek: Is that to defer to the next committee, the appropriate committee or
the next Commission meeting?
Mr. Mayor: I think that—
Mr. Hatney: Next Commission meeting.
Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] request because it does not have unanimous approval
to be added to the agenda. Okay, Ms. Bonner, let’s go to item number 58.
The Clerk:
58. Presentation by Ms. Lola Waltower regarding a sewer tie in to her home.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham?
Mr. Brigham: Can we deal with the Planning and Zoning items so some of these
people can leave?
Mr. Mayor: Well, Mr. Brigham, we’ve already moved on to this one but then we
will deal with those shortly thereafter.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, please, let’s start at the top of the agenda and work
down it.
Mr. Hicks: Mr. Mayor, if you’d like, I can comment on the situation with Ms.
Waltower if she’s not here. Oh, Ms. Waltower.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Ms. Waltower: My name is Lola Waltower. I live at 1935 Lionel Street, Augusta
30906.
11
Mr. Hicks: Speak into the mic.
Ms. Waltower: My name is Lola Waltower. I live at 1935 Lionel Street, south
Augusta. The problem that I have is an issue with tap, tie in to the sewage. I paid the
fee, the appropriate fee to have, to be tied in to the City, and I had a problem. The City
tie-in is too low so—actually it’s not low enough. I have a low grade. My property have
a low grade so therefore it’s not sufficient enough to give me a proper tie-in, a good tie-
in. I spoke with the City about it and they told me that there wasn’t nothing they can do
about it but they refund my money and that was that, but it was not good enough for me.
So I spoke with Mr. Max, director I believe, Max Hicks, and he came out and he did what
he did [unintelligible] brought it up as high as I could. But it’s still not good enough for
the inspector to properly give it a good inspection. So he said that as long as you spoke
with someone, Mr. Hicks, and he’s going to be responsible, but he was not adamant about
giving it a passing inspection. So Mr. Hicks did do that. Now, in the meantime my
plumber—first of all before we did this, spoken with Mr. Hicks, they informed me that it
was fine, there was nothing wrong with the tie-in, that if we have a problem it was
because my plumber would not be doing it right, if he did a problem it wouldn’t be no
problem. However, that was not the case. It is a problem. So after that we hired a
plumber and the plumber did his job. The problem is now that even though I had some
work done and the plumber did everything, it’s not sufficient, it’s not good enough, the
inspector said the same thing. But I do have a flow. It’s not a proper flow but it’s a flow.
And what I’m here today is to say that if there’s a problem in the future because of this,
who is going to be responsible? That’s what I want to know. Because there is a
possibility that there will be a problem. It’s not sufficient.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hicks?
Mr. Hicks: Thank you. Ms. Waltower is right. When she first contacted our
department and our fellows went out and looked at the sewer tap, the tap at the manhole
was a little too high so we went back out there. I told them we’ve got to try to do
something. There was two places that it could potentially be tied to the sewer but the one
that was put in for that home was coming out of a manhole. So we went out and we
lowered the tap at the manhole as much as we could. We lowered it by about three to
four inches. Lowered it there. It’s that [unintelligible]. Then we went back up in Ms.
Waltower’s yard and uncovered her sewer lines coming from her house, the original part,
then the slab on grade, where they intersection at the septic tank. We got elevation there
and elevation at the adjusted sewer tap coming out of the manhole. Then we calculated
the grade and we told the plumber it would need to be a 6” line because the minimum
grade that we had there was .67%. That’d be almost 7/10 of a foot in a hundred feet and
what they like to have is—I think what License & Inspection likes to have is more
clearance than that. But it does indeed meet. If you look at your little handy-dandy
sewer flow gauge a .67% on a 6” line will give 2’ per second sewage flow, which is the
proper sewer flow by state standards. So while it is flatter than they and we would like to
see, it will work. Now, I’m saying that cause there’s many a slip twixt the cup and lip.
But we put a clean-out down at the manhole and there’s a clean-out at Ms. Waltower’s
area. We also had the plumber put in a backwater valve so that the sewage flow would
12
not come back in and go into her house with it being that flat. So that’s all we can say
about that right now. And I don’t know if Ms. Waltower—is it giving you any difficulty
when you flush? Okay. The difficulty is that the plumbing—License & Inspection was a
little leery of it, and I don’t blame them. It is a flatter grade than we like to see, but that
line was extended before—well, it was immediately after consolidation I think and the 8”
sewer line was brought at a minimum grade all the way up to her house. We got it as flat
as we could, brought it to that house, and it is tight all the way. But it should work by
engineering standards. Of course, by the way things go and the way things come flush
down into the toilet sometimes things get clogged up. But it should work. That’s all I
can tell you. And we did all we could. I’m not going to get—to make sure—we wanted,
we did everything we could to make sure that it worked and get Ms. Waltower a tap that
would work. Now, if it should give her difficulty then there’s a line that is along a street
that parallels Gordon Highway, but to get the line from her house to there would be
longer and we’d have to have a little aerial crossing across a ditch. And while there are
those that exist in our system we don’t really like for it to be that way because anytime
you’ve got a sewer pipe spanning an open ditch you’ve got a problem of it getting broken
and debris hitting it in a storm so we’d rather try it this way to make sure it’s going to
work before we look into any other way. So that’s a report as to what we’ve done.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I just want to know—I think Ms. Waltower is looking
for some answer as to what if something happens, cause we already admitting that it’s not
working like it should work. And it possibly may not have no problems. But if it does,
having the problems that she had already, right there off of Gordon Highway, next to
[unintelligible], her house sits low. But we trying to get people to get off the system and
get onto mandatory system with sewer. But what if it doesn’t—I mean—and I think she
understand the normal circumstances from a child or somebody putting something in
there that may cause normal problems, but what happens if it doesn’t flow and it comes
th
to be a problem [unintelligible]? Now, we got other—I can think about 15 Street at the
church over there, Max, we had to put in a pump. We come in there and it sits low, same
process, we had to put a pump in in order to get it out. But we had to put that pump in.
And I think she’s right now, cause if next month, next year, we done forgot about it and
another set of group of Commissioners up here and she be standing there looking at folks
who be looking strange back at her. So—
Mr. Hicks: That’s why I was asking if it was flushing right now, then that means
it’s working. That means it’s got the grade, it will carry the water away, will carry the
waste away. Just like you said, you’re going to have your normal problems with any
household sewer, so we’ll just how that works. And it is at a flatter grade than License &
Inspection likes to see, but engineering-wise from the measurements and [unintelligible]
we took on the lines, it will work. We made up a sketch and gave it to her plumber, told
him if you lay it like this it will work. And so he did and it is working. But I know Ms.
Waltower is concerned inasmuch as someone told her well, we don’t like to see it that
way. I can understand that, but if it should give excessive problems then we can go to
13
that back and see if we can get a tie-in off of that area. That’s the only thing I know to do
other than a pump, and we like to avoid a pump on a residential service if we can.
Mr. Mayor: Is everybody—are you okay with that?
Mr. Hicks: Just let me tell Ms. Waltower through you, Mr. Mayor, that we will
keep an eye on it and if she has problems she can give a call and we’ll certainly get right
on out and give it the same attention we did to get the tie-in made.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do we need a motion to receive?
Mr. Cheek: Motion to receive as information.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s move on to the consent agenda. And seeing as we’ve got a
bear of an agenda, are there any items to be added to the consent agenda? I’ll let you
read through it first.
The Clerk: Our consent agenda consists of items 1 through 21, items 1
through 21.
For the benefit of any objectors to our planning petitions on our consent
agenda, when the petition is read would you please signify your objections by raising
your hand?
PLANNING
1. Z-06-27 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Mary Rebecca Cibak 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 containing .30 acres and is known under the present numbering system as
1937 Roys Lane. (Tax Map 133-3 Parcel 120) DISTRICT 6
2. Z-06-29 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Michelle Hill, on behalf of
Mitchell Shaw, Sr., 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 containing .25 acres and is known under the
present numbering system as 2714 Glenn Hills Drive. (Tax Map 96-1 Parcel 134)
DISTRICT 5
3. Z-06-37 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Steve Green requesting a change
of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1E (One-family
Residential) affecting property containing .36 acres and is known under the present
14
numbering system as 2513 and 2515 Dover Street. (Tax map 97-3 Map 29)
DISTRICT 6
4. Z-06-39 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that a parking plan be
submitted and approved by the Planning Commission before a Certificate of
Occupancy is issued; a petition by Tara Johnson, on behalf of Donald H. Skinner,
requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone P-1
(Professional) affecting property containing .4 acres and is known under the present
numbering system as 1946 Kissingbower Road (Tax Map 71-3 Parcel 137)
DISTRICT 5
5. Z-06-40 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that there be no access to
Simkins Lane; a petition by Jeffery Harris requesting a Special Exception to
establish an inert fill area per Section 24-2 (a) (18) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing
approximately 148 acres known under the present numbering system as 1710 and
1768 Dixon Airline Road and 3650 and 3650-A Simpkins Lane. (Tax Map 145
Parcels 31.07 and 33 and Tax Map 158 Parcels 1 and 4) DISTRICT 8
7. Z-06-30 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Willie Mae Jackson, on behalf of
Susie Jones, 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 containing .24 acres and is known under the
present numbering system as 2459 Dublin Drive. (Tax Map 94 Parcel 49)
DISTRICT 4
8. Z-06-31 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Mills Briggs, on behalf of Rebecca
Rice, 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 containing contains .70 acres and is known under the
present numbering system as 1927 George Road. (Tax Map 71-3 Part of Parcel 50)
DISTRICT 5
9. Z-06-33 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that no building may take
place closer than 185 feet for the right-of-way of Maddox Drive; a petition by ATC
Development Corp., on behalf of Mary U. Sheppard, requesting a change of zoning
from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-1E (One-family Residential) affecting
property containing approximately 4.74 acres located on the east right-of-way line
of Maddox Drive, 915 feet, more or less, north of Wrightsboro Road. (Tax Map 40
Parcel 30) DISTRICT 3
10. Z-06-35 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Channika Daniels, on behalf of
James Warren, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-MH (Manufactured
Home Residential) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) affecting property
containing .54 acres and is known under the present numbering system as 2429
Turkey Trail Drive. (Tax Map 166 Parcel 168) DISTRICT 6
15
11. Z-06-36 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Jack N. Coley, on behalf of the
Curtis Baptist Foundation, requesting a change of zoning from Zone B-1
(Neighborhood Business) to Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property
containing approximately 11.4 acres and is known under the present numbering
system as 1128 Marks Church Road. (Tax Map 31 Parcel 4.1) DISTRICT 3 with the
following conditions: 1. Use of property limited to uses permitted under the present
zoning (B-1 with conditions) or the following uses permitted in the B-2 (General
Business) zone: • Golf driving range • Boat dealership • Funeral home • New car
dealership with incidental functions; parts sales, service, repair and used • car sales
• Mini-warehouses 2. A 50 foot undisturbed natural buffer adjoining Kingston
Subdivision with an 8 foot fence or wall constructed of masonry, solid board or
chain link (with slats) on the inner side of the buffer; 3. No access to Dominica
Drive; 4. The maximum height of any sign on the property shall be 50 feet; 5.
Developer to pay for any improvements within the right of way deemed necessary to
accommodate development that are not part of the GA DOT project; and 6.
Illumination: • All building wall lighting on walls facing Kingston Subdivision shall
be directed down the building, no outward; • All freestanding lighting located within
100 feet of Kingston Subdivision shall be full cutoff lighting that does not shine onto
Kingston properties. There shall be no more than 5 freestanding lights within 100
feet of Kingston Subdivision; • All other lighting shall be directed away from the
area within 100 feet from Kingston Subdivision.
The Clerk: Those are all of our planning petitions on our consent agenda; are
there any objectors to those petitions as read? There are no objectors, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do we have anything to be—items to be added to the consent
agenda or items to be pulled for discussion? Commissioner Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, yes. Under the Public Services regular agenda items,
beginning with agenda item number 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 and 36 to be
placed on the consent agenda. It is my understanding that all of the applicants are present
for the beer and wine license and I request the body to accept this as consent.
The Clerk: Did you add item 35, you said?
Mr. Grantham: I did.
The Clerk: Okay. That’s a discussion item. You want it added?
Mr. Grantham: No, take that that off.
The Clerk: Take it out? Okay.
Mr. Williams: Ms. Bonner, could you run those number back by one more time?
16
Mr. Grantham: It would be item 26 through 36, excluding 35.
PUBLIC SERVICES
26. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 -17: A request by Han Kie Min for a
retail Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Walton Way Supermarket
located at 1931 Walton Way. District 1. Super District 9.
27. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 18: A request by Anna E. Murray for
a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Lee
Opel, Inc. DBA Big Tree Package Store located at 2525 Washington Rd. District 7.
Super District 10.
28. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 19: A request by Mohammad Javed
Abdul Aziz for a retail package Beer license to be used in connection with ASNA,
Inc. located at 2700 Peach Orchard Rd. District 2. Super District 9.
29. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 20: A request by Jinsuk Ha for a
retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Coliseum Amoco
located at 801 Walton Way. District 1. Super District 9.
30. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 21: A request by Kun Kuk Lee for a
retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with J. C. Food Mart
located at 1635 Gordon Hwy. District 2. Super District 9.
31. New Ownership Application: A N. 06 - 22: A request by Ini Suk Yu for a
retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Suzy's Place
located at 1377 Wrightsboro Rd. District 1. Super District 9.
32. Motion to approve an amendment to the lease at Lake Olmstead Stadium
between Augusta, Ga. and Augusta Professional Baseball, LLC (Ripken Baseball) to
provide for the disbursement of SPLOST V funds for stadium improvements.
33. Discussion: A request by Heather Williams for a Therapeutic Massage
License to be used in connection with Augusta Massage Therapy located at 1433
Stovall St. District 1. Super District 9.
34. Discussion: A request by Donna B. Smith for a Therapeutic Massage license
to be used in connection with Augusta Massage Therapy located 1433 Stovall St.
District 1. Super District 9.
36. Approve request for Taxiway "C:"/Apron General Aviation Parking
Expansion Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $241,542.15.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull item 10 for discussion and refer item 49
and 50 from Public Safety back to committee.
PLANNING
10. Z-06-35 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Channika Daniels, on behalf of
James Warren, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-MH (Manufactured
Home Residential) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) affecting property
containing .54 acres and is known under the present numbering system as 2429
Turkey Trail Drive. (Tax Map 166 Parcel 168) DISTRICT 6
17
The Clerk: What items were you referring back, Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: 49 and 50.
PUBLIC SAFETY
49. Motion to approve the purchase of a new Presentation, Sound and Voting
System. (No recommendation from Public Safety Committee April 10, 2006)
50. Motion to approve the purchase of radar units for the Georgia State Patrol
subject to the Administrator identifying a funding source other than contingency.
(No recommendation from Public Safety Committee April 10, 2006)
Mr. Williams: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: I’d like to have some discussion on item 50, Mr. Cheek, if we
could.
Mr. Cheek: That would be something we could have at committee,
Commissioner, and expedite the meeting if that’s okay. And then we could bring it back
to the full Commission for additional discussion. We’ll be discussing it three times
otherwise.
Mr. Williams: I think we discussed it three times already but I ain’t got no
problem with doing it again.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: If we can get it to the body to go ahead and approve that.
Mr. Mayor: Any further items to be added to the consent agenda? Commissioner
Smith?
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. From Engineering Services I’d like to add
51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 59, 60.
ENGINEERING SERVICES
51. Motion to authorize the purchase and acceptance of property located off of
Bennock Mill Road in connection with the 80500 Spirit Creek Collection System
and Force Main Project.
53. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property # 139-0-231-00-0
3522 Barker Drive, which is owned by Derrick McClusky for 4,171 Sq. Feet for a
Permanent Easement and 4,171 Sq. Feet for a Temporary Easement. AUD Project:
Horsepen Sanitary Sewer, Phase 2A.
18
54. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property # 139-0-245-00-0
3102 Blackmon Court, which is owned by Emma Lou Phelps for 4,619 Sq. Feet for a
Permanent Easement and 4,666 Sq. Feet for a Temporary Easement. AUD Project:
Horsepen Sanitary Sewer, Phase 2A.
55. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property # 111-0-015-00-0
3108 Mike Padgett Hwy and #111-0-017-00-0 3110 Mike Padgett Hwy, which is
owned by William A. N. Sweat and Frankie A. Sweat for 1,276.928 Sq. Feet for a
Permanent Easement and 975.061 Sq. Feet for a Temporary Easement of # 111-0-
015-00-0 3108 Mike Padgett Hwy and 1,479.574 Sq. Feet for a Permanent Easement
and 1,104.526 Sq. Feet for a Temporary Easement of #111-0-017-00-0 3110 Mike
Padgett Hwy. AUD Project: Horsepen Sanitary Sewer, Phase 2A.
56. Motion to approve and accept Agreement with Acsential, Inc. for Corporate
Communications Plan for Augusta Utilities Department.
59. Approve Award of Construction Contract to Blair Construction, Inc. in the
amount of $427,123.51 to be funded from the project construction account for
Paving Dirt Roads Phase VIII, (Contract I: Whisnant Drive and Hauchman Hill
Road) CPB # 323-04- 200823808 as requested by the Engineering Department,
subject to receipt of signed contracts and proper bonds.
60. Approve the creation of a top ten list of road and drainage projects for the
purposes of tracking and regular status reporting on major work in the city.
(Requested by Commissioner Cheek)
Mr. Smith: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull number 5 for discussion.
PLANNING
5. Z-06-40 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that there be no access to
Simkins Lane; a petition by Jeffery Harris requesting a Special Exception to
establish an inert fill area per Section 24-2 (a) (18) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing
approximately 148 acres known under the present numbering system as 1710 and
1768 Dixon Airline Road and 3650 and 3650-A Simpkins Lane. (Tax Map 145
Parcels 31.07 and 33 and Tax Map 158 Parcels 1 and 4) DISTRICT 8
Mr. Mayor: All right. Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull item 14 and 15.
The Clerk: 14 and 15?
Mr. Williams: 14 and 15. And 18 I’d like to get some clarification on.
PUBLIC SAFETY
14. Motion to approve the leasing of Old Fire Station #12 to the Board of Health
for the purpose of housing equipment for their mosquito control program.
(Approved by Public Safety Committee April 10, 2006)
19
FINANCE
15. Motion to accept and approve the changes and transfers as listed on the
schedule including the following to cover the negative cash balances through the end
of 2005: $242,000 from General Fund for the Municipal Golf Course, $266,000 from
the General Fund for the Newman Tennis Center and $1.2M from Urban Services
and $3,130,000 from the General Fund for the Transit Department relative to the
2005 Audit. (Approved by Finance Committee April 10, 2006)
FINANCE
18. Motion to approve cancellation of tax accounts on Land Bank owned
property. (Approved by Finance Committee April 10, 2006)
Mr. Mayor: Is there anything else to be—items to be added to or items to be
pulled for discussion from the consent agenda?
The Clerk: Could we add item 70?
OTHER BUSINESS
70. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission
held on March 29, 2006 and the called meeting held on April 10, 2006.
The Clerk: And item 64, can we do 64?
OTHER BUSINESS
64. Motion to ratify the authorization letter dated March 29, 2006 relative to the
execution of the contract between Augusta, Ga. and ANIC for the purchase of
Sunset Villa Apartments.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Grantham: Commissioner Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Could we, could we request—ask Commissioner Williams if he
would postpone 71 based on the fact that Mr. Russell is not here and that I think he would
be the person that we would need to ask to give us that report, that we would need from
him, since we had charged him with the approval and the information that would be
coming from Heery.
