Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 17, 2006 ARC Commission meeting REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER January 17, 2006 Augusta-Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., January 17, 2006, the Honorable Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor; Holland, Smith, Colclough, Grantham, Hatney, Williams, Beard, Bowles and Brigham, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. ABSENT: Hon. Cheek, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Also present: Steve Shepard, Attorney; Fred Russell, Administrator; Lena Bonner, Clerk of Commission. The invocation was given by Reverend Frederick L. Patterson, Pastor, True Vine Missionary Baptist Church The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Mr. Mayor: Rev. Patterson, this is from the Office of the Mayor. By these present, be it know that Rev. Frederick R. Patterson, True Vine Missionary Baptist Church, is Chaplain of the Day, for his civic and spiritual guidance demonstrated throughout the community and serves as an example for all of the faith community, given th unto my hand this 17 day of January 2006. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: Obviously everybody knows we switched the meeting place to accommodate the crowd so we don’t get in trouble with the fire marshal. But we are going to be dealing with agenda item number 15. PLANNING 15. Z-06-01 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE with the conditions listed below a petition by Forum Development Group, on behalf of Nixon Trusts and Roger Graham, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1 (One-family Residential) and Zone R- 1A (One-family Residential) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) with a Special Exception to have a group of retail buildings which would exceed 15,000 gross square feet of area per Section 21-2 (a) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Walton Way Extension and Interstate 20 consisting of six land parcels totaling 44.8 acres. (Tax map 16 Parcels 55, 52.2, 52.1, 52, 51.1, and 51) DISTRICT 7 1. There shall be no development or other encroachment in the 100 year floodplain except for connections to sewer lines if necessary; 2. The only access 1 to the property shall be a new intersection on Walton Way Extension in the vicinity of Hebron Court to be paid for by the developer of the subject property. This intersection shall also provide access to the apartment complex across Walton Way Extension. The intersection shall be signalized and the cost of equipment and installation shall be borne by the developer of the subject property. If the new signalized intersection is determined not to conform to the AASHTO standards, then the new zoning classification shall revert back to the previous classification. 3. There shall be no access to Walton Way Extension except at the new signalized intersection. If outparcels fronting on Walton Way Extension are created there shall be no access easements placed on plats and deed of such parcels. 4. Illumination at the rear of the complex is a potential impact that can be mitigated by the following: A fence, wall or solid vegetative screen shall be located along the entire floodplain at least six (6) feet above the elevation of any retaining wall or fill at that location. For building walls facing the floodplain on the creek side of the property, all building wall lights shall be directed down the building, not outward; In the rear parking area there shall be full cutoff lighting that does not shine into the floodplain. 5. That the only development of this property other than development allowed in the R-1 and R-1A zones shall be an upscale shopping center consistent with the concept plan in the file. If site plans for such development are not presented within two years of approval of the rezoning then the zoning of this property reverts to R-1A. If development of the property does not begin within three years of approval of the rezoning, then the zoning classification reverts to R-1A. Mr. Mayor: I believe there is a representative. Prior to going to agenda item 15 I would like to recognize Mr. Randy Sasser to speak on behalf of the Foxhall Neighborhood. Is Mr. Sasser here? Mr. Sasser: Yes, sir. J. Mr. Randy Sasser, Foxhall Circle. Concerns relative to the rezoning I-20@Walton Way Extension from R1-A (Single Family Homes) to Business of 44 acres. (see Z-06-01 Planning Petition) Mr. Sasser: Mayor, if we could, we would also like to yield a little bit of that time to our Representative, Mr. Ben Allen. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Sasser: Our attorney for this endeavor. Mr. Mayor: I will—once again you have five minutes to speak and if need be, Mr. Allen, would you need an extra five minutes on that? Mr. Allen: I’d appreciate the extra five minutes. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We will take you first and then I will recognize Mr. Allen. 2 Mr. Allen: Let me ask you something before we get into this. Are we considering a vote on this agenda item now because I know that Mr. Sasser is on the agenda twice. One was to speak generally on the agenda item itself [unintelligible]. Are we now considering whether this Commission is going to vote or approve the zoning request? Mr. Mayor: Well, we also have a request, I believe, on the addendum to move agenda item 15 to the next meeting of the Commission. Mr. Sasser: That is what we would really like to implore that happen today, that that item not be postponed. Look at this group of people here in opposition to this zoning change. We’ve got to get on with our lives and this thing has interrupted our lives long enough and we would really appreciate the support of the Commission and your Office to go ahead and vote this thing as you see fit. If it’s [unintelligible] if that’s not what your vote is today. I don’t understand what postponing it is going to bring. Nothing is going to change. The traffic is just absolutely deplorable. 18,000 cars a day from a 300,000 square foot shopping center with one entrance and one exit onto Walton Way Extension—that’s absolutely ludicrous. We’ve got a flood plain there with Crane Creek, which everybody knows what the flooding problem has been around Richmond County. Crane Creek flows into Raes Creek. We really cannot afford to have this type of development. That property is currently zoned single-family residential. That zoning would make the least impact on the flood plain and on the traffic. So we’re desperately asking the Commission and yourself and your Office to please vote against this zoning change. The developer’s very own traffic engineering people, once they did their analysis—the traffic engineer that Forum Development hired, they gave this intersection a level of service grade of C. They also gave the capacity utilization at this intersection a B. Those are horrible, horrible scores from a traffic engineering standpoint and we desperately do not need to start out with a brand new development with that level of service. That is going to impact not only Walton Way Extension, that’s desperately going, definitively going to impact Pleasant Home Road, Skinner Mill Road. Let’s don’t forget we just moved the Social Security Administration office also out to the Augusta Exchange. We are going to have a number of people going to and from that office. We don’t, we don’t need a shopping center in this location. We talked about the plain. We’ve got very, very serious issues along Crane Creek and Raes Creek with the flooding. This will definitely put an impact, even though there is a detention pond planned, that detention pond is going to be at one end of the development and it is definitely going to, as it empties out into Crane Creek, going to be a problem. The comprehensive land use plan—this property has been zoned single family residential. When we did the traffic study, or when the long term traffic study was commissioned it was factored in that this property would remain single family residential. There was no plan in the long term traffic study of widening Walton Way Extension [unintelligible] or another 18,000 cars a day to be put out on to that highway. We’re asking for gridlock, we’re asking for a big problem from the very beginning. If the communities continues to grow as we all hope it will that is not going to get any better. That’s just going to get worse. So what we need is we need more homes. Homes and families are real growth. That’s what west Augusta 3 and all of Richmond County desperately needs. We don’t need to continue chasing our citizens and our tax dollars into other counties. We desperately need that property to remain single family residential so that families can move into Richmond County and have them a place to build them a nice home. Urban blight. A new shopping center. The people that they’re trying to attract into this development—my goodness gracious, they’re going to be leaving Surrey Center and the Augusta Mall, Barnes and Noble. Those are the type of tenants that Forum is asking to come into their development. That is going to present urban blight. Anther shopping center is going to be future problems for everybody in this room and we certainly are asking the Commission to really strongly consider a no vote for this plan. There’s nothing good about this plan. We’ve got traffic, we’ve got urban blight, we’ve got flooding. All of these issues are very, very real serious issues that will not get better as time goes on. It can only get worse. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: Mr. Allen, please come forward. Once, again, there is an addenda item that addresses moving this to the next meeting of the Commission. Would it be appropriate for us to go ahead and consider that with regards to agenda item 15 so if the body decided to do that we wouldn’t keep folks here any longer with regards to speaking. Mr. Allen: Your Honor, clarification. Are you saying that you’re going to ask the Commission to vote, whether or not you’re going to consider our presentation today? Are you asking the body to [unintelligible]. I’m not sure. Mr. Mayor: Well, the development company has requested that the agenda item be moved to two weeks from now. The Commission will have to consider that request but it is my understanding that it would have to—obviously it has to go through the body first. So in order for us not to—I’d like to go ahead and get the Commission to consider that. Mr. Allen: We would like to speak on that particular issue at the appropriate time [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Speaker: I’d like to ask the Commission what good is it going to do to postpone it. Ms. Speaker: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Please address through the Chair. We’ve got a huge crowd here and we need to keep everybody in control and just ask you to respect that, please. Mr. Sasser: Mr. Mayor, nothing is going to get better with postponing it. I feel like honestly that’s a political ploy because the developer does not want to face this room full of people. It’s going to be very hard for this group of people or these concerned 4 citizens to continue to interrupt their lives and their livelihood to come down here and ask for the right thing to be done. Mr. Mayor: I would ask that we now go ahead and consider agenda number 15, along with the request. Mr. Sasser: We have some handouts we’d like to pass to the Commission. Mr. Mayor: Please do. The Clerk: I call the Commission’s attention to our addendum agenda. Under the deletion portion of that agenda, there is a request from the Forum Development Group: [reading] I would like to request that the above zoning case, zoned B-06-01 be removed from today’s Augusta Commission agenda and placed back on the agenda for the February 7, 2006 Augusta Commission. Mr. Speaker: Was there a reason given, Ms. Bonner? The Clerk: No, sir. Mr. Mayor: Please address through the chair. We are working on following the rules. Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, in light of all the people who are here, you do not have unanimous consent to anything to the agenda today. I think these people came down and they want a vote up or down that [unintelligible] so you do not have unanimous consent to even consider that item. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard, is that unanimous consent— Mr. Shepard: I think that it is required. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Shepard: So therefore it remains on the agenda. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Shepard: Now, the consideration of the main motion, that also could be made that—to consider a motion to postpone, could be made. Mr. Mayor: All right. Based on your ruling we can go ahead and address agenda item 15. The Clerk: 5 PLANNING 15. Z-06-01 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE with the conditions listed below a petition by Forum Development Group, on behalf of Nixon Trusts and Roger Graham, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1 (One-family Residential) and Zone R- 1A (One-family Residential) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) with a Special Exception to have a group of retail buildings which would exceed 15,000 gross square feet of area per Section 21-2 (a) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Walton Way Extension and Interstate 20 consisting of six land parcels totaling 44.8 acres. (Tax map 16 Parcels 55, 52.2, 52.1, 52, 51.1, and 51) DISTRICT 7 1. There shall be no development or other encroachment in the 100 year floodplain except for connections to sewer lines if necessary; 2. The only access to the property shall be a new intersection on Walton Way Extension in the vicinity of Hebron Court to be paid for by the developer of the subject property. This intersection shall also provide access to the apartment complex across Walton Way Extension. The intersection shall be signalized and the cost of equipment and installation shall be borne by the developer of the subject property. If the new signalized intersection is determined not to conform to the AASHTO standards, then the new zoning classification shall revert back to the previous classification. 3. There shall be no access to Walton Way Extension except at the new signalized intersection. If outparcels fronting on Walton Way Extension are created there shall be no access easements placed on plats and deed of such parcels. 4. Illumination at the rear of the complex is a potential impact that can be mitigated by the following: A fence, wall or solid vegetative screen shall be located along the entire floodplain at least six (6) feet above the elevation of any retaining wall or fill at that location. For building walls facing the floodplain on the creek side of the property, all building wall lights shall be directed down the building, not outward; In the rear parking area there shall be full cutoff lighting that does not shine into the floodplain. 5. That the only development of this property other than development allowed in the R-1 and R-1A zones shall be an upscale shopping center consistent with the concept plan in the file. If site plans for such development are not presented within two years of approval of the rezoning then the zoning of this property reverts to R-1A. If development of the property does not begin within three years of approval of the rezoning, then the zoning classification reverts to R-1A. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] roll call vote so the public will know exactly how we vote [unintelligible] since this situation is different from our normal procedure, I think a roll call vote will be in order if we vote. Mr. Mayor: Okay. 6 Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I’d like for that roll call vote to be in District order. Mr. Mayor: Okay. A roll call vote has been called for. Is there a motion and a second? Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Okay, just for the roll call— The Clerk: [unintelligible] he was saying when a vote is taken, a roll call. [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: I’ll make a motion, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: A motion that we deny the zoning or the change of zoning on that particular piece of property. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: This the main motion, Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. Mr. Shepard: [unintelligible] I understand the request is for the Commission to have roll call vote [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to have Mr. Patty to come and speak to this, for one particular reason, is we receive a item on our agenda that’s been approved by Planning & Zoning and of course 90% of the time the favor is to go along with what they’ve done. I realize the dilemma that’s here and with the problems that the neighborhood has and with the questions that have been raised in regards to the safety issues, as well as the number of automobiles. I’ve met with these people on both sides. I sympathize with both cases. But for us to get a unanimous decision from Planning & Zoning to be presented to us, I’d just like to know how this was presented and why it was done that way when there is so much opposition involved in this particular issue. 7 Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty? Mr. Patty: First of all, it was not a unanimous vote. It was an 8-2 vote. This is obviously a difficult decision regarding this zoning. Similarly situated propertied are zoned commercial. It’s sitting on the ramp. About to be sitting on the ramp of an urban interchange. Walton Way Extension is about to be a [unintelligible] road, it’s going to be a urban section. The property is linear along I-20 and it’s separated from this neighborhood, Foxhall and the other neighborhoods [unintelligible] Crane Creek flood plain which is approximately 300 feet wide throughout the property. [unintelligible] not to disturb in any way the flood plain so there would be a substantial buffer. I think that there were several issues raised. Obviously in each of those issues there would be some impact. The folks on the lower end of Foxhall are definitely going to be see this development in the wintertime when the leaves are off the trees. It could be situations where it might affect property values at certain times. But not to any great extent, I wouldn’t think. The environmental impact, this section of Crane Creek has flooded numerous times but we’ve now got new flood plain data. The [unintelligible] recently completed the amendment of the flood map of this area [unintelligible] protect I-20 from flooding. The new flood plain data shows the flood that occurred in the Commonwealth project and other areas, it shows, it proves that that data—that that damage would have occurred and it shows that this area would not be damaged by flooding. The plans that they have—the central plan they’ve given us no intrusion into the flood plain, complete protection of it [unintelligible] trees so that there would be a buffer. The environmental impact—you know, no engineering is perfect. They would have to improve the situation regarding the 25 year storm. They would have to retain the 25 years storm and release it at 90% of the predevelopment rate, meaning that have to improve the existing situation 10%. The [unintelligible] impact I think is the traffic impact. I think that would be very real. The study done by the applicant’s consultant reveals that there would be [unintelligible] C and D and I think just the cursory review of the traffic that we did shows about 12,000 to 13,000 one-way trips entering and exiting the property on a typical weekday. It would be a traffic impact that would affect the new road when it’s completed. There would have to be, in order for this to function there would have to be a new signal between the signal that would be placed at the ramp at Walton Way Extension and the signal at Pleasant Home Road. [unintelligible] distance requirement of 660 but still with the traffic volumes in that area and the number of signals in that area the traffic would be slowed a bit. I don’t think it would be gridlocked like you might expect in some place in Atlanta but I think there would be situations where you’d have to through two or three phases of a traffic signal and traffic would be, by Augusta standards, affected. The Planning Commission heard all the information. They did what they’re supposed to do. They attempted to balance the various interests here. They knew what the effect on the property would be. Obviously the property is worth a lot more if it’s zoned for a shopping center. They tried to balance that against the impact on the community as a whole, some of which would be positive. These people would be paying a lot of taxes. They’d be bringing a lot of new retail to the area. As many of you know there’s a new generation of retail now called lifestyle centers. That’s what this would be. And it’s just I think a fact of life that as retail evolves and the new centers to some extent are going to replace the old ones. There are communities in this country that have done 8 everything they can to avoid that happening and I think they all have vacant stores just like we do. So this is going to happen. I think the Planning Commission balanced all those factors and I think they voted to approve it and that’s what [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Patty. Mr. Grantham: Let me ask Mr. Patty a question while he’s up there. George, based on the approval, and I know you back your Commission, committee strongly, but were these questions raised at those meetings as far as the safety factor of the one ingress and egress and also the flooding problems which you just alluded to? Mr. Patty: Yes, sir, they were. I think I didn’t mention the one ingress and one egress and that’s definitely the weakest point in this application, is there is only one way in and one way out. And that [unintelligible] right turn in the same general area and there is really nothing else that could be done. [unintelligible] anything [unintelligible] if that happened. It’s not something that we’ve got another example of in Augusta but there are examples in Atlanta and other places. It’s certainly not an idea situation but it’s just something [unintelligible] balance all these other factors and make a decision. Mr. Grantham: So George, you feel like that all request have been explored as far as the ingress and egress and the flood problems from the standpoint of the Forum Group and of the neighborhood? Mr. Patty: Well, like I said, they are totally committed to staying outside the flood plain. As a matter of fact if you see the [unintelligible] recommend they be imposed, which they’ve agreed to. It protects the flood plain to the extent that anybody can protect it. I mean some day this property will be development. The future development of this property could, you know—single family, multi-family, they could legally go into the upper portion of the flood plain [unintelligible]. They’ve done everything they can [unintelligible] eliminate the exacerbation of the flooding that already exists in Crane Creek. As far as ingress and egress, there’s nothing else that can be done. There’s one way in and one way out. Mr. Grantham: There’s no other contiguous property? Mr. Patty: [unintelligible] Mr. Grantham: Have they responded to that with you as far as any contiguous property that might be there? Mr. Patty: Well, before this ever came up in the form of this request I [unintelligible] owner of this property pretty fully explored the possibility of [unintelligible] to Warren Road. The engineer and I had extensive conversations about that and they found that due to the flood issues [unintelligible] where Raes Creek goes under the interstate it was just impossible to do that. That would be the only other possible way to enter or exit the property. 9 Mr. Grantham: Okay. Thank you. You’ve answered my question. Mr. Sasser: Mr. Mayor, can we address Mr. Patty? Mr. Mayor: You’ve actually had your five minutes. Mr. Allen? Mr. Allen: I’ve just a couple of comments. Because I’m trying to be sure I understand the process that you’re going to go through. Mr. Mayor, also Commissioners, what we have here—and it’s a tough situation that we’re asking you to consider. Normally with this [unintelligible] what he or she [unintelligible]. But you as a government, you have a responsibility. You have a responsibility anytime that a person comes [unintelligible] advocate [unintelligible] property. And we’re asking you as a Commission to take a look at the things that we’ve highlighted here today. The first thing, and Mr. Patty admits, that the traffic is going to be a problem. It’s a very real property. [unintelligible] Mr. Patty talks about [unintelligible] cars a day. The study that was done by the Forum Group talks about 16,000 to 18,000 cars per day. And with this I-20 interchange we really don’t know how that’s going to impact this area. [unintelligible] Augusta Richmond County is doing a tremendous amount of work in terms of roadways in this particular area. But we don’t know the full extent of what the traffic is going to be right there at this point in time. So it would be premature for y’all to even consider—for this change at this time period, based on traffic concerns. And then Mr. Patty also talks about one way in, one way out, no way to correct the problem. That is a serious problem, ladies and gentlemen. That’s a serious problem. Because if there is a medical emergency there is going to be a problem getting in there. If there is a fire in that particular area there is going to be a real problem getting in there. So traffic congestion, because of the one way in, one way out is a problem that can’t be overcome. Mr. Patty knows that. That alone is enough to deny the zoning request. And then flooding. You all know the problem we’ve had with flooding [unintelligible] flooding problems. You say, well, go talk to the developer. Well, usually when you have these flooding problems the developer is long gone. Who is going to be left picking up the pieces? The County Commission. That’s who is going to be left to pick up the pieces. And there is a very real flooding problem here. Take a look at where the property is located. You will see behind a number of these residences there is a creek that runs within a few short yards of many of the residents’ back yards. And now when it rains, when it rains—and we’re not talking about heavy rain—just normal rain, there [unintelligible] increased construction, particularly commercial, all this asphalt coming down, we’re not going to catch that water. It’s going into the creek [unintelligible]. You all know that and who is going to pick up the pieces? The County Commission. Because the developer will be long gone. On that one issue alone it’s enough for you to turn down this zoning request. And then probably most important, you’ve got public safety, you’ve got public health—public safety with transportation, public health with flooding, and probably more important [unintelligible] you’ll be asked to consider today is the integrity of the community. Take a look at west Augusta. This community where this proposed shopping center is being requested to be placed, this is a residential area. Why should you allow a developer to come in and destroy a nice residential area? [unintelligible]. 