OTHER BUSINESS
71. Discuss Heery International's work authorization and the associated dollar
amount paid to date. (Requested by Commissioner Williams)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
20
Mr. Williams: I talked with the interim, the assistant administrator, Robert
Leverett. He’s got that information for me. I made sure. I called the office on time and
make sure Mr. Russell going to be on vacation, be out, but I would love to discuss that
just a little bit, to get some information. This is not the first time that we asked for the
information on this account and what’s going on so Mr. Leverett went through a great
deal of work to get that.
Mr. Grantham: That’s no problem.
Mr. Williams: I think he’s got enough.
Mr. Grantham: Don’t pull it.
Mr. Mayor: We’ll leave it on. Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, can we look at item 47 for the consent agenda?
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
47. Approve Early Retirement of Mr. James Thomas under the 1977 Pension
Plan.
Mr. Cheek: 51?
Mr. Grantham: Already got it.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, that’s already on there.
The Clerk: 47? Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Is there anything further to be added to or pulled for discussion? Mr.
Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I’d ask that 69 regarding the necessary of 991 and enhanced 911
charges, the annual resolution be adopted, that be added to the consent.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
69. Consider Resolution to reaffirm the necessity of the 911 and enhanced 911
charges.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Anything further to be added to or pulled for discussion?
Okay, Ms. Bonner, would you like to read those back to us?
The Clerk: Yes, sir. The consent agenda, items 1 through 21; item 5 was
pulled for discussion; item 10, item 14, 15 and 18 were pulled for discussion; added
to the consent agenda item 26—
and for the benefit of any objectors to these alcohol
21
petitions, Mr. Mayor, if I could, please, could I please the read the application and the
location for any objectors present?
Mr. Mayor: Please.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
26. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 -17: A request by Han Kie Min for a
retail Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Walton Way Supermarket
located at 1931 Walton Way. District 1. Super District 9.
27. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 18: A request by Anna E. Murray for
a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Lee
Opel, Inc. DBA Big Tree Package Store located at 2525 Washington Rd. District 7.
Super District 10.
28. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 19: A request by Mohammad Javed
Abdul Aziz for a retail package Beer license to be used in connection with ASNA,
Inc. located at 2700 Peach Orchard Rd. District 2. Super District 9.
29. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 20: A request by Jinsuk Ha for a
retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Coliseum Amoco
located at 801 Walton Way. District 1. Super District 9.
30. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 21: A request by Kun Kuk Lee for a
retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with J. C. Food Mart
located at 1635 Gordon Hwy. District 2. Super District 9.
31. New Ownership Application: A N. 06 - 22: A request by Ini Suk Yu for a
retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Suzy's Place
located at 1377 Wrightsboro Rd. District 1. Super District 9.
The Clerk:Those items are
Are there any objectors to those alcohol petitions?
added to the consent agenda, along with item 33, 34; item 35 pulled out for
discussion; item 36.
Mr. Williams: Pulled?
The Clerk: No, added. Item 47 for consent agenda; item 49 and 50 referred
back to committee; consent agenda from Engineering Services, item 51, 53, 54, 55,
56, 59, 60, item 64, item 69, item 70.
Mr. Williams: Madame Clerk? I mean Mr. Mayor, there is a discussion on
a couple of those items. 64, I need some clarification on.
OTHER BUSINESS
64. Motion to ratify the authorization letter dated March 29, 2006 relative to the
execution of the contract between Augusta, Ga. and ANIC for the purchase of
Sunset Villa Apartments.
22
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith?
Mr. Smith: Item 61, I think I overlooked that one.
The Clerk: You want to add item 61?
Mr. Smith: Right.
ENGINEERING SERVICES
61. Approve CPB# 323-04-200823591 change order number three in the amount
of $53,868.00 with Beam’s Contracting, Inc. for the Traffic Engineering Phase II,
North Leg & Gordon Highway Project to be funded from the Project Contingency
Account as requested by the Engineering Department.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, are we good to go on the consent agenda?
Mr. Smith: 62 as well.
Mr. Mayor: 62?
Mr. Grantham: 62.
ENGINEERING SERVICES
62. Reauthorize and reappoint the Water Way (Hydrilla) Sub-Committee.
(Requested by Commissioner Cheek)
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Clarification on 46. How does that impact the first week in April, the
first full week in April as far as meeting schedules?
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, may I respond? That amendment to the ordinance was
drawn so that we would not have a Commission meeting during Masters. I followed this
year’s example and moved it to the last Wednesday in March.
Mr. Cheek: Is 46 on the consent agenda?
The Clerk: No, sir. There’s two ordinances in there. And my recommendation is
the first ordinance—the second ordinances—well, coming from the Clerk’s office I
recommend item 1.
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor?
23
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: You said there’s two on under which ordinances that you’re
referring to?
The Clerk: Mr. Shepard has drawn up two. I recommend, I recommend from the
Clerk’s office the first ordinance.
Mr. Colclough: What item?
The Clerk: Sir, item 46.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
46. An Ordinance to amend Augusta-Richmond County Code Title 1, Chapter 2,
Section 2(a); to provide for an amendment to the monthly schedule for the holding
of the regular meeting of the Augusta-Richmond County Commission on the first
Tuesday in every month; to provide for the scheduling of the first meeting in April
to the last Wednesday of March each year effective with the first regular meeting of
the Commission in April, 2007; to repeal conflicting ordinances and for other
purposes.
Mr. Colclough: 46? Okay. What’s the second ordinance?
The Clerk: There was a directive in the second ordinance that I think is handled
through my job description and it didn’t need to be placed in an ordinance.
Mr. Colclough: So that’s not on there?
The Clerk: Not on the first one.
Mr. Colclough: What about the second one?
The Clerk: The second one has a directive in there that I think is included in my
job description and doesn’t need to be in an ordinance.
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, you already handle that?
The Clerk: Yes, sir, I already handle that.
Mr. Colclough: So you don’t need an ordinance.
Mr. Grantham: That’s why it’s not on here.
Mr. Colclough: Okay. I just wanted clarification, needed clarification that it
doesn’t be on here.
24
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir?
Mr. Williams: I guess my question is who is paying the attorney to write these
ordinances that we ain’t recommending? I mean who, somebody got to give some
direction to this now. I don’t think Mr. Shepard, who was a Commissioner himself,
decided to write an ordinance just to write it. Somebody had to be, had to be some
directive somewhere, for any ordinance.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Williams, I consulted with some Commissioners and asked
them if they would like—
Mr. Hatney: You didn’t call me.
Mr. Shepard: It was just necessary—not necessary, but just a suggestion that his
be handled as a matter of rescheduling other meetings when we have the meetings of the
National Association of Counties, those type things, if we had a forward-looking time in
January that would identify these conflicts. That certainly can be repealed out. I do
specifically remember speaking with Mr. Brigham on this. So that’s the answer. It was
just an opportunity when I had the other before the body to do it.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I going to try to go through the Chair. It’s hard to do
but I’m going to try. Even Mr. Brigham and Mr. Cheek and Mr. Williams and Mr.
Colclough and anybody else cannot tell directly the attorney to go write ordinance. That
ought to come through the committee and ought to come through this body. I mean
nobody ought to have the free will to meet with an attorney, he or she, and tell anybody
to make, to suggest to write an ordinance. Now, I seen a lot of that come through here
and I ask the question who gave the directive. But people can call the attorney to write
an ordinance and he go to writing and we go to paying. That ain’t good government now.
We talking about good government. So I’m glad that was clarified but I think Mr.
Shepard needs to understand that any other ordinance ought to come through this body as
a vote, like anything else, so we will be [unintelligible]. It don’t take but six votes
[unintelligible]. But I don’t think nobody else ought to just have the liberty to do that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Hatney?
Mr. Hatney: [unintelligible] agree to put number 46 on the consent agenda if
[unintelligible].
25
Mr. Williams: I’m confused now, Mr. Mayor. I don’t know which ordinance.
Y’all done kicked around.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay.
Mr. Williams: [unintelligible]
The Clerk: [unintelligible] An ordinance—meeting rescheduling. This is an
ordinance to amend the Georgia law for the holding of the regular meeting of the
Augusta-Richmond County Commission on the first Tuesday in every month, to provide
for the scheduling of the first meeting in April to the last Wednesday in March, effective
th
date, with the first regular meeting of the Commission on March 7. That’s the
ordinance, with that caption.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: So that’s the one that needs to be in there?
Mr. Mayor: 46 needs to be in the consent?
The Clerk: Yes, sir, with that ordinance. [unintelligible]
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Hatney: Okay, now, is the first ordinance—it’s already in your job
description; is that correct?
Mr. Williams: No, the second part.
Mr. Holland: The second part?
The Clerk: Yes, sir. It’s already in there.
Mr. Mayor: Is this like who’s on first, Abbott and Costello?
Mr. Holland: Another thing, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Shepard said he contacted some of
the Commissioners in reference to this. I don’t know why.
Mr. Mayor: And I know where you’re going with that, Commissioner Holland. I
would recommend, Mr. Shepard, to contact all of the Commissioners for conversation on
these.
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir, I will do that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Cheek, and then let’s move on with
this humungous consent agenda.
26
Mr. Cheek: Just for clarity. This body has voted a couple of time on a couple of
consistent years to deal with the first full week of April. And the last time I asked the
question was this put in the form of an ordinance, because we had to vote on it a second
time, based on the full will of this Commission to reschedule and allow us to attend
Masters Week and host our guests to the city from all over the world, I’m sure the
attorney took it on his initiative to rectify the problem, working with the Clerk. That’s
why we’re here today. I don’t think there’s any vast conspiracy on the part of the
attorney to do anything. But after a majority of the Commission voted twice to correct
this problem and it was highlighted that this would be a reoccurring problem from now
on, I think the attorney exercised some initiative with the Clerk to go ahead and correct it
once and for all, which I brought up and talked about at the last Commission meeting
before Masters. Wanted to throw some sunlight on that.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Do we have the consent agenda straight now?
Mr. Williams: I probably need to hear those numbers again, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: I feel like I’m playing bingo now.
Mr. Brigham: Move to approve, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to approve.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I asked for the numbers to be read. Now, maybe they
got a understanding. I don’t have one.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] but I don’t have one. I’d like to hear the Clerk
read the numbers again. I thought I asked that.
Mr. Mayor: I understand. That’s fine.
The Clerk: The consent agenda consists of the following items: 1 through
21, with the pulling of item 5 for discussion, item 10, item 14, item 15, item 18; under
Public Services portion of the agenda, added to consent item 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31,
32, 33, 34; item 35 for discussion; item 36, item 46 first ordinance, item 47; item 49
and 50 back to committee; item 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 59, 60, 61, 62; item 64 pulled for
further discussion; consent item 69, item 70.
CONSENT AGENDA
PLANNING
27
1. Z-06-27 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Mary Rebecca Cibak 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 containing .30 acres and is known under the present numbering system as
1937 Roys Lane. (Tax Map 133-3 Parcel 120) DISTRICT 6
2. Z-06-29 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Michelle Hill, on behalf of
Mitchell Shaw, Sr., 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 containing .25 acres and is known under the
present numbering system as 2714 Glenn Hills Drive. (Tax Map 96-1 Parcel 134)
DISTRICT 5
3. Z-06-37 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Steve Green requesting a change
of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1E (One-family
Residential) affecting property containing .36 acres and is known under the present
numbering system as 2513 and 2515 Dover Street. (Tax map 97-3 Map 29)
DISTRICT 6
4. Z-06-39 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that a parking plan be
submitted and approved by the Planning Commission before a Certificate of
Occupancy is issued; a petition by Tara Johnson, on behalf of Donald H. Skinner,
requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone P-1
(Professional) affecting property containing .4 acres and is known under the present
numbering system as 1946 Kissingbower Road (Tax Map 71-3 Parcel 137)
DISTRICT 5
6. FINAL PLAT – ELDERBERRY, SECTION II, PHASE II, - S-705 - A
request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission
to APPROVE a petition by James G. Swift & Associates, on behalf of Larry and
Connie Force, requesting final plat approval for Elderberry, Section II, Phase II .
This residential subdivision is located on Logans Way and Reagans Lane, adjacent
to Elderberry, Section II, Phase I and contains 59 lots. (Reviewing agency approval
4-3-06)
7. Z-06-30 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Willie Mae Jackson, on behalf of
Susie Jones, 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 containing .24 acres and is known under the
present numbering system as 2459 Dublin Drive. (Tax Map 94 Parcel 49)
DISTRICT 4
8. Z-06-31 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Mills Briggs, on behalf of Rebecca
Rice, 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 containing contains .70 acres and is known under the
28
present numbering system as 1927 George Road. (Tax Map 71-3 Part of Parcel 50)
DISTRICT 5
9. Z-06-33 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that no building may take
place closer than 185 feet for the right-of-way of Maddox Drive; a petition by ATC
Development Corp., on behalf of Mary U. Sheppard, requesting a change of zoning
from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone R-1E (One-family Residential) affecting
property containing approximately 4.74 acres located on the east right-of-way line
of Maddox Drive, 915 feet, more or less, north of Wrightsboro Road. (Tax Map 40
Parcel 30) DISTRICT 3
11. Z-06-36 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Jack N. Coley, on behalf of the
Curtis Baptist Foundation, requesting a change of zoning from Zone B-1
(Neighborhood Business) to Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property
containing approximately 11.4 acres and is known under the present numbering
system as 1128 Marks Church Road. (Tax Map 31 Parcel 4.1) DISTRICT 3 with the
following conditions: 1. Use of property limited to uses permitted under the present
zoning (B-1 with conditions) or the following uses permitted in the B-2 (General
Business) zone: • Golf driving range • Boat dealership • Funeral home • New car
dealership with incidental functions; parts sales, service, repair and used • car sales
• Mini-warehouses 2. A 50 foot undisturbed natural buffer adjoining Kingston
Subdivision with an 8 foot fence or wall constructed of masonry, solid board or
chain link (with slats) on the inner side of the buffer; 3. No access to Dominica
Drive; 4. The maximum height of any sign on the property shall be 50 feet; 5.
Developer to pay for any improvements within the right of way deemed necessary to
accommodate development that are not part of the GA DOT project; and 6.
Illumination: • All building wall lighting on walls facing Kingston Subdivision shall
be directed down the building, no outward; • All freestanding lighting located within
100 feet of Kingston Subdivision shall be full cutoff lighting that does not shine onto
Kingston properties. There shall be no more than 5 freestanding lights within 100
feet of Kingston Subdivision; • All other lighting shall be directed away from the
area within 100 feet from Kingston Subdivision.
PUBLIC SAFETY
12. Motion to approve GIS Sharing, Mutual Confidentiality, and Nondisclosure
Agreement with AGL Resources (AGLR). (Approved by Public Safety Committee
April 10, 2006)
13. Motion to approve the purchase of an HVAC System for Information
Technology. (Approved by Public Safety Committee April 10, 2006)
FINANCE
16. Motion to abate penalty for 2005 taxes, Map 54, Parcel 95.01. (Approved by
Finance Committee April 10, 2006)
17. Motion to approve continuing the route of self funding - Automobile
Liability. (Approved by Finance Committee April 10, 2006)
29
19. Motion to approve cancellation of tax accounts for city owned property.
(Approved by Finance Committee April 10, 2006)
20. Motion to approve the acquisition of two mini-excavators for the Utilities
Department-Construction Division from Hertz Equipment, Inc. of Augusta, Georgia
for $26,708.00 Each (Lowest bid offer on bid 06-118). (Approved by Finance
Committee April 10, 2006)
APPOINTMENT(S)
21. Motion to approve the appointment of Mr. Bryan Patterson to the Augusta
Ports Authority representing District 3.
PUBLIC SERVICES
26. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 -17: A request by Han Kie Min for a
retail Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Walton Way Supermarket
located at 1931 Walton Way. District 1. Super District 9.
27. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 18: A request by Anna E. Murray for
a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Lee
Opel, Inc. DBA Big Tree Package Store located at 2525 Washington Rd. District 7.
Super District 10.
28. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 19: A request by Mohammad Javed
Abdul Aziz for a retail package Beer license to be used in connection with ASNA,
Inc. located at 2700 Peach Orchard Rd. District 2. Super District 9.
29. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 20: A request by Jinsuk Ha for a
retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Coliseum Amoco
located at 801 Walton Way. District 1. Super District 9.
30. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 21: A request by Kun Kuk Lee for a
retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with J. C. Food Mart
located at 1635 Gordon Hwy. District 2. Super District 9.
31. New Ownership Application: A N. 06 - 22: A request by Ini Suk Yu for a
retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Suzy's Place
located at 1377 Wrightsboro Rd. District 1. Super District 9.
32. Motion to approve an amendment to the lease at Lake Olmstead Stadium
between Augusta, Ga. and Augusta Professional Baseball, LLC(Ripken Baseball) to
provide for the disbursement of SPLOST V funds for stadium improvements.
33. Discussion: A request by Heather Williams for a Therapeutic Massage
License to be used in connection with Augusta Massage Therapy located at 1433
Stovall St. District 1. Super District 9.
34. Discussion: A request by Donna B. Smith for a Therapeutic Massage license
to be used in connection with Augusta Massage Therapy located 1433 Stovall St.
District 1. Super District 9.
36. Approve request for Taxiway "C:"/Apron General Aviation Parking
Expansion Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $241,542.15.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
46. An Ordinance to amend Augusta-Richmond County Code Title 1, Chapter 2,
Section 2(a); to provide for an amendment to the monthly schedule for the holding
30
of the regular meeting of the Augusta-Richmond County Commission on the first
Tuesday in every month; to provide for the scheduling of the first meeting in April
to the last Wednesday of March each year effective with the first regular meeting of
the Commission in April, 2007; to repeal conflicting ordinances and for other
purposes.
47. Approve Early Retirement of Mr. James Thomas under the 1977 Pension
Plan.
ENGINEERING SERVICES
51. Motion to authorize the purchase and acceptance of property located off of
Bennock Mill Road in connection with the 80500 Spirit Creek Collection System
and Force Main Project.
53. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property # 139-0-231-00-0
3522 Barker Drive, which is owned by Derrick McClusky for 4,171 Sq. Feet for a
Permanent Easement and 4,171 Sq. Feet for a Temporary Easement. AUD Project:
Horsepen Sanitary Sewer, Phase 2A.
54. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property # 139-0-245-00-0
3102 Blackmon Court, which is owned by Emma Lou Phelps for 4,619 Sq. Feet for a
Permanent Easement and 4,666 Sq. Feet for a Temporary Easement. AUD Project:
Horsepen Sanitary Sewer, Phase 2A.
55. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property # 111-0-015-00-0
3108 Mike Padgett Hwy and #111-0-017-00-0 3110 Mike Padgett Hwy, which is
owned by William A. N. Sweat and Frankie A. Sweat for 1,276.928 Sq. Feet for a
Permanent Easement and 975.061 Sq. Feet for a Temporary Easement of # 111-0-
015-00-0 3108 Mike Padgett Hwy and 1,479.574 Sq. Feet for a Permanent Easement
and 1,104.526 Sq. Feet for a Temporary Easement of #111-0-017-00-0 3110 Mike
Padgett Hwy. AUD Project: Horsepen Sanitary Sewer, Phase 2A.
56. Motion to approve and accept Agreement with Acsential, Inc. for Corporate
Communications Plan for Augusta Utilities Department.
59. Approve Award of Construction Contract to Blair Construction, Inc. in the
amount of $427,123.51 to be funded from the project construction account for
Paving Dirt Roads Phase VIII, (Contract I: Whisnant Drive and Hauchman Hill
Road) CPB # 323-04- 200823808 as requested by the Engineering Department,
subject to receipt of signed contracts and proper bonds.
60. Approve the creation of a top ten list of road and drainage projects for the
purposes of tracking and regular status reporting on major work in the city.
(Requested by Commissioner Cheek)
61. Approve CPB# 323-04-200823591 change order number three in the amount
of $53,868.00 with Beam’s Contracting, Inc. for the Traffic Engineering Phase II,
North Leg & Gordon Highway Project to be funded from the Project Contingency
Account as requested by the Engineering Department.
62. Reauthorize and reappoint the Water Way (Hydrilla) Sub-Committee.
(Requested by Commissioner Cheek)
OTHER BUSINESS
31
69. Consider Resolution to reaffirm the necessity of the 911 and enhanced 911
charges.
70. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission
held on March 29, 2006 and the called meeting held on April 10, 2006.
Mr. Mayor: That being read back, we have a motion and a second. If there is no
further discussion Commissioners will vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Hatney abstains.
Motion carries 9-1. [Items 26, 27, 28, 20, 30 and 31]
Motion carries 10-0. [Items 1-4, 6-9, 11-13, 16-17, 19-21, 26-34, 36, 46-47, 51, 53-56,
59-62, 69-70]
The Clerk:
PLANNING
5. Z-06-40 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that there be no access to
Simkins Lane; a petition by Jeffery Harris requesting a Special Exception to
establish an inert fill area per Section 24-2 (a) (18) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing
approximately 148 acres known under the present numbering system as 1710 and
1768 Dixon Airline Road and 3650 and 3650-A Simpkins Lane. (Tax Map 145
Parcels 31.07 and 33 and Tax Map 158 Parcels 1 and 4) DISTRICT 8
Mr. Smith: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Smith?
Mr. Smith: Can we get Mr. Johnson to comment on that? Mr. Patty?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty?
Mr. Patty: Yes, sir, this is a tract, 148 acres on the south side of Dixon Airline
Road that’s been mined extensively over the years. The gentleman to my left has bought
it and wants to continue to mine dirt from the property and bring some inert fill in there.
Inert fill by definition is bricks and concrete, dirt, stumps. Very few items qualify as
inert fill under state—our law. If you look carefully at this, what it says is the condition
is there be access to Simkins Lane and we had some objectors that were concerned about
that and they were satisfied with the condition. I doubt that they are here today but we
recommend you approve it.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith?
32
Mr. Smith: Mr. Mayor, I had talked with Mark Johnson at the landfill and I’d like
for him to comment on this. What’s your feeling of this, Mark, if you would?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson?
Mr. Johnson: The questions that we shared were not directly derived from zoning
but from economic impact, from some of the sentiments that this body shared about out-
of-county wastes, some of the same types of things, and it’s directly creating direct
competition to things that we’re already doing and already have disposal options for. So
the question becomes why. And we have inert landfills. There’s one on Gordon
Highway. There’s one off Old McDuffie Road. How many more landfills does the
county need? And where’s the waste coming form and how is it going to impact us long
term? Those were some of my questions to this body as to why we would want to do
variances for a problem that’s already controlled.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Is the clay mine or dirt mine licensed
through the state? Does it have a state permit?
Mr. Harris: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Do you have a restoration plan for the topsoil replacement and the
revegetation of the area?
Mr. Harris: Yes, sir. We are—what we’re going to do is use the inert landfill to
reclaiming the property.
Mr. Cheek: The thing that concerns me if we put an inert landfill in, even if we
put topsoil and pine trees on top of it that renders that unusual for any type of
development that includes buildings. So—
Mr. Harris: I think they have a standard of after eight to 10 years that it will be
reusable again.
Mr. Cheek: I don’t think that inert landfills or landfills period are reusable for any
type of construction or development of that area, and that’s the thing that concerns me, is
we have off of Tobacco Road several hundred acres at a landfill that we walked off from,
we can never use. We have off of Molly Pond Road a couple of hundred acres there we
can’t use. For the same thing. We’ve covered them up, they still generate methane and
other things and I know inert you have concrete and asphalt but you also have other fill
agents that are subject to settling and shifting over time. So I’d like to get some more
information on that. The thing I don’t want to do, I don’t want to limit the use of your
property but what I do want to have is the ability for that property to be developed in a
usable manner in the future, just not be a big vacant field sitting there.
33
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty?
Mr. Patty: I might be able to add something to that. It’s my understanding that
there are currently some [unintelligible] out there, some areas that have been
[unintelligible] and all he wants to do is fill those areas with this material. He’s not going
to fill 148 acres but just these areas that have already been mined, these [unintelligible].
That’s my understanding.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. How can I say this? Damascus Road, up
there now we been filling that property for 20 years. Used to be owned by some folks. I
won’t call no names. But I guess what I’m saying is if this man meets the guidelines, and
Mr. Patty, who has done his job, in approving it, I’m trying to figure out the reason not.
Mark Johnson said why more landfills? But that’s called free enterprise. That’s called
going into business. That’s called developing your property and turning it over and doing
something with it. You know we talk about what we ain’t doing in Augusta but then we
say we doing too much. But I’ve got a problem when Planning & Zoning approved it.
The man, you know, we got guidelines, the state got guidelines for them to go by, but we
trying to find a reason [unintelligible] stop him. Now, if you think you ain’t got enough
in your landfill, Mark, you need to come to District 2 cause I put you some more stuff out
there that we ain’t picked up yet now. So I’m in favor of any other landfill, any other
places that we going to be guided by guidelines. I don’t want them to dig it out and walk
off from it. I’m like Mr. Patty said earlier, if it’s going to be fill and there’s going to be a
need I’m sure a hundred and something acres he’s going to be able do something else
with this stuff later on. But I just don’t hear the reason for not supporting it now. I mean
we trying to find something but I don’t see nothing. Now, if you hunting you going to
find something. If it ain’t nothing but a dead rat, you going to find something if you
hunting it. Now, if it’s out there you ought to get it. But I think we looking for
I think, Mr. Mayor, I’m going to make a motion that we go ahead
something now.
and approve this, cause Planning & Zoning done their job and I think it’s ready to
be done, the people ready to go to work, my motion is to approve.
Mr. Colclough: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham, did you—
Mr. Grantham: Yeah, I’m going to have discussion after you’ve accepted the
second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Mr. Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I kind of have to agreed with
Commissioner Williams based on the fact that I’ve seen several of these come up before,
and I talked to Mr. Patty about some that they have to have a plan to rehabilitate this
34
property once they make any excavation, whether it be any mining done on it at all. And
if that’s been conformed and approved by the state then I can’t see us trying to interfere
with private ownership, enterprise, whatever you want to call it. I think the government
is trying to get involved to ward away competition and it’s hard for me to accept and do
something like that. So I’m going to be in favor of this, along with the idea that we do
any screening or any type of inspections that we need to do, Mr. Patty, along the lines of
making sure that this is conformed with.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith?
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My concern in talking to Mark Johnson was
the fact that the money that we would receive toward servicing the bonds that we have
out was my concern. And after him saying what he did I wanted the other side to come
out. That was my main reason.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Patty?
Mr. Patty: Mr. Mayor, I had a brief conversation with Mark and one thing that
you could do is limit this special exception to only those inert areas identified on the map,
where he wants to build. Which I think there are three small areas. You could limit the
special exception of those areas and then it wouldn’t be any rights that go beyond that to
fill the entire area.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to have to agree with our director of Zoning
and Planning and I’m going to follow along by saying I had a [unintelligible] on Karleen
Road that had a revegetation plan that wasn’t enforced for over 20 years. I have had
about half a dozen trailers washed out and threat of loss of life during heavy rainfall. So I
guess my concern is that we have a large hill at Bobby Jones, we have a large hill on
Gordon Highway now that I’m sure have vegetation plans. I just want to hold folks that
open these things accountable and just make sure they follow through and make it look as
good or better than it did when they started and not leave us with 20-year eyesores across
the city. And that’s my concern.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and second.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham?
Mr. Brigham: Are we going to follow the director of Planning and Zoning’s
recommendation as to limitation of this area as a special exception to this ordinance or
not?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, would you like to amend your motion to include that?
35
Mr. Williams: No, sir, I would not. I mean if there was some reasoning for it—
why are we trying to find a reason? Now, if Planning and Zoning had of sent us those
special exceptions I could amend it. They approved it. I think the young man’s got
guidelines to go by by the state and we got people in this government that get paid to do
the work. Whether they doing it or not, that’s another thing. But we got people we pay.
So I’m not going to amend my motion to do that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Brigham votes No.
Motion carries 9-1.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you.
Mr. Harris: Thank you.
The Clerk:
10. Z-06-35 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Channika Daniels, on behalf of
James Warren, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-MH (Manufactured
Home Residential) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) affecting property
containing .54 acres and is known under the present numbering system as 2429
Turkey Trail Drive. (Tax Map 166 Parcel 168) DISTRICT 6
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: The reason I asked to have this pulled is I just wanted to know what
kind of business we’re talking about. There wasn’t a lot of backup information in there.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am? Your name and address for the record.
Ms. Daniels: Channicka Daniels, 1874 Heathers Way, is my address. The type of
business it is is a day care and we have one already on 4326 Windsor Spring Road.
Mr. Cheek: Move to approve.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, if I may, this is an example of how to run these day care
centers and they are an asset to the communities.
36
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SAFETY
14. Motion to approve the leasing of Old Fire Station #12 to the Board of Health
for the purpose of housing equipment for their mosquito control program.
(Approved by Public Safety Committee April 10, 2006)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, I’m in favor of this motion to approve it but I
had to ask this question. And my question was utilities, any other expenses, now who is
paying what, Chief? I just need to know. We going to lease this facility but what about
the other costs associated with that, whatever other costs there is?
Mr. Willis: All expenses would be, that would be incurred would be handled
through the Health Department.
Mr. Williams: Through the Health Department?
Mr. Willis: All we’re doing is allowing the use of the building.
Mr. Williams: I make a motion to approve, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
15. Motion to accept and approve the changes and transfers as listed on the
schedule including the following to cover the negative cash balances through the end
of 2005: $242,000 from General Fund for the Municipal Golf Course, $266,000 from
the General Fund for the Newman Tennis Center and $1.2M from Urban Services
and $3,130,000 from the General Fund for the Transit Department relative to the
2005 Audit. (Approved by Finance Committee April 10, 2006)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
37
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I had some concern when I saw these two items up
here from Recreation, the golf course. I know there’s a subcommittee looking at some
things now. But did we not pay off the indebtedness that we had with the golf course
here in 2000 with our sales tax? And I guess I need some answers. How can we be—
how can we be like this with the money we already paid off, Tom? We on even keel.
We might not be making none but we ought to at least be coming out even.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beck?
Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, the question regarding the
paying off of the COPS issues, it was paid off actually in 2001. That issue was paid off.
I believe it was 1.7 million in total that was paid off, that ended up saving about a half
million dollars in interest over the course of that COPS issue. Your concern regarding
the [unintelligible] balances, this is an accumulation and Ms. Williams might be able to
answer some of these questions better than me. This is an accumulation of balances since
the enterprise fund was started many years ago. The majority of that 242,000 was
actually from last year. As many local golf had, it was a pretty tough year. There was a
couple of new courses that opened. We had double the number of rain days in 2005.
Now, we have made some arrangements. It has to be fun like a business so we have
made some arrangements to cut our expenses. There was a scheduled fee increase that
the Commission approved as part of the improvement plan in 1988. We have
implemented a scheduled fee increase that was approved by the Commission that still
keeps the fees the lowest in the area and we think that’ll help accumulate some of the—or
take care of some of the negative cash flow.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I see Ms. Williams and she’s standing there in the
corner there to maybe answer some finance questions. But look like to me that if this
occurred recently that we would have either increased our fees or changed our strategy or
we would have done something before it got to this point. And that’s, that’s quite a lot,
Mr. Beck, and I don’t now anything about a golf ball except you can bounce it pretty
high. But I just don’t see how we are not able to be mindful of what’s going on and make
some changes, in mid stream if we have to. If other golf course open up and took some
of the business or something then we probably wouldn’t have made as much but we
shouldn’t have lost as much, Tom. I just [unintelligible] I know there are some other
things going on but I had to make those comments, Mr. Mayor. We hired a tennis
professional and we was paying him a salary and benefits and stuff but we, we are not
good stewards of the money for whatever reason. Those are my comments. I can’t make
a motion either way.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland?
Mr. Holland: Yes, Mr. Mayor. I, too, am very, very much concerned about his
negativity in terms of the finances of this golf course. Because I have observed a number
of occasions when this golf course has had the opportunity to be full. And I’ve observed
on a number of occasions when I’ve been playing at that golf course when there were a
number of people that had the opportunity to play there that don’t play there any more.
38
And for some unforeseen reason these people don’t come back because they were not
treated fairly. And this is a reason why there might be a deficit in the finances there.
And when these other people were playing on this golf course I’m sure that the finance
increased tremendously. But for some reason or another at this golf course—and I’ve
been around to a number of golf courses and we have a couple of other people in here
that play golf—there’s no reason for a municipal golf course such as ours to be negative
like this. Now, there’s a reason for this and that reason, what I’ve observed, is
mismanagement. And something has to be done about it and something has to be done
about it soon, because somewhere down the line I’m seeing a plan, and the plan that I see
in the back of my head is that there may be some private enterprise that may want to take
over that golf course and start to making some money off of it. Because it’s no reason—
if you travel around this city, River course, Forest Hills, I don’t believe there is another
golf course in the city of Augusta, in the CSRA, as negative like the Augusta Municipal
Golf Course. And that’s poor management and I’ll stand on it.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: I’m going to kick in on transit. My concern is that with all of the—
and I understand that we have situations for ridership and some issues, but my question is
are we managing our grants properly, doing our spend downs properly and recouping all
the money that we’re promised at the beginning of the budget year that we’re going to
recruit from these federal grants and are we getting all the money we’re promised when
we have these hearings on budget and all about SPLOST money and other things? Are
we getting our biggest bang for our buck out of that? Are we getting all we’re supposed
to get?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, as a member of the Finance Committee, I had the
pleasure of meeting with Ms. Beard, our Chairman, and with Ms. Williams in regards to
the reason for writing these particular issues out of the general fund. And of course the
main reason—and I know we’re looking for the answers as to what the problem is and we
need to delve into that as much as possible, but the answer that I think we should all seek
and consider is that the auditing firm has indicated that they would not give us a qualified
audit based on the continuation of carrying these losses on the books like we have in the
enterprise fund, and hoping that these enterprise funds will eventually make up their
shortfall. That is not the case, we are not going to see the make up of these shortfalls
anytime soon. The only one that was removed from the request of the auditing firm was
the landfill and that was because we approved about three or four months ago a plan in
order to overcome the shortfall within that location. There has not been any plans put
forth to overcome the shortfalls in these areas. And Ms. Beard, please excuse my
indulgence, but I had to step in to make these statements today in regards to these. And if
we cannot receive this unqualified audit approval by the auditors then what that does to
us as a government entity is it reduces our bond rating and any type of bonding powers
that we may have in the future. So several of these—I won’t say all of them—have been
accumulated over a number of years and I think we just need to address this on an annual
39
basis instead of waiting until the horse is out of the barn, so to speak, and we know that
we have to do something. So as we look forward to the years to come, any of these
enterprise funds that are in a shortfall situation where they have to be made up out of the
general funds, I’m going to recommend that they be addressed in that fiscal year and that
we take the issue at hand and do what is necessary. If it calls for adjustments then I think
we need to make whatever adjustments are necessary within those particular areas. And
personally, I’m going to come back with a recommendation based on the golf course in
the very near future. Thank you.
Mr. Cheek: Motion to approve.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Grantham brought up the point about interest rates
and stuff being reduced and I think when we got a, a enterprise situation such as the golf
course, tennis court, any other enterprise that’s not producing, I think that ought to be
reduced as well. Whether it’s going to affect this government and then somebody else
ought to be affected, I don’t think we can sit back and—Don brought it again, we
shouldn’t wait till the horse is out of the gate and then we want to close it. We sit here
[unintelligible] eight years, but we got to hold ourselves accountable because we saw this
coming up. This ain’t just happened last month. This ain’t something that just happened
yesterday. We won’t address it, though. We have not, we still ain’t addressed it. We
talking about our bond rate and what we are going to have to pay. We still ain’t
addressed the problem. We still act like—you know, you can’t go in the cookie jar and
then you say well, you done eat all the cookies and that’s fine, you just going to be sick
on your stomach. Now, there ought to be some disciplinary action. There ought to be—
something got to happen when we continue to let this kind of stuff continue to grow.
And it’s been growing. So I think Don is right, we are going to have to do something
with it, but somebody ought to be able to tell us something. You just can’t walk in the
store and walk out with everything you want and say I just felt like doing it or I didn’t
know what to do. If you don’t know what to do then you ought to get out the way.
Mr. Mayor: Can we get a motion either way on this?
Mr. Cheek: Motion to approve.
Ms. Beard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Holland votes No.
Mr. Williams and Mr. Colclough abstain.
Motion carries 7-1-2.
Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item, please.
40
The Clerk:
FINANCE
18. Motion to approve cancellation of tax accounts on Land Bank owned
property. (Approved by Finance Committee April 10, 2006)
Mr. Brigham: So move.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I resemble that, item 18, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: And we going, if we going to do that, and I got no problem with it,
but if we going let the Land Bank have these properties and they’re not going to pay
anything; is that what we’re saying, that we would turn these properties over to the Land
Bank who have the owner authority, that we don’t have any say-so over, and now won’t
pay anything at all? I just want to get clear on it. I learned to count to six, but I just want
to know what six doing, that’s all.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, in order for the Land Bank to remarket and economically
place these properties out for economic redevelopment, one of the things that has to be
removed from them is the tax burden placed on them. Because a lot of times that come
into the Land Bank as reclaimed properties from tax sales and so forth. To ease the
pressure on the Land Bank, because it’s just the government paying the government
essentially, it would allow them to take these properties and then remarket them at a
reasonable price in order to have them brought back on to the tax rolls and producing
revenue for the City. So this is a good measure that would enable the Land Bank to do its
job. I just see no purpose in moving into a situation where the government is paying the
government and we’re tying the hands of an entity that we as a Commission voted to
make into an economic redevelopment arm of this government.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: I can concur with Commissioner Cheek, Mr. Mayor, but my
problem is when the Land Bank sells this property and makes a profit on it—now I’m
going back to a piece of property across the street here that the Land Bank had and
bought at one price, sold at another price, and we hadn’t seen I mean anything. So I’m
not against the Land Bank but I think we ought to be doing the same thing all the time
now. If the Land Bank is going to sell this property, if we are going to turn it over to
41
them and they are going sell it and then make a profit, somebody else—it may not be the
Bank, but anybody else gets it and makes a profit out of it and it’s supposed to be for
economic development or for those who needs an opportunity to do some economic
development. But when you putting economic dollars in just one side of this government
or one side of this city I got a problem with that, especially when you are going to weigh
the taxes and stuff they got to pay. So if—and Commissioner Cheek, you know exactly
what I’m talking about because you—
Mr. Cheek: I agree with you on that piece of property.
Mr. Williams: You informed me about it. And so it’s—but if you going to do it
with the other small properties then you going to do it with the large ones. So—
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard?
Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, this came up in the Finance Committee and I believe we
asked Mr. Shepard if he would get with Mr. Williams, because the very same thing came
up and you were supposed to work it out before this meeting so that we could go on with
the vote.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hatney?
Mr. Hatney: I have one observation. Are you saying [unintelligible] parcels of
land are now owned by the Land Bank and they’re asking to cancel the taxes? I don’t
have any problem necessarily with that but I would hope you would give the same
consideration to those CHDOs who have the same problem. [unintelligible] so if you are
going to do it for one entity I think you ought to do it for all of them.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek, did you—
Mr. Cheek: I was going to say, Mr. Mayor, I’ve got to concur with the Mayor Pro
Tem. The issue with the DeLaigle property and the way it was managed, apart from the
Land Bank, the whole thing on that is cloudy in my mind and looks, deserves definite
deeper review. But I still think this is a very good thing to do.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Is there any further discussion?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Sherman wanted to talk.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Sherman?
Mr. Sherman: I was going to comment on Commissioner Hatney’s comment.