10 And for that reason enough it is enough for you to deny the zoning request. But when you put all of these things together—traffic, flooding, integrity of the community, it is overwhelming that you should deny the request. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: I think we need to give equal time now. Is there a representative from Forum here? I’d like to recognize y’all to come up and speak. I ask you to state your name and address for the record. Mr. Nixon: My name is Cobbs Nixon and I’m a representative of Nixon Trust and property owner. We have made a request to postpone the hearing today based on some safety concerns that we felt should be addressed with the property owners. We want—Forum wants to be a good neighbor. They want residents, nearby residents to come to their center. We have met with the Foxhall group and addressed some of their concerns. This is a new concern that we feel like ought to be seriously considered. However, I brought with me today Todd [unintelligible] who represents Forum Group and I’m going to let him make a presentation. Mr. Speaker: My name is Todd [unintelligible] and I represent Forum Development Group. We actually have a Point Point presentation [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: I think that might over the five minutes. Mr. Speaker: [unintelligible] I think the flooding issue, I think Mr. Patty has addressed that with you clearly and indeed we complied with everything we have been asked to in terms of staying [unintelligible] flood plain and the flood [unintelligible]. We will not increase the flooding on Crane Creek at all. We are detaining our water and releasing it slower than it would have been released [unintelligible]. I don’t think flooding is an issue. And if the neighborhood does want some type of [unintelligible] then we can look at that. But our engineering is telling me there will not be any new flooding or addition to the flooding situation now on Crane Creek. In terms of traffic, that’s another complex issue. I’ve hired a [unintelligible] engineer, nationally known, and I think Mr. Allen, the neighborhood, [unintelligible] report [unintelligible]. I brought my traffic engineer with me today and he’d like to explain briefly about the level of service at the intersections along Walton Way, and what A, B, C, D and E mean in terms of traffic. Mr. Speaker: To be able to quality the traffic service with the availability of a roadway to be able to handle traffic we use the current level of service. Level of service A is pretty slow. Level of service B is there is [unintelligible]. Level of service C is still a level of service—it’s kind of like a report card, I think. You make a C in history, and that’s not good. Level C of service is an area where even the DOT will [unintelligible]. We do not design roadways for A level of service because even your neighborhood streets would be eight lanes wide. So normally for the design of roadways, a C level of service is an acceptable level for a roadway to be designed at. Now, one of the things 11 that we presented to the Planning Commission, we did not stress the additional lanes that would be constructed under this new project. And the capacity for these intersections to handle traffic is at least double, if not a third again, three times as much. And that’s because you’ve got additional turn lanes, you’ve got additional thru lanes that you do not have now. Also, at Scott Nixon there’s going to be a thru right turn, and all those right turns will not have to go through the traffic signal. So the traffic that you’re experiencing now, for instance, at Scott Nixon, is much, much more congested than what you will experience with the new constructed highway with the additional traffic that this facility would generate. Another point to be made here is that on the—they are proposing a right turn lane in to the facility where traffic coming off the interstate would come straight into the facility and it would work quite well. Also, the study that we prepared and the information they currently have is for one hour per day. And that is one hour, five days a week, times one is five hours. The level of service from 8:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m., say twelve hours a day, would be sixty hours a week. And on either side of that one hour is either level of service A or B. So for 92% of the time during the week there is going to be level A or level B service. And level C, once again, is a very acceptable level of service. What you’re seeing out there today—a good analysis, the level of service out on Walton Way is E or F. Okay? So right now the level of service out there is considerably worse than what it will be with new construction, even with new development. So in our subsequent analysis we’ve shown that potential capacity is available and that capacity will not be completely used up today as it is today on the existing roadway. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. I think we’ve amply heard from both sides on the issue. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: If Mr. Nixon [unintelligible] record [unintelligible]. Mr. Meyer: My name is Steven Meyer. Mr. Shepard: One of these petitions indicates that you would test the intersection by [unintelligible] standards; is that what [unintelligible]; is that correct? Mr. Meyer: Well, the thing is the design—it’s my understanding that the Georgia DOT in the design meet [unintelligible] standards. Mr. Shepard: [unintelligible] that’s why I’m asking. Trying to clarify [unintelligible] intersection as [unintelligible] standards. Mr. Meyer: Definitely. The intersection at the entrance to the development will meet all those standards. That’s correct. Mr. Shepard: So the condition that has been [unintelligible]? 12 Mr. Meyer: That’s correct. Mr. Shepard: And could you for the record tell me what those conditions would be? Mr. Meyer: The conditions would be—conditions in this particular location that the design requirements of this intersection would meet all Georgia DOT standards, that they would meet all the AASHTO standards. That turns include turning radii, that includes lane lengths, that includes color of [unintelligible], that includes drainage, and everything related to the actual engineering and operation of the interstate. As a practice we follow all the standards of the federal, state and local entities in regards to geometric sign. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. [unintelligible], I appreciate the attorney doing what he’s doing but he needs to be reminded he’s not in the courtroom and trying someone with questioning this developer. The Commission may have some questions. But I think the attorney have [unintelligible] that. I’d like to get some clarification on the roll call that I asked for. I think Commissioner Brigham asked for it by— Mr. Mayor: By District. Mr. Williams: By District. Roll call I think, what we state is roll call as in name [unintelligible] I have a problem with that. But I don’t think you [unintelligible] 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Roll call is by name, I believe. I might need to get that from the attorney because he’s our expert. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Williams is correct. It is ordinarily by roll call unless a Commissioner asked for it by District. I didn’t hear anyone object for it to be by District. Mr. Williams: Well, I was waiting on a ruling. You got an objection, Mr. Mayor, cause I asked for a roll call. Not a number call but a roll call, by name is what I think a roll call indicates. Mr. Mayor: But then Mr. Brigham asked for it by District. Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] vote on it, Mr. Mayor, how do we resolve that? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? 13 Mr. Shepard: My ruling would be that you would vote by District because that’s what has been requested by Mr. Brigham. If you wish to appeal that ruling [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Either way I think we’re going to get the same vote on this. Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] confused. I asked for a roll call vote, not Mr. Brigham. Mr. Brigham asked for an alternate vote or alternate call. Mr. Mayor: I believe that Mr. Brigham just said that he could clarify that; is that correct, Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: I asked for it to be called by number, is what I asked. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, he asked for it by number, I asked for it by name, how do we resolve it? Mr. Mayor: It was my understanding Mr. Brigham was clarifying and asking for it by District. Mr. Williams: I understand that. But we [unintelligible] I agree for it by name and he asked for it by District. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, here again I think it’s semantics. Whichever way it goes, the vote will go the same. Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Brigham has asked that that be [unintelligible] and I did not hear an objection. And to be honest, the rule is the roll call is by District or by number [unintelligible], I mean by alpha or by District. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Shepard: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, as it was, your first request, we will go by alpha on the roll call vote. Once again, it’s semantics. Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I understand where they’re coming from with this roll call and that’s fine with me. But I’d like to clarify the fact that I don’t think we still have answered the two questions in regards to the safety factor that is 14 involved here or the flooding problems, and so I’m going to make a substitute motion that we postpone this decision until, until we get those answers and then I think we have given everyone the opportunity to make their decisions in regards to this particular issue. And there’s a no win situation for either party in this so I think we need to go the full length of determining all of the areas that needs to be determined so that there’s not a doubt in mind when the vote is given for this decision. Mr. Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioner will now vote by—Mr. Smith? Mr. Smith: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Okay. The Commission will now vote by a roll call vote by alpha on this substitute motion. Ms. Beard: No. Mr. Brigham: No. Mr. Bowles: Yes. Mr. Colclough: No. Mr. Grantham: Yes. Mr. Hatney: No. Mr. Holland: No. Mr. Smith: Yes. Mr. Williams: No Motion fails 3-6. Mr. Mayor: Okay, the Commission will now vote on the original motion by roll call vote by alpha. The Clerk: The original motion was to deny the petition. Mr. Williams and Mr. Hatney. To deny the petition. Ms. Beard: Yes. Mr. Brigham: Yes. Mr. Bowles: No. Mr. Colclough: Yes. Mr. Grantham: No. Mr. Hatney: Yes. Mr. Holland: Yes. Mr. Smith: No. Mr. Williams: Yes. Motion carries 6-3. (78 objectors to the petition noted) 15 [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: I now call for a recess. We will reconvene upstairs. [RECESS] The Clerk: --by His Honor, Deke Copenhaver, to Dayquan Miller: Greetings. By virtue of the power and authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of this state and pursuance of your appointment, I do hereby commission you the said Mayor for the Day. You are thereby authorized and required to perform all and singular the duties incumbent on you as said ambassador according to the laws and the trust reposed in you. Given unto my hand and the seal of the Office of the Mayor at the Municipal th Building in the city of Augusta, Georgia, on the 17 day of January in the year of our Lord, 2006. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: Congratulations. I will go ahead and call the meeting back to order. It’s my understanding that the representatives of the Buffalo Solders have left and will do the presentation another day, so we will now do the item agenda B, the Employee of the Month award. RECOGNITION(S) B. Employee of the Month Mr. B.J. Rucker, Facilities Maintenance Construction, Public Services. The Clerk: Mayor Copenhaver, the Employee Recognition Committee has selected—Mr. B. J. Rucker, would you please join the Mayor here at the podium, along with representatives from the Public Services Division? The Employee Recognition Committee has selected Mr. B. J. Rucker as the December, 2005 Employee of the Month for the City of Augusta. Mr. Rucker has been employed as an employee with the city of Augusta for twelve years as a carpenter for the facilities maintenance construction shop under Public Services. Mr. Rucker was nominated by his fellow co-worker, Carlton Todd Thomas. Mr. Rucker was nominated because of the pride and great attitude he exhibits whenever he starts a project. He has sacrificed his weekends on several occasions to ensure that tasks are completed in a timely manner. He is also very innovative in finding ways to be cost effective with funds and man hours. His dedication and hard work has led him to become a leader for the construction shop. The committee felt that based on his co-worker’s recommendation and Mr. Rucker’s dedicated and loyal service to the City of Augusta he should be awarded Employee of the Month. We would appreciate you in joining us in awarded Mr. Rucker Employee of the Month for the month of December. 16 [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Speaker: [unintelligible] I just want to echo what they said about his dedication. He takes pride [unintelligible] service and [unintelligible] whatever he does, he does it [unintelligible]. We appreciate what he does. Thank you. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: We’ll go on to agenda item C, the presentation of the 2005 Employee of the Year award. C. Presentation of the 2005 Employee of the Year Award. The Clerk: This will handled by the Employee Selection Committee. Mr. Williamson: Mayor Copenhaver, lady and gentlemen of the Commission, thank you for letting us be here today to select the Employee of the Year. For those of you who do not know me, I am Jim Williamson, a member of the Employee Recognition Committee. I am the representative for the Augusta Engineering Department. I want to tell you a little bit about the Employee of the Month program and how we go about selecting those people. I’d also before I start, real quickly, I know y’all have a big agenda today, is to recognize the first Employee of the Month in 2000 and she’s here. Julia Lee. That was our very first Employee of the Month. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Williamson: The Employee of the Month program was started in July of 2000. Each month one employee for the City of Augusta is selected from the nominations received. The winner receives an award, one day off with pay, and a letter of congratulations from the Mayor. Each year we also select from the twelve monthly winners an Employee of the Year. The year is calculated from December to November of the following. And I’d like to recognize the Employee Recognition Committee. We have Teresa Dixon from the Marshal’s Department. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Williamson: Joyce C. Ford from Augusta Housing and Economic Development Department. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Williamson: Chris James from the Augusta Fire Department. [A round of applause is given.] 17 Mr. Williamson: Linda R. Hand from the Recreation and Parks Department. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Williamson: Any myself, Jim Williamson from the Engineering Department. I handed out a little flyer to each of you. It’s the criteria for selecting the Employee of the Month and it shows you which departments are covered by which individual so that you know who represents who. I’d like to call on Chris James. He’s going to tell you a little more about the Employee of the Year. Mr. James: Good evening. Just to give you a brief description on how the program works, nominees are any Augusta government employees that are nominated by other employees, passed through their Department head and submitted to the Employee Recognition Committee. These things have to be submitted to us before the fifth of each month and at that time we select an Employee of the Month based on work performance and outstanding job duties. Each month, each winner for each month is eligible to be the Employee of the Year. The Employee of the Year will be recognized in front of the Commission, the Employee of the Year is also given $100 gift certificate from Best Buy. At this time, I will have Teresa Dixon and Joyce Ford introduce you to all of the winners from the past year. Ms. Dixon: Good afternoon. As I call your name, if you’ll come stand up front, please. Anthony “Tony” Williams, the December 2004 winner, Public Works and Engineering. Joshua Cole, winner of January 2005, Augusta Regional Airport. Our dual—Chester Willis and Joe Crozier, Risk Management, February 2005. Lori Videtto, Public Works/Engineering, March 2005. Ralph Jenkins, Fire Department, April 2005. Joyce, will you continue? Ms. Ford: Charles Wallens, Marshal’s Department, June 2005. Harold Davenport, Augusta Utilities Department, July 2005. Donnie “Bo” Chavous, Augusta Regional Airport, August 2005. Earnestine Phelps, Public Services, September 2005. Beverly Wright, Trees and Landscaping, October 2005. Now we will hear from Ms. Linda Hand, introduction of 2005 Employee of the Year. Ms. Dixon: Will you give all these a hand? [A round of applause is given.] Ms. Hand: It is indeed a pleasure to come here every year and recognize the top of the 2600 employees in Richmond County. And this is the hardest decision that we have to make every year. This committee is a great committee but when it comes to this we do get into arguments so it takes a while to do that. This year the winner is Ralph Jenkins from the Richmond County Fire Department. [A round of applause is given.] 18 Ms. Hand: All of the winners, monthly winners, y’all are invited to a reception on the second floor, which is a very hot spot today down on the other end of the hall. So y’all just come go with us. Thank you. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: In order to try and get a few more people out of here, we’re going to go on to the consent agenda. Items 1 through 13. The Clerk: The consent agenda consists of items 1 through 13. Our planning petitions, if there are any objectors to any of the planning petitions would you please signify your objections by raising your hand once the petition is read? For clarification purposes, items 1 and 9 are the same item. Item 1 and 9, a duplication. PLANNING 1. ZA-R-173 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition to consider an amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County to modify the General and Specific Land Use Requirements regarding Off-street Parking and Loading (Section 4). 2. Z-06-02 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that the radio tower not exceed 100 feet in height; a petition by Matthew Judd, on behalf of Good News Church, requesting a Special Exception to establish a church radio tower per Section 26-1 (A) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property located at 400 Warren Road which contains 7.47 acres which is part of the Good News Church. (Part of Tax Map 17 Parcel 26) DISTRICT 7 3. Z-06-03 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Reverend Carlos Quinones, on behalf of Dennis C. Stanfield, requesting a Special Exception to establish a church related activities including a day care per Section 26-1 (A) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property known under the present numbering system as 1021 Patriots Way and containing 2.06 acres. (Tax Map 11 Parcel 74) DISTRICT 7 4. Z-06-04 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by SAA, on behalf of Thomas W. Hitt, requesting a change of zoning from Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) to A (Agriculture) affecting property known under the present numbering system as 3647 Wrightsboro Road which contains approximately .51 acres. (Tax Map 40 Parcel 114) DISTRICT 3 5. Z-06-05 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Jonathan Marshall, on behalf of Marshall & Turner Properties LLC, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1B (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) affecting property 19 known under the present numbering system as 1920 Pennsylvania Avenue and contains .21 acres. (Tax Map 56-2 Parcel 49) DISTRICT 3 6. Z-06-07 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Nathaniel Dunn requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) to Zone P-1 (Professional) affecting property known under the present numbering system as 1388 Laney-Walker Boulevard which contains .15 acres. (Tax Map 46-3 Parcel 258) DISTRICT 1 The Clerk: Are there any objectors to those planning petitions? No objectors, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to have members consider adding item 14 to the consent agenda. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to add a few items to consent agenda, if I can. The Clerk: Mr. Mayor, before we start can I go ahead and announce this petition? Mr. Mayor: Yes, go ahead. The Clerk: Item 14 under our regular portion of the agenda. PLANNING 14. Z-06-06 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE with the following conditions 1) a 50 foot undisturbed natural buffer be maintained along the property line adjacent to Kingston Subdivision and 2) that there be no access to Dominica Drive; a petition by Jack N. Coley, on behalf of the Curtis Baptist Foundation, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property known under the present numbering system as 1128 Marks Church Road which contains approximately 11.4 acres. (Tax Map 31 Parcel 4.1) DISTRICT 3 The Clerk: Are there any objectors to that petition? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to see about adding some to the consent if I can, if no other Commissioner have any problem with those. I’d like to add item 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 26, 29 and 30, 32, 34, 36, 37 and 38, Mr. Mayor, 41. 20 The Clerk: [unintelligible] Mr. Williams: All right. 42, 43, 44 and 45 and 46, Mr. Mayor. 51, Mr. Mayor. 52. The Clerk: [unintelligible] Mr. Williams: All right. 55, 56, 57, 58, and 59, Mr. Mayor. The Clerk: Mr. Mayor? Item 58, it’s suggested through the Mayor that the meetings begin at 1:00. Do you want to make that a part of the motion if it meets no objection from the members of the Commission? Mr. Mayor: Is there any discussion on that? Does 1:00 o’clock sound like a reasonable— Mr. Williams: Is that just— Mr. Grantham: That’s just for Wednesday [unintelligible]? The Clerk: [unintelligible] Wednesday. Mr. Mayor: That’s just shifting to Wednesday to make sure people aren’t late for church. Mr. Hatney: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: We’re trying to keep the meetings short so you can get to church on time. Mr. Williams: I got no problem, Mr. Mayor, if that’s just for those two particular days that we changing. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Hatney: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Mr. Hatney. Mr. Hatney: On number 17, just note that I’m going to abstain. The Clerk: On item 17? Mr. Hatney: On item 17. 21 The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay, any further discussion on the additions to the consent agenda? Mr. Bowles: Ms. Bonner, I’ll have to abstain on item 36 for a conflict of interest. Mr. Brigham:Mr. Mayor, I make a motion we add these items to the consent agenda. Ms. Beard: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Mr. Russell, did you want to— Mr. Russell: I assume on 36 Mr. Williams meant go by our normal policy of buying tickets for those individuals that— Mr. Williams: The normal policy, Mr. Russell. Those who going to participate. The Clerk: The purchase of tickets. Mr. Williams: The purchase of tickets, right. CONSENT AGENDA PLANNING 1. ZA-R-173 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition to consider an amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County to modify the General and Specific Land Use Requirements regarding Off-street Parking and Loading (Section 4). 2. Z-06-02 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE with the condition that the radio tower not exceed 100 feet in height; a petition by Matthew Judd, on behalf of Good News Church, requesting a Special Exception to establish a church radio tower per Section 26-1 (A) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property located at 400 Warren Road which contains 7.47 acres which is part of the Good News Church. (Part of Tax Map 17 Parcel 26) DISTRICT 7 3. Z-06-03 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Reverend Carlos Quinones, on behalf of Dennis C. Stanfield, requesting a Special Exception to establish a church related activities including a day care per Section 26-1 (A) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property known under the present numbering system as 1021 Patriots Way and containing 2.06 acres. (Tax Map 11 Parcel 74) DISTRICT 7 22 4. Z-06-04 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by SAA, on behalf of Thomas W. Hitt, requesting a change of zoning from Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) to A (Agriculture) affecting property known under the present numbering system as 3647 Wrightsboro Road which contains approximately .51 acres. (Tax Map 40 Parcel 114) DISTRICT 3 5. Z-06-05 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Jonathan Marshall, on behalf of Marshall & Turner Properties LLC, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1B (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) affecting property known under the present numbering system as 1920 Pennsylvania Avenue and contains .21 acres. (Tax Map 56-2 Parcel 49) DISTRICT 3 6. Z-06-07 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Nathaniel Dunn requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) to Zone P-1 (Professional) affecting property known under the present numbering system as 1388 Laney-Walker Boulevard which contains .15 acres. (Tax Map 46-3 Parcel 258) DISTRICT 1 7. RESOLUTION – A request for approval of a Resolution adopting the Fort Gordon Joint Land Use Study. 