These properties are currently owned by the Land Bank. I think the Land Bank came
across these properties in 2004. Typically how the Land Bank does come across
properties is that the property owner is told by the License & Inspection Department to
either repair the property, demolish the property, if you can’t do that you need to sell if, if
42
you can’t sell it consider giving it to the Land Bank. In this case that’s what they did.
The Land Bank received the tax bill last October or thereabout and it’s typical for the
Land Bank to request the Commission to waive the property taxes. When it gets to the
point where we have an interested party who would like to buy the property, we have a
fee schedule that we look at, and this is something that Warren Smith brought to the
Commission back in April, I guess, of last year. The price that we I guess start our
negotiations at, it slides. If you’re a CHDO it’s 25% of the appraised value plus any
costs that the Land Bank incurs in purchasing the property or in maintaining the property.
If it’s a property where we have to demolish the structure that goes into the total price
and then 25% of that—it goes across the board to a private developer wanting to buy a
piece of property, at that point it’s 50% of the appraised value and any costs incurred.
The idea of the Land Bank is that we make—we have to provide an incentive for
developers to come and want these properties at this time. And the incentive is a reduced
price so that they can go in and redevelop the properties and ideally make affordable
housing for someone who also will need an incentive to be able to get in on the—into the
house.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, what I would ask Mr. Sherman is that is the tax
appraiser’s office informed when the Land Bank is taking property?
Mr. Sherman: Well, there is a person in the tax office who is on the Land Bank.
Mr. Colclough: My point being if the county owned the land, why is the tax
assessor’s office continuing to charge tax on it?
Mr. Sherman: Well, the Land Bank owns it.
Mr. Colclough: Well, isn’t the Land Bank part of the government?
Mr. Sherman: Well, that’s a legal question. Technically it’s set up as a separate
authority. And the reason I guess, generally the reason it was set up is so that you, the
Commission, can dispose of city-owned properties by transferring them to the Land Bank
and then it’s disposed of through the Land Bank.
Mr. Colclough: So the Land Bank is a semi-private—
Mr. Sherman: It’s—
Mr. Mayor: Quasi-governmental?
Mr. Hatney: What is it? What is the Land Bank? Seriously?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
43
Mr. Shepard: If I can address some of the questions—as I indicated in committee,
the Land Bank is an authority, which was an authority that was activated by the passage
of a resolution here and any county in the state or consolidated government can take
advantage of the enabling powers of the statute. So it is government, it is a governmental
agency and it has the authority to extinguish taxes if it chooses to do so. We can also do
that for it, but the idea of canceling the taxes basically furthers or it lessens the expenses
of that authority so that it can function and fund its own operations.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: My question still remain the same. If it’s a governmental agency
of this government why would taxes be assessed on a government agency by the same
government? And then we have to come up and abate the taxes?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: The extinguishment power occurs when it sells or disposes of
property, so if it’s in inventory—
[Tape 1 ends here]
[Tape 2 starts here]
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: I think this is a public authority. It has the authority to extinguish
the taxes at some point. What we are doing is making, as Mr. Cheek said, we’re making
the property more marketable by extinguishing these taxes so that—you have blighted
areas which are being redeveloped and the blight usually has a code violation, it may
have taxes due, but the whole process is designed to put a fresh start onto this particular
piece of real estate, which has gone through the Land Bank.
Mr. Colclough: That’s a nice dissertation but it still doesn’t answer the question
as to why the tax assessor’s office is taxing another governmental agency. Simple.
Mr. Mayor: Is it be statute, is it by—
Mr. Shepard: Why—
Mr. Colclough: [unintelligible] also.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Hang on. Commissioner Hatney and then Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Hatney: You mentioned that they are [unintelligible] eradicate blight and
that’s why I asked why couldn’t the CHDOs enjoy the same privilege. Because that’s
44
why they organized. And they also [unintelligible] what I’m hearing is that
[unintelligible] CHDOs, they take government money and buy a piece of land, then they
turn right around and get billed [unintelligible] taxes. [unintelligible] government
money. My concern is why can’t they be given the same thing, the same tax
[unintelligible]. That’s all. Small question.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: The answer [unintelligible] CHDOs that relief but it’s through the
use of the power of the Land Bank to extinguish those charges. I mean when they
dispose of the property. A transfer from the Land Bank to the CHDO would be such an
event. I mean this is how the CHDOs benefit from the Land Bank. And they don’t have
to go through the competitive bidding. It’s a way to do things more in a negotiated style,
a style of business as opposed to the statutory requirements that attach to a sale of
property such as by bid or by auction.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham?
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, it’s my understanding—maybe I’m wrong—but this
was property that was not in the Land Bank’s name at the beginning of the year and if
that’s the case the property taxes would be levied on whoever was the name was in and
the new owner, who happens to be the Land Bank that took these properties over in the
course of the year are responsible for those taxes, is my understanding. Now, if that’s the
case it’s back like Commissioner Cheek said, we’re a government agency, we’re going to
give them government funds and turn around and give the money back to us. That makes
no sense. Now, why we just go on and waive these taxes?
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams and then I think we’ve fully
discussed this.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, most of these properties are dilapidated properties in
the first place, so we got to understand something. Most of these properties are not—
most people are not going to buy them because if they was eligible for sale or someone
would have bought them from the property owner. When the Land Bank gets them,
really they’re they are at the last stop. I don’t understand why we talking about waiving
the taxes when they going to get money for them, but if we going to do anything, and I’m
not on the Land Bank Authority and I think we got some good people there, but we ought
to be trying to get these properties in the hands of the CHDOs to get them back in the
hands of some property owner so we can collect taxes on them. We spend more time
trying to decide on who going to buy which one and which one—I mean it’s just another
place to sell it at. And I know I see Rob out there and I know he [unintelligible] but I
don’t understand why we can’t get these properties moving quicker. We got a bunch of
these little shotgun houses, Mr. Mayor, you don’t know what that is, I don’t think, but
most folks know what that kind of stuff. We got a bunch of that kind of stuff that nobody
really wants. And when you’re talking about paying half of what they want for it and
people know you can’t sell it in the first place, I mean all we doing is we spinning our
45
wheels. But when we waive these taxes then some people take advantage of it, whether it
be the little ones or the large ones, then we end up in trouble. But I’m like Mr. Brigham
now, we need to vote, get it on over with, and do what we going to do, but we need to
face the reality of it that we are not making good use of the properties. I got a list
[unintelligible] but I got a list of those [unintelligible] one on this street and two on
another street that nobody really want cause they’re not big enough to do anything with.
So I guess all I’m saying, Mr. Mayor, is we need to try to get those in the hands of those
people that can get it back on the tax books.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Our rules really say that everybody is supposed to be
recognized once and then one rebuttal so I think we’ve adequately discussed this item.
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Williams votes Present.
Motion carries 9-1.
Mr. Mayor: Now we’ll move into the regular agenda.
The Clerk: Item 35, and companion item—do you want to take those items up
together, items 35 and 63?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, that’s fine.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
35. Discuss contract for taxi cab service at Augusta Regional Airport.
(Requested by Commissioner Williams) (Referred from March 29 Commission
meeting)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
63. Discuss/receive recommendation(s) from the Augusta Aviation Commission
regarding taxicab service at Augusta Regional Airport as approved in the March 29,
2006 Commission meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had this placed back on the agenda
before realizing the last time that we met was before the Masters and saying to this body
that the airport board wasn’t going to do anything by the next day and if they did they
wouldn’t have time for the business to participate. So I think they come up with some
resolution. I need to hear from them what did they come up with and where do we go
from here? What’s our next step?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson?
46
th
Mr. Johnson: Commissioner Williams, we did on March 30 right after your
meeting voted unanimously to cancel the contract with Radio Cab. And at that point in
time the staff was instructed to come up with a mutual beneficial arrangement that will be
beneficial to our customers and to the independent cab drivers.
Mr. Williams: Can you tell me, Mr. Mayor, what that contract, what that mutual
arrangement is?
Mr. Johnson: Still working on it. I mean we don’t have a plan as of yet. They’re
working on the plan.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, and I think we got to have a plan, too. I think this
body needs to go ahead and I’m going to make a motion that we go ahead and approve
those certified taxi cab drivers, certified owners, not just anybody [unintelligible] inside
the car. I think there is a problem that every business that you can get in line. And
airport is under construction and we know, I believe, like if you put [unintelligible] it’s
going to come, I believe if we build this airport people going to come. I think that the
taxi owners ought to have that opportunity to go and serve the public. They ought to
meet certain guideline. Whatever those guidelines are for the City of Augusta ought to be
the same guidelines it is for the airport. By my motion, Mr. Mayor, is that we go ahead
and approve that that taxi cab, certified taxi cab drivers, certified through our License and
Inspection, certified through our Richmond County Sheriffs Department have the
opportunity to go as this motion fails or pass and start to work and start to get in line and
do the things that’s necessary. They should not get in front of anybody. If they leave, the
come back and get behind the line like any other organization. Ought to be a rotating
type situation, Mr. Mayor, and I think we going to be [unintelligible] to go ahead and do
that before somebody force us to do that, Mr. Mayor. That’s my motion.
Mr. Holland: I second that, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I would like to at some point, whether not today or
another day, this city’s taxi cab situation needs to be completely reviewed and
overhauled. We have a near monopoly situation and very poor service across the city.
We have some archaic rules and an inspection process that’s inconsistent with the needs
of the taxi fleet and the public in this city. So what I would like to do is bring through the
committee process a recommendation to develop a taxi commission to review the taxi
licensing process in this city, to review what’s done in other cities, to come up with
something that is consistent. It’s my understanding that there is a finite number of
licenses that are purchased up and then those licenses in this city are sublet to people who
subcontract under one of the cab companies here, making them pay to become taxi
operators in this city, a middleman, if you will, and it’s my concern that we create fair,
safe and honest competition in this city and that we review the business practices of the
past and change and make them consistent with successful taxi cab operations in other
cities.
47
Mr. Mayor: I agree. Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir. I did follow up with the Aviation Commission and I
would suggest that Mr. Williams’ motion be effective at the end of this contract period,
that we have with Radio Cab. The notice, as Mr. Johnson has said, written notice has
been given to cancel the contract. That contract will cancel as a result on the end of June
of this year and at that point there would be on contract. Policy would be, if you
implemented it immediately, Mr. Williams, would not cause anything other than a
confusion with the present contract and I would suggest to let it go cleanly.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I differ, I differ with—
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: I differ with my own attorney. Now, let me go back and bring
some of the legal terms that you share with us. First of all, that contract, it been non-
binding for a long time anyway. The City of Augusta don’t have a contract that renews
every 60 days and that’s what that contract do. So the contract already broke. Ain’t no
such thing as we’ve got to wait in order to uphold our end of the deal when the deal was
already broke because it was a illegal contract in the first place for over 20 years. It had
been rotate every sixty days. Now it may be wrong. Somebody need to straighten me
out. Somebody need to tell me. If we wasn’t renewing every 60 days, if it was once a
year or once every 5 years, speak now or forever hold your peace. Well, it must have
been 60 days then. So if we renew it every 60 days the contract was already broke. It
was already illegal. It was already wrong. So why we got to wait now till June when we
done held people off for 20 years? So Mr. Mayor, my motion is, effective [unintelligible]
fails or pass, ain’t no such thing as waiting because the contract is already illegal. In fact
we ought to be in court now because the contract illegal.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: If you want to reduce your expenses in the legal area, Mr.
Williams, and that’s fine, my suggestion is that you [unintelligible] your motion in at the
time when this contract has no claim whatsoever. And that would be at the end of June
of this year. There would be no litigation whatsoever.
Mr. Williams: So Mr. Mayor, my attorney, this board’s attorney advising this
board that we are in a contract now that was renewing every 60 days? I want to get some
clarification through the Chair, Mr. Mayor. Is that what he’s telling this board that we
had a contract that renewed every 60 days that we didn’t know nothing about; is that legal
or illegal? That’s my question, yes or no? I ain’t got to have no other opinion. Just yes
or no.
Mr. Shepard: In my opinion that type of contract was legal, yes.
48
Mr. Williams: That’s all I wanted to hear, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham?
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, since we are discuss ideas and plans on how to deal
with taxi cabs, and I’m assuming that’s what this discussion is about since we’re making
motions to dictate the rules, I think first we ought to look at the ordinance and deal with
it. But I think if we’re going to do this, I think that we do have to open up—I agree with
Mr. Williams, Dr. Hatney and several others that we do need to open up competition.
But I think we need to open it up like we open up competition on our Sunday sales and
the liquor business, is where you pay extra to provide this service to the airport. I think
that that is something we ought to look at. I think we ought to set a fee for it. And I
think it ought to be part of our ordinance. But I think that is something that we as a
Commission have to address.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Mr. Bowles?
Mr. Bowles:
Mr. Mayor, I think I would like to—I agree with Mr. Williams that
that previous contract, that doesn’t look good, but two wrongs don’t make a right in my
So I would like to make a substitute motion that we wait until the end of
opinion.
the contract before we initiate what he described in his motion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Your motion, though, is to go ahead and open it up to
everybody at the end of the contract period?
Mr. Bowles: Yes, sir.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioner Hatney?
Mr. Hatney: My questions is at the end of the day, I think you’re talking about
th
June 30, who are we anticipating to get together to do all this stuff? Expect the airport
folks to do it? Who going to do it? [unintelligible] airport, they ought to do it.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, I agree with Dr. Hatney.
He’s exactly right. It should be the Airport Commission charged with the operation of
Augusta Regional Airport and that’s what our ordinance is saying and they are
responsible for contracts less than one year in term. This is a 60 day contract and they
took their responsibility very seriously the last time they met and when there was no
further concessions forthcoming from the current holder of the contract they terminated
it.
Mr. Grantham: Call the question, Mr. Mayor.
49
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Did I hear a call for the question?
Mr. Williams: You saw my hand first.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I request that you rule consistently. If there’s been two
minutes’ discussion by every minute as earlier, let us proceed.
Mr. Mayor: Good point. Mr. Williams, we have—you have been recognized I
believe twice.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, you asked for the motion. I don’t want to tell you how
to run your meeting, Mr. Mayor, but you asked for a motion. You got a motion and a
second, then you asked for other discussion. Now, we discussed one time. You didn’t
have a motion. I’ve got a time and everybody else got a time to come back. Now, if you
run the Chair, you run the Chair. You can’t have some sidekicks up here running the
Chair for you. Now, the—
Mr. Mayor: I believe that’s getting personal, Mr. Williams. Please, I will give
you your time. Go ahead.
Mr. Williams: I would like to hear from—not hear, I’d like to get a report back
from the attorney as to how our contracts are and the level [unintelligible]. I disagree
with the 60 days deal.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: I want to know what the attorney have already made reference to
earlier about the 60 days, Mr. Mayor, but I think something has been in place to share
with us. I think Purchasing was here last time and explained to us that a contract can’t go
60 days in this government, whether it be the airport or anywhere else. That was
something that was done back in 20 years ago and it stayed like that. And it probably not
known to this body. Had it been, I know I would have at least [unintelligible] but I’m
thinking that’s illegal. And I would like to have the ordinance that say what our contract
supposed to read and how it read.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: And not only that, every contract that the airport dealing with Mr.
Mayor, I’d like to see those, too, if they less than a year’s contract they don’t come before
this body. Cause we are the body that govern that body. [unintelligible] airport but we
govern that body.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Are you comfortable with that charge, Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir, I am.
50
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a substitute motion on the floor. Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign. The substitute motion was, Ms. Bonner?
The Clerk: Was to approve and allow certified taxi cabs that has been inspected
by License & Inspection and the Sheriff’s Department to work at the regional airport at
th
the end of the contract period which is June 30 of this year.
Mr. Mayor: This is Joe’s substitute motion.
The Clerk: Substitute motion.
Mr. Mayor: At the end of the contract period.
th
The Clerk: Which is June 30 of 2006.
Mr. Grantham: Excuse me, Mr. Mayor. Did it also allow the airport
authority to be the ones to negotiate the contract and bring it back to us?
Mr. Smith: That was in the motion.
Mr. Grantham: I think that was one of the things that Dr. Hatney asked.
Mr. Bowles: I will amend my motion for that clause in there like Dr. Hatney
described.
Mr. Grantham: We were concerned about who was going to put together this
contract or this agreement based on either us as body or the authority of the airport, and it
should come from the authority of the airport.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. That is included in the motion. Rev. Hatney, you just don’t
want us to have to do any more work.
Mr. Hatney: [unintelligible]
Mr. Mayor: I agree.
Mr. Williams and Mr. Holland vote No.
Motion carries 8-2.
The Clerk: Item 52. No, I’m sorry, item 37.
Mr. Mayor: If everybody’s good, we’ll take a five minute recess.
[RECESS]
51
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk?
The Clerk:
PLANNING
22. Z-06-25 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to DENY a petition by Clyde Ray, requesting a change of
zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) and Zone B-2 (General Business) to Zone B-2
affecting property located on the north right-of-way line of Wrightsboro Road, 404
feet, more or less, west of Maddox Road and containing approximately 45 acres.
(Tax Map 39 Parcels 3.04, 4, 5, 5.05 and 5.07) DISTRICT 3
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty?
Mr. Patty:
Mr. Mayor, this is petition that was initiated about three months ago
and after the petitioner initiated it he had some health problems and was in the hospital
and we were unable to contact him. And for legal reasons we didn’t feel we could carry
it more than two months under the legal advertisement we ran so we had no alternative
and he’s
but to deny it. Since then he’s gotten out of the hospital. I’ve heard from him,
asked that you allow him to withdraw it without prejudice
and I’m sure my
Commission would have no problem with that.
Mr. Grantham: So move.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Thank you, Mr. Patty.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
23. Z-06-28 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Randy Barrs, on behalf of
William E. Goss, requesting a Special Exception to establish Transition Housing per
Section 26-1 (g) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond
County affecting property containing .31 acres and is known under the present
numbering system as 904 and 916 Merry Street. (Tax Map 35-3 Parcel 416 and Tax
Map 45-1 Parcel 94) DISTRICT 1
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty?
Mr. Patty: This property—one of these lots is zoned Professional and the other
has a Special Exception for a parking lot. It’s being used by a chiropractor in recent
52
years and we’ve got a local non-profit corporation that provides transitional housing that
wants to go in that property, and the Planning Commission recommends it be approved.
We did have a couple of objectors at the time. One of them, I think one dropped her
objection, and we had a couple more that maintained their objection.
Mr. Grantham: Motion to approve.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion?
Mr. Brigham: Are there any objectors here?
Mr. Mayor: Are there any objectors here? Okay, we have a motion and a second.
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 10-0.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
24. Z-06-32 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to DENY a petition by Reverend Larry Hall and Reverend
Roosevelt Walden requesting a change of zoning from Zone LI (Light Industry) to
Zone B-2 (General Business) with a Special Exception to establish a temporary
housing re-entry program for ex-felons per Section 26-1 (p) of the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing
approximately .09 acres and is known under the present numbering system as 1694
Broad Street. (Tax Map 35-2 Parcel 180) DISTRICT 1
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty?
Mr. Patty: This is a request for special exception. Under our zoning ordinance a
special exception is needed if a use in any way relates to incarceration and it was the City
Attorney’s opinion that this use did—they have requested a change in zoning from LI to
B-2 with this special exception. We had objection from the Board of Education. This
house is approximately two homes away from Martha Lester school where the county
orchestra practices and performs and they had some—they testified they had some
daytime school activities for disabled children that were going to intensify in that
location. It’s a necessary, necessary function in the community. We all recognize that.
We just don’t feel this is the place for it.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, can you please state your name address for the record?
Mr. Hall: My name is Larry Hall and I live at 4034 Pinnacle Way, Hephzibah,
Georgia. When you look at the attachment, this is the program that we wanted to get
53
involved with, Rev. Walden and myself wanted to get involved with. We were also—as
you look at it, we’ve already worked with the transitional center and we have indeed
housed people from the transitional center in this home. We thought it would be no
problem because out of two years we haven’t seen anybody over in the building. I’m not
saying they don’t use it. I just haven’t seen anybody use it in two years. One of the
things, some of the questions—if you look at page 2, the goal of the program of course is
to get these people back into society so that they will remain crime-free. And it’s not like
we’re going to be—they’re going to have permission to just go anywhere they want to.
On the last page, I just took some excerpts out of the full program description and if they
have mental health problems they will not be a part of this housing program, if they’re
sex offenders they’re not a part of this program. And they will also have electronic
monitoring that the Parole Board and Pardons would also monitor them.
Communications, there will be a lot of communications between we the owners and also
some other people who have agreed to work along with us to help rehabilitate these
people. Matt Aiken has volunteered to get these, develop some programs, help them get
back in society. And if you know where the property is, we have the house right between
us and the school—that person that runs that facility also manages our home so he’s there
24/7 to manage the property. We have house rules and if there’s any house rules broken
or whatever, then they are taken back over by the Parole Board. What she passed out is a
brief description of what the program is about.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Hall, we played phone tag a couple of times and I missed you
but how many residents are you talking about having at this facility?
Mr. Hall: We’re talking about no more than four. We’ve got four bedrooms, two
baths, kitchen.
Mr. Williams: My question was to you [unintelligible] how many people was
objecting. Mr. Patty, do we have any objectors come?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty? Do we have any objectors here?
Mr. Patty: The only objection we had was the Board of Education. They sent one
of their employees down and they went through a lengthy objection based on the
functions they have there at night, which are the orchestra, whatever it is. And the
disabled children that are there during the day that they said they were going to intensify
that function at the school. This has not been used as a typical school for some time.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m a little biased. I worked with Larry for a number of
years and I know the character of the man and his intentions. How would you address
these concerns the Board of Education has as far as monitoring the people in transition,
making sure they’re not out running the streets at night, causing problems?
54
Mr. Hall: Well, if you look at the third page we have house rules, and the house
rule says they have to be in at a certain period of time. Okay? And of course you can see
that they have electronic monitoring, also the Parole Board would be involved with
monitoring them also. They’re adults and they’ve done their time. They are ex-felons
and—but we’re going to have a number of people working with us to make sure that
these people—now, I just want to make this point. We’ve already worked with the
transitional center and we’ve had people from the transitional center in this particular
house. Of course, when they broke the rules they had to go. And so what they did with
them after that, I don’t know what they did with them after that, but here if they break the
rules they are taken back into custody by the parole people.
Mr. Cheek: If I can close out, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: I just would like to offer in the form of a testimony to know that this
man is in this to take care of the people and return them to useful purpose in society and I
know he won’t put up with any mess so I have no problem with it.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney?
Mr. Hatney: [unintelligible] electronic monitoring; is that the device they put on
their ankle?
Mr. Hall: Yes, sir.
Mr. Hatney: They have that 24/7?
Mr. Hall: Yes, sir.
Mr. Hatney: Then they’re really not authorized to go out at night anyway?
Mr. Hall: That’s right. They have a curfew. They have to be back in at a certain
time.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard?
Ms. Beard: Yes, Mr. Hall, I think I mentioned [unintelligible]. Rev. Hall?
Mr. Hall: Yes, ma’am.
Ms. Beard: I believe I spoke with you yesterday.
Mr. Hall: Yes, ma’am.
55
Ms. Beard: And mentioned that we are looking at placing the Kroc Center across
the street and asked that you talked with the Major. Did you have a chance to do that?
Mr. Hall: He’s out of town. I didn’t get a chance to talk to him. And I didn’t get
to talk to his representative either. But I plan to talk with him and see if somehow we can
work together in some way since we’re so close to each other.
Ms. Beard: Because that’s going to be so important to that area and our city.
Mr. Hall: The property has been—there’s been a lot of work done to the property.
The property looks good. Our property. The property next door to it doesn’t look as
good but our property looks real good and I believe it would be a service to the
community and not a disservice.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland?
Mr. Holland: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor, I heard Mr. Hall, Rev. Hall mention a curfew.
What curfew, what time will it be coming in? What time is the curfew? 6:00 o’clock?
7:00? 8:00? 9:00? 10:00?
Mr. Hall: I don’t know the exact time. I know it’s before 11:00 o’clock. I don’t
know the exact time. But it’s before 11:00 o’clock. The Parole Board and us will decide
on the exact time but it will be before 11:00 o’clock. Our rules in our house is that they
have to be in before 11:00 o’clock. That’s the rules in our house now.
Mr. Mayor: If there is no further discussion, I’d look for a motion either way.
Mr. Cheek: I make a motion to approve this request.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Is there a second?
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Colclough and Mr. Holland abstain.
Motion carries 8-2.
Mr. Mayor: Motion passes.
The Clerk: To approve.
Mr. Mayor: To approve.
The Clerk:
56
PLANNING
25. Z-06-34 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to DENY a petition by Curtis Obannon requesting a change
of zoning from Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) to Zone B-2 (General Business)
affecting property containing approximately .23 acres and is known under the
present numbering system as 120 Sand Bar Ferry Road. (Tax map 48-3 Parcel
79.01) DISTRICT 1
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty, you’re on again.
Mr. Patty: This is a building that had been used as a nightclub for some time. It’s
my understanding from License & Inspection and others that it has somewhat a sordid
history at that location. It’s been vacant for a while. The zoning does not allow it to be
used for a banquet hall to be rented for parties and events as the petitioner wants to use it
in the future, and he needed the zoning in order to get that. We didn’t have any objectors
to it but the staff felt that it would be—there is an apartment complex immediately behind
the building that’s been renovated and looks good—it would be an impact on that
apartment complex. He does have an agreement with the adjoining property owner to
provide parking. There wasn’t adequate parking with the building but he does have an
agreement there that he presented to us at the meeting. But when you sort of balance the
whole thing, problems in the past, proximity to the apartment complex, staff and the
Commission felt it should be denied.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I talked with Mr. Obannon and he had
indicated that he had applied initially for a beer and wine license, alcohol license on the
application I think. Is that right?
Mr. Patty: I’m not up on the licensing laws. He did indicate that there would be
liquor served at the location. Whether he’d have the license or it be a different type of
licensing I don’t remember.
Mr. Williams: And I asked him to get with Ms. Beard and I think he did, but he’s
wanting to approve this for a place to hold banquets and other things. But without a
liquor license—is this denied because of the liquor license, George?
Mr. Patty: It’s his intention to have alcohol served at these functions.
Mr. Obannon: My name is Curtis Obannon. I live at 612 Macon Avenue.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. Obannon: I didn’t apply for a liquor license. Y’all told me I had to have a
liquor license to open a banquet. That’s the reason why we got a liquor license. That’s
57
why I had to go to the place and apply for a liquor license. Y’all the one that told me to
do that. I said I didn’t want no alcohol license. I don’t want alcohol at all.
Mr. Patty: So they’re not going to serve alcohol at this location?
Mr. Obannon: No, I’m not serving alcohol at all. I won’t sell alcohol period. I
don’t want nothing to do with alcohol.
Mr. Cheek: Move to approve.
Ms. Beard: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Rev. Hatney?
Mr. Hatney: If he was instructed by somebody from the City to buy this
license they need to refund him his money.
Mr. Hall: That’s what they told me.
Mr. Hatney: Get your money back.
Mr. Mayor: Can you amend the motion?
Mr. Cheek: So amended, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Grantham: That’s without alcohol license.
Mr. Mayor: Yes.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk?
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
39. Consider a request from the Augusta Mini Theatre, Inc. regarding the sale of
their property at 2253 Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard.
Mr. Mayor: Please, for the record.
Mr. Butler: Tyrone Butler. 2414 Madrid Drive, Augusta. As most of you know,
on May 6, 2003 I stood here and said to you that we had received an offer of $110,000
58
for property that the Mini Theatre purchased with SPLOST funds. We purchased that
property [unintelligible]. After we purchased the property we—the Department of
Transportation put a sign up stating that they were going to widen Martin Luther King
Boulevard and they did not know how much property they would need or which side of
the road they would take the property. So our architects went to work and tried to design
the building, the new Augusta Mini Theatre Arts School, based on what they thought in
terms of how much property the Department of Transportation would take. We
discovered that by—what they discovered, the architects, when they designed the
building and put the building on the property they felt that the building would be too
close to the street. So I came back to you all and asked if we could purchase property on
Deans Bridge Road which would give us more land and you agreed to allow me to do
that. So we purchased the property on Deans Bridge Road to build the new Augusta Mini
Theatre Arts School. When I came before you asking to sell the land on May 6, 2003 you
asked that I do a couple of things. You said get the property appraised on MLK. And we
did that. And the appraisal came out to $129,000. You asked that we leave the property
out on—to be sold—on the market two months. Of course, we kept it out for almost
three years trying to get more for the property. The highest offer that we have right now
is $125,000 for that land on MLK. So we’re here again asking you to consider allowing
us to sell that property for $125,000. We have set an October date for the
groundbreaking this year of the Arts School. So at this time that’s my request on behalf
of the Augusta Mini Theatre.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Move to approve.
You’ve done your due diligence. Thank you.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion?
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham?
Mr. Brigham: I’d like to know who he’s selling it to, cause I think the taxpayers
invested $190,000 in this property and I want to see who is going to replace y’all.
Mr. Butler: The offer has come from Good Shepherd Baptist Church on Olive
Road.
Mr. Brigham: That’s fine. Just wanted to make sure.
Mr. Mayor: Amen. We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now
vote by the usual sign. That was the deacon coming out in me.
Motion carries 10-0.
59
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
65. Discuss/approve Basis Swap Proposal. (Requested by Commissioner Richard
Colclough)
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, I put this on the agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough:
We’ve had this out for about a year. We had some issues with
it. I think they’ve been cleared up. I think everybody is aware of this basic swap. We’ve
done it before in the past and it helped us out. I think this will help us out again if this is
And I would like to make a motion that we approve item 65.
approved today.
Mr. Holland: Second the motion.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. I’m in support and we’ve been tinkering
back and forth, back and forth, but—and I’m trying to be an advocate of fairness. Have
we looked at—and I know this firm is here and I think they’re reputable and I think
they’re good. But have we compared anybody else? Have we compared any other
swaps, any other similar situations, I guess is my thing?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Williams, this is the only company that brought a swap to us
to us [unintelligible] we have not gone out and did any comparisons but I think the
lawyer can kind of explain what we’ve been doing [unintelligible].
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Well, now, if we spending any money now—we talking about
playing this game fair. I mean we need to let everybody have an opportunity. What,
what, what are we—Steve, I see you—
Mr. Shepard: I have some further expertise which I’d like to bring to the body if I
can.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor. Marty Stallone is here with Image. He’s come down
today especially for this meeting and I would like for him to speak for just a minute.
60
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Stallone, if you could state your name and address.
Mr. Stallone: Good afternoon. My name is Marty Stallone. I’m with Image and
we are headquartered just outside of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. We were hired by the
Commission approximately a year ago, back in July of last year, pursuant to a
competitive request for proposal for advisory services. After we were retained we then
were asked to evaluate the swap proposal that you had before you and we submitted I
believe for your August meeting a detailed review and analysis of that proposal. We
responded favorably that we thought that having weighed the pros and the cons of the
transaction that we thought it was a transaction that you ought to favorably consider.
Subsequent to that memorandum and report, we had—I’ve been before this Commission
a couple of times although I know there are some new people that are now on the
Commission, and we had a number of telephone conference calls to answer questions
regarding the structure of the swap and the alternatives. The key questions, just to review
because I know it’s been several months since you’ve contemplated this, and also again,
some of the new board members. One of the first questions that was asked is does this
impose interest rate risk, variable interest rate risk for Augusta? And the answer to that is
no. You are not changing from a fixed rate of interest into a variable rate of interest with
this transaction. And in fact, we have in our report a historical analysis that over the last
20 years, if you look at the change in interest rates as they have gone up and down a
number of times over the last 20 years, that this transaction is more beneficial to you
economically in a higher rate environment than a low interest rate environment. So the
concern that interest rates have been low and they might likely go higher is a valid one,
but not a risk that you are exposed to with this particular transaction. We think that
makes sense for you since that your other debt that you have outstanding, that is, fixed
rate debt, if interest rates do go back down again in the near future then you can either do
financings for new projects at lower interest rates or refinance your existing fixed rate
debt. This, on the other hand, if interest rates go higher, where you will not have that
benefit, this should provide added additional cash flow for you in a higher interest rate
environment. The other question that was asked in terms of the potential savings—
looking back over each of the last ten years, this transaction as it’s currently proposed
would have resulted in positive cash flow savings to of between 500,000 and 1.3 million
annually. And I think it’s also important to remember, and I think it was mentioned a
few minutes ago, you have already done a very similar transaction to this. In 2004 you
entered into an interest rate swap that although it is a fixed-rate swap, it has exactly the
same risk profile that this done. In fact, slightly greater because you also had to issue
some variable rate bonds. This is not a transaction that is new to you necessarily in terms
of the risk profile. But the savings are new to you and this should add some additional
savings. And it is not new in terms of the governmental marketplace. You should know
that we were actually the swap adviser here in Georgia for MARTA in Atlanta that did
exactly this type of transaction, in the amount of approximately $700 million, that we
were the advisor to that. You should also know that we are the swap advisor, again
pursuant to a competitive RFP, for the City of Atlanta, and I’ll be driving back up there
this evening for a meeting tomorrow where they’re contemplating a similar transaction.
So this is not an unusual transaction in the marketplace. Both you have done something
similar and other people right here in Georgia, as well as around the country, have done
61
very similar transaction over the last five years and continued to do them as, again,
Atlanta has one on the proposal.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I appreciate the fact that your
statement is that there is no variable rates included in this transaction. And also that you
approve the idea or you recommend the idea of the swap. But like Commissioner
Williams, I’m going to ask the question now that we’ve got to that point. You know,
why, why wouldn’t it be a recommendation that we get several people involved as far as
recommendations or proposals or whatever? And I think that would behoove us to go out
on an RFP or whatever to make that happen. Mr. Mayor, this does affect the Utilities
Department and I’d like to hear from Mr. Hicks in regards to his involvement in this type
of transaction in the past, as well as what we might see now for the future. I’m not
opposed to it, I just want to let’s do it in a fair and equitable basis.
Mr. Stallone: May I address the first half of your question?
Mr. Mayor: Please.
Mr. Stallone: Which is, in terms of the competitive procurement of the
transaction, again—first, our involvement was done on a competitive basis. And now if
you decide you’d like to move ahead with the product, being this [unintelligible] swap,
number one, part of our engagement and role for you, as it is with any other
governmental unit, is when you are prepared to enter into the transaction we will and are
required to by the tax law—and your counsel will ask for it—is a letter or certificate from
us that you have entered into the transaction at a fair market price. Okay? So there is a
certain value in the market for this particular transaction and we will make sure you get
that. The other thing that is important is because of this type of transaction, if you were
to competitively bid it the way you do police cars or some other fixed product, if you
have a number of entities who are pricing exactly the same transaction of this sort in the
market at the same time, you will actually—it’s been proven—you will get worse
execution than if you pick a firm and negotiate it with a firm like us.
Mr. Grantham: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. May I address the—looking at it the way
you describe it, and I understand what you are saying, but since we have engaged your
services to do just that for us, would it not behoove that you go out and contact or that
companies could contact you in regards to what we are looking at doing right now, and
then you come back to us with a specific recommendation to where—you may have one
today but I don’t think we’ve had the input from other people involved in this type of
service.
62
Mr. Stallone: We have essentially done that, going back, starting in July of last
year.
Mr. Grantham: Can you supply that list to us, who you talked to?
Mr. Stallone: Certainly.
Mr. Grantham: Okay. Could I hear from Mr. Hicks, please?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hicks?
Mr. Hicks: As I stated before when y’all were considering this last year, I know
about water and waste water and how to handle those services, but I don’t know about
buying and selling money, which is what this is doing. And I understand this is what’s
called a derivative transaction or involves derivatives. In other words, if you got money,
you pay a certain rate for it, and somebody else might want to use it, you in effect let
them use it or something. I guess if there’s no risk to it, I’m, I’m certainly not opposed to
a no risk kid of deal. It’s just that I don’t know. I can’t assess for myself if there is or
there is not any risk. The only thing that we would want to do is that we can always use
more money to do more water and sewer projects. Even though we have borrowed a lot
of money there are still several million dollars’ worth more of work to be done. I would,
I would wonder if it wouldn’t be worthwhile to consider. I wouldn’t be interested in an
RFP because this is a professional service and I’ve never been really in favor of bidding
professional services. But we do have RFQs, and that is where we invite those firms that
are interested in providing services to send us a resume of their qualifications and then
we’ll select those that we want to talk with and then they present to us how they would
handle such as this. Not a bid. I’m definitely not in favor of bidding professional
services. But and RFQ type of transaction where you’d have them come in, then you’d
listen to them, and then select the one that you’d want to negotiate with and then actually
negotiate the transaction. And this firm very well may carry the day in such an effort as
that. I don’t know. But that’s the kind of thing we generally do in a situation like this. It
does easy my fear somewhat to hear that this is not swapping a fixed rate for a variable
rate, because if you do that then you really are at the mercy of the ups and downs of the
market. So I thought that’s maybe what they were after. But if that’s not the case then
my only other thought would be would we do better to do an RFQ in which this firm
might well still be selected firm.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, only one firm came forward and brought this swap to
us. The same firm that we did business with on the previous swap came to us with this
swap. This is the only firm that made an effort to come to us and offer us a deal like this.
I mean no other firm did it. And so we have a firm that’s been with us, we have a firm
that’s been around with us for about a year on this deal here, and to send them out again
for further RFQs and RFPs I think would be unfair to this firm because they’re the one
who initiated the swap. No other company did.
63
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Hicks ever retire from the water and
sewer department, he can go into finance, cause he right on it over there with interest
rates and stuff. My question been answered, and I try to be fair up here, I try to make
sure we go by the [unintelligible] guidelines. This young man has addressed the issue
that I had, you know, that was in my mind, in his capacity and what they do. Seem like
we done touched base. And I kind of agree, if you go out and ask people to bid and then
they bid on the same money, I mean all they [unintelligible] the money still going to be
there. You got, you got ten people with ten different conversations but the same money
is still there. The same interest is still there. They can’t break that down, I don’t think
now. They can’t break that down any lower or raise it up any higher because the money
is going to be there. So I think my question been answered, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham?
Mr. Brigham: Sir, I believe you said you were going to Atlanta tomorrow?
Mr. Stallone: Yes, sir.
Mr. Brigham: To basically do the same thing you’re doing with us right now,
except that they’re going out for a request for qualifications?
Mr. Stallone: No. They have, they have contemplated proposals from firms to
enter into similar transaction.
Mr. Brigham: Similar transaction, but there’s been more than a single source?
Mr. Stallone: I would say that Atlanta is back where you were in July and August
of last year, in the process. We’re not quite to this stage at this point in time.
Mr. Brigham: But they are looking at more than a single source place for
proposals?
Mr. Stallone: The proposal that’s on the table right now is from a single firm.
Mr. Brigham: Single firm.
Mr. Stallone: [unintelligible] proposals yet, I have not been given them. I may
see them tomorrow, but the proposal that I’m there for the meeting tomorrow is from a
single source.
Mr. Brigham: Single source.
Mr. Stallone: Yes.
64
Mr. Brigham: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’ve been in these meetings where we’ve had several
meetings and discussed the same types of things. I’ve heard the issues that were issues of
concern by the Commission addressed and I’m satisfied. I think of about a million and a
half worth of dollars, dollars’ worth of additional repairs, unanticipated repairs to the tow
path and diversion dam along that need to be made. It’s more money for more pipes and
pumps and I think it’s time to move on with this.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Brigham, Mr. Smith and Mr. Grantham vote No.
Motion carries 7-3.
Mr. Stallone: Thank you for your time.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Where are we now? 37?
The Clerk: If we could, Mr. Mayor, Mr. White requested item 38, if that’s okay
with the Commission.
Mr. Mayor: That’s fine.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
38. Approve Market Validation and Building Programming Services Agreement
for Trade, Exhibit and Event Center.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, now I know we want the men to come before the
ladies and Mr. White has already been called up, by Ms. Nunnally has been sitting there
to speak on a Housing and Neighborhood Development issue for quite some time. I think
the staff is here as well.
Mr. White: I’ll defer.
Mr. Mayor: Barry, would you be okay deferring to the lady? You’re such a
gentleman. We’ll go with that one.
Mr. Williams: She’s a lot prettier than he is, I guarantee you.
The Clerk:
65
48. Presentation by Ms. Stella Nunnally regarding the contractors for the home
rehabilitation program.
Ms. Nunnally: Thank you. My name is Stella Nunnally. I live at 1030 Phillips
Street and I’m here on behalf of some renovations through Augusta Housing and
Development. And what I have been through, I don’t hope nobody else ever goes
through it. This has been going on since March of last year and it’s not finished yet.
From the beginning it was approved through ANIC. Now, ANIC didn’t have anything to
do with this. ANIC did the paperwork. The City, Augusta Housing and Economic
Development came out and did all the inspections. They wrote up what the house needed
to bring it up to Code. They told me that if I had any problems that the inspections would
be there for me. They were to inspect, they was responsible for the contractor. They got
[unintelligible], I thought he was going to do the job. No inspector came to see what the
contractor was doing. I’m calling. I didn’t get an inspector. I didn’t get a return phone
call. When they finally came, the inspector who wrote up the project was lied on because
he—I guess his supervisor [unintelligible] inspector who wrote up the project and I had a
confrontation. So he was going to take him off and send somebody else. So I wanted to
know what it was, but he could never tell me. He just said he wasn’t coming back. So
about two weeks later I found out that they was going to write up this inspector and send
somebody else. But they didn’t send anybody else to do the inspection. If they did the
inspection, if they inspected what they said that that contractor did, something wrong
with them. Because it was a lousy job. I started writing it down and then I said no, I
wasn’t going to write it down, I was going to tell them and whoever wanted to come by
1030 Phillips Street, the can come by and see part of that mess that that contractor did
and those inspectors who was supposed to be responsible did not inspect. Because a lot
of the work that he was supposed to have did at that time, had to be done over. When I
say done over, then when I kept going down there, requesting that the director come out
and see what was done, he didn’t do nothing. I finally come here in November and I
talked to Rev. Hatney about this mess. Got some pictures going around so you can see
what was going on. And this has been since March of last year. Now, my house was tore
up from the first of March last year, of course before then because I moved stuff. And it
still ain’t finished. And there is no reason. I’ve had enough sleepless, headaches going
through this, and I think something needs to be done, that it’s the inspector’s fault. It’s
not ANIC’s fault. They wanted to put it on ANIC but it was not ANIC’s fault. It was the
inspector’s fault cause the inspector said they was responsible for the contract, and that
contractor should not get another contract. Cause if he fix everybody else’s house like he
has, did mine it’s a wreck. And I don’t think—I think you all need to know this, if this
where the money going. It’s our money and I think it ought to be put to good use. And I
think everybody should be treated fair and nobody should have to go through what I have
gone through for 13 months. The facing in all of the windows that he replaced the
windows, all of them had to be replaced in the home [unintelligible] be replaced because
the wood that the man used, after [unintelligible] a blind man could feel it and tell it
wasn’t right. The information, the stuff that this contractor did and these inspectors did
not come, they did not return my calls, I went by that office two or three times and it still
ain’t right. I have some pictures and if y’all want to come by there [unintelligible] they
66
have not finished. And I’m tired of this. I don’t think nobody has to go through it. I
think if it’s HUD money, if it’s City money, or whoever money it is, something needs to
be done about it. And if anybody have any questions or you want to come by there, they
can ask them.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. That’s five minutes. Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, you don’t think this déjà vu, but—
Mr. Cheek: All over again.
Mr. Williams: All over again. We—
Mr. Mayor: Déjà vu all over again.
Mr. Williams: We had this similar problem and Commissioner Cheek was
accused of micromanaging and all kind of stuff he was accused of then. In fact, we was a
two-armed bandit or something they called us because we was on top of this type
situation. But I want to hear from the staff and see what the staff got to say, Mr. Mayor,
as to the same contractor still in business or same inspector still inspecting. I see staff
here so somebody ought to—
Mr. Mayor: Mr. DeCamp?
Mr. DeCamp: We genuinely as a department share Mrs. Nunnally’s concern and
we’ve made a concerted effort in conjunction with ANIC over the last several months to
essentially finish the job on Mrs. Nunnally’s home. It was, according to the work write-
up items, generally complete by early July of last year. But I think, it’s my impression
and I wasn’t, I wasn’t directly involved in a lot of the conversations and the back and
forth, but I think by early—I get the impression by early July there was a lot of frustration
on everybody’s part involved. Not only Mrs. Nunnally. The inspectors and some of the
staff with ANIC as well, with regard to this project. In response to Mrs. Nunnally’s most
recent concerns, and again we’ve been—after there were concerns and complaints about
the quality of the workmanship, in the last summer or early fall ANIC had personnel go
out to rectify some of that, some of those items. We followed up after Mrs. Nunnally’s
appearance here in November by having some other contracted labor do some work after
the holidays were through. Even as recently as today we’ve got personnel out there doing
what we essentially believe are the last three minor, minor items to complete this project.
th
When I met on site with Mrs. Nunnally on April 10, which was eight days ago, and it
wasn’t the first time I had done this, but I apologized to her for any inconvenience caused
by the lack of communication or miscommunication with regard to this particular project.
I said I would review and I will the procedures with our rehab inspectors with the intent
of reinforcing good service to all of our property owners. I also told her that we will get
together with ANIC to review the procedures and roles and responsibilities that we have
between the two of us with regard to rehab projects that are done in ANIC’s target area.
And again, I think I’ve already mentioned this, but we are—well, probably not at this
67
particular moment, but today we were essentially wrapping up the final items that we
discussed on site with Mrs. Nunnally eight days ago. We certainly are very concerned
about any complaints that we receive with regard to the rehab program and we want to
address them in an equitable and fair fashion. And we are certainly going to take her
comments to heart, make a list of lessons learned, and make adjustments as necessary to
hopefully assure that it doesn’t happen again.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, a few years ago, as Commissioner Williams mentioned,
we toured several rehab projects and it would have been different if it were one in ten that
we found problems with. The same list of complaints—shoddy workmanship, poor
inspection—the inspectors were approving the painting of rotten wood, the painting of
windows sealed shut, uneven floor board replacement, things that we went through the
argument of rehab versus renovate. Quality work is quality work and we’re still paying
the same amount. If we paid a contractor to do this work, if you have outlets with
exposed, open area on the top of the sheetrock, that’s not according to Code. It goes back
to—and I’m very concerned—if we have the same group of inspectors and the same
select group of contractor that seem to float to the top on all these projects, then that’s a
repeat of the same problem we had several years ago. And if we have the same
inspectors making the same excuses and trying to justify this as a rehab [unintelligible]
shoddy work’s okay, I’d be in favor of terminating some of them and finding people that
can inspect according to Code. People ought not have to suffer through this and I’ll close
with this. In the projects that we went to see, they didn’t have staff or time to get things
done on time, but they would have time to go into the hundred year old homes they were
renovating and take the cast iron, claw foot tub and spirit them out the back door and into
their truck and disappear. And that’s a case in fact. This is a problem we need to correct.
And Paul, I know that you’ll do the corrective action and the lessons learned and it
wouldn’t hurt to review some of the verbatim minutes where we had a hearing with some
of these same inspectors in here about [unintelligible].
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I just, I just like to ask Paul how much money did we
spend on this?
Mr. DeCamp: Well, according to the records that I got from ANIC, this was
approximately $27,910, is the figure I have.
Mr. Williams: And, and, and, and you know, some things we can rehab and some
things we can’t. And when the inspector went in and told Ms. Nunnally that they can do
whatever they can do, for that amount, that’s what I expect them to do. If they couldn’t
have done it they should have said no, this is not enough money and I can’t do it. We had
contractors, Mr. Mayor, who said that they gave a bid and they was to rehab this building
or rehab this room. If you going to do a room, then you do the room. But if you going to
paint outside, you going to do all this other stuff—and I looked at some of those pictures
68
where the brick was missing, they took off a block and laid it there and then
[unintelligible] the block, which you know, I understand you can’t make them a new
house, but you ought to do what you say you are going to do. You ought to do what you
get paid for. But when we spend that kind of money then the contractor and the inspector
both ought to be held accountable. In fact, they both ought to be gone. Whoever he or
she may be. If they went in and approved that. Now, if that wasn’t the agreement and
they just helping Ms. Nunnally out, then she—they didn’t get paid and they
[unintelligible] but somebody should have said hey, you’re not equipped to do this work,
we can’t continue to do that. But this is history here. This is something that we done
had—I mean I can give you some addresses where people’s furniture sit outside for three
or four months in the rain, Mr. Mayor, covered up with some plastic, where a contractor
went in there and worked and still didn’t do the house right. So I think they taking
advantage of certain people.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland?
Mr. Holland: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. This is in reference to what is being
discussed. I sympathize with Ms. Nunnally. I even spoke with her on the telephone and
she shared her concerns with me also in reference to the problems she’s had with the
house. But all due fairness to Paul and his staff, this is something that they inherited.
And of course has already been mentioned by both Commissioners, this happened years
ago. Now, I think at this particular time I believe that Mr. DeCamp and his staff will do
everything that they possibly can to try to correct this and hopefully this won’t happen
again. But in all due fairness to Mr. DeCamp and his staff, I don’t think they should be
totally, completely blamed for what has happened. There are those out there, those
inspectors, something needs to be done about that in reference to those inspectors. So
when we have people coming on board and doing shoddy jobs, we shouldn’t wait around
and let them continue to do the shoddy jobs. We need to get rid of them right then and
there and move on and get somebody else. Because it’s not fair to this lady to have to go
through what she has gone through and make it appear as though Mr. DeCamp and his
staff are at fault for what has happened. As Chairman of Administrative Services, and
representing from the administrative services staff, I want to apologize to her for going
through all this and hopefully this will not happen to you any more in the future, and I
feel sure that Mr. DeCamp and his staff is going to do everything they can to try to
correct this. And we need to find out who those inspectors are and get rid of them.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, this whole thing is resurfacing again [unintelligible]
there’s another one coming and I think you’re aware of it, where—you’re aware of it
because you had an inspector out there. This other lady has endured the same thing for
five years, where she documented every time she called Housing and Neighborhood
Development and no one ever returned her call. So you have another one coming and I
looked at her house and it is totally messed up. So it’s resurfacing again like we had.
History is repeating itself.
69
Mr. Mayor: Sounds like Commissioner Cheek and Commissioner Williams were
a good team, Batman and Robin. Y’all need to go out there again. Yes, ma’am?
Ms. Nunnally: The first time, you know, I had [unintelligible] before I could get
any results. And they had the contractor, the inspector, all there. And that was like June
of last year. Now, I moved most of my furniture out of my house. I end up having to buy
a mattress set because it stayed out there in that garage. I have had headaches,
nightmares, and I’m regular calling. Now, [unintelligible] Mr. DeCamp can’t say I didn’t
talk to him, I didn’t call him, and he knew who the inspector supposed to been, they
didn’t come out there, and those inspectors [unintelligible]. But I don’t appreciate no
inspector telling a lie on me and another inspector, to keep that inspector from coming
out there, to inspect [unintelligible]. If the contractor is responsible to the inspector, then
the inspector ought to be doing a job.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am.
Ms. Nunnally: The inspector didn’t do his job, the contractor didn’t do their job,
and I feel like Housing and Economic Development didn’t do theirs. And I don’t feel
like I should have to—and even now, they aren’t finished. You know, if you’re
th
interested in doing something, they had from November the 14 after I came down here
and talked to [unintelligible], he told [unintelligible] to get the inspectors out there, to see
what needed to be done. [unintelligible]
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am.
Ms. Nunnally: They were supposed to come fix it starting the second week in
January. They started the last week of the month. They come, they do so much, and then
they leave and then maybe a week or so, they come back and do a little bit more. You
know, the communication and [unintelligible] they did [unintelligible]. If you want to
come by and look to see if I was lying or not, cause I [unintelligible] last year.
Mr. Mayor: I understand.
Ms. Nunnally: [unintelligible] November. I asked them to come out there and
see what was going on. You know, if somebody [unintelligible] you need to get up and
see what’s going on.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. And I’m, I know. I very, very much appreciate your
concerns and appreciate you bringing this to us. I know Commissioner Holland, as head
of the Administrative Services Committee, we’re as a body there’s the [unintelligible].
Ms. Nunnally: [unintelligible]
Mr. Mayor: Ma’am, I gave you, I gave you your allotted five minutes at the
beginning and I understand—
70
Ms. Nunnally: [unintelligible] but five minutes I would have wrote it down. If
you don’t want to hear [unintelligible].
Mr. Mayor: No, ma’am. No, ma’am. We do.
Ms. Nunnally: Y’all go out there and look at it.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We do.
Ms. Nunnally: Come on out there. 1030 Phillips Street and see this mess. And
you need to, I’ll say it again, you need to get rid of the contractor, you need to get rid of
the inspector, and if you need to you need to clean house at Augusta Housing and
Development.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am.
Mr. Cheek: Motion to approve receive as information.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Moving on to Mr. White. Madame Clerk?
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
38. Approve Market Validation and Building Programming Services Agreement
for Trade, Exhibit and Event Center.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. White?
Mr. White: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Please keep it to five minutes.
Mr. White: Yes, sir. I’m here to present this agreement on behalf of the Trade
Exhibit Center Task Force and to remind you of who that is. It’s a five member task
force that you all approved from this body. Mr. Russell sits on that task force,
Commissioner Colclough and Commissioner Bowles. We also have a representative
from the CVB and from the hotel partnership at the Marriott. So at their
recommendation, with their recommendation for approval back to the full Commission I
71
present this to you and just provide you with a quick summary. There are two
components to this agreement. One is a market validation study. The original feasibility
study for the exhibit and trade center was commissioned in 2001 so the information we
have right now is about four and a half years old. We want to go back and make sure
that—our competition has changed some and we want to check that, we want to look, talk
to our potential user groups that we talked to originally in the feasibility study, we want
to look at industry trends, local hotel market and those types of things to make sure that
we are going to build the right size facility and build it in the right location. We just want
to approve that information, excuse me, review that information that is four and a half
years old. The second and the major component of this study, of this agreement is the
building program. And the building program will provide the details and the instructions
for the architects, that they will need and that we will need actually to let the RFP or the
RFQ for the architects. Specifics on the size, the structural needs, building codes,
lighting, audio visual, mechanical, back of the house spaces like the kitchen and the exact
sizes of the architects need and will need to issue the RFQ or RFP. This agreement for
professional services, the company is Strategic Advisory Group out of Duluth. It is the
same company that conducted the feasibility study for us in 2001. They’ve been working
with us periodically over the past four years in various stages of this project, including
SPLOST passage and some other areas. So we think this is a continuation of an existing
professional services agreement with Strategic Advisory Group and with that we present
this for consideration with approval from the task force.
Mr. Cheek: Move to approve.
Mr. Colclough: Second.
Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First question is how much, Barry, will
this crew cost to do the continuation of what you want to do?
Mr. White: This agreement has a cap of $130,000 plus travel expenses. But they
will not exceed 130,000 in professional fees.
Mr. Williams: Same question go back to the swap. Have we got the best for the
money? Is there another group to do this? I mean I think we ought to have a bid process
when we’re talking about $100,000, no more than 130. Is there anybody else that has the
opportunity to bid, to give us a price?
Mr. White: Not at this stage. Again this is a company that we’ve worked with for
the past four years, have been involved very closely with this project from day one, and
I’m not aware of any local company that has the time of specialization.
72
Mr. Williams: Not necessarily local. Talking about saving dollars. Ain’t got to
be local. I’m talking about a bid process. When you talking about spending the money
that we’re talking about spending. The other thing is, and I think you talked about the
particulars [unintelligible] kitchen and all the other stuff, the location, has that been
finalized as of yet?
Mr. White: No, sir it has not. We plan to be back before this Commission within
the next four weeks with that recommendation.
Mr. Williams: Okay. And I think that’s going to be important for us in our future
growth, that the location be in a, in a location that’s going to be beneficial to the entire
city for future conferences and different stuff to come. If we, if we don’t think about that
now, and go ahead and build the facility cause it’s convenient or because it looks good,
and not look at the growth around us, cause as we grow, when your great-grandson stand
up before somebody’s Commission and tell them that he wants to host a convention in
town, we want to say, you know, we able to do it because we built the convention center
back in the days when it was, you know, it was planned out. So I would love to see that
recommendation. I’m not opposing but I wanted to make sure that we, we advertise. We
talk about anything over $10,000 ought to be advertised in this body, that we have—
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland did you want to speak to this?
Mr. Holland: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. Inasmuch as I want to see this particular
project come to fruition, my concerns are somewhat similar to that of Commissioner
Williams and a couple of other Commissioners. And that’s in reference to—I’m new and
I need to know these kinds of things. Why some other companies did not get an
opportunity to bid on this. Are we going to do it or are we just going to accept this and
just pass this and not give another company an opportunity to bid in this draft? We don’t
have anybody locally or nobody in Atlanta or Columbia, South Carolina? That’s my
concern. I just want to know why, you know, this particular company just got all of the
pie and continued to use them every year and nobody else is given an opportunity. And
I’m on the board with you over there and I just want to know. Because fair is fair and
that’s what I believe in.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. White?
Mr. White: Again, this organization is one that we have full faith and confidence
in and they’ve been working for us, they’ve been working with us over the past four and
a half year and we feel that they are probably the most qualified in the country and the
sub that they’re using to provide some of the renderings that were originally done with
the feasibility study and to do some work on this project is a company called TVS
architectural firm and I would put them up against almost anybody in the world as far as
architectural firms for convention, exhibit and trade centers. So I think the, I think the
price is fair. We discussed this in the task force. Mr. [unintelligible] is here, he’s an
advisor to that task force, and he’s reviewed it and approved it. Mr. Russell has reviewed
73
it and approved it. And we would not bring it before this Commission without that type
of approval.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles?
Mr. Bowles: Mr. Mayor, as a member of the task force, I think it’s critical to
point out that what SAG will do is revisit their first feasibility study. If we go out and
hire another firm they’ll have to create a new feasibility study, which will prolong this
process at least six to eight months, I would say. It’s going to save us money by not
having to go back and do all the research. They’re going to go back and update the files
based on current market conditions of these users. Secondly, TVS, like Barry said, gave
us examples of all the convention centers that they’ve built. This is a partnership group,
is a company that specializes in convention centers. And I think that all too often we
don’t go with the best firm and sometimes we, in my opinion, it would be the
[unintelligible] large enough. I think that these people understand the need to build it, not
only to meet our needs today but also to allow us the expansion capabilities of tomorrow.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. White:
Mr. White: Just to echo those comments, you’re exactly right. The original
feasibility study will be updated by the same company who performed the original
feasibility study so they have an understanding from the client contacts and lists that they
used, will be same, will go back and talk to the same people they talked to the first time
around and they have that information.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I find this conversation very interesting
to the fact that I think we just went through a very similar discussion in regard to the rate
swap, where we were looking at the people who said they had been here a while, they’d
been proposing things, and now we are going to approve that one but we’re going to have
problems maybe approving this one because we hadn’t gone out for an RPF or an RFQ.
Well, if we approved this several years ago to have the convention center put in place and
for them to have the architectural work and everything brought back to us and presented
[unintelligible] contract, then the concept of the whole project. And so I find nothing
wrong with this. And I find nothing wrong with the other. I just didn’t like the way it
approached. So I’m going to find the same thing in this case. But if we are going to do
it, let’s all do everything the same way. Let’s don’t be beating around the bush. Thank
you.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m just going to remind the Commission that we
promised the people when we passed SPLOST V that this, the judicial center and the jail
pods would hit the ground as soon as possible. I don’t see any need to prolong this. We
have a group that is familiar, that can help bring it to the table sooner. The economic
74
development derived from the construction of these projects and the additional economic
infusion in this community from this convention center—every day we wait is two days
that we lose. I just urge passage and us to move forward and deliver on the promise we
made to the people. So I’m going to make a motion to approve.
Mr. Mayor: I believe we already have a motion and second.
Mr. Cheek: Well, I’m going to make a second motion to approve.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to go back to my trip to Hawaii when I was
there and they built a convention center I think in ’97 or ’98 and it looks as good today I
guess as the day it was built. I mean a really, really nice place. And I think that’s what
other, other areas or other businesses will bring or give us a different look. We talk about
doing another study but I don’t see why. The study been done. Any other firm ought to
be able to look at the same study and say after the study been done, it’s been done. But
I’m just trying to get us to understand in this government here, and this one only I’m
talking about now, we got a history of getting somebody in, that person stays in and stays
in and stays in. Now we talk about other things that this city done built and it don’t last
20 years and they fall down. We use the same companies, same folks. Same
[unintelligible]. We got folks doing streets and roads and we spent so much money with
them they don’t even have to bid no more. Just come in and get the job. That’s what it
seem like, Mr. Mayor. I’m like Don, I’m not trying to stop the project, but I just think we
ought to at least give the impression. We don’t have to choose nobody else but at least
you ought to do fairness. If you do one, Don said play by the same rules all the time.
But if you do one group, then the next [unintelligible] same thing and the same thing.
We got a history of that. At least we ought to give the perception. [unintelligible] look at
it, the man that been working for us, he’s got a little higher price but we want to go with
him. But we don’t even consider nobody else. That just gives the perception that we’re
not trying to do fair.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland?
Mr. Holland: I just want to, for clarification purposes, Mr. Mayor, as I stated in
my statement in the beginning I said I wanted this to come to fruition. I don’t think
anywhere in my statement I said that I would try to or want this be denied. However, I
still feel that I have the right and I have the opportunity to share my feelings and my
concepts and my thoughts in reference to what is taking place in this city, especially
when we are spending over a hundred thousand dollars. I said nothing about denying, I
said nothing about not having this particular project. But I do feel that I have that right to
share my feelings and my thoughts.
Mr. Williams: Call for the question.
75
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by
the usual sign.
Mr. Williams abstains.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 8-1.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
37. Approve authorization to submit application under the 2006 Continuum of
Care Process.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Johnson.
Mr. Cheek: Move to approve.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Ms. Johnson: I’d like to also is that 37 and 42 will be presented at the same time.
Thank you for your vote of confidence and your approval on 37. As you know, here we
apply to the Department of HUD for our Continuum of Care dollars which is an annual
allocation made available to entitlement cities and in asking your approval to enter into
this application process and forward to HUD. We’ve also recognized that it has become
a very, very competitive process and we have felt the need to get assistance in preparing
this application. Item 42 we’re asking for your approval in reprogramming $6,614.20 so
that we can enter into a contract with a grant writer and a grant writer reviewer. You
received that information, I’m sure, [unintelligible].
42. Reprogram $6,614.20 in R-UDAG Funds for payment of Continuum of Care
Consultants.
Mr. Cheek: So move.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second to approve both 37 and 42.
Commissioners will vote by the usual sign. Thank you, ma’am.
Ms. Johnson: Thank you very much.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
76
40. Reprogram $22,000 from the Augusta Mini Theatre for the Beulah Grove
Resource Center Project.
Mr. Cheek: Move to approve.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to ask the question, wanted some
clarification. It says reprogram from Augusta Mini Theatre. And in the backup it talks
about the Mini Theatre agreeing and approving. If this is a, if this is money that the Mini
Theatre has, how can we—I mean how can the Mini Theatre [unintelligible] for the
approval? Meaning that HED has the authorization—either they meet the guidelines or
don’t meet it. if they going to lose the money and you’re going to put it somewhere else
it’s one thing. But I don’t want to get into [unintelligible] where somebody approves to
get their money now and later on I’m going to get the money from here and the next
person going to get the money, and we’re going to create some more trouble, in my mind.
So I’m asking, I guess from HED, is this reprogram money that we reprogram from the
Mini Theatre? If they okay with that?
Ms. Speaker: Yes, sir.
Mr. Williams: Wait now, let me finish. Cause they come back. If they okay with
that? I don’t think they allowed to come back cause if you’s in line and you get out of
line and [unintelligible] I was here and I was waiting. These dollars are carefully divided
in your department so how can we let one group approve for another group
[unintelligible]?
Ms. Speaker: It’s my understanding that the Mini Theatre came in and met with
staff and the result of that meeting was that the money has been allocated for the
project—it’s not that they’re ineligible for the dollars. Obviously they are. But the
project is slow in moving those dollars. Beulah Grove’s project is ready to move. They
need it, this assistance, this additional money. So it was agreed upon between staff and
Mini Theatre that we’re not necessarily de-funding your project, we just need to move
these dollars, and we have another project that’s ready. As you all have requested, all of
this has gone before our Citizens Advisory Committee who also I believe approved that.
So [unintelligible] at this time and use them for another project that’s ready and as you all
know we have an annual application process. So if the dollars are lost to the project,
there’s always a way that they can come back when they’re ready.
Mr. Williams: My problem is—and I’m not against, I’m just trying to be clear,
trying to be fair. If we allow anybody to say okay, I approve moving any monies to
somebody else, then when the money comes back in next year then I can automatically
go back to the head of the line. I don’t think that’s right. That’s my personal opinion. I
don’t think you can come back and say I let y’all have my money to do something else
77
with so when this money comes—we got so many applying, so many people putting in
for funds, so how can we hold a spot for somebody, regardless of who it is? And that’s
the problem I got with it. I’m not fighting the Mini Theatre or anybody else but I just
can’t see holding a spot when it comes to money.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. DeCamp?
Mr. DeCamp: Mr. Williams, for clarification and I think [unintelligible] has kind
of alluded to this, it’s not necessarily a guarantee of holding a spot, but when the Mini
Theatre comes back with a project that timing-wise is ready to go, then they will stand a
very competitive chance of being recommended at least by the department for funding in
that.
Mr. Williams: And Mr. Mayor, I agree, I agree, but I just think it should have
been worded such as we going to use the money for this project because you’re not ready
to move. Not that you are agreeing to it and next when the money comes back.
Mr. DeCamp: I understand.
Mr. Williams: Because that gives the perception, if you tell me that I’m going to
hold you to your word. I’m going to wait. I’m going to do whatever it takes to get—
cause you done promised, in other words, that I can have that at that time. And that
going to create some---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. DeCamp?
Mr. DeCamp: I think Mr. Butler is here from the Mini Theatre.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney?
Mr. Hatney: Am I hearing this correct? What I think I’m hearing, what you’re
trying to do is [unintelligible] Mini Theatre has been awarded $200,000 and you’re
reprogramming 22,000 or whatever that amount is, but that figure really don’t change,
you’re using current money [unintelligible] is that what you’re saying?
Mr. DeCamp: I’m sorry, repeat.
Mr. Hatney: [unintelligible]
Mr. DeCamp: I heard most of it. Sorry.
Mr. Hatney: My question was, and I think I’m hearing this properly, is that the
money is being used now, if you don’t go ahead and use it—
Mr. DeCamp: 22,000 is being proposed for reprogram to completely fund the
Beulah Grove project which the bids have already been opened on that, the project has
78
come in roughly $23,000 under what funding has been allocated. What we’re trying to
do in the broader scheme of things is to reprogram—making recommendations at the
staff level to reprogram CDBG funds—even though this is a relatively small amount in
the whole scheme of things—to spend down these funds.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: Mr. DeCamp, does this conform with [unintelligible]
Washington, with HUD?
Mr. DeCamp: This is a small—this particular reprogramming—
Mr. Colclough: Is this part of the conversation we had in Washington, D.C., that
week [unintelligible]?
Mr. DeCamp: We didn’t talk specifically about this.
Mr. Colclough: [unintelligible] overall concept of what we—
Mr. DeCamp: Right. To spend CDBG dollars on projects that are ready to go.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, [unintelligible] one thing. Paul, one thing. How can
the bids be opened and awarded if there wasn’t no funds?
Mr. DeCamp: Well, hadn’t been awarded.
Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] process and all, they got everything in place and
they got the bids but they—I mean how can that happen? Cause you ought to have the
money before you even do the other necessary things, before you ask people to come in
and give you a proposal look like the money ought to be there first. And what we’re
hearing is, you know, they’re ready to move and ready to be, you know, forward on.
Mr. DeCamp: I can understand that, sir. This is a good example of—there have
been several projects like this over the months and years where a certain amount is
requested and I don’t know in the case of Beulah Grove. My hunch is that they initially
requested a higher amount, they were awarded the amount of $25,000 for this project,
and it’s systematic, there were other projects that don’t get allocated enough funds to get
done in a timely fashion and they just sit on—not being done because they don’t have
enough funds.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I think HUD is coming down Wednesday; is that right,
Mr. DeCamp?
Mr. DeCamp: Thursday. Thursday.
79
Mr. Williams: I think we need to get some clarification, too, on their guidelines
and we ought to obey, you know, kind of level this stuff out. Because I think we going to
get back to where we was if we don’t. But I think we need to go ahead and approve this.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the
usual sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
43. Approve the reprogramming of $172,329 in HOME Funds from the Rental
Rehabilitation Program and award to the Homeownership Program.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. DeCamp?
Mr. DeCamp: This is an item. Our Homeownership Program is our down
payment assistance program. It’s proven over the last two years to be a very popular
program. We’re currently down to a balance of about $3500 in that account and have 26
applications waiting on additional funds. The Rental Rehab Program by contrast is a
program that in talking to the staff we feel like it needs to be retooled, that there’s over
$300,000 languishing in that, that account without any particular takers at this point in
time. If you do approve this reprogramming that will still leave a balance of $142,000 in
the Rental Rehab Program should an application be forthcoming, application or
applications be forthcoming in the near future.
Mr. Holland: Move to approve.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] no rentals coming, if you ain’t got not rentals
coming you got something wrong. Something [unintelligible].
Mr. Decamp: When I said the program needs to be—the way it’s currently
designed, Commissioner Williams, it’s really geared toward the small individual property
owner that has a duplex and they live in one half and have a renter in the other half. We
have been approached even since I’ve been down at HED by developers of bigger
projects that could probably—if we retooled the program, we could benefit from it.
80
Mr. Williams: All right, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
44. Presentation by Mr. John Allen, III to address the differential rates for city
employees to the health fitness organizations.
The Clerk: Is Mr. Allen?
Mr. Mayor: I don’t see him.
Mr. Cheek: Motion to defer this item to the next Commission meeting.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Do we have a second?
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual
sign.
Mr. Brigham and Mr. Bowles vote No.
Ms. Beard and Mr. Hatney out.
Motion carries 6-2.
The Clerk:
45. Motion to approve an Ordinance providing preferences to local businesses
doing business with their local government. (Referred from March 29 Commission
meeting)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bowles?
Mr. Bowles:
Mr. Mayor, I have worked with Yvonne Gentry a few months and
charged her with helping me come up with something on this. Most of the other counties
and cities that we had seen had a 5% margin when it came to the bids. If they were with
I would like to make a motion to approve this item changing the
5% rather than 1%.
1% to 5% not to exceed $10,000.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. That is a good one.
81
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
57. Presentation by Mr. Joe Jones of Jay's Carwash & Supply regarding
problems at his business due to construction work on Barton Chapel Road.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Jones, if you could state your name and address and keep it to
five minutes, please, sir.
Mr. Jones: My name is Joe L. Jones. I live at 3324 Deans Bridge Road. I have
some property on Barton Chapel Road. I have a car wash and detail shop over there.
And what’s been happening, that [unintelligible] project, they told me they was going to
do things to improve my property but some things they did was dis-improving it, you
know what I’m saying. First, I have a list, I sent a list to the Clerk’s office for—it was
2004 I talked with the foreman that was running the project out there and I had a sign out
front he said they might or might not remove it. A few days later, I come and they done
snatched it up and threw it over in the ditch, busted it up. So I went back and asked them
when the project was beginning to close was they going to replace the sign. They said
no, it’s not our responsibility, it’s the city’s responsibility. So I go down to the engineers
and talk to them and they said it’s in arbitration, we’re doing that, we’ll get back with
you. And no one ever got back with me. So I got with Mr. Hankerson before he got out,
I got him involved in it, and he told me before he left they were going to replace the sign
but they weren’t going to do anything about the parking lot or the business that I lost in
2004 or 2005. Now, they came along and [unintelligible] move sewer lines, water lines
over and all that [unintelligible] property and also put in a sidewalk. The whole time they
were there for 2004 I didn’t have any water. And people that tried to get in there to use
the car wash, go in and put money in and it didn’t work, they’d get mad, cut my hoses,
took my [unintelligible], took my brushes, hauled off stuff. [unintelligible] Still I haven’t
received nothing but a letter from the Engineering Department stating here are your
options [unintelligible] he City Attorney, take the contractor to court. But I don’t think I
should have to do that [unintelligible]. It should have been put back the way it was when
they left. They come in and they told me they were going to do these things. I look at
the parking lot nowadays [unintelligible] drain. He come in and [unintelligible] on top of
it. He come back, he cut a [unintelligible] beside it for the drain to run off. But what it
does, [unintelligible] build up then I got a big puddle of water sitting in the middle of the
parking lot, sit there for two or three days. After that, then grass and stuff start growing
up. But I was told [unintelligible] I said well, I didn’t have this problem before you came
through [unintelligible] PVC pipe down and let it run off in the ditch like it was before.
They said no, ain’t going to do that, either. So that what bring me here. I’ve done been
down to Engineering, went through everybody I thought I could to try to get this
accomplished and I haven’t go anyone [unintelligible] tell me, give me any kind of
compensation for [unintelligible]. I lost [unintelligible] business, I just had to put up a
new sign up there [unintelligible] for 2004 I didn’t make a penny because the water was
82
cut off for that entire year. I don’t know whether the City cut it off or the engineering cut
it off, but there was no water at all that came into my property. I went to the Utilities
Department about a seven hundred and I think twenty nine dollar bill that they billed me
on for what. I finally got that off. They still charged $200 for [unintelligible] no water.
[unintelligible] allocate you a thousand gallons; whether you use it or not, they charge
you for it. So I need to be reimbursed, I’d like to be reimbursed or some kind of
compensation for what I went through from 2004 to now. Thank you. If anyone has any
questions I’ll be happy to answer them.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: [unintelligible]
Mr. Speaker: We actually—the first letter we actually received in reference to the
water being cut off and the storm drain was basically this letter right here. Now, on the
actual sign that he had up there, we went out there last week and felt that we needed to
put that sign back and also to take care of the storm drain. Now, in reference to the water
being shut off through 2004 and 2005, we don’t have any records or any letters from this
gentleman or anybody else out there about the water being—problems with the water
being turned off. So as far as being I guess reimbursed for the water turned off for the
year 2004, 2005, we don’t have any record, any letters, anything in our files on that. And
on the storm drain, on the storm drainage and the sign, we’re going to make that a part of
the punch list, the final punch list for the contractors. But in reference to water line, we
don’t have any records on that.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Colclough?
Mr. Colclough: Are you—you’ve put his sign back out, or you’re going to put his
sign back out?
Mr. Speaker: It’s his sign. He already put a sign.
Mr. Colclough: [unintelligible] back up there?
Mr. Speaker: In all honesty I don’t know if we were going to put the—at that
time, put the sign back up or not.
Mr. Colclough: [unintelligible] sign up there and the contractor takes that sign
down, they put that sign back up.
Mr. Speaker: Yes.
Mr. Colclough: The storm drain?
Mr. Speaker: The storm drain, that’s going to be a part of the punch list and
we’re going to get that corrected.
83
Mr. Colclough: [unintelligible] contractors at the entrance of my subdivision tore
up the sign we want to [unintelligible] sign back up there. I know if they tore it down
then we’re owed a new sign.
Mr. Speaker: Exactly. And that’s where [unintelligible] contractor will be
responsible for that.
Mr. Colclough: Reimbursing him for putting up a new sign.
Mr. Speaker: Exactly.
Mr. Colclough: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: I want to ask a question. The gentleman said the water was off for
a year I think, from ’04 to ’05. Was that just one location that it was off at, or everybody
on that side where they was working at was off?
Mr. Jones: I’m not for sure [unintelligible]. What they were telling me, where
they worked out, at the [unintelligible] my property, that was the central location for all
the lines or something. This is was I was being told by the inspector out there.
[unintelligible] they indicated that’s where all the lines—that’s the reason the water was
being cut off more [unintelligible] my [unintelligible] than it was anybody else. I’m not
saying that—when the [unintelligible] but I don’t know. Whether they cut it off or
whether the construction worker cut it off but I know it was off the whole year. Until I
came down and argued with them about the seven hundred and something dollar bill.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to make a motion we send it back to
committee, the we look at the water bill from the water side and talk to Engineering
side as well to try to find out. That’s my motion.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Colclough and Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 8-0.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
52. Report from staff regarding the funding for a maintenance agreement for the
Augusta Canal. (Referred from March 13 Engineering Services)
84
Mr. Mayor: Is there appropriate staff here to—Mr. [unintelligible]?
th
Mr. Speaker: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, since the March 13
meeting I’ve gotten in contact with the three departments and we came to an agreement
on a proposed cost sharing for a work detail to provide maintenance to the Augusta
Canal. The three departments are in agreement with the proposal that you have in front
of you.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek:
Mr. Mayor, I’m not sure—we’re seeing the dollar cost but there
should be a breakdown between Utilities, Public Works and the Canal Authority to cover
this cost. We’ve been beating this horse for several months now. We’ve got a waterway
that’s barely navigable because of the dad gum trees falling it. We’ve been working on
this for three years now that nobody can seem to get [unintelligible]. We need to move
forward with this and I guess instruct maybe the Administrator to come up with a
[unintelligible] if you will, to the three different departments to get this accomplished or a
funding source. But we’ve got some areas up there that are beautiful public greenways
that are used by a lot of citizens. We’ve got some areas that are in desperate need of
upkeep, maintenance and repair, and this would be one way to accomplish that. I’m very
disappointed that staff has kicked this around. It’s got to be six months now and it’s got
to be three years that we’ve been talking about developing a maintenance program for the
canal. It’s 140 or 160 years old now. The bricks are falling out. The trees are caving in
the bank. It’s time to do something or we won’t have it for our children’s children like
our forefathers left it to us to enjoy. This is neglect by inaction. It needs to be dealt with.
Motion to approve with the Administration finding a funding source to cover the
costs.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
64. Motion to ratify the authorization letter dated March 29, 2006 relative to the
execution of the contract between Augusta, Ga. and ANIC for the purchase of
Sunset Villa Apartments.
The Clerk: Mr. Williams pulled that one.
85
Mr. Williams:
I think Paul—is Paul still here? Mr. Mayor, my question was that
I know we authorized the money to buy this property [unintelligible] but are we going to
be required to maintain this property, this program, this property? And the reason I say
that, there was some discussion already about water main over there and what needed to
be done and utilities come out and [unintelligible] told them that there wasn’t nothing
wrong with it. Mr. Cook had some definite opinions about it but I just wanted to get that
I make a motion to approve it.
clarified. [unintelligible]
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Motion and a second. Any further discussion? Commissioners will-
-
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
66. Receive report from staff as directed by the Commission in its meeting held
March 7, 2006 relative to an inventory of the city's ten most marketable properties.
Mr. Mayor:
This was my item and you are in receipt of that report from the
I would seek a motion that this is referred to the Finance Committee
Administration.
for them to develop a process and procedures and to prioritize this list for possible
dispensation of the properties.
Mr. Hatney: Correction, there’s 11 on here.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Hatney: And it’s ironic that number 10 is on there.
Mr. Mayor: What do you think about that? Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I applaud the effort to get this list together and I full
support us marketing this nationally or internationally. I just wanted to make a comment
on record. Is the value of the 22 acres that we hold in Columbia County according to the
land values on the list here and the recent assessment we got of the property way
undervalued as compared to the surrounding lots available? Riverfront lots across the
river right here are going for half a million dollars for a quarter of an acre and we’re
telling people a hundred thousand dollars per acre on a 50 foot bluff overlooking the
Savannah River? I’d like to see that addressed. Secondly, on the pension property that
we own, the rail warehouse is currently in the position of having a nearly half million
dollar grant to convert that into a visitors center. It’s currently a tinder box sitting, with
homeless people living in it and also doing other acts that are not really human in nature,
86
all over the floors in there. It’s a tinder box waiting to go. It’s the only warehouse we
have situated exactly the same as the one in Charleston. We need to instruct DDA to
move forward with repairing the roof and securing that building, but that price for that
property, too, is way undervalued. I think we would probably offset our deficit for the
next two years if we offered these things on the national market to a private marketing
firm, probably I would guess three or four million dollars at least apiece for these two
properties alone and I, for one, am not in favor of selling the golf course.
Mr. Mayor: Well, that’s the first step in the process, to let Finance decide how to
go with it. Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I agree with Commissioner Cheek. I’ve
got some issues, I’ve got some serious issues now. We talked about looking at these
properties and I thought we as a body was going to look at these properties in maybe
committee meeting or maybe just among the Commissioners. But I mean I’m hearing
now that we’re already talking about selling property. First of all, I may need my
attorney to weigh in here. I didn’t think we could sell city’s property in the first place. I
can get a quick answer cause I don’t need the court version. I just need the Commission
version which I think out to be short. Can we sell City property? Just a yes or no. Yes if
we can, no if we can’t.
Mr. Shepard: Yes, but—
Mr. Williams: That’s all I want.
Mr. Shepard: I can’t explain my answer, Mr.—
Mr. Mayor: No, sir, that’s all right. If you say we can sell it, Mr. Shepard,
[unintelligible]. But I just think when we talked about this we would be talking about
selling properties, especially prime properties. Now, you as the Mayor for this year and
there’s an election coming up in November. We don’t know who going to sit in that seat
and it may well be you. But if we sell this property now and there is somebody else in
this seat and we don’t know whether or not they going [unintelligible]. But I was a little
disappointed when I saw the value of the property in Columbia County that we held on to
the Reynolds Street property, we kept it out of the Land Bank because that’s an authority
we couldn’t do nothing with. We kept that property out of the Land Bank because we
wanted to be able to make sure there was some good and positive growth. Well, I been
called a lot of names and crazy was one of them, and when I talked about a hotel that sits
in Augusta and North Augusta at the same time, folks looked at me like I was strange.
But that’s thinking out of the box. I’m saying that we need to look at that property and
those prime properties. Now, we got some stuff that we talking about earlier that we
can’t give away. But those prime properties, we ought to be trying to develop that or
getting these developers to come in, not even sell it. Let them take the footprint and give
them a long term lease. So I don’t mind talking about it but it look like once you okay
with talking about it we went ahead on and made provisions, made some contacts, made
some calls to get some things in place. I got a serious issue with that, Mr. Mayor. I don’t
87
think I’m ready to look at—this my personal opinion—selling prime city property at a
market rate that’s below everything else around those properties. That pension property,
we held on to it for all those years and we paid dearly to the pensioners to make sure we
could control—meaning we as this government—know what’s going to be built on that
property. And we don’t host any major conventions in this town, we don’t have anybody
coming. [unintelligible] new things that happen in Augusta and people starting to come
to Augusta but folks [unintelligible] Aiken, South Carolina and [unintelligible] Aiken
when the Masters is in town because there is no place to stay here.
Mr. Mayor: I understand. I understand, Mr. Williams. And yes, I come from a
real estate and development background, and this really is just the first step in a process
which would be a long process. This isn’t just going out and having a fire sale and
referring it back to Finance they could research some of it and they could come up with
exactly the recommendation that you’ve just come up with. I know it said sell on there,
but—okay, this one let’s hold on to and bring in a developer on. So this is just the first
step in the process. That’s what I’m saying. It’s my strong feeling that it should go to
the Finance Committee. It’s just a first step in the process.
Mr. Williams: And I understand. We talked about it. I agreed, when you asked
about looking at these properties, I agreed we ought to look at them. But there have been
so much other stuff that has been done and before we got our value, even before we got
these plats we ought to been able to sit down and talk about these things, even if we just
had a list of them, and then got the deeds and the plats on them to see how much land and
how valuable they were. But it’s a perception. And maybe that’s all it is. But the
perception is out there that we ready to—you can’t say—
Mr. Mayor: No, no, no.
Mr. Williams: I know we need money but you can’t sell you way out that way.
You be raggedy naked if you try to do that.
Mr. Mayor: Exactly. But Mr. Williams, as Mr. Shepard said, there are
procedures to go through and the values on these are just what’s on the tax books so that
doesn’t have anything to do with the market value. So once again, I assure you, it’s a
first step but it is by far not the last step. Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m gong to make two quick comments and I’m going to
be done with it. But this, the pension property, I really applaud you for doing what
you’re doing. We sat on it and managed it now and this is about the fifth first step we’ve
taken on this property without a second step. And I’ll say what I’ve said before. We
manage vacant lots better than any city I’ve ever seen and it’s time to do something with
these properties. They’re doing no good to us, our citizens, or anybody else sitting their
vacant. Let’s get them on the market.
Mr. Mayor: We have—I was asking for a motion. Does anybody want to make a
motion to that effect?
88
Mr. Cheek: So move.
Mr. Bowles: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, what’s that motion?
Mr. Mayor: Can you read that motion back, Mrs. Madame Clerk?
The Clerk: The motion was to refer it back to Finance Committee for
further consideration.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the
usual sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
67. Consider action taken by the legislative delegation regarding elected officials
pay raises. (Deferred from the March 29, 2006 Commission meeting)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney? Commissioner Hatney, did you want to
speak to this?
Mr. Hatney: Go ahead.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Hatney wants to say that this should not even come up for a
vote, it should have been—
Mr. Hatney: It is a mandate.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: It is a mandate.
Mr. Hatney: Waste of time voting on it.
Mr. Grantham: You make a motion and I’ll second it.
89
Mr. Hatney: I simply move that we accept the mandate and implement it.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the
usual sign.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, clarification now.
Mr. Mayor: Excuse me. Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Last time we talked about raises for elected officials we didn’t
know who was going to get them. So I don’t want this to go out again and come back in
about—
Mr. Mayor: No. No.
Mr. Grantham: The list is on here.
Mr. Hatney: The list.
Mr. Williams: The last time we talked about everybody.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
68. Discuss/approve changing start times for the Augusta Commission and
Public Safety meetings. (Requested by Commissioner Andy Cheek)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, thank you. I’m going to be as brief as I can with this. I
sent everyone a letter pretty much outlining the situation. I know that there are several of
us that either have full-time jobs or businesses or have had them in the recent months. I
also know there’s a number of citizens within the community that have to do business
with the government, that they have to take off, and in a lot of cases for zoning issues
have to come back repeatedly. There’s two issues that I’ve heard that are negative to this
recommended change. First, I’m going to remind everybody we’re the only body in this
area that meets this time of day, which does not have always—always have the benefits
that we seem to think it would have. But the staff that we ask to be here, same as in
Columbia County and Aiken County who meet at night, they are exempt-roll employees
who are on salary. Moving and changing the time to 5:00 in the afternoon would allow
them a full business day to conduct their business. Coupled with that, if we keep to a
90
5:00 to 7:00 schedule, and Mr. Mayor, have everybody go once around the table and keep
to two minutes, I believe we could finish our meetings in two hours. So I would like to
make these motions, one concerning committee meetings, and this first one would be a
motion to change Commission meetings for the period of the remaining calendar year as
a pilot to 5:00 with a target of 7:00 for a completion time. So I make that as a first
motion.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My brother is being selfish right now. I
mean I got to say that up front. I mean for one Commissioner, and we joined at the hip
before, for one Commissioner to want to impose to change the hours that’s going to affect
the staff, affect the community coming in, coming out, the camera people who operates
the equipment for us, and not only that but the citizens who have to come in and out of
this building at night, it’s going to put a lot of burden on everybody else. Now, I
sympathize with Commissioner Cheek probably more than anybody, but I understand his
point, but I can’t how we can justify saying that we will vote to change the meeting and
then put a time on it from 5:00 to 7:00. Now, y’all been complaining about how late we
are but we want to be here for the folk who [unintelligible] afternoon. So you ought to
tell folks to come at 2:00. Now, we going to be there late this evening so just come on
anyway. But if we want to stop it at 7:00 o’clock and it’s 6:25 right now, it’s going to be
7:00 o’clock in a few minutes and we still hadn’t probably stopped, been here since 2:00.
Mr. Mayor: But this has been a big agenda.
Mr. Williams:
Yes, it has, Mr. Mayor. But I just can’t support that. I just think
we got to be mindful of what we’re doing, how it’s going to affect not just the staff
people who comes and has to stay, but even the people that come to the regular meeting
and stay here. The Marshal’s Department, who has got to have additional staff to stay
late, the doors that have to be open to the public meeting downstairs. The expenses going
to be put on the City of Augusta and we already talking about selling our prime property.
Well, we going to have to sell the courthouse if we keep doing this, Mr. Mayor. I just
think we need to understand that we either do our business and get it over with as quick
as possible, but at the same time be men and women enough to handle the City’s
business. This is not a walk-through. This is not a piece of cake. This is—this takes a
lot. Now, we don’t get paid much but it takes a lot to do this job. And some people get
paid. But we don’t get a whole lot. And we’re not down here cause we want to be down
here. We’re down here because we say we’ll serve. If you can’t serve—as my
granddaddy used to say, if you can’t stand the heat don’t get in the kitchen, Sylvia. So I
don’t go in the kitchen. I stay out. And I wouldn’t be down here if I couldn’t handle
motion that we deny that and go on back
that. So I just thing that–I’m going to make a
to our regular business.
Mr. Mayor: Is that a substitute motion?
91
Mr. Williams: That’s a substitute motion.
Mr. Bowles: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute motion on the floor. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Mr. Brigham, Mr. Grantham and Mr. Cheek vote No.
Motion carries 6-3.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, if I can follow along with my request for the committees?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek?
Mr. Cheek:
I would—and we’ve done this in the past with no financial impact
and no sky falling or the lake [unintelligible] and flooding the city or anything like that.
But in any event I do request to make a motion that we rotate the committees such
that Public Safety is the last committee meeting.
Mr. Williams: So move.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the
usual sign.
The Clerk: So in essence, Mr. Cheeks, we’re just swapping out?
Mr. Mayor: We’re just bumping it to the last.
Mr. Cheek: Engineering Services will move up and move everything up. Just
unplug it from that slot.
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. Smith: Where is that going to put Engineering Services?
The Clerk: 1:30.
Mr. Smith: 1:30?
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Ms. Beard out.
92
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
71. Discuss Heery International's work authorization and the associated dollar
amount paid to date. (Requested by Commissioner Williams)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We get this periodical updates from
Heery International. This group was hired back two sales tax ago. At one time we was
receiving bills and we was paying them and it didn’t have any, any definition exception
the amount. It wasn’t no work related to it. It was just—we were just paying them. And
we questioned that in committee and we brought it to the Commission and I think they
got better with that and started putting down what they were doing. But this group was
hired for sales tax that wasn’t passed. And it was hired for the sales tax if it passed to do
some, some, some things for us. And we kept them on. I’ve got a problem with that
when we have not went out for bid to give anybody else an opportunity to do those same
services and we been paying and don’t know—I don’t know what projects they working
on. So I asked Mr. Leverett, since Mr. Russell going to be out, and I called Mr. Russell
but he was on vacation, so I asked Mr. Leverett to get a copy of how much money we
paid up until this date. And the jobs that related to those things. I see Mr. Leverett’s up
there, along with someone from—
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Leverett?
Mr. Leverett: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, Mr. Williams did ask that
we get the amount of monies that have been paid to Heery International and also a list of
the projects that they’ve been working on. I spoke with Bob Munger and asked him to
get me a list of those projects, but he was unable to do that. He will have those this week
and we ask that you would defer those until the committee meeting on Thursday and we
will have a list of those projects at that time. But what you have in front of you is the
amount of monies that have been paid to Heery International to date.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I mean, and with this document here
shows services rendered and other professional services, I guess, that had been
performed. But I don’t understand how we can not have somebody, and I know Mr.
Russell is the man who authorized the work that’s being done, but this company, and I’m
not saying they’re doing a bad job, I’m just saying that it was authorized to help us with
our sales tax that didn’t pass. We never came back to this body and approved that
company for setting anything up. We just kept them on. Now, if that’s the way this
government going operate businesses, then I expect other people to have the same rights
and opportunities. We can’t keep allowing that. I done addressed this at least two other
93
times. This going to be my third time, Mr. Mayor, where we didn’t even know why we
were being billed and what we were billed for. But we had not done anything as a body
to go out for bids or bring somebody else in. They was approved and I remember that so
well because the sales tax didn’t pass. I asked the question how can this firm still be in
existence if the sales tax didn’t pass, but still doing business? And if we just paying them
now, something wrong, Mr. Mayor. I think, I think we already [unintelligible] for
something and I don’t want to get set up for anything. I just like to know those things on
our next committee meeting that the Administrator brought in and to find out where that
contract is, who authorized, how did it get to be? I think that’s what I need brought back,
Mr. Leverett. I need that contract, Mr. Mayor. If I can get that contract brought back to
see who authorized, how that, when that was and whatever. Because this has been going
on and on and on. We talked about it before but we have not addressed it. And that’s no
knock on the company but I think anytime a company bills us, at least ought to put down
what they’re billing us for, and then when they start to tell us what they’re billing us for
they just kept on and kept on and kept on. So—
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney?
Mr. Hatney: Question. Looking at this document here, you say you have other
documentation that distinguishes individually what they have done [unintelligible] or
just—
Mr. Munger: Mr. Commissioner, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, my
name is Bob Munger with Heery. I was asked to get that list together yesterday and I
just, I tried to get it together and the numbers that I had in individual projects did not add
up to the total. I got some information—this came from Atlanta and I’ve sent it back to
them and said, you know, I need some more information because this isn’t adding up
correctly. So I am going to have the information by the committee meeting on Thursday,
if that’s acceptable. I would like to say one thing about our contract. There is a
perception that we were hired to work on the SPLOST V referendum projects. At the
time that we responded to the RFQ and the time we were awarded, there was no SPLOST
V. There was a SPLOST IV. And our contract says nothing about SPLOST V. It just
says capital improvements. So we were under the impression that we were brought in to
work on—we knew it was SPLOST projects but there was nothing about SPLOST III,
SPLOST IV, SPLOST V. There are some SPLOST III and IV projects that we have been
working on and were working on prior to SPLOST V.
Mr. Hatney: My concern is that the information that we do not have, can you
have it by Thursday meeting?
Mr. Munger: Yes, sir. Absolutely.
Mr. Hatney: I move for postponement of this until it goes back to committee.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
94
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioner Cheek?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, the problem we have is we hired this firm to manage
different projects for us, but then we continue to maintain staff to manage projects in-
house and really didn’t turn a whole lot over to Heery to manage. They’ve helped us
with the Law Enforcement Center and few other odds and ends. What this Commission
needs to do is look at the examples in the first sales tax referendum the school board used
when [unintelligible] came in and did a hundred and eleven million dollars’ worth of
projects and managed them without any additional in-house staff over at the school board
and saved enough money to pay for engineering, to pay their entire fee without any cost
to the school board and add an additional track and a gym. The problem we have here is
we want to hire a firm but we don’t want to relinquish control to allow them to manage
the new construction projects, while we maintain staff to manage our sales tax program.
If we turn this over to them in a manner similar to what the school board has done, they
can save us money, manage the projects, and when the projects are done, their staff
diminishes and goes away and we don’t have additional payroll to carry. That would also
free up employees in this city and allow us to redirect those work activities to other areas
of need where we are short personnel. But I see as the main problem they have had to
scramble to find work to do to fulfill their contract, because we don’t relinquish control
of them. But if you track on any of the road or drainage or other, recreation or any other
sales tax projects, we are in desperate need of a unified effort to manage these projects.
Like I said, the school board saved enough money to cover the cost of their professional
management firm and their projects were on budget and on time, something we cannot
say. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I concur with Commissioner Cheek in
his comments, because once we’ve finally grasp of this thing, we did turn this over to our
Administrator and to Mr. [unintelligible] to give us these reports and make sure that these
projects are kept on time and in line. I feel like that’s being done. We have the proper
motion before us right now to bring all this information to us so we’ll know the questions
that we really need to ask them on Thursday and I think that would help satisfy maybe
Mr. Williams’ questions, as well as my own. And so I think we’re heading in the right
direction and as soon as we can get that done then the sooner the better.
The Clerk: Could we maybe defer to our first meeting in May, first committee
meeting in May?
Mr. Grantham: Would you do that?
Mr. Hatney: Be fine.
Mr. Grantham: We postponed this meeting coming up.
Mr. Hatney: Oh, we did?
95
Mr. Grantham: Yes, we did.
Mr. Hatney: First meeting in May, then.
The Clerk: First committee meeting in May.
Mr. Hatney: First committee meeting in May.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I want to clarify something. We didn’t bring this firm
or this agenda item up because there was not enough work for them to do or they did not
do a good job. First of all, this thing had came up before when we was getting billed just
a dollar amount. Nothing associated with it. I think we addressed that and started getting
associated. But I brought the same question then, that this company was hired, and it was
hired and I need to go back and get the Clerk’s minutes cause it’s on the minutes that we
hired them to help with the sales tax in ’05. I say ’05, the last sales tax that didn’t pass
before this one was. And then after that didn’t pass, I asked the question well, you know,
the first is still here, the first is still doing, so we started them to do some other little
things. They start to looking for work. Now, if you hire a firm, you ought to at least
have some work for them to do. If you got to find something for them to do it tells me
we must have hired somebody that we didn’t need or we paying somebody to find work
and the Administrator was the one who started to take charge of this and find a little
something to do. They been working on several projects. But if that what they hired for,
I ain’t got no problem with that, but we going to do things right or let’s don’t do them.
And I got some more [unintelligible]. Well, Sylvia, I got all my papers, you know what
I’m talking about? I got all my figures. And the figures that on this paper here, I don’t
know what date this for, but these figures ain’t right. I can tell you that. I can tell you
that these are not the figures that since the firm been here. Now it may be this year up to
this date or for one year, but this ain’t all the figures here. I got different figures than
this, that it was brought—in fact, I even got the invoices [unintelligible] to show when
they was turned in, who turned in, it’s a long history of this stuff, now [unintelligible].
Mr. Mayor: And I’m glad you brought it up.
Mr. Williams: Well, I was just—don’t act like I’m crazy cause I—
Mr. Mayor: I wasn’t acting like you’re crazy. We have a motion and a second.
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: I believe that is it. Mr. Shepard?
96
Mr. Shepard: We can do anything I need Thursday, like the tradition started last
year.
The Clerk: We won’t be meeting Thursday.
Mr. Speaker: Move to adjourn.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion to adjourn. We are adjourned.
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Lena Bonner
Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and
correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Augusta Richmond County
Commission held on April 18, 2006.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
97