8. FINAL PLAT – WHEELER LAKE, PHASE TWO-C – S-647-II-C – A petition by Southern Partners Inc., on behalf of ATC Development Co., requesting final plat approval for Wheeler Lake, Phase Two-C. This residential townhome subdivision is located on Reagan Circle, adjacent to Wheeler Lake, Section 2-A and contains 11 lots. 9. ZA-R-173 - A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to approve a petition to consider an amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County to modify the General and Specific Land use Requirements regarding Off-street Parking and Loading (section 4) (Approved by Commission January 3, 2006 - second reading) PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 10. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held January 3, 2006 and Special Called Legal Meeting held January 9, 2006. APPOINTMENT(S) 11. Motion to approve the appointment of Harold D. Engler, M.D. to the General Aviation Commission - Daniel Field representing District 3. 12. Motion to approve the appointment of Mr. Wayne Frazier to the Board of Zoning Appeals, Mr. William Wright- Planning and Zoning Commission, Mr. Corey Rogers - Historic Preservation Board, Mr. Joe Scott - the Augusta Aviation Commission, Ms. Janice Jenkins - Coliseum Authority and Mr. Jackson Usry, II - Personnel Board representing District 5. 13. Motion to approve the appointment of Crystal A. Eskola to the Augusta Animal Control Board and (to be presented at the meeting) appointment to the Augusta Housing and Economic Development Department representing District 7. 23 PLANNING 14. Z-06-06 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE with the following conditions 1) a 50 foot undisturbed natural buffer be maintained along the property line adjacent to Kingston Subdivision and 2) that there be no access to Dominica Drive; a petition by Jack N. Coley, on behalf of the Curtis Baptist Foundation, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property known under the present numbering system as 1128 Marks Church Road which contains approximately 11.4 acres. (Tax Map 31 Parcel 4.1) DISTRICT 3 PUBLIC SERVICES 16. A motion to approve, in resolution form, support of the Georgia Transit Association's FY 2006 Legislative Agenda. 17. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 04: A request by Kanwaljit Longani for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Pleasant Development LLC DBA Sunoco Food Mart located at 3403 Mike Padgett Hwy. District 6. Super District 10. 18. Motion to approve an amendment to the 2006 contract with CSRA-RDC for Wellness and Recreation Grant funds for Senior Services. 20. Motion to accept a donation from Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. in the amount of $1,500.00, and to approve a Budget Resolution to amend the 2006 General Fund Budget accordingly. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 22. Approve 2006 Annual Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG), HOME Investment Partnerships and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Funds. 23. Approve the Forfeiture of the ARC Community Partnership for Children and Families 2005 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) in the amount of $5,050. 24. Fix and publish qualifying fees for 2006 Election for Augusta-Richmond County. (Requested by Commissioner Don Grantham) 26. Approve request from Hope House, Inc. for $18,000 from Reprogrammed Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds. 29. Approve Retirement of Mr. Jessie Tarver under the 1949 Pension Plan. 30. Approve retirement of Mr. Robert Young under the 1977 Pension Plan. PUBLIC SAFETY 32. Approve and sign Annual Support Agreement with SunGard Bi-Tech, Inc. for the period covering January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006. 34. Renewal of Subcontract for "The Counseling Group", Mrs. Caffee Wright. FINANCE 24 36. Consider a request from Paine College for city sponsorship through the purchase of tickets for the Sixth Annual Masked Ball. 37. Approve the replacement of 1 full size pickup truck for the Public Services Department-Maintenance Division for $17,590.00 from Legacy Ford of McDonough, Georgia. (Lowest bid offer for bid 05-134). 38. Approve the acquisition of 1 regenerative air street sweeper for the Public Services Department-Maintenance Division from Tractor and Equipment Company of Augusta for $136,683.00 each (lowest bid offer on bid 05-146). ENGINEERING SERVICES 42. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property # 128-0-077-00-0 3617 New Karleen Road, which is owned by Albertha and Terry King for 1,446 Sq. Feet for a Permanent Easement and 1,000 Sq. Feet of Temporary Easement. AUD Project: Horsepen Sanitary Sewer Phase 2 Improvement Project. 43. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property # 140-0-783-00-0 4525 Ridge Run Drive, which is owned by Charles and Cynthia Day for 0.01 acre (501 sq. ft.) for a Permanent Easement and 0.01 acre (494 sq. ft.) of Temporary Easement. AUD Project: Pinnacle Place Subdivision Erosion and Drainage Improvements Project. 44. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property # 139-0-262-00-0 3525 Barker Drive, which is owned by Resolution Trust Corporation (no longer in existence) for 31,766 Sq. Feet for a Permanent Easement and 16,509 Sq. Feet of Temporary Easement. AUD Project: Horsepen Sanitary Sewer, Phase 2. 45. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #048-3-086-00-0 210 Telfair Street, which is owned by River Glen Associates for 0.032 acre (1,388.91 sq. ft.) of Right-of-Way and 4,424.46 sq. ft. of temporary construction easement. Public Works Project: East Boundary Street and Drainage Improvements Project. 46. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property # 139-0-404-00-0 2918 Arrowwood Circle, which is owned by Sid A. Hone and Mary M. Hone for 1,994 Sq. Feet for a Permanent Easement and 2,003 Sq. Feet of Temporary Easement. AUD Project: Horsepen Sanitary Sewer, Phase 2. 51. Motion to approve contract documents for the acquisition of land from Georgia Vitrified Brick and Clay Company for the Upper Butler Creek Sewer Line. ATTORNEY 55. Accept Donation of Property and Abate Taxes Thereon. (Property: 1762 Martin Luther King Boulevard; Owner: Estate of Dollie Robertson) 56. Approve contract documents for Upper Butler Creek Sewer Lines. 57. Approve Right of Entry Document for Georgia Power 15th Street Substation. OTHER BUSINESS 58. Motion to approve the rescheduling of the February 7th Commission meeting to February 8th and the February 21st meeting to February 22nd. 59. Motion to approve a lease agreement between Augusta Richmond County Commission and the Georgia Commissioner of Agriculture for Building 31 at the 25 Augusta State Farmers' Market for the Motor Vehicle Tag Office for the period January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006. 60. Motion to approve the appointment of Mr. Jeffrey L. Foreman to the Housing and Economic Development Department Citizens Advisory Committee. (Requested by Commissioner Brigham) 61. Motion to approve the appointment of Mr. Lonny Wimberley to the ARC Citizens Minority Business Development Advisory Council. (Requested by Commissioner Holland) Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote with the usual sign. Mr. Hatney abstains on Item 17. Mr. Bowles abstains on Item 36. Motion carries 9-0. [Items 1-13, 14, 16-18, 20, 22-24, 26, 29-30, 32-33, 36-38, 42-46, 51, 55-61] Mr. Mayor: Well, we’ve gotten through a little more business. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I move to approve the consent agenda. Mr. Mayor: We just did. Mr. Brigham: We did? Mr. Speaker: We just added them. Mr. Mayor: Did we just add them? The Clerk: His motion was to add them to the consent agenda. Mr. Grantham: I move that we modify the motion that we add and approve. Mr. Mayor: Okay, modify the motion. Mr. Colclough: Second. Mr. Mayor: And a second from Richard. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Hatney abstains on Item 17. Mr. Bowles abstains on Item 36. Motion carries 9-0. [Items 1-13, 14, 16-18, 20, 22-24, 26, 29-30, 32-33, 36-38, 42-46, 51, 55-61] 26 The Clerk: All the planning items and all the alcohol petitions were approved, with approval of the consent agenda. All the appointments as well. If there were any citizens here for those particular items they were approved with our consent agenda. Mr. Brigham: Ms. Bonner, Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: Those items that were on the addendum agenda also for appointments? Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] addenda? Mr. Speaker: [unintelligible] Ms. Bonner? The Clerk: Mr. Brigham has suggested that we—that the Commission consider the additions to the agenda, items 1 and 2, and can we ask for consideration of item 49 to be deleted from the agenda at the request of Ms. McClure? Mr. Williams: I got no problem, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] I’m looking for those addendum, and they just appointments? The Clerk: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Is there any discussion? Jerry, you want to make a motion? Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: I make a motion we add items 1 and 2 to the consent agenda and delete item number 49. Mr. Colclough: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor: One last request. We have a doctor in the house that needs to go back to work. I would like to go ahead and move to agenda item G and recognize Dr. Terrence Cook. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, a point of clarification. 27 Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams: Mr. Williams: There is some [unintelligible] out in the hallway that requested the same privilege that we gave to the issue we had down in the courtroom, they outside and I just wanted to bring that to your attention. They asked me about it and I said I would pass it on to the Mayor about getting in to be addressed. And they are here for some other items after this item that I think we going to speak on. So I wanted to just make— you know, before we get started, to let you know that they has requested the same consideration. They took time off their jobs to come over. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We will—we’ve already got one of the delegations recognized and the folks waiting out in the hall—we’ll recognize Dr. Cook and then we’ll get to the folks in the hall. Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Please state your name and your address. DELEGATIONS G. Dr. Terrence Cook, Chairman and/or, Dr. Frank Rumph. RE: Report on the status of the South Augusta Clinic Facility. Dr. Cook: I am Dr. Terrence Cook. I live at 10 Summerville Lane in Augusta. 30909. And I’m the president, the chairman of the Board of Health of Richmond County. I bring very good news for our Commissioners. With the opening of the southside clinic during the past month, this marks a momentous occasion for Richmond County, in that we are now out of the leasing business. I think it’s interesting to note that when Dr. Rumph joined us as our Health Commissioner fifteen years ago, we had eleven installments scattered throughout the community. Some of them were in very old buildings and private homes that had been redone. Many of them were in very Third World conditions. Since he has become Commissioner we have been able to consolidate all of our facilities in new or updated facilities since the late 90s. We have six buildings, three campuses. Back then we were paying over $200,000 a year in leasing arrangements and rentals. Today we are now out of the leasing and renting business. All of our properties are owned by the Richmond County Board of Health. This is in no small part due to the generosity of this Commission, of previous Commissions, who made SPLOST money available to us to pay for those facilities. And I’m happy to report that now in Richmond County we have state-of-the art facilities in all aspects of our mission here. We have a Northlake campus where we have the bio-terrorism and we have facilities there for emergency preparedness program. It is interesting to note that a recent article from the AMA News stated that while large amounts of funds were given after 9-11 to the various states to implement a bio-terrorism program at the local level through the health departments, most of that money is still sitting in the bank, sitting on the table. Very little of it has been spent nationwide. However, very little bit has been spent in Georgia except in this community, where our Public Health Commissioner immediately 28 set forward a program of bio-terrorism preparedness that is a state-of-the-art facility. We now are a model for the nation. Model not only for the state, but for the nation. And our district was chosen to prepare a program which will be a prototype for rural areas across the country. We now have 90,000 square feet of working space. It has a value of $14 million. It is all hours. All of the programs, it should be said, on time and under budget. That is in no small part due to the good work of F. A. Johnson consulting firm. He was the developer, his company was the developer in these projects. They obtained the properties, they surveyed them to make sure they were appropriate for our use, and they supervised not only the construction but also the furnishing of those facilities so if you go by any of those facilities today they are responsible in large part for the high qualify of those structures. We now have a facility also in south Augusta. Again, Windsor Spring and Winston Way facility, which is for patient care and treatment. Our headquarters are on Laney Walker Boulevard. We are going to present to the Commission a collage of picture. Mr. Johnson has that collage and will present it to the Commission, which shows our facilities across the community, across Richmond County. As I say, all of them are first class installations. We also have prepare a compact disc which is a ten minute presentation, which we’re not going to show here today but we encourage you after we pass that out to take a look at it. It really goes over and shows all of our facilities, both inside and out, and how it all came to be. Our Commissioner now, Frank Rumph, has retired, as of last month, or I should say later this month. His replacement has been chosen. That is Dr. Cassandra Youmans. Dr. Youmans comes to us from New Orleans, where you can imagine the public health office had quite a challenge. This young lady is th eminently qualified. We look forward to her joining us on February 16. She will be moving her family to this community, although she has many community ties of her own here. It is in view of all of the progress that we have made, that this county Commission has made in making the funds available to us, and that this community has made to bring public health here to the level that it is, we want to recognize Frank M. Rumph, Public Health Commissioner for Richmond County, the Board of Health voted 10-0, fully unanimous, to rename our building on Laney Walker Boulevard in his honor, and did want to bring that information to you. He’s an outstanding individual who has served our community well and we will miss him greatly but his replacement, shortly to be with us and looks to be an outstanding individual, also. There is a reception for Dr. Rumph on th February 13 at 11:30 a.m. and we will be renaming the facility at that time. Mr. Mayor: Dr. Cook, you’ve reached the five minute time limit, so if you can try to wrap it up. Respectfully. Dr. Cook: Will do. Thank you very much. I appreciate this opportunity to bring this information to you and appreciate all that you have done to make it possible. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, I think we would be doing the right thing for this Commission board to ratify the decision made by the Board of Health in naming the building after Dr. Rumph and congratulate him. I’d like for us to do that and put that in the form of a motion. 29 Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Is there any more discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. Dr. Cook: Mr. Mayor, one last thing. If I could ask any members of the board of health of Richmond County who are present, if they would stay and be recognized because they have contributed to this, also. [A round of applause is given.] Mr. Mayor: As we have delegations in the hall, I’ll just move down the list. I’d like to go ahead and recognize Ms. Beverly Rowell. Is she in the Chambers or is she in the hall? H. Ms. Beverly Rowell. RE: Local minority businesses and awarding of City contracts. Mr. Mayor: If you could state your name and address, and I’ve got my nice little watch that keeps time now so we’ll stick to five minutes. Ms. Rowell: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. Ms. Rowell: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, my name is Beverly Rowell. I reside at 2748 Crosshaven Drive. That’s in Hephzibah. I’m here today as a Christian to voice my concerns regarding how this government body operates. I have attended a few of the Commission meetings and I’m here to say today enough is enough. In the word of God, He talks of Haggai and he says first to the leaders in that day and time consider your ways. That’s what we’re here to say to you today. I understand that you went on a retreat and I look forward to what has come forward from that retreat. I understand that you took time to reflect on your effectiveness as a governing body. Now that the retreat is behind you I’m asking you what have you learned about yourselves and how can you implement that in this community. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, this don’t have anything to do with minority contracts. Ms. Rowell: Mr. Mayor, if you would let me [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: I have recognized [unintelligible]. 30 Ms. Rowell: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The words of Peter, rules over men must be just. You are a governing body, you rule over this city, you make decisions concerning us. Fairness for all people is a must and is the expectations of all Augustans, including black Augustans. [unintelligible] is that you should work together so that all Augustans can prosper. Righteousness exalts a nation. Doing what is fair and what is right for all Augustans is what I’m asking of you. Put away your division, put away your attempt to exalt your own selves. I have questions for you today. I would like to know are there any blacks that are significantly prospering from City contracts? Because we are a diverse culture there must be diversity in operations. How have you planned to handle those things? I have two questions for you today. I would like to know from you if you could give me documentation of the percentage of blacks awarded Augusta Richmond County contracts and the dollar amounts that are attached to those awards? I would also like to know the percentage of local black businesses that hold major contracts with the City of Augusta and the dollar amount also. I wonder [unintelligible] black businesses, entrepreneurs have any kind of trust in the City of Augusta and the fairness that will come out of this governing body. How shall you work with the black community? What plans do you have in place in 2006 to help all Augustans, black, white, blue, green, yellow, to help all Augustans prosper? When all ten of you are worker together for prosperity of Augustans, this city will thrive. I heard one of you at the last meeting say that this body should move forward, left, right or backwards. I’m here to tell you that backwards is not the option. That’s the state we’re in right now. Our Lord and Savior when He walked the earth always moved forward. He was progressing and He was prosperous in the work that he did. Why should you be any different? I watched each of you as came forward last Commission meeting, new Commissioners you put your hands on the Bible and you swore or affirmed to uphold the good of this community. Not just one entity in the community. So I’m asking you here today to consider your ways. Let’s all of Augusta prosper. For those that have new businesses that are black that are coming along, what can you offer us? What can you tell us? How can we get in on this slice of the pie and prosper also? Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think lady had a good report or good presentation. I think we ought to be able to direct her somewhere. Is there anywhere where she can find that information that she’s requested? I mean we may not give it to her here but there ought to be somebody in this government that can direct her to that information so not just her, but we’ll know as well. And I just think if there is a point, whether it be in Finance, whether it be—wherever—is there some direction we can give her? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Williams, Ms. Rowell made an Open Records request for that type of information and I immediately consulted with Ms. Sams. Ms. Sams determined the amount of effort that would be needed to bring that type of information today, extra staff time and copying time, I mean copying expense. We on 31 Friday responded to her and we invited her that we meet and determine a more economical way of getting exactly what she wanted, because Ms. Sams estimated some 60,000 to do it properly. And so I thought that was—I didn’t know whether it was excessive or not, Mr. Williams, but I did have my associate email her back this past Friday and we’ve invited her to discuss exactly what we can get to her in an expeditious fashion. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Rowell, just brief, please. Ms. Rowell: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I was in contact via email with Ms. Sams and I think that 60,000 copies is a bit excessive. I was in phone contact with Ms. Sams and asked to be able to revise my request and was told that I could not by Ms. Sams at that point in time. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, quick, and then we’ll move on. Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. I know the Open Records Act is effective, or should be effective in this state or in this city, but I can point out some people now who been trying to get some open records, Mr. Shepard, and hadn’t got them yet. And it wasn’t related to black and economic dollars. But if we got over some 60,000—you say thousand—I want to be correct. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Williams— Mr. Williams: I just need the number. That’s all I need. Mr. Shepard: That’s correct. Mr. Williams: If we got over 60,000 that shouldn’t be very hard to come up with, if you got over 60,000 there. That ought to be an easy number to propose. But now if we got 60,000 contracts—I think she’s specific with black contracts, the economic dollars. Now, that something we been talking about. We hired a DBE person. We been talking about trying to be fair in this community. We trying to be diverse. So if we got over 60,000 I think Ms. Sams ought to be able to do something pretty quickly, relatively fast, you know, Mr. Mayor, so we can get something back to her. I think if we can maybe give her a time or time to come back and get it but we got over 60,000 that should be no problem. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I think she should be directed to our DBE person, Ms. Gentry. And I think she will be of great help to you and it should make a difference. Mr. Mayor: I agree with you. I think that’s a good recommendation. Ms. Beard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. 32 Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. Yes, ma’am? Once again, you’re not on the list, just brief comments, state your name. Ms. Sams: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, coming from the Procurement office, I’m Geri Sams. Mr. Mayor: I apologize. There are so many people today. Ms. Sams: The reason for the 60,000 copies, it was not excessive. The Open Record request that we received asked for a copy of all purchase orders, which we did about 25,000. it asked for a copy of all bid specifications, which we did 180 and each page of the specification averages about 30 pages per bid. So when I look at the word “all” under the Open Record request I had to respond to it as written. That was my answer then and we then later asked that Ms. Rowell would come back to us or give us some type of idea of what it was she was searching for. Because do remember, in her Open Records request she did not state a purpose. So after we talked we could narrow it down. The other issue was the timing. We are in our year end. That doesn’t end until tomorrow. And we were busy doing that. Staff being limited, we could not of course copy that many copies under that request. And two other departments would have to become involved. Three other departments, actually. The DBE office, which Ms. Beard has suggested, along with the Finance Department, and my office and Records Retention, because most of those files are now in storage in the Records Retention Department. But we will be more than happy to assist her. Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. Thank you for that information. Mr. Russell? Mr. Russell: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. We did meet late last week in reference to that specifically. We had not really been capturing the data in that format. I mean we—and that’s the reason for the large numbers of stuff there. The DBE Office, our IT people, and Ms. Sams met last week to develop a format where we can begin to capture that data and try to go back and figure out a way to capture what we’ve got, but continue to move forward. But it’s a very reasonable request. And something we need to be able to provide in a more timely fashion and we’re looking forward to putting that process together so we can do that. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Great. Thank you. Thank you, ma’am. Ms. Rowell: I just wanted to say thank you to Mr. Russell because I did come away with understand. The entire conversation with Ms. Sams was different phone call. But I heard what was said today and I thank Mr. Russell for his [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: See, that’s what’s I like, when everybody’s happy. We’ll now did we want to receive that last as information? move on to agenda item I. Oh, Mr. Williams: So move. 33 Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. I. Augusta Branch of the NAACP RE: Community Concerns Mr. Mayor: Dr. Smith? I know you run a tight ship so I’m keeping you on the five minutes. Dr. Smith: We did make a formal request, sir. Did you get the call? Mr. Mayor: Yes. Dr. Smith: Okay, thank you, sir. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. I greet you in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and I’d like to read to you a verse from rd the 133 Psalm. In addition, it reads behold, how good and pleasant it is for brethren to swell in unity. I’m here to seek unity on behalf of the citizens of Augusta Richmond County. The Honorable Mayor, Deke Copenhaver; County Commissioners; Administrator, Mr. Russell; Clerk of Commission, Ms. Bonner; citizens present in the Commission Chamber; citizens of Augusta, black, white and others; let me start by thanking you for allowing me to appear before you today. The Augusta Branch of the NAACP, working under the auspices of the state, southeast region and national organization in Baltimore, Maryland, prides itself as a champion of civil rights. We are identified as a beacon of hope for those discriminated against in America and even right here in Augusta, Georgia. I’m here based on calls and requests from throughout Augusta and the community, black, white and others, asking the NAACP to dialogue with you in regards to numerous concerns and complaints that must be adequately addressed immediately. The NAACP has established a wonderful working relationship with former Mayor Bob Young, Interim Mayor Willie Mays, and with hopes to continue the same dialogue with the new Mayor, Deke Copenhaver. We are here to encourage you to remove the race tensions that’s dividing this community and remedy many of the in- house problems still plaguing this fine city, this community, and our citizens. I am also here to address the unjustified firing of Mrs. Teresa Smith, a black female department head or director over the Engineering Department whose salary we believe is in the range of $85,000 to $95,000. The NAACP’s investigation into her termination resulted in numerous violations of her constitutional rights based on sex, race, and/or gender, as well as wrongful termination without cause. In addition to these violations of her constitutional rights we are indeed [unintelligible] the unjustified manner in which her career ended before the new Commissioners could take office was unwarranted and unjustified, as well as unfair. It is clear and evident that an at-will employee is the supervisory in a supervisory capacity, works at the mercy of the Commissioners. In this case, terminating a good, strong, organized, highly qualified, highly paid African 34 American female Director of Engineering is a slap in the face to Mrs. Smith and it’s unacceptable to this community. The NAACP would like to ask the Commissioners who terminated Mrs. Smith, the old Commissioners, the following question. How long will it be before the other [unintelligible] African American employees and other minorities at this level or at any level will receive their unannounced termination? How long is politics [unintelligible] Commission six votes going to ruin the lives of the county employees and citizens in this community? How long is the Augusta community going to sit passively by and observe the lack of unity among our elected officials? How long is it going to take to realize that all of you campaigned—all of your campaigned for one—and I repeat—one Augusta for all citizens of Augusta? And we would like for you to please stick by your platform and your political pledge. Our investigation further revealed that her personnel file and job performance evaluation was above average. It revealed that Mrs. Smith was blindsided during the Christmas holidays. How long can you go? This is a time when a mother need every dollar she can earn to support her children and her family. No one needs a halo hanging over his or her head to determine when and where the next paycheck will come from. To terminate her without sitting down to discuss the scenario for making this decision is again unjustified, unwarranted and unfair. To terminate her then offer her a severance package indeed, is indeed a detrimental blow to her family as well as Mrs. Smith. Ladies and gentlemen, those of you who voted against her please take a moment to ask yourselves the same question, and that question is would you want this to happen to you in the same manner? I would think not. The NAACP is not here at the personal request of Mrs. Smith. We are here to voice our displeasure and the displeasure of the community of African Americans and other citizens in the city of Augusta who are not pleased with your actions. Furthermore, at the request— Mr. Mayor: If we could hurry it along. Dr. Smith: Yes, sir, I’m going to move it along because I have a second point. We did request an extension. We haven’t [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: I did not see that. I’m sorry. Dr. Smith: Thank you, sir. I will not argue it. I will move right along. But I need to read this. Furthermore, at the request of the citizens of this community, the Augusta NAACP is respectfully requesting you to take time to reevaluate and reconsider that hasty decision made to terminate Mrs. Smith before the new Commissioners took office. The NAACP does not offer legal advice but is hopeful that Mrs. Teresa Smith, in consultation with you, Mayor Copenhaver, and the Commissioners can reach an acceptable resolution to this problem without further humiliation, hurt, pain and/or suffering her. We challenge you, we ask you, we plead with you to allow the newly elected Commissioners to have some input in this and other decisions regarding this matter. We are asking you to reinstate Mrs. Smith as Director of Engineering with all rights, privileges, benefits, civil liberties pertaining to her termination. It’s not too late to correct the wrong that has been perpetrated against Mrs. Smith and other county employees. In regards to the hiring of a permanent Fire Chief, which is the second point, 35 the NAACP is not here to attack the fine character of Chief Willis. The character of Chief Willis. It is the opinion of the supporters of this community that he is a fine man with years of longevity and experience in his profession. We applaud the outstanding work he has done with the Graniteville disaster and wish him well in his new position. The NAACP of Augusta is here to make it an official part of the record that before the fire chief position was filled, former Mayor Bob Young, the County Commissioners, the County Administrator—Mr. Fred Russell—was notified in writing by me as president of the Augusta Branch, as well as Commissioners. They were asked to consider waiving educational requirements for the fire chief position. The NAACP made this request in 2005 for the Commissioners to allow other applicants, external and local, who did not meet the educational requirement [unintelligible] apply for this position. I’m almost finished. The NAACP agrees with this position and we agree that this position should have been filled sooner. Moreover there was no need to rush to do it before the new Commissioners could have input in the decision. However, the NAACP is totally opposed to filling the fire chief position after waiving educational requirements and not allowing other qualified firemen, internal and external, with at least two years of college experience or less to apply. Federal laws require that all positions must be advertised before they are filled. Mr. Mayor: Dr. Smith, we really--- Dr. Smith: I’m almost to the end, sir. Mr. Mayor: You have to wrap it up. Dr. Smith: Thank you, sir. The result would probably the same, with Chief Willis still being selected. It is not fair for those who aspire to rise in the hierarchy of this department without being given the right to apply for the position. The County under federal law cannot discriminate to job applicants regardless of race, creed, religion, and/or sex. By not advertising the position when educational requirement was waived so stipulates that you as a governmental body are in violation of federal law. In conclusion, the NAACP is not here to make threats. We have a wonderful relationship with the Commission and the Mayor’s Office. But here, today, we are a watchdog for the community on all significant and important concerns that have not been adequately addressed. We urge you to continue to dialogue among each other. Come together and get a consensus vote for the Vice Mayor’s position. The community does not need to be divided any longer regarding this matter and many others. Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, we expect great things to happen in this beautiful garden city of Augusta Richmond County. It is with love that we ask you to reach out and touch each other’s heart. Show some love and respect for those who have been downtrodden. It cannot happen until you put away your petty differences and work for a united, unified better community for all of the citizens of the city of Augusta. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for allowing me to present this and I hope the citizens will listen and will understand that we are a working body in coalition with the community and as president of the NAACP it is my duty to voice these concerns. And I thank you, Mr. Mayor. 36 Mr. Mayor:Do we have a I did not get the extension and we have a big agenda. motion to receive that as information? Mr. Williams: So move. Mr. Holland: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Grantham votes Present. Motion carries 8-1. Mr. Mayor: I recognize Mr. Curtis Simmons, who I do not think there was any extension on this one so we will stick to the five minutes. K. Mr. Curtis Simmons, Heritage Crest Foundation RE: City Participation in the James Brown "Soul of America" Music Festival Mr. Mayor: Is Curtis Simmons here? You’re not Curtis Simmons. Mr. Walker, please try to—five minutes. We’ve got a lot of business to get to. Mr. Walker: Mr. Curtis Simmons could not be here today. He had trouble with his flight from Washington, D.C. So on his behalf I will present some documents, as well as to talk briefly about the James Brown “Soul of America” Music Festival. First of all, thank you all for your time. The “We Feel Good” Committee of course is the committee that put together the slogan for the City of Augusta, “We Feel Good,” as well as an ongoing economic development plan that encompasses the James Brown “Soul of America” Music Festival and which we hope will rival or equal the attraction, the prestigious golf tournament, the Masters has had on the city. In order to do so we’ve had to go out and find sponsors. It will cost us—initially our budget stated it would cost at least $1.7 million in order to do so. Our budget now is close to $450,000, all of which is detailed in the paperwork that we will submit. Our goal is to [unintelligible] this community’s image around the world and use our greatest assets—James Brown and of course our medical community are major assets in this area and we’re asking that the City be a sponsor and support this major event. Currently we have Coca-Cola, Budweiser, [unintelligible] Records, Radio One, Clear Channel, and many, many, many, many other sponsors that have supported this event, not only locally but regionally and nationally and internationally. There will be a sister “Soul of America”—I’m sorry, a sister James Brown Music Festival in Hamburg, Germany already. There have been two international tributes that will be paid and be broadcast internationally, as well as domestically. Our request is that the City consider funding a portion of this sponsorship in the amount of $250,000, with an economic impact on these city of $15 million to $30 million based upon the projected attendance of 50,000 to 75,000 people to this city. Also, there will be a major art exhibition, as well as the use of the Common, the Depot, the Riverwalk Amphitheatre, and the Golf Gardens as well. As well as a major, major—a couple of 37 major receptions and club venues throughout this community. The information that I will hand out will give y’all information relative to budgets, projections, and how it would impact this city, and we would like to make that information available to y’all. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: I didn’t know what Mr. Walker was asking us to do as a body. I mean I have been hearing of the event but I’d like to know what specifically he asking this body, what can we do, how can we do? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Walker? Mr. Walker: Well, there’s certain city-owned venues, such as the Depot, the Boathouse, the Common, and the Riverwalk Amphitheatre and some of the Riverwalk grounds that we will be utilizing. We’re asking that you consider waiving those fees as part of a sponsorship. In addition, we have a major regional budget that when the city first started to do this festival they commissioned—I believe it was Janie Peel and Helen Blocker-Adams—to see what type of venue or attraction or tourism can we bring to the Augusta area. And the budget was stated, would need at least $250,000 to do so. We have over $1.5 million already allocated toward promotional and advertising needs, so we’ve been able to reduce—I mean we’ve been able to enhance our budget by $1.5 million thus far with television, domestic television and international television. Mr. Mayor: Would it be appropriate to receive this as information for now so that we can take time to look through it? Mr. Hatney: So move, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: Any more discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. And thank you for the presentation. Look forward to looking through the information. Mr. Walker: Thank you. Mr. Grantham out. Motion carries 8-0. Mr. Mayor: We will now move on to agenda item D. Mr. Williams: We had a delegation, Mr. Mayor, that was here. 38 Mr. Mayor: I think we went through all the delegations that were on the list. Mr. Shepard: Brownfields? Are you thinking of the Brownfields delegation, Mr. Williams? They’re in the middle of the agenda. May not be treated as a delegation. The Clerk: He’s here. Mr. Colclough: Rev. Utley is here. Mr. Mayor: Would we—Commissioners, would we like to go ahead and pull that agenda item and bring forward Rev. Utley? Mr. Speaker: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Okay. We’ll go to agenda item—Rev. Utley. We’ll go to agenda item number 41. The Clerk: ENGINEERING SERVICES 41. Presentation by Mr. Charles Utley regarding the Mayor's Brownfield Proposed Summit and discussion of future funding for the program. Mr. Mayor: You’re on. Mr. Utley: Thank you for allowing us to come before this afternoon to hopefully not for information’s sake but for action, because we are against a time restraint on doing some things for the Mayor’s Brownfield Commission. And I’d like to hand this out so you can actually look at it and get an idea of what we’re talking about. What we are proposing—we realized that there are not monies available for what we want to do in the brownfield and the monies that we already raised were in the neighborhood of almost $500,000 of our own and that was used for the assessment of the Goldberg site and now we’re moving into the Hyde Park area where we will do an additional study to see exactly what need to take place. What we are asking for us to be able to pull in the federal, local and state agencies, that we might be able to do a summit, pull all of the federal agencies in together where we can look at what they can do in order to make brownfield a vital part of this city, realizing the clean-up of Goldberg itself we generated over $10 million. The idea of brownfield is to take away those sites and those dull areas, and the bottom line, we want to put people to work, put [unintelligible] to waste, and make it a viable place where we can put those workers who are bringing monies back to the city and taxes and also a tax base for the new businesses. But in order to do that we need you to okay for us—and we’re talking only about $25,000—and that $25,000 is broken down on the back of that sheet that I gave you and it’s primarily to pull all those federal agencies in. They’re in the middle of their budgeting area right now and if we can get a summit with them—and by the way, our track record shows that we can pull them together because 39 earlier this year we had a brownfield meeting here. By the way, brownfield, everybody wins. If it’s a bad place, it could be north, south, east or west. [unintelligible] It’s federal dollars but at some point we need to buy into the program. Right in our own neighborhood—when you look at the Panthers, that stadium is a brownfield site. South Carolina took the initiative to develop the [unintelligible] all the money that is now generated. All we’re saying is let’s look at some of these sites around here. We have the expertise, we are now noted for not only the Augusta brownfield, but we are the only one in the United States of America that was written and funded [unintelligible] by a community group, and we’re saying now if you can just buy into $25,000 to go ahead and go into this summit, and it’s a time frame. As long as you keep your fist closed you’ll never receive anything. And as our Administrator said, we have open, we have to be receptive to new ideas. And all I can say is that if you give us this opportunity we can go forward and then we’ll come back and we want [unintelligible] plan. And what I’m going to give you, the last thing is our projection, the purpose, the inventory of all the sites. And I’m not speaking of Hyde Park and Aragon Park and Virginia Subdivision. I’m talking about the CSRA, the entire city of Augusta. All of these sites. Some of them, you’re looking right at them each day but in order for us to get rid of them and make them into productive places, we need your support. And if you would just give us this opportunity to put all those together I’m quite sure you’ll be very proud and pleased with what we can do on the final analysis, when you can ride in your city and have those you want to work at work. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Rev. Utley. I would just like to make a comment. We’ve met and brownfield programs, very good brownfield programs are great for a city. To take these blighted areas and redevelop when we have so much that we have got a lot of the blighted areas and I’m just—I’m impressed with what you’re doing. Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: Mr. Utley? Mr. Utley: Yes, ma’am? Ms. Beard: I’m wondering if you have been working with the CSRA RDC. Mr. Utley: Yes, ma’am. Ms. Beard: Okay. But— Mr. Utley: We need this body to make the recommendation so they can move forward. Ms. Beard: Okay. Maybe I could get with you and we meet with them together and get something started? Mr. Utley: That’s fine. Love to. Mr. Mayor: With regard to—Mr. Russell—money in the budget? Is there— 40 Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, there [unintelligible] money in the budget at the moment. Rev. Utley would be a very happy person. Unfortunately [unintelligible]. If there is will to go forward with this, and I think it’s a worthwhile project. We’re going to have to find some funding somewhere to do that. And I do not mind, and I told Dr. Utley that we don’t mind looking obviously but we need some direction to do that. $25,000 is a small investment for the return, in my mind, but it’s $25,000 that we have to take away from someplace else. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Hyde Park is a place that really has been in a terrible condition for some time with the old Goldberg’s and even with the situation as it stands right now with moving that stuff. But I think Rev. Utley and the brownfield, along with the Mayor, Bob Young, who initiated and got some things rolling, we need to look at some federal dollars maybe through Economic Development, Housing and Economic Development, or some way to try to help them. We can get the RDC to go ahead and give them an okay [unintelligible] we in support. But I think it’s very urgent that we do something to not just let this sit around. I think he explained about being on a time frame and we don’t want that to do like we always do, Mr. Shepard, and get up against the wall and then we can’t do that and we, you forget about it. So if we can look at recaptured money from the federal dollars we got, we got SPLOST money, I don’t know whether it could be used, but we ought to be able to find that kind of money to help with organization that’s going to do the amount of good that we just heard and we just seen experienced. Now, we still got a serious problem over there. You got people that’s dying in Hyde Park from diseases that they don’t even know what’s causing it. They been infiltrated with so much stuff for so long till it’s not even safe to even plant vegetables in yards over there any more. Hyde Park is a place that’s been forgotten about. Even though the old Goldberg property is there and the junk was there and we keep fighting it and I think we did a great job. I think we cleaned up a lot of that stuff, Mr. Mayor, but I think we need to try and direct the Administrator to find some, specially some federal dollars if they’re available, some recaptured money or something to help with this. Mr. Mayor:Could we look for any kind of a motion You and I agree on that. to give the Administrator direction with regards to seeking funding for the project? Mr. Hatney: So move. Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Mayor: There is a motion and second. Any other discussion? Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? 41 Mr. Brigham: I would also request that we have a more detailed budget than the outline of a budget that we have here. Mr. Mayor: Rev. Utley, is that— Mr. Brigham: [unintelligible] determine if [unintelligible] budget also. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, Ms. Flournoy, staff attorney, has been tasked in this area and I understand has been working closely with Mr. Utley— Mr. Utley: That’s correct. Mr. Shepard: --about that before the committees which were not held the other day. We are—we have structure in place, Mr. Williams, have had it place for—since before you had the meeting at Augusta Tech. My office is very interested in finding those monies and moving consistently with this program. Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Mr. Utley, what is— Mr. Utley: We’d like to have it somewhere between—before Memorial Day. Mr. Mayor: Before Memorial Day? Okay. Mr. Russell: 2006? Mr. Utley: 2006. [unintelligible] we’re trying to deal with federal budgets and before they—that’s why I put it on your sheets there. We need to get in the [unintelligible] Departments of HUD, of the Chambers. Talking about Federal HUD. Federal Chambers. We’re going for federal dollars. And the only money that we’ve generated has been federal dollars coming in from the Environmental Protection Agency, which gave us two grants of $200,000. Mr. Mayor: And as you and I discussed, I mean a program like this is a great selling point to a community with regards to economic development. A strong brownfield. I applaud you. We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Williams: Does the Mayor have any discretionary funds in his account? Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. 42 Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Utley: Thank you very much. Mr. Mayor: Another agenda item that somebody said should be treated as a— Mr. Brigham: Probably 33, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: 33? Okay, item 33. 33. Presentation by Mr. Harold E. Rhodes regarding heater safety. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Rhodes, if you’d please come forward, state your name and address for the record. Mr. Rhodes: Harold Rhodes. Mr. Mayor: Please keep it to five minutes, too, please, sir. Mr. Rhodes: I will. Don’t worry. 4756 Mike Padgett Highway. I’m here on behalf of South Augusta Flea Market, which I established thirty years go. The problem I’m having here is just like Dr. smith and others say, you want to know where your next paycheck is coming from. Well, when you have government servants, government officials who are threatening you from one to another we’re going to shut you down, we’re going to shut you down, that’s not good for business. It’s not just me. We have probably forty vendors who make their living at South Augusta Flea Market. Now I’ll get into more specifics. The heaters that have been down my center aisle for 22 years I have gone and followed recommendations. I’ve had black iron pipe, the tanks are outside, there is no tanks in the building. The heaters were exposed, and I agree with the Fire Department, they needed corrective action. So I went and got 4 x 4 grates and built walls around them to where nobody can walk into them. They are totally safe. My building is not an enclosed building. It has the entire roof system is vented. It’s an old cattle auction. What I’m saying, we had a fire about six years ago. The fault was determined to be a kerosene heater, the old wick type kerosene heater. The lieutenant investigated it and that was the determination. He told me at that time your only safe heat is propane and so I with great indulgence got and spent a lot of money and got propane heat. Now, I was threatened to be shut down for the last month, yet I went or had someone go to the Barnyard Flea Market, they have the tanks and the heaters sitting in virtually every stall. Now, I complained about that but was told they didn’t have the overtime allocated to go and check. Well, my livelihood of something that I established thirty years ago is being threatened by an agency that should be there to help me, not kill. And that’s all I have. I’m asking for a waiver to use my heaters, which is perfectly safe. There’s not a thing wrong with them. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? 43 Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to hear from the Fire Department. I see the [unintelligible] and the Chief here. Mr. Rhodes asked me about those and I asked him to come before this committee and just share what we dealing with, what’s going on. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, please come forward. Mr. Hannon: I’m Lt. D. B. Hannon, Acting Fire Marshal. And I was investigator for that incident. It was caused by a heater but I did not tell him that he could use propane. Any unvented, by the International Fire Codes, the law states that in an assembly he cannot have unvented portable heaters. We’re going by the law. He has had them in there twice this past year. We’ve asked him to remove them. He finally removed them this last time about a month ago. But he cannot have those portable heaters in there in a place of assembly. The Barnyard, by the way, is not ruled as a place of assembly. It is ruled a mercantile and he was allowed to have them in there. This is a place of assembly so there is a different Code on it and that’s what we [unintelligible]. The other thing, we sent him a certified letter in April to correct the violations [unintelligible] [End of tape one] [Beginning of tape two] Mr. Colclough: --Barnyard and I guess the one down the street from the Barnyard, are they not—well, what’s the difference between the—one is a mercantile and the other is a place of assembly? I’ve passed there on Saturday and I’ve seen people in assembly at the Barnyard as well as the other placed. Mr. Hannon: There is an auction part of this assembly that he has that is an actual assembly. There is no— Mr. Colclough: So he has an auction section, where people auction off stuff? Mr. Hannon: Yes, sir. Mr. Colclough: And then the flea market on the other end of it? Mr. Hannon: Right. And it’s covered. It’s like a mall, it’s covered. And it’s been ruled an assembly. There’s no place like that in Barnyard. Mr. Colclough: Okay. I know there are some heaters at the Barnyard because I’ve been down there and in the stalls [unintelligible] stuff. Mr. Hannon: That’s in mercantile area, sir. 44 Mr. Mayor: It’s just two different, separate classifications, two different classifications. Mr. Colclough: The only difference is he’s got an auction in his and the other person doesn’t have one. Mr. Hannon: He has an assembly area and he has mercantile. When you have mixed occupancies you have to go by the most stringent. The most stringent is assembly. Mr. Colclough: I just need clarification. I don’t now what you’re talking about, sir. Mr. Rhodes: I don’t either, sir. Mr. Hannon: Well, we’ve been trying to explain to them for the last— Mr. Colclough: I just need it for my benefit. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Smith? Mr. Smith: What can we do there to help this man? Mr. Willis: I’ve had conversations with Mr. Rhodes and we’re going to meet with him, me and the bureau, Inspection, and we’re going to see what we can do to help him out. We need to address these issues. He has had several violations that he has corrected. We are willing to sit down and work with him and go through the issues. The thing is the particular corridor and all, the corridor that we’re [unintelligible] is an unprotected facility and we want to help him address those and how we can take care of business for him and keep him in business. We certainly don’t want to shut anyone down. We have to look at the overall aspect of it as well, too, of our citizens being in that building in case something was to happen, that we have the immediate egress points established for them, as well, too. Mr. Smith: Thank you, Chief. I hope you can help him to keep on operating. He has a thriving business there. A lot of cars in every weekend and we need all the entrepreneurs we can get. Mr. Willis: I agree. And we want to help all of our citizens to help make sure that they can stay in business and to help generate income for our city, as well as the citizens that have jobs that their livelihood is dependent on. Mr. Mayor: Is there any— Mr. Grantham: Motion to receive as information. Mr. Mayor: Is there a second? 45 Ms. Smith: Second. Mr. Rhodes: Mr. Mayor, may I ask a question before we vote? If I do away with the auction, does that enable me to have heaters for my flea market? Mr. Hannon: Not the unvented portable heaters. Mr. Rhodes: There are unvented portable heaters in the Barnyard? Mr. Mayor: Would y’all discuss that outside? We have a motion and a second. Any more discussion? Commissioner will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Lena, is there another agenda item that would be a presentation? The Clerk: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Do y’all want to recess before we get into that? Do you want to take a little break? I’m going to call a ten minute recess. [RECESS] Mr. Mayor: We’re going to move on to agenda item 47 first. The Clerk: 47. Receive report and approve plan from the Convention and Visitors Bureau regarding the SPLOST V bonded project for the Exhibit and Trade Center Project. Mr. White: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. At the request of Mr. Russell, we prepared an A-B-C, kind of a next step on the Exhibit and Trade Center that was funded through SPLOST Phase V. We’re distributing some of that information right now, and in the sake of time, decided not to set up the PowerPoint presentation but do it be handout, so we’ll go through one slide at a time, starting with the first page of a very brief presentation. Again, just going to talk about what an exhibit and trade center is, why it’s needed, just do a little overview of the study that was done about four years ago on this project. If you’ll turn to the next page, slide number three, what is an exhibit and trade center? Talking about a large, flat floor area, [unintelligible] 30’ ceiling, no fixed seating. This is not an arena. Be used for trade shows, exhibit shows, conventions, boat shows, that type thing. The reason we commissioned the study about four years ago is because we thought we did not have any true exhibit space in Augusta. The civic center was utilized with civic and arena type events and exhibit space offered by the civic center and that at the city conference center was not competitive with other markets, didn’t have dedicated exhibit space. We were challenged and unable to attract 46 larger exhibit-based events and so we wanted to determine if there was a need for such a facility in Augusta. Turn to the third page. Slide five. We asked our clients. We talked to meeting planners and one question we asked was if our facilities stayed the same as they are right now, with the city conference center at the Radisson and the civic center, what is the likelihood that you would consider coming to Augusta for your event? We had 41% said that they might or they would definitely would bring their event to Augusta under our current circumstances. After some further analysis and some research we determined that Augusta had very good hotel space in proximity to our meeting space at the city conference center. There is good meeting and ballroom space, we had very poor exhibit space, and new exhibit space is needed and can be supported in Augusta and the competition is very strong that we’re facing in the market place. If you turn to page four, slide seven, we also talked to our customers and asked them about locations for such a facility. We studied six sites. You can see site A is Augusta Golf and Gardens, site B is the City Conference Center, site C is the Ramada Plaza Hotel, site D is the Civic Center, E is across the river in North Augusta, and we also studied a site out along Riverwatch Parkway and I-20. When we asked our customers about locations, you can see in slide A, that site B, there was a 95%--there was a jump from 41% to 95% that they would consider Augusta as the destination for their event. If you’ll turn the page and go to one th possible physical plan of this facility, that top slide, number nine, 10 Street, down the th left hand side, Reynolds Street across the bottom, 9 Street up the right side. This represents the 40,000 square feet and that’s inside, usable space, a plan for 40,000 square feet attached to the City Conference Center at the Radisson. The slide below it just shows kind of [unintelligible] exercise that that facility would fit. It also includes a 500 space parking deck. Turn the page and you’ll see another scale, slide, from a different angle. So what we were asked to do is how do we move this project forward, how do we get the SPLOST dollars used quickly, [unintelligible] the time frame of this project and the recommendation that we have is the next step of this presentation. The stakeholder committee, we are recommending that it consist of two Augusta Commissioners, a representative of the Administrator’s office, a representative from the Convention & Visitors Bureau and a representative from the Augusta Conference Center that’s currently at the Radisson. The responsibility of the stakeholder committee would be project oversight, recommendations back to the full Commission for approval on major decisions such as land acquisition plan, site, project budget, architect, operations and lease agreements. Page seven, slide thirteen, the diagram of the development team—again, this facility will be owned by the City of Augusta so you as Augusta Richmond County Commissioners would have complete oversight over the project. Fred Russell then directly underneath you, Steve Shepard to the right, then you have the Finance office to the right. The Stakeholder Committee that was recommended, five member Stakeholder Committee would report directly to Mr. Russell and ultimately to the Commission. Under the stakeholders we’d be using the project manager that’s under contract, which is Heery, and then we would use a consultant that’s been with us on this project for the past four years, Strategic Advisory Group. They would oversee land acquisition and operations agreements. Heery would do the project and contract administration and the scheduling and budgeting. The next step, slide fourteen, we are seeing approval of the Stakeholder Committee and approval of the Phase I of the work plan. Phase I would be an update and validation of the feasibility study, produce a facility program which is 47 simply an architect’s instruction book that we would be able to hand to the architect and have them draw the plans for the project. Develop preliminary agreement. Operations [unintelligible] and land acquisition and eventually architect selection. The time frame for this would be to have Phase I as outlined, completed by May of this year. By winter we’d like to see the design complete. By this time next year, construction would begin and doors would open in January of 2009. Again, the Stakeholder Committee would operate throughout the life of this project [unintelligible] 2009 and report regularly back to this body for approval on major decisions. I have representatives from Strategic Advisory Group and from Heery who is under contract with the City if you have any specific questions. A detailed time frame is also attached for your information. I’ll be glad to entertain questions. Mr. Mayor: You were right on five minutes on the nose. Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’d just like to ask have any consideration—and I’ve looked at these charts as he went through those, but how many levels are we looking at? Like for instance on page six, slide twelve, how many stories are we talking about building a facility? What—and I guess what I’m thinking about, we going to build a facility, we need to build a facility that’s going to be this facility that we going to need for the future with at least the perception to advance with it. We build—even when this was built and we know now that we didn’t build for the growth, we didn’t build for [unintelligible] I wouldn’t want us to short ourselves, build a building that’s going to be good for five or ten years, and then ten years later we are going to need another building. So I guess that’s my question, is that trip to Hawaii, Mr. Russell, we went to— Mr. Mayor: Address the Chair. Mr. Williams: Well, I’m speaking to you, Mr. Mayor, but I called Mr. Russell’s name because I want him to pay attention. The media went there with us and Sylvia Cooper couldn’t go but some of the media went and we went to a facility that was state- of-the-art. And it was probably twenty years old. But it was built back I the time—it was a glass building and [unintelligible] some photographs of them, Mr. Mayor, I’ve got some photographs I can show you. We did learn some things over there. An escalator that ran three lives, if I’m not mistaken. But I’m just saying if we going to build something, let’s building something that’s going to be of some magnitude that we can get some use out of, not just next year but for years to come. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, I will tell you that you and I are in complete agreement on that and I think the civic center, with regards to cutting back on the size of that when it was built is a prime example, so you and I are on the same page. Mr. White? Mr. White: I agree with both of you gentlemen and that’s an excellent question, Mr. Williams. And I will tell you a couple of things that we’re doing to address that. First of all, the validation of the feasibility study. There’s been little change in our competitive market. What’s going on, we went to make sure we stay at least competitive 48 with the people out there. We’re going after the same events every single day. Secondly, there’s been some discussion on—as we get into the design of this project that it will be built with future expansion in mind, meaning that we need to design the parking deck that’s column free on the first three levels, that we can expand out with meeting space, in five years or ten years we can do that. If we need to design it where we have foundations that strong enough to build additional hotel rooms or meeting space on top of this facility, we will do that as well. As I’ve said before in front of this body, we would consider other land in the general area that should be banked for future development for these projects. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, that answered my question and I’m glad to hear that explanation because if we can’t build it like we want it, we ought to build with the expectation of coming back and adding to. A lot of time we build and don’t think about that. We just build a building. We got a jail down here now, it’s about to fall down. It ain’t twenty years old yet. And [unintelligible] make that kind of mistake again as a Commissioner sitting here on this board and make sure that we put those things in place to be able to build a facility. Mr. Mayor: I agree with you completely, not handcuff future governments. Mr. White: And likewise, we want to have a facility that we’re proud of, that we can go out and sell and make sure that it’s the best that we have to offer and the best that the customer and client of ours can utilize in the area. Mr. Mayor: Any more discussion? Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell? Mr. Russell: I was going to tell you what we need right now. Because of the unique nature of this project there is a partnership [unintelligible] entities, including the Convention & Business Bureau, it was our thought that the study group or the operating group consisting of two Commissioners, member of my staff or myself, and representatives of these two groups would be appropriate to be the group to get this done. What we’d like for you to do is endorse that concept and then appoint two people to—not today specifically but sometime in the near future—to that group from the Commission so we can continue to move forward. As you know, this project is bonded—is funded through the bond part of the SPLOST. The reason for that is to move it forward quickly, because every day that we don’t have those doors open are days that we’re losing dollars. I think Barry got some good news in reference to our money coming in last year on our tourism dollars and stuff. I think it’s up. It’s up significantly and we need to continue to So if you could approve this in move in that direction and this is going to help that. concept and agree to appoint somebody or two Commissioners at the next Commission meeting to this group, that’s what we’re after. 49 Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard? Mr. Grantham: Motion to approve. Mr. Colclough: Second. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard wanted to speak right quick. Ms. Beard: I notice where you’re planning to put this. My understanding is a new company may be purchasing those hotels. Are we dealing with that in any way? Or is the city, in that we are supposed to own some things there already? Mr. White: The city does own the Conference Center. When you walk up the stairs at the Radisson Hotel and through the doors, that actually becomes city property. There is a management contract in place for the hotel partnership to manage that facility. The change—it’s not a change in ownership of the hotel, it’s a change in the name of the hotel and the franchise, right. So it will be changing just in name only from Radisson to Marriott sometime next month. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion—Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: One request, please. I’m just a stickler for this. I notice the date on here in January 9. There was plenty of time to get this in our package. Stuff like this need to [unintelligible] bring something [unintelligible] vote on it [unintelligible]. Mr. White: I apologize. The date on that was originally set for Engineering Services Committee and since those didn’t take place last week, you’re right, we should have gotten them to you in advance. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. White: Thank you very much. We appreciate the confidence. Mr. Mayor: Thank y’all. Okay [unintelligible] we will now go on to agenda item D. The Clerk: ELECTION OF OFFICER(S) D. Election of the Mayor Pro-Tempore for 2006. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough? 50 Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to nominate Mr. Williams for Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, out of respect for Mr. Andy Cheek, I’m going to nominate him for Mayor Pro Tem. And we received a letter today, a request from Mr. Cheek, and I’d like for the Clerk to read that, to be part of the record, if she would, please. The Clerk: [reading] Ladies and gentlemen, please know that I regret that I must be absent from the Commission today due to my injury which I had as a result of a fire in my laboratory one week ago. I am under doctor’s orders to remain at home this week. I rd anticipate being able to return to my Commission duties during the week of January 23. I want to take this opportunity to let all of you know that I am a serious candidate for the Office of Mayor Pro Tem. I, like Martin Luther King, Jr., have a dream. That dream is for a better Augusta. I have stood up for persons of all races, all stations in life, and in all areas of Augusta and would like to continue my service to this community in the Office of Mayor Pro Tem. I am running on my record that has demonstrated over and over during the last years my willingness to cross economic, racial, and social lines so that our community would work together and become a better place to live. I want to have the opportunity to make my case as candidate for the Office of Mayor Pro Tem in person. My earnest request to each of my fellow Commissioners is that this vote be held in a th recessed portion of today’s meeting which would be set sometime after January 24. I specifically implore and request my friend, the incumbent, Mayor Pro Tem Marion Williams, to join me in this request. I also want to take this opportunity to thank all of you for your thoughts and prayers for me and my family during this pas week. Please know that I sincerely appreciate all those thoughts and prayers and I want to get back to work for all citizens of Augusta next week. May God bless you and may God bless Augusta. Sincerely, Andy Cheek. Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. With that request in mind, and we have nominated the two candidates already, but I would like to make a motion that we request—that we honor the request of Commissioner Andy Cheek and recess this election th until he can return on January 24. I put that in the form of a motion. Mr. Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to I guess clarify something. It been stated that we needed to elect a Mayor Pro Tem. I’m a little bit confused because last time we voted, after we voted we voted to table. And I don’t understand how we can make a vote and then table it. But my perception or my understanding is that if you in office and you don’t have the votes to move you from office then you stay in office. And this is an election we hold the first of the year. Now, if we didn’t have a Mayor Pro Tem, 51 and I heard somebody say, well, we don’t want to be said because we didn’t do what the charter said. A lot of things the charter told us to do we ain’t did yet but I’m just trying to get some clarification now because if you’re in a position and in a position of election and you are qualified to hold said office for a certain number of years and you hadn’t fulfilled that, you’re not going past the designated time with not having the votes to move it, now what I’m thinking is if we vote on the Mayor Pro Tem, whether it be me or Mr. Cheek or anybody else, and next week I want to vote on it again do we come back? Because if I’m in the position or if a person in the position, regardless of who it is, and they don’t have the votes to move it cause the way I read the agenda item, Mr. Mayor, and y’all taught me to be very careful about this stuff, but if you had a vote to move this box and there wasn’t enough votes to move it, that box would stay exactly where it is. Because it didn’t have sufficient number of votes. Now, if we going to go back and vote every two weeks, I mean whoever gets six votes we can swap it back and forth. I just want to know the rules as we go so we be on the same rules. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. And as we discussed in the meeting last week I just—from my personal opinion we need to get down to what is the law? And if the law states—and let me finish, please, Mr. Williams— Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Mayor: If the law states that we need to elect a Mayor Pro Tem in 2006 that’s the way we need to proceed. That is from Mr. Shepard my understanding and I believe that he had appealed to the State Attorney General for an opinion on that. I’m not sure if we have the opinion of the Attorney General just yet or—Mr. Shepard, please? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, particularly Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, my friend Mr. Williams, I think that my position is the same. Mr. Williams is holding over in the office of Mayor Pro Tem. He is eligible to succeed himself. There is another candidate who had misfortune. And I am of the opinion that this election should be held in—you could honor as a courtesy to the other Commissioners the man who is offering against Mr. Williams. And I don’t endorse either candidate. But I think that the Attorney General will issue a ruling which will pretty much indicate the memo that I gave to each of you a week ago is the correct path to follow. And if we were—if we had both candidates here today I would say vote the election. And it’s I think appropriate in this second meeting of January of this year to recess it to a time that you agree next week so that Mr. Cheek can be accommodated. He has appealed to your sense of fairness and I think that’s the appropriate thing to do. Once that election is held and there is an election, that will end it, Mr. Williams, there will be a—when the Mayor pro Tem gathers—when one candidate gathers enough votes of his peers—that would be six—he could be elected. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: Mr. Shepard? 52 Mr. Mayor: Address the Chair, please, ma’am. Ms. Beard: I’m sorry. Mr. Mayor: That’s okay. Ms. Beard: I respectfully disagree with Mr. Shepard and I want to take you back a few months. Before, as a part of the charter, it was a gentleman’s agreement that if you had a white mayor you would have a black mayor pro tem. I really feel I’m responsible for what is happening here. Because [unintelligible] at a point where we would not begin the type position we’re in now. Actually, the Mayor Pro Tem pretty much stays for two years. Now, when it was stated that we did not need that any more, to have the gentleman’s agreement, I was one of the ones to vote to throw it out. But as soon as it happened everyone came forth to say I want it. Wouldn’t it have been wonderful if we could have gone on, even though that agreement wasn’t there? And now, you ask that we step aside and wait here. I really, I don’t see that that should be necessary at this point because the [unintelligible] cast. And it may be legal but it’s not the right thing to do. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, keep it brief, please, sir. We have debated this several times and we do have a motion and a second on the floor. Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I don’t have one of the fancy watches like you got but I took my watch off when Mr. Shepard start talking and I’m going to have the exact time that the attorney who we pay had and ain’t got no business having. So let me take my time cause this is very important. Now, we done [unintelligible] all this other stuff but first of all, we voted on something that really wasn’t anything to vote on. You can’t vote on a gentleman’s agreement that wasn’t never put in place no way. So the vote really didn’t need anything. Now— Mr. Mayor: Which vote are you referencing? Mr. Williams: I’m talking about the gentleman’s agreement that Ms. Beard said she second and she felt like she’s a part of and she don’t have to feel like because you can’t undone something that [unintelligible] done. How can you vote on something that wasn’t voted in the beginning. That wasn’t a vote took place to do it so you can’t take a [unintelligible] to undue it. That’s the first thing. The second thing is that if you didn’t have a Mayor Pro Tem at all then I can see you saying well, we got to elect somebody. It could be between whoever. But by having an incumbent mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, whoever, if you don’t get enough votes to dethrone, deseat, throw them out, do whatever you call it, then you stay in that position. We vote on this the beginning of the year. [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor, I’m directing you. Mr. Mayor: I’m waiting. Mr. Williams: Mr. Shepard, who won his seat by default—wasn’t enough votes to move him—he stayed there for the year. He didn’t stay there for two months. Only 53 this year, this body said that we would vote on Mr. Shepard on a month-to-month basis to give the new Commissioners time to look into the law department and what we supposed to be doing as far as the charter. But now he can stay and make the ruling for a year but—he can rule on whether or not I’m going to be the Mayor Pro Tem [unintelligible] incumbent Mayor Pro Tem already. Now, you ain’t got to like the Mayor Pro Tem but you got one. And I’m not going to hold up, I’m not going to hold up the vote for Andy, which is my twin. And he got criticized for saying that. But I’m not going to hold up for Andy or anybody else. If he was here the vote would still go on. It probably going to end the same way. But I’m not going to prolong the assignment of the committees that need to be set up for the people of the city of Augusta to handle the business. We ain’t going to have another meeting. The attorney could have told us in the last meeting when we voted that [unintelligible] committee [unintelligible], have people come down to this building, wait outside, for us to walk out like dummies saying we can’t handle the city’s business. So we going to vote today, Mr. Mayor. One way or the other. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, can I put a question to you, though? You, you’re not putting any faith in the Attorney’s legal opinion. What is the ultimately—I’m trying to get back to what the law is that governs this Commission. And let me ask you this, please. I allowed you to finish, you allow me. Do we have to go find another lawyer? What do we need to do? And I think that’s exactly—we’ve appealed to the Attorney General to get a legal opinion but what if the Attorney General gives an opinion that you don’t like? Does it stop there or do we go further than that? Mr. Williams: First of all, Mr. Mayor, I learned some from Jim Wall and Steve Shepard but let me say what it state. It state that you will select a Mayor Pro Tem. You got one. Now, you said that the law says select a Mayor Pro Tem in 2006. The law don’t designate no date. You got a Mayor Pro Tem that don’t [unintelligible] the time frame that he’s allowed to be in that seat. Now, I don’t know how much plainer that can get rather than putting a date on it saying we going to elect one in 2006. We got one already. We ain’t got to like it now, but we got one. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, I tell you I’m willing to work with any Mayor Pro Tem. I’ve worked with you on different occasions and to me I just personally I just want a Mayor Pro Tem to work with. But I think we have to realize that there are laws that govern us. And we need to at some point go back to what the law says. The law is not biased. It’s just ultimately the law is the law [unintelligible] situation. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if you can get this attorney or any attorney to interpret the law for you, it’s not going to put a date on it. And if it says you got to have a Mayor Pro Tem you look back it [unintelligible] and say do we have one? I think the answer be yes. Now, can we change it? The answer be no. But we do have one. And that’s what the law says. Now, we’ll be breaking the law if we didn’t have one. Mr. Mayor: I think we’ve got a legal opinion that says one thing and then you’re telling me how we’re breaking the law and— 54 Mr. Williams: Right. Mr. Mayor: Do I listen to your opinion [unintelligible]? Mr. Williams: We have always set a precedent where the Mayor Pro Tem has served two years. Now if I serve two years, I be breaking the law? Have I served two years? No, sir, I have not. I only served one. So now it don’t take no rocket scientist or no lawyer to determine that. Mr. Mayor: Well, I will—Ms. Beard and then— Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, a motion is on the floor. I call the question. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor? Point of order. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: This is ridiculous. We’re going to have a debate between you and two Commissioners, and there’s ten of us up here? Mr. Mayor: I have been looking down the line to see— Mr. Brigham: Well, you know, Mr. Bowles had his hand up, I had my hand up. Mr. Mayor: Further discussion? Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: [unintelligible] at least the quorum of being able to debate what— Mr. Mayor: And I apologize if I did not offer that to you. I would call on you for your remarks. Mr. Brigham: You first. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Bowles? Mr. Bowles? Mr. Bowles: I don’t want to get into personalities with this discussion but as you know I’ve been for the last seven days actively seeking a third candidate and we’re right back here to where we were two weeks ago and we know it’s going to go five and four or five and five. The people of Augusta deserve better than this. I’m willing to stick my neck out on the line for any candidate that can get six votes. If nothing is change— nobody has called me to persuade my decision to change. We’ve got to do better. And Dr. Charles Smith talked about unity and I agree 100% with him and today is my anniversary and unity is kind of like a marriage. You have to compromise and it takes both sides to compromise a little bit and we need to get beyond personalities and we need 55 to find somebody that everybody can support and we need to get past this issue and that’s all I have to say. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland? Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor, the ruling states that we’re supposed a Mayor Pro Tem in 2006. We already have a Mayor Pro Tem. It’s very unfortunate that Mr. Cheek cannot be here. That’s not our [unintelligible]. We sympathize with him. But the time has come for us to move on with the people’s business. And we’re talking about personalities. We going to all have different personalities no matter where you go and no matter what you do. But the time has come for this body to vote. The time has come for us to vote for the Mayor Pro Tem that we have here. And it’s unfortunate that the other person is not here so we need to be about the people’s business, of voting and getting on with this because people are tired of us sitting up here not doing what we’re supposed to do. Now it’s time for us to vote, Mr. Mayor, and move on with the people’s business. It’s unfortunate that the other person is not here. You and I travel about Augusta speaking about unit during our campaigns. Let’s unify. Let’s vote. Mr. Mayor: I wish I had the power to pick one myself. I’d already done it. But—Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I had the pleasure of being the only member that sits up here that was on the original Commission. [unintelligible] elect a Mayor Pro Tem not by a gentleman’s agreement [unintelligible] political solution all the years that I was on the Commission. The first six years of this Commission it was never a gentleman’s agreement. It was a political solution. A political solution is very simple. The charter says we will have an election of a Mayor Pro Tem every year. The charter also says that Mayor Pro Tem must receive six votes. We must keep voting until we have a Mayor Pro Tem that receives six votes. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Brigham: And I think that is a very easily—if I’m wrong I would like the attorney to correct me, but I know that that’s the law. So I’m ready to vote. I don’t think we’ll have six votes today but I’m ready to see. Mr. Mayor: Well, prior to that we have a motion and a second on the floor. Lena, could you please read the motion back? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard, excuse me. Mr. Shepard: There are two nominations. Are you wanting to make a third nomination, Mr. Bowles: 56 Mr. Bowles: No, sir. Mr. Mayor: We have the two nominations. First— Mr. Shepard: In the order they’re called, in the order they were nominated. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Shepard: And [unintelligible] gets the requisite number of votes you can reopen the nominations and vote again. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, thank you. I made a nomination of Mr. Cheek but then I also made a motion that that motion would be to recess until Mr. Cheek was able to return. I don’t think those nominations would supersede a motion that’s been seconded by this body that has to take action before you go to the nominations for that decision. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Are you asking me the priority of the motion? Mr. Grantham: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Yes. Mr. Shepard: And the priority would be to take up your motion to recess this issue to a later part of the meeting on a date that the Commission should determine. That would be the first motion to take. Mr. Grantham: And that could determine what happens? Mr. Shepard: It could. If it doesn’t pass, then you go into the nominations. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and second and it has been thoroughly discussed. Mr. Williams: Clarification, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: The agenda item says elect a Mayor Pro Tem. It don’t say nothing about no motion. Now, the item is elect a Mayor Pro Tem. Now, if we going to change that and go to something else, now y’all—I been listening up here. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, I think the motion— 57 Mr. Williams: The item need to be addressed. Mr. Mayor: The motion pertains to the item. Mr. Williams: Mr. Shepard? I need a ruling. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir. It’s my opinion that the motion to recess these issues comes first, can interrupt the main nomination process. That’s my ruling. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Shepard: The subsidiary motion which takes precedence over the nominations. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, that’s why the attorney’s the attorney, I guess, but I want a roll call vote on Mr. Grantham’s motion. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Shepard: Alphabetical? Mr. Mayor: Yes. Alphabetical. The Commission will now vote a roll call vote on Mr. Grantham’s motion using alpha. Ms. Beard: No. Mr. Bowles: Yes. Mr. Brigham: Yes. Mr. Colclough: No. Mr. Grantham: Yes. Mr. Hatney: No. Mr. Holland: No. Mr. Smith: Yes. Mr. Williams: No. Motion fails 4-5. Mr. Mayor: We will now vote on the candidates for Mayor Pro Tem as the names were submitted. Mr. Williams: Same roll call, Mr. Mayor. Go ahead. The Clerk: Mr. Williams’ name has been placed in nomination for Mayor Pro Tem. 58 Ms. Beard: Yes. Mr. Bowles: No. Mr. Brigham: No. Mr. Colclough: Yes. Mr. Grantham: No. Mr. Hatney: Yes. Mr. Holland: Yes. Mr. Smith: No. Mr. Williams: Yes. Motion fails 5-4. The Clerk: Commissioner Andy Cheek. Mr. Williams: Same roll call, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Beard: No. Mr. Bowles: Yes. Mr. Brigham: Yes. Mr. Colclough: No. Mr. Grantham: Yes. Mr. Hatney: No. Mr. Holland: No. Mr. Smith: Yes. Mr. Williams: No. Motion fails 4-5. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard, would it be appropriate to— Mr. Shepard: It would be appropriate to nominate other candidates. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: I will nominate Don Grantham. Commissioner Don Grantham th from the 10. Mr. Mayor: I would continue to open the floor for nominations. We have a motion. Are there any other nominations? We will now vote on Mr. Grantham by roll call vote. Ms. Beard: No. Mr. Bowles: Yes. Mr. Brigham: Yes. Mr. Colclough: No. Mr. Grantham: Yes. 59 Mr. Hatney: No. Mr. Holland: No. Mr. Smith: Yes. Mr. Williams: No. Motion fails 4-5. Mr. Mayor: The floor is back open. Ms. Beard: I move that the nominations come to [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard, direction on how to proceed? Mr. Shepard: If there are no further names to be placed in nomination, you call for the order of the day. If there are no further nominations. Until the nominee is selected. Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: I’d like to nominate Jimmy Smith because I think we have candidates that are qualified up here and are names that have not been mentioned. And if we’re going to—let’s just go through the whole gamut today and we’ll see who can come out and surface. But other wise we can sit here all night long, and it suits me fine. But I think we’re getting nowhere fast. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hatney? Rev. Hatney? Mr. Grantham: I’ll withdraw that for the time being, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor, after what I heard the attorney said and due to the fact that there’s no decision seem that can be made, he call for the order of the day, that mean the next item. Mr. Colclough: Second. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: I said that, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Hatney, I said that would be a possibility if there are no further nominations. Mr. Hatney: No, you didn’t say that, sir. Mr. Shepard: Well, I can’t call the— Mr. Hatney: You did not say that. 60 Mr. Mayor: Everybody— Mr. Hatney: The Mayor asked—Mr. Mayor, you asked him what’s the next moved. He said due to the fact that you’ve got no decision, call fro the order of the day. You said that. Mr. Mayor: Calvin? Mr. Holland: Call for the order of the day, Mr. Mayor. Next item? Mr. Shepard: I would like the Clerk to re-read the nomination. I believe there was one nomination—you withdrew it? Mr. Grantham: I withdrew it. Mr. Shepard: Then if it’s withdrawn, we go to the next item. E. Appointment of Standing Committees for 2006-2007. Mr. Mayor: Now, I would look to legal counsel as well on this. Is it appropriate for myself and the current Mayor Pro Tem to recess and address this issue? Mr. Shepard: Yes. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if it’s appropriate now, it was appropriate last week. I mean you ain’t going to change rules when you want to change them, now. If it was appropriate today, cause we didn’t get anywhere last week, it was appropriate last week when I gave you [unintelligible] those issues. Mr. Mayor: But Mr. Williams, also if memory serves me correctly, in the last meeting which was two weeks ago today the item at that point was tabled and was not addressed. It was voted on and tabled and so it was never addressed. And I’m just saying it is a different situation. This item, agenda item has not been tabled today as voted on by this body. Mr. Shepard: That would be my recollection, that election of the committees was not attempted because of a preemptive subsidiary motion to table, which I believe was tabled by Mr. Jerry Brigham. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I think it’s absolutely essential that we have these committees so I’m hoping the two of you can get together and work them out so that we can do the city’s business. 61 Mr. Williams: I got no problem going in. I just hate for this community and these people that come down and we yo-yo up and down the things we going to do, when we going do them. I mean if it’s right, it’s right. If it’s wrong, it’s wrong. And I been a advocate of that all the time. But because it’s not going to way certain folk want it to go, they going to change it. I got no problem, Mr. Mayor. Me and you talked about this last time. We had already made some concessions. But because certain folks—I guarantee you— Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams [unintelligible]. Mr. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: My question is I think the last time we gathered and we were over here, over here [unintelligible] we came back it had gotten late and I was hungry and I [unintelligible] three or four items that we would not [unintelligible] because they had been tabled. [unintelligible] that’s what happens. We got over here last week or whenever it was and couldn’t have the meetings and that was a bad solution because anytime you get eight or nine Commissioners together you could have business. You could handle business in a bathroom with a majority. And for the attorney to tell you that you couldn’t handle business [unintelligible] committees, you presiding, [unintelligible] taken care of that. We getting some bad advice, Mr. Mayor. You don’t have to like what I’m saying. We getting some bad advice. Any time your body gathers, all you have to do, if it’s committee [unintelligible] enough folks you could suspend those rules and then [unintelligible] president through the [unintelligible]. We could have had that meeting [unintelligible]. And Mr. Mayor, he keep on giving bad advice. I’m finished. It just bothers my [unintelligible] for an attorney to sit there and tell that lie, that you got the majority of the body here, that you can’t do business. That ain’t true. I’m sorry if I offended anybody but [unintelligible]. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, may I— Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: We did do business at the special legal meeting which was a full meeting of the Commission. And we did do business which was a special meeting of the full Commission. Everybody was in attendance and there was business handled properly. Then when the committee issue came up, because the committees had not been appointed, I had no other way of ruling than to take the facts which are who was incumbent in what slots and apply them to the committee quorums. When I applied them to the committee quorums, plus we had an absence, then there were four committees that could not do business. Then I believe the Finance Committee decided in light of the other committees not doing business that it would not have business. But my ruling was based on the fact the Commission had not organized itself into committees and my advice was not sought as to whether the committees should be held or not held. And when the agenda book went out I had no, I had not comment. I was not asked to comment. Then I was asked to rule in writing by several of you and I did. And I tried to give you the ruling at the same time to each one of you. So I think now the appropriate thing to do is for the Mayor and the holdover Mayor Pro Tem to consider the committee assignments. 62 If they agree, those are committee assignments. If they don’t agree, there can be motions for committee slates put up by members of the Commission. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We need to recess for Commissioner Williams and I to— Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Call for a recess. Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor, you all were instructed that other day to do the same thing. Yes, sir. Yes, you were. I’m not being funny. Yes, you were. You all were— Mr. Bowles: No, sir, they were recommended to and it was never agreed to and then [unintelligible] dismiss the entire meeting. Mr. Hatney: Mr. Bowles, I’m sorry— Mr. Bowles: That was brought up, Mr. Hatney. Mr. Hatney: It was stated that they get together. Mr. Bowles: It was stated but it was never done with the consent of the Mayor and that’s why it did not get approved. [RECESS] Mr. Mayor: The Mayor Pro Tem and I have agreed on standing committees for 2006. Ms. Clerk? The Clerk: Yes, sir. Under Administrative Services Committee: Commissioner Calvin Holland, Chair; Commissioner Richard Colclough, Co-Chair; Commissioners Andy Cheek and J.R. Hatney. Engineering Services: Commissioner Jimmy Smith, Chair; J.R. Hatney, Co-Chair, Commissioners Richard Colclough and Marion Williams. Public Safety: Commissioner Andy Cheek, Chair; Jerry Brigham, Co-Chair; Ms. Betty Beard, Joe Bowles. Public Services: Commissioner Don Grantham, Chair; Andy Cheek, Vice-Chair; Calvin Holland; Joe Bowles. Finance Committee: Betty Beard, Chair; Joe Bowles, Vice-Chair; Jerry Brigham; Don Grantham. Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, I want to applaud you and Commissioner Williams And I think for going and bringing us this slate and the agreement that y’all have made. in all due respect that this body owes this recommendation by y’all a 100% vote and we would like to ratify this recommendation from you in the form of a motion. 63 Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to clarify that when the Commission was convened the last time the rule of add and approve would have applied. If there had been one single hold-out you could not proceed in any fashion on the committees. And that’s— Mr. Grantham: I amend my motion to add and approve the recommendation of the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem. The Clerk: No, it’s not— Mr. Shepard: The distinction is, it’s here on this agenda because it was postponed from the first regular meeting. And off the record Mr. Hatney and I had a discussion and I appreciate it if he’d put his remarks on the record. Mr. Hatney: Let me apologize [unintelligible]. I apologize if I misunderstood you. Thank you. Mr. Shepard: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Moving on to agenda item F. The Clerk: F. Appoint County Attorney for 2006. Mr. Grantham: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, I asked this to be placed back on the agenda and after hearing and knowing that we had holdover positions as far as our Mayor Pro Tem and our County Attorney, then I would ask this body that we rescind the vote that was taken at the last meeting to hire the attorney on a month-to-month basis, but to hire him for the year 2006 and then I charge this Commission—not the attorney but I charge this Commission to proceed as vigorously as possible in setting up the legal department that has been in the Charter for many years. It has not been the blame of the administrator or the attorneys or whatever. It’s the blame of these Commissioners and the reason for that is we wouldn’t sit here without a Finance Committee or a Finance Department. We wouldn’t sit here 64 without an Engineering Department. We wouldn’t sit here without the departments that are necessary to run the government based on the charter. So I think we owe ourselves that charge and that responsibility to do it as quickly as possible and bring it back. But I would to rescind what we did with Mr. Shepard at our last meeting and vote him in as 2006 attorney until we sit fit to release him. That’s a motion. Mr. Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Ms. Beard, Mr. Colclough, Mr. Williams and Mr. Holland vote No. Motion fails 5-4. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: Ms. Mayor, in addition to what has taken place I’d like to go back to our charter, section 13, line 24 through 34, that states we should create a law department. That has been in the process and it was in the process with our last attorney, Jim Wall. We should have one or morefull time attorneys. That has been put in place. We should have a clerical staff. I believe part of that has been put in place. Office equipment and a law library. So I honestly believe those things are in place at this point. So at this point I think we need to really go back to where we were and instruct our administrator to work with Human Resources and go out for a lead attorney for our law department at this time. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to hear from HR where are we because that was an instruction that was given, that we address and do that, but like Mr. Grantham said, we [unintelligible] ourselves, because we have dropped the ball. But there was some direction given, if I’m not mistaken, to set up and to hire. What I’d like to know from HR where are we and what it’s going to take to get us on center. Mr. Mayor: Is there anybody from—Brenda, would you please take the stand? Ms. Pelaez: Well, I can come to the podium. I don’t know how much assistance I will be. The last time that Human Resources was working on this project we did actually end up hiring a search firm to try to get out and get us general counsel and then it was the movement of the body that we stick with the city attorney. And in the last meetings that there have been different discussions as it relates to general counsel, that has not made it down to my level. Mr. Williams: Well, maybe I need to, Mr. Mayor, get the Clerk to give us some clarification, maybe not now, but as to documents as to what we said and what was supposed to be done. Cause I’m like Mr. Grantham, I was thinking that the law department, the library and all the other functions that go along with that was being put in 65 place. Now, we did hire a staff attorney and I remember the attorney telling us that the staff attorney couldn’t even apply for the attorney job and I was upset about that because I said once we train somebody you mean they can’t even apply for the job? That was one of the stipulations that was put in when the staff attorney was hired but I thought sure we pay a firm to go out and do a search for a law department or for an attorney, then we just drop the ball, we canceled that, I’d like to see that in writing someone. Somebody had to write that on the wall somewhere. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: That recollection is correct. And I think you just need to pull the minutes. That is correct. Mr. Williams: Well, if I can—Ms. Beard—I don’t know, what that a motion you made, Ms. Beard, just now? Ms. Beard: I don’t think I need a motion because I think that was in place that those things would be done. Mr. Williams: If that’s not in place, I mean I need to know how we can get off center. Because see, we be talking about that I know since 1999 and we have not come to a conclusion as to what we going to do. Each year we been going through the same process. We voted on the month-to-month to give the new Commissioners who had some interest in the attorney and what the salary was and what the benefit, the pros and cons as to having an in-house. Now we talking about being sued because we don’t, we hadn’t selected a Mayor Pro Tem, but we really going to be sued if we hadn’t put a law department together or a legal counsel for this government. I think that’s urgent and I think that’s something we need to go ahead and get the process underway, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: I would agree, just to comment on what Ms. Beard said, that—I don’t think that we need a motion on this and I think it would be appropriate to review the minutes to see what direction was given at that point in time and really where we stand on that direction. Does anybody recall when that direction may have been given? The Clerk: 2002. Mr. Mayor: Ma’am? The Clerk: 2002. Mr. Mayor: 2002. Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Either 2001 or 2002. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? 66 Mr. Grantham: You know, we can sit here and beat this thing back and forth, but I’m going to recommend that you, Mr. Mayor, and the Administrator get together, review the minutes of what should have been and what took place and let’s go to work on it. Mr. Mayor: do we need that in the form of a motion, because I would be more than happy to do that? Ms. Beard: Yes. Mr. Grantham: I’ll put it in the form of a motion. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: There’s one other job or position that’s open, and that’s a charter position, and that’s EEO officer. That position needs to be filled. 62. Motion to approve reestablishing the sub-committee previously appointed to fill the EEO Officer position. Mr. Colclough: So move. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: Can you— Mr. Hatney: A charter officer. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Is there— Mr. Bowles: Mr. Mayor, I’m just curious about— Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles? Mr. Bowles: --if we could ask the administrator if those items are budgeted in this year’s budget. 67 Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell? Mr. Russell: We’ve been carrying both positions—the law department is budgeted and has funds available to do that. Or it’s budgeted through the attorney so that funding is there. The EEO position is normally carried as [unintelligible] position and is funded [unintelligible] that money could be available. I can’t speak specifically to that and obviously we plan on using some of the money in the manpower savings if it wasn’t filled [unintelligible] move forward to get that filled [unintelligible] bring forth. And if I may, in the past there was a committee of Commissioners that actually did that and worked with the DBE position we got filled and I assume that is the same direction you want to go with the EEO position, I don’t mind helping you put that together if you want to do a—whatever format you want to use [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I remember when this government found $1 million and my comments was I congratulate the person who found it but I wanted to find the person who lost it. well, my point is if it’s in the charter and said we got to fulfill, that’s the law, we need to find the money from somewhere, regardless of whether we got. We need to get those position. I understand Mr. Bowles’ comments about not trying to [unintelligible] we don’t have. But Mr. Mayor, if we can, we need to look at the positions and put everything on track. Then we worry about the money as where we can find it at. Mr. Mayor: Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: Could we just ask the administrator to go back and research that and bring that with us the next time we meet [unintelligible]? Mr. Speaker: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: If we’ve got the money to do it—we’ve got a motion and a second and could you, Lena, could you please read back the motion then? I believe it’s to give the administrator direction to fill the position; is that correct? The Clerk: [unintelligible] direction. He was asking for direction to reestablish the subcommittee that was appointed to facilitate that. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, that’s a [unintelligible] position. The Clerk: [unintelligible]. Mr. Russell: [unintelligible]. 68 The Clerk: I’ll give it to the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem, the members that were appointed to that subcommittee. Administrative services position. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Speaker: What was the motion? Mr. Mayor: Excuse me? Mr. Brigham: Restate the motion, please. Mr. Mayor: Lena, could you please reread? The Clerk: The motion was to allow the administrator to work with the Mayor and the Mayor Pro Tem to reestablish the subcommittee appointed to oversee the hiring of the EEO officer. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor: I wish the other TV stations were here to cover now that we’re getting some unanimous votes. The next agenda item? The Clerk: 19. Motion to approve the Fourth Amendment to the Lease at Augusta Soccer Park between Augusta Arsenal Gunners Soccer Club and Augusta, Ga. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beck? Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, this amendment is just the continuance of the amendment that the Commission approved last year to allocate $50,000 to the Gunners Soccer Club, the Augusta Soccer Club, for the operation of the soccer park. All operations were turned over to them last year. That arrangement worked out very well. They are in agreement with this same lease. The funds are budgeted in the 2006 budget and we’d recommend your approve. Mr. Grantham: So move. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. 69 The Clerk: 21. Motion to approve an amendment in the employment agreement for Mr. Richard Hatfield, Newman Tennis Center Manager. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beck? Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, what we’re asking you to do here—as most of you are aware, but some of the new Commission may not be aware, our tennis professional and manager at Newman Tennis Center works under a year-to-year contract. You approved, or this Commission approved his contract fro the period of August through August of 2006 for the ninth consecutive year. The manager is in charge of all the activities up there, as well as running tennis tournaments that provide a tremendous amount of economic impact to this city. And what we’re asking you to do with this amendment would be to bring his base compensation up to the same amount that you gave to all employees, which was the 8% level. In the contract that was approved in Augusta, that amount of 2.5%. We’re asking you to bring that amount up to the 8% that all employees were given. Mr. Mayor: Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: Is this person a regular employee or is this person a contract person? Mr. Beck: This person received benefits per his contract. He receives benefits, health insurance, those types of things, but he is on a year-to-year agreement. He is not a regular employee. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. [unintelligible] contract and looking back at it, my question was, was he a regular employee or a contract, but this young man has got the same rights and benefits as any employee has, Tom, plus he’s able to get [unintelligible] of the money he’s charging for classes and stuff goes to him as well, plus we paying all the—we pay him a salary and I’m looking for the salary. How much is that salary, Tom? Mr. Beck: I believe it’s under section— Mr. Williams: It’s $43,976.95. Mr. Beck: That’s correct. Mr. Williams: Okay. But—and he’s getting 80% of the money that comes in for the tennis lesson. We also, we are maintaining the property, we keep it up, we do all of the maintenance work on everything, we are keeping it up. Wouldn’t it be cheaper for us to hire a person to work for the Recreation & Parks Department to teach and save some money, rather than do a contract for $50,000? I’m going to say $50,000. Well, $45,000. 70 $43,976 plus the other money that he’s getting and the benefits. Wouldn’t it be cheaper for us to do that? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beck? Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, it might be cheaper but this has been a very effective arrangement that we have had. This was a similar arrangement that Augusta State University had when we took over Newman Tennis Center in 1997. This is a very common practice in the tennis industry where there is a base level of compensation and the tennis professional would get some percentage of lessons. He gets very little in the amount of lessons. We have other instructors up there who get probably 98% of all the lessons that are taught up there. But should he teach any, then he would be compensated with 80% of that. This again, this arrangement has worked very well. It’s been a very successful operation and I would recommend continuing in the same method. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can continue. Now, it says here that the tournament compensation is $150 per day in the backup. Along with the regular $43,976 and 80% of the percentage of the stuff that comes in. I got no problem. It’s been working, Tom, and it ought to work. I mean because with that kind of situation I don’t see why it wouldn’t work. But I’m just trying to figure out how we can save some money with a professional or training somebody or send somebody to school or doing whatever we need to teach the tennis to do it. You’re talking about nine years of this? There are city employees who don’t have a contract, who is at will employees who may be brought in here and chopped off at any time. He’s got a contract we’ve got to agree to. We going to give him the same 8% that the regular person gets? He shouldn’t receive the same benefits as a regular employee with a contract. So every time they going to get an increase or the regular employees get an increase—I don’t see the [unintelligible], Mr. Mayor. I think we need to look at this again. I’m not opposed to it. I just think we need to—this think need to be tweaked. There is no record to show me what has been done, what has been made, what the pros and cons. I just happened to look through the contract I’m going to make a and look past the [unintelligible] to see what I could find. And motion that we deny this until we get a chance to look at this again to see can we do something different from this, Tom. Even if we do it this time we ought not keep doing this over and over and over. This is a bad practice for us to do. I know we got a My motion is to deny this and lot of them but this is one practice, I think, Mr. Mayor. give us time to look at it, to see can we get a better solution or talk to them and agree on something different. I think that just too much. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Smith? Mr. Smith: [unintelligible] Mr. Beck: This Commission approved this same contract that you have in your packet. This Commission approved that in August of this past year. What I’m merely asking for is an increase in his base compensation, based on what other employees have gotten. If you see fit to give him a lesser amount or none at all, he would have no 71 recourse whatsoever. But I’m certainly recommending that this same situation stay in place. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m not familiar with the tennis profession as much as I am with some golf professions but I think in order to find a person of this caliber and we hired someone like that, we would be paying more money than what we’re doing here today. If we put them on a payroll, and I think the benefits and all of the extras that we would have to pay at that time would cost us more than what I’m seeing right here. I do know that even assistant golf professionals make more money than this, what we’re talking about for this particular individual. If he doing the job for us, then maybe we ought to look into it and see what we can do to hone it down, but I would be in favor of continuing the project until we get some more information on it. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: In the back of this contract, Mr. Mayor, it says that the county should pay for all dues for manager. If any of the following [unintelligible] professional, civic, association with [unintelligible] him. In other words, if he a member of any professional [unintelligible] we’re paying for that, too? It’s not way you can say that we can’t hire somebody, because I can remind you we had a young man out here, Fleming Tennis Park, that doing an outstanding job. They been coming down here begging for money to keep the program going. [unintelligible] keep the program going. They got children and young folks running over each other out there because [unintelligible] but this is something I think we need to look at, like Don said, we need to look at this and and my motion was to send it back to come back before we make a decision, committee. Mr. Mayor: Okay, there is a motion on the floor, but we do not have a second at this point. Mr. Colclough: I second. Mr. Mayor: There’s a motion and a second. Mr. Grantham: Send it back to committee? Not deny it but send it back to committee? Mr. Williams: Well, I think we send it back to committee so we can talk about it. I don’t want to send it back to committee just to bring it back. We got to have some dialogue on this. Mr. Mayor: Fortunately now we have some committees formed to—we’ve got a motion and a second. Is there any more discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. 72 Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 25. Approve Contract Extension with Prime Commercial Properties, Inc., in the amount of $35,000, for the Economic Development Ombudsman Program. Mr. Mayor: Mr. DeCamp? Mr. DeCamp: Mayor, this item is brought back—I believe at one of the Administrative Services Committee meetings back in December and the one committee meeting back then and it would extend—if approved would extend the program for at least—I’m still in discussion about the time period, but at least for another six to nine months, maybe as much as a year, and the requested amount is $35,000. Of course, Ms. Peel is here tonight to provide background on what she’s been doing and what she foresees doing through this contract extension. It has been an effective program and we at staff level recommend approval of that extension. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Smith? Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This money the same—a certain amount was for south Augusta and a certain amount was for downtown; is this the same part? You might answer that, Janie. But my question is, is this taking south Augusta’s money? Mr. DeCamp: Is this taking south Augusta’s money? It is in that some of the dollars that were formerly allocated last summer for south Augusta would be rolled into this but there would be work on—correct me if I’m wrong, Janie—but there would be work on behalf of south Augusta as a part of this contract extension. Is that a fair statement? Ms. Peel: I’ve actually been working— Mr. Mayor: Ms. Peel? Ms. Peel: Thank you. I’ve been working both sides and it was the downtown and the remainder of Augusta, west Augusta, the neighborhood, and then the other side was south Augusta, but since Helen resigned in June I have been working both sides of it, which did put my contract short and that item did not make this agenda but we thought st we’d go ahead and talk about renewing the next contract, which would start February 1. But I have been working both sides, the drag strip has really been very time consuming. That seems to be the main item that we are working on. And we are doing a workshop on 73 that Thursday. A short workshop. And we really need a full fledged workshop because there are so many items out there that we need to discuss and go over. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough? Mr. Colclough: Ms. Peel, is this $35,000, is that your salary? Ms. Peel: Yes, sir. That takes care of support staff and supplies and my contract. Mr. Colclough: Thank you. Help out. You said—and this is just for my own information and I’m not quite sure what this entails. I know you said you’re working on the race track and all that. Help me out. I don’t really— Ms. Peel: Okay. And you’re probably one of the few that I haven’t had a one-on- one to update you. Mr. Colclough: Just briefly. You don’t have to it here. Ms. Peel: The bottom line is job creation. More specifically, minority and female job creation. And what we decided from the very beginning to—for economic development work to happen in Augusta we really had to get our house in order so most of the time has been spent getting the organizations profiled, doing the workshops, getting the information out. Since then we went to the implementation stage which is tracking the jobs and the accomplishment. And more specifically, this last contract I have forms to fill out for the federal government that show specifically what jobs, what percentage are minority that I’ve directly been related to creating those jobs. Mr. Colclough: So you’ve created how many minority jobs over the past [unintelligible]? Ms. Peel: I would say roughly fifteen. Mr. Colclough: In terms of the technical or what type of jobs? Ms. Peel: They’re across the board. A lot of them are service. Mr. Colclough: Service oriented? Ms. Peel: Barbers, beauticians, restaurants, just different—bakeries, just a little bit across the board. Mr. Colclough: And economic development, I really have a problem with that word. A lot of people use it but never explain to me what they mean when they say economic development. Just briefly. 74 Ms. Peel: It’s basically creation of jobs and to create those jobs we have to have new industry, tourism, cultural. Mr. Colclough: Brought in some new industry? Ms. Peel: We have. We’ve brought in actually quite a bit and I have [unintelligible] is one of them. If I’m saying that correctly. That’s the vitamin folks. And Augusta Tissue has also announced, the different retail centers that have announced, and we’ve tried all the retail. You know, Starbucks, anybody that comes in, any type of new business, and we are tracking it also through the business licenses to the City and we’re trying to figure out a way to make it a little bit easier to track the minorities so that—minority jobs so that that question is easily answered. We’re just doing the best we can. It never has been tracked before and so we’ve got four different areas of economic development and we are tracking, and I’ve got it all on paper and would love to go over the whole foundation with you on it. and when we have the workshops we do updates so that we do have that information so that it is at our fingertips. Mr. Colclough: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Smith? Mr. Smith: I don’t want to belabor this but we will not have—we started off with two ombudsmen, you and Helen? Ms. Peel: Right. Mr. Smith: Helen is not there any more. Is that we’re doing now—does that eliminate that position? Ms. Peel: Not particularly. And like I said, one of the items that didn’t come on the agenda that we do need to discuss is that my contract last time did fall short because of the extra work that I was doing. I was actually working by the size of it, so it did fall short and then this time I just went in and said basically my contract is short and [unintelligible] and [unintelligible] go ahead and renew and then we will come back and talk about the other contract falling short. But I don’t think it necessarily eliminates that. I’ve just been working by the size of it. Mr. Smith: Can I ask Paul about that? Are we going to have another ombudsman for south Augusta? Mr. DeCamp: Well, we haven’t been requested to have one specifically for south Augusta. That would be up to the Commission to make that decision. Mr. Smith: This money, for the rest of the year, you contract for the rest of the year? 75 Mr. DeCamp: It’s actually for six months and what I have found is that from this last contract, because I was working both sides my contract ran out and I still continued to do the work. But it just depends on how much work is— Mr. Smith: I don’t want you to think that I’m nitpicking you. I’m just trying to find out, you know. Ms. Peel: No, I’m fine. Mr. Smith: If we can expect another person to work out there because it was a lot of companies out there. Ms. Peel: Absolutely. Mr. Smith: And we don’t want to see that stopped. I know that you’ve got your plate full trying to do the whole county. Ms. Peel: It’s a lot. It’s a lot to do and I’m not sure that the $35,000 will last the six months because I never know what projects and what things come up. I mean it’s almost—it’s something all the time. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you. Walter Sprouse had shared with us and met with us, I mean me anyway, about some of the stuff that they’re doing, and you mentioned about the vitamin thing that’s coming up. I’m more interested in seeing something done in the city of Augusta as a whole, not necessarily south Augusta, not necessarily downtown, not necessarily the inner city. Economic development ought to be something that come out of Paul’s back yard over there, at HED. But I had seen the magnitude of things happen when it comes to economic development. Now, you say you’re tracking jobs. I understand when you track jobs. Starbucks came in and you know when a business come in, if you track those that come in—I need to know what are we doing or what we need to do to attract people and businesses to Augusta. Not track those that come in here because they [unintelligible] but I hadn’t seen that. Like Jimmy said, this ain’t no picking. You and me talk all the time. I’m just trying to get it off center so we can get some things done. Now, we are going to approve $35,000 for six months. It may not be for that long. It depends on how much work that you got. If we don’t have the other person to do that now, why hadn’t somebody applied for that job? Why hadn’t we advertised? Paul, I guess you can answer that. It shouldn’t be, we shouldn’t have to wait until somebody throw a flag up and say you know, y’all ain’t doing nothing over here. We got stuff going on. But I would love to see a report, not of a tracking, but what we have done at economic development in this city. Cause I can take you some places that been trying to exist and been trying to get on their feet. They haven’t had any assistance at all from this government. And there is businesses who trying to thrive. So if I can get a report back to see—now those things that going to bring some money here, I think we ought to jumping on them first. We talked about that, too. I mean ought not have to worry. I mean some 76 things just going to blow up in our face with growth. But seem like we are not addressing that as quickly as we ought to. I would love to see a report on what you done, what is being [unintelligible] to be done. Ms. Peel: Okay. Mr. Mayor: I think it was Rev. Hatney and then Commissioner Grantham and then Commissioner Bowles. Mr. Hatney: Very quickly. Looking at this material here, this contract will st actually go to June 21, is according to what—continue it as of June 21 of ’05, so we can st anticipate this going to June 21 of ’06? st Ms. Peel: It will actually be a new contract that would start February 1 and go through the end of July. Mr. Hatney: Six months? Okay. Ms. Peel: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have been a part of these meetings with Ms. Peel and seen some of the results and I know that she has to file reports that are necessary because this is being through the HED Department, and federal funds, and these things have to be complied with an certainly has to be accounted for. So with what I’ve seen take place I feel like that we really off to a good start with our ombudsman program with the two people we had and I certainly would like to see a second one come on as soon as we can. And Paul, if you can get involved in that findings or research or whatever, but as of now I feel like we’re on the right track and we’re headed in the right direction. And Commissioner Williams is right, we have so many development authorities and so many development departments and so many development this and that that we don’t know what the left hand is doing with the right hand. And so I think some But I’m going to make a motion that we coordination needs to be made in that regard. approve this for Ms. Peel for the six months that she’s requesting for this program that she’s involved with, and until we get a person on board to help on the southside, that she be charged to do the work out there as well. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. 77 Mr. Mayor: We’re on a roll with the unanimous votes. By my clock it’s almost seven. I wonder if we could get out of here by 7:30. The Clerk: 27. Approve a request from Light of the World Neighborhood and Economic Development, Inc. for $15,000 in Reprogrammed Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds. Mr. Mayor: Mr. DeCamp? Mr. DeCamp: Yes, this is—Light of the World is one of our public service agencies that has received block grant funding over the years. They provide tutoring programs for youth, brown bag food program for seniors, and also transportation for seniors. At this particular time they have requested an additional $15,000. $12,000 of which would be for the salary of their program administrator, $2,000 to cover gas for their van, and another $1,000 for program supplies. Bishop Green is here to answer any specific questions you have. This particular request has been through the proper procedures, has been endorsed by our Citizens Advisory Committee at their meeting just last month. I’ll be glad to answer any questions or have Bishop Green explain. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Yes, Paul, I’m in support but I need to ask a question. Can we pay salaries with this? Mr. DeCamp: With block grant funds? Yes, we do provide funding for salaries for a number of public service agencies. It varies from one to another but yes. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham? Mr. Brigham: Mr. DeCamp, do we normally pay 80% of the funds requested in salaries? Mr. DeCamp: Mr. Brigham, Commissioner Brigham, it varies from one agency to another, depending upon their request and what actually it takes for them to operate. Some agencies—most of their cost is salaries and other administrative costs. Sometimes we provide in some of the allocations up to 100% of the funds that are allocated to an agency—goes to salaries. Mr. Brigham: I personally think that we ought to be providing services with these monies and not paying salaries. I would hope that y’all would draft a policy to that effect, that the bulk of these monies go into providing services and not paying salaries. These funds, if they’re going to be used to help people, they need to be spent on people, to provide them services. 78 Mr. DeCamp: At the staff level we’re very aware of that issue. We are taking steps to present alternatives to the Citizens Advisory Committee at their meeting next week, in fact, to discuss this very issue. And I would say, just by way of examples, overall of the allocations of the public service agencies that this body approved earlier in this meeting, in the cumulative only 28% of the total amount allocated for public services is going to salaries. Mr. Brigham: But that ought to be the strive of every program. Mr. DeCamp: I understand. And that’s what we’re— Mr. Brigham: [unintelligible] overall percentage. It ought to be the strive. Mr. DeCamp: I understand. Mr. Brigham: [unintelligible] majority of the funds go to service people. Mr. DeCamp: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to move for approval. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any other further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Brigham and Mr. Smith vote No. Motion carries 7-2. Mr. Grantham: [unintelligible] Paul a question. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, thank you. It would be helpful to us based on these [unintelligible] federal government just to get a general idea of how much of those funds actually go to salaries, based on the request that is made by you from the various agencies. And I know some of them have to operate on that since they are non-profit, but it still would be interesting. I’m not asking for any particular reason but I think it would be good for us to know here on this Commission [unintelligible] because we do know that some go for salaries, some do not. Mr. DeCamp: Okay. Thank you for the suggestion. Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item? 79 The Clerk: 28. Presentation by Ms. Mary Bogan of Southside Outreach Community Program, Inc. regarding a decrease in grant money for 2006. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Bogan, could you please state your name and address for the record and before, I would just like to say thank you so much for your patience. I know you were here last Monday to make a presentation and you waited for so long. So thank you very much. I just did want to recognize you for that. Ms. Bogan: My name is Mary Bogan. My address is 3026 Eagle Drive, Augusta, Georgia. But I’m representing Southside Outreach Community Program located at 1930 Olive Road, Augusta, Georgia. We operate a tutoring center there and programs and we have never really—we have submitted proposals to CDBG but we have never really received any money through that program other than through UDAG and that was only because of the Commission, that Administrative Services Commission granted us $10,000. And this time on your annual, proposed annual action plan, if you look at a proposed budget—instead of the $10,000 that we were getting they moved us down to $2,500 and suggested that we have volunteers to come in and help students, which our program has been in progress since 1995. When we started the program we had, tried to have volunteers but it was not successful. Now we have certified teachers that come in Tuesdays and Thursdays from 5:30 until 7:30 in the evening and they tutor math, science, language arts, social studies, SAT, ACT, and we have a computer lab. Now, we are asking that the Commission, the Mayor and the Commission see that Southside at least get $10,000 to help us to continue the program. And when Commissioner Hankerson was here, he was an advocate for us because they just said no to us, and just as these people are coming in today, asking for more money, they can get more money, but Southside was always zero. But I do not understand and I’m asking for clarification today. I’ve talked to you, Mr. Mayor. I’ve talked to Commissioner Williams. I talked to Commissioner Cheek and he told me to call him and I’ve called him I don’t know how many times but never received any feedback from him. Talked to Commissioner Dr. Hatney, Commissioner Grantham and Mr. Smith and Mr. Holland, and I would like for you all to reinstate the money for our program, because we need that money to help us continue our program. We are in an area where we are surrounded by low [unintelligible] to low income people and we are in an area where there are charter schools all around. I even sent information to you concerning a recommendation and a [unintelligible] how the school has helped the students, from parents, [unintelligible] stating that the school is necessary. And I have one with me now, even though I faxed all of you one and you should have it before you, that the tutoring program is a necessary program in south Augusta. But every time we apply—and this time they just flatly said too much money is going for salaries. Well, the money is going directly to help the students. The teachers are helping the students and the students are passing. So I’m asking you to please reconsider. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland? 80 Mr. Holland: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In a situation like this, and I’m trying to get myself very much familiar with the program, and I appreciate the information that was sent to me. Being one that’s an advocate for education, I seriously think that we should as a Commission and Mayor reconsider the amount of money that this program has received, simply because of the fact that we want to make sure that our schools come up to date and we want our children to come up to date. We need to provide these kinds of incentives to public students in these schools. So $2,500 is just a drop in the bucket. So I’m going to suggest and You can’t hardly buy supplies with that amount of money. put into a motion to this Commission and to the Mayor that we rescind and try to get the money from somewhere for this program and bring it back up to the $10,000 that she had previously. Mr. Smith: I’ll second it. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Bowles? Mr. Bowles: I’d like to ask Mr. DeCamp the justification on why these funds were reduced and if there are funds available. Mr. DeCamp: They were reduced as per reduction of the Citizens Advisory Committee in the course of balancing the overall allocation of funds to various public service agencies in the 2006 block grant application to HUD. Secondly, we can—it would be my recommendation we can probably find some additional funds to reprogram out of another year’s, another year of block grant funding to cover this shortfall. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further—Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Just one comment, Mr. Mayor, to Paul. The Citizens Advisory Board is a recommending body. Mr. DeCamp: That’s correct. Mr. Williams: You as department head in your Department would have to sit down and I think talk with them and y’all got to really make the final decision as to what needs are there versus—and that’s always been the case [unintelligible] advisory board recommended this and this what we going with. But look like there ought to be somebody there that can recognize the need versus what the board said. And I don’t want no problem between you and the board but I want y’all to work together. But I want you to understand that that’s a recommending body. They don’t have the final say, that you ought to be able to look at a program and say well, this program will suffer if we don’t do whatever. And I know there a bunch of programs out there, too. But I just want to remind you that that’s a— 81 Mr. DeCamp: I understand, Mr. Williams. And in this particular case the actual staff—staff actually recommended that this organization receive $8,500. Mr. Hatney: Call for the question, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Ms. Bogan: One more question, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am? Ms. Bogan: We usually get—they recommend that we get the money up front because you really need to know [unintelligible] our organization need that money up front [unintelligible]. Even though we have private donations and we have different fund raisers, but we are at a [unintelligible] with needing the money. It has been done before. Mr. Mayor: Mr. DeCamp? Mr. DeCamp: All of our [unintelligible] recipients receive their funds under reimbursement basis and that’s what I would recommend in this particular case. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item? The Clerk: 31. Consider a request for the Weed and Seed Initiative to become a County Department. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible], thank you for waiting patiently as well. Mr. Speaker: This request was done as a strategy to keep [unintelligible] for Augusta-Richmond County. In the original agreement the county had to agree that after the [unintelligible] federal funds were exempt, that we keep the program. And one of the things, in order for us to keep the [unintelligible] city of Augusta we have to keep with the guidelines of the Department of Justice and one of the strategies that we came up with was [unintelligible] county is already funding the department at $140,000 for the 2006 budget. So the idea was that if it became a city department then the city would show that we are sustaining the program as required by the original grant. Mr. Colclough: So move, Mr. Mayor. 82 Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: How much will that future budget? Will it be more than $120,000? Mr. Speaker: It might. It depends, Commissioner. We run so many programs. Those programs—the cost for those programs varies from year to year with supplies and other requirements. It’s hard to project that cost at this point in time. Mr. Brigham: What is the total cost of the program now if you didn’t receive federal funds? Mr. Speaker: The total cost of the program is $750,000 over the seven year period that we first had it. Mr. Brigham: The annual cost? Mr. Speaker: The annual cost is running around probably about $160,000 or $170,000. Mr. Brigham: So we’re paying 60% to 80% of it already? Mr. Speaker: You’re paying 100%. Mr. Brigham: Well, you said $120,000 and $160,000, so that’s $40,000 we’re not paying; right? Mr. Speaker: No, sir. We’re paying all of it. Mr. Brigham: We’re paying all the $160,000? Mr. Speaker: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess my question comes in as they come in the city, would the employees come up under the city as well? I mean that’s going to be a transition from the Weed & Seed. And what about [unintelligible] but what about the federal agency? You know, we been threatened with money, going back, and we ain’t been doing. I’m just trying to figure out a way. I’m not opposed but if you put that agency under what about when the next five years ends and there’s a new system, will that come up under the city, too? I guess is my question, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Administrator? 83 Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, I think what you’ve got to do is look at those on individual cases and I think the feeling in this particular case is this has been a successful program over the last seven years with the federal funding that was there and it would be our recommendation to continue this program and we’ve allocated in our budget city dollars to do that. But I think we need to look at it with no promise to anybody. You start with a grant. But if you look at each individual and look at the value that it brings to the table. In this case it’s our opinion that that value is worth the dollars that we are expending. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can respond? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: I’m in agreement. I’m not in disagreement. But I mean I want to be clear, I want to be as open minded as I possibly can, but I remember when we got grant money for police cars and even police, and once that grant ran out then the city had to foot that bill. And I mean that’s another way going after a grant. But once the grant is over then when the cookie crumbles then who picks up the pieces, I guess. But I think it’s a good program, I think [unintelligible] great service but I just want to be mindful. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Russell: Each individual grant has that usually up front as part of the deal. With the COPS grant we were required to provide some support and I think we eventually pulled that out after our time, after the time was available. If I remember correctly, the COPS grant went down, they provided x number of dollars and then reduced those dollars yearly. We were supposed to pick that up. At the end of that I think we did have a decision not to pick that up and I think we opted for that. And I agree that we’ve got to be very careful because [unintelligible] great deal up front might end up being more expensive in the long run. But once again, I think you look at those individual cases and then I think this case is one that provides a real good service to the community for the amount of dollars that we invest. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, can I? I’m going to tell the administrator my problem with it. If we are laying off people and that’s what the last instructions I heard to you for the budget was to lay off some people, why are we creating another city department? Mr. Russell: I think, if I may, Mr. Mayor, I think once again you’ve got to look at the different type of services and the different areas that we’re dealing with and the impact that that has on the community that we’re looking at. I think in this particular case you’ve got to weigh the impact that this program has on our youth and on our children and particularly those that are definitely in need of those kinds of services. And it’s always a gamble—not a gamble. It’s always a very tough question when you starting having to reduce services, to look at those that are either reducible or don’t have the 84 impact that we hope that they had. And you’ve always got to weigh the amount of benefits you get for the least dollars spent. And I think in this particular case, as I said before, that benefit outweighs the cost and in some other areas where we will be probably having to come back to you with some reductions in the near future, that we would have to look at areas where the benefits don’t outweigh the costs. Mr. Brigham: I would still feel a little more comfortable if we had more than just a figure that was batted around on the floor and a dollar amount of maybe $120,000. I would feel a whole lot more comfortable about voting on it after I’ve seen some real, honest projections. Mr. Russell: I can provide that if you’d like. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion on the floor. Do we have a motion and a second/ Ms. Beard: I’ll second that. Mr. Hatney: I did second it. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Brigham and Mr. Bowles vote No. Motion carries 7-2. Mr. Mayor: By the way, [unintelligible], before you leave, they’re having a trash pickup out at the Carrie J. Mays Center on Saturday at 10:00 o’clock. I’ll be out there and any Commissioners that would like to join us for the Weed and Seed program. Next agenda item? The Clerk: FINANCE 35. Consider a request from Hammond Grove Baptist Church for a waiver of property taxes for The House of Abraham located at 2023 Grand Blvd. (Referred from December 19 Commission meeting) Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This has been in front of us a couple of times and I think what we did was change the zoning request on this back last year. And [unintelligible] should have incorporated the property tax [unintelligible] into this, a So I’m going to make a motion that we go Baptist Church that’s used for that purpose. ahead and approve the property taxes to be waived on the House of Abraham. 85 Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. [unintelligible] I’m all for it cause I got one I need taxes waived on, too. But I just need to ask a question, whether or not—and I think there some guidelines. It has been before us and I think we asked the question whether or not they applied or were they in this property at the first of the year. So I’d like to hear from somebody from the Tax Office that’s in here. I mean I want to support it but I don’t think we ought to open up a door that we going to end up getting slammed in our own faces. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Thank you. This somewhat resembles the Boxing Club precedent in that there is a reason to exempt it because of tax exempt activities. In addition, this was used as part of the ministry of Hammond Grove the entire year. [unintelligible] so I can, I can on those two reasons I can go ahead with the [unintelligible]. Mr. Williams: Well, now, if I’m not mistaken, Mr. Shepard, we had someone from the Tax Office come up and tell us that it was not in use, said the parking lot was being used, and it wasn’t in the building. I want to go by whatever it was stipulated, that they wasn’t, that [unintelligible] this year, for 2006 I got no problem. But last year I think this is what this is asking about [unintelligible], to waive the taxes for last year when they wasn’t in the building. Last year. Is that right? Mr. Grantham: I think it was the last half. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Williams, you said that they was using it as a parking lot? Mr. Williams: No, I’m saying it was stated— Mr. Hatney: It doesn’t matter if they put a basketball up there and nothing else, it qualifies [unintelligible]. Mr. Williams: I got no problem. Mr. Hatney: [unintelligible] basketball court over there. Mr. Williams: I ain’t got no problem, Mr. Hatney, Dr. Hatney. My problem was, my point was that when they came before this body and the Tax Office came up, the Tax Assessor’s Office came up, and explained to us that they have not applied in time. What they stated was that the church next door was using it. Now, I want to help, I want to help, but I just want to follow the rules. 86 Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles? Mr. Bowles: I believe, Commissioner and Mayor Pro Tem Williams is referring st to is that they were not in occupancy of the building on January 1, and it’s the first day of the year is how the Tax Assessor’s office. It probably needs to go back down to the Tax Assessor’s Office for clarification. Mr. Williams: I make that as a motion then, Mr. Mayor. Go back to the Tax Assessor’s Office and [unintelligible] in compliance then we need to go ahead and pass it. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham? st Mr. Grantham: Well, you know, based on whether they applied January 1 or not, it’s up to this board to waive it or not, whether [unintelligible]. I think we got the final word as to whether we are going to waive that tax or not. And I made a motion to waive the tax. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, I’m in favor. I mean let’s do it. I’m ready to do that. Mr. Brigham: How many motions are on the floor? Mr. Mayor: I believe we have a motion from Mr. Grantham to waive the taxes. Mr. Brigham: Has Mr. Grantham’s motion been seconded? Mr. Mayor: Yes. And Mr. Williams had made— The Clerk: I didn’t get it. The second? Who did? The second? Mr. Mayor: Dr. Hatney seconded Commissioner Grantham’s motion. Commissioner Williams’ motion to send it back to the Tax Assessor’s Office has not been seconded. Commissioner Holland? Mr. Holland: I was just concerned here, Mr. Mayor. I see we got two different addresses. see one on the stationery says 590 Hemlock Drive, North Augusta, South Carolina. That’s Hammond Grove Baptist Church. And then we got Hammond Grove here on—is this the House of Abraham, [unintelligible]. What we talking about? Mr. Grantham: The one on Grant Boulevard. Mr. Mayor: Is one of those a mailing address? Okay. 87 Mr. Hatney: Who is the pastor? Who is the preacher? Who is the pastor? Mr. Grantham: Rev. Hankerson. Mr. Hatney: I’m just asking for clarification because I didn’t know. When I see two different addresses on here [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: I believe we have one motion on the floor that’s been seconded. Mr. Grantham: Call the question. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Williams: That’s to approve; is that right? Mr. Grantham: Right. Mr. Mayor: To approve. The Clerk: To approve waiving. Mr. Bowles votes No. Mr. Holland abstains. Motion carries 7-1-1. Mr. Williams: Point of clarification, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: We just approved—cause this board has the authority the approve, whether they were in compliance or not. And I know of one that’s standing at the door and I just want to be made aware of this body, that if that’s the rule, that’s the rule. This body can do whatever it wants to do. Mr. Mayor: You better be nice. Mr. Williams: All right. Next agenda item? The Clerk: 39. Reallocate $900,000 from SPLOST Phase I, Future Maintenance, to General Administration SPLOST Operations, Phase IV for 2006. Mr. Hatney: So move. 88 Mr. Grantham: Second. Ms. Beard: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Colclough: [unintelligible] clarification on it. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Colclough? Mr. Colclough: You’ve moving SPLOST Phase I to IV? Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir. Basically what we’re doing it— Mr. Colclough: Why is SPLOST Phase I still there? Mr. Speaker: This is money that was set aside for future maintenance. Non- designated. It was designated for future maintenance. And each of the phases we had funds that were set up for maintenance, for our personnel, etc. Phase V just went into effect. No funds were set up. We were instructed and we presented a plan to the administrator last fall to how could we operate the next four years. This is part of that plan that we presented, was to take part of that future, that money that was reserved for future maintenance so that we could continue with our administrative forces. Mr. Colclough: SPLOST I was [unintelligible]? Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir. Mr. Colclough: [unintelligible] SPLOST V? Mr. Speaker: That’s correct. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Let me bring up this aspect. Mike, are you going to be using it for the same purposes [unintelligible]? Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir. Mr. Shepard: Because more restricted SPLOSTs have expanded in their purposes over the years and this is one of the—obviously one of the first SPLOSTs and its purposes are roads, streets and bridges, so if we could [unintelligible] and keep that, those purposes in mind, Mike, that would be— Mr. Speaker: Yes, sir, this is for the personnel on the SPLOST payroll. 89 Mr. Shepard: But who deal with roads, streets and bridges? Mr. Speaker: Absolutely. That’s all, yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Shepard. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: 40. Request to Abate 1999 Tax Account--Map 7, Parcel 236. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell? Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, I was given this a few minutes ago and apparently this is current money due on a common area in the town house complex known as Berckman Court. The company that owns the common area is now, from what I understand, out of the business and therefore the money would be uncollectible and they just want to clear the books, if I understand the rationale [unintelligible]. $384 on the common area. Mr. Grantham: Motion to approve. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Bowles votes No. Motion carries 8-0. The Clerk: 48. Receive from staff a report regarding the approximate dollar amount spent with the consulting firms of Jordan, Jones & Goulding and CH2MHill for staff augmentation services for the Augusta Engineering Department. (Requested by Commissioner Williams) The Clerk: Mr. Williams requested that. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Yes, Mr. Mayor. I needed to get some clarification or some report back. We hired these consulting firms to do some work, to hire some people for us. And I want to know where are we with that, who we hired, how much longer we are going to 90 need to keep getting folks to hire folk for us and how many folks have they hired, how many still here, how many gone, how many didn’t come. I just need a report. Where are we with that? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, could you please state your name? Mr. Ladson: [unintelligible]. I’m representing the Engineering Department. Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, currently [unintelligible] start with Jordan, Jones & Goulding. We initially had a contract with them in June of 2005 for six months. We just recently amended the contract with an additional $85,000. Thus far to date we have spent approximately $61,618.26; currently we have $13,381.74 in the [unintelligible]. We contracted JJ&G for an additional six months. And that position, it’s basically one person that’s fulfilling the job duties of the project manager, which manages the [unintelligible] projects. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, thank you for explaining that y’all hired the firm to do project managing work; is that what you’re saying? Mr. Ladson: Yes. Mr. Williams: And I may be confused but I thought we was hiring some folks to help us find the necessary people that we need to [unintelligible]. Mr. Ladson: That’s correct, also. We also have a contract with CH2MHill and that’s a separate contract than the JJ&G contract. Now, on the CH2MHill contract, we entered into an agreement with the engineering firm last year. We had notice to proceed in November of 2005 for them to do staff augmentation. And the engineering and traffic, traffic engineering. And currently they have—well, two or three individuals working in the traffic engineering section to basically help with staff augmentation. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, what I was thinking and what I was trying to get a handle on was where were we with the process of hiring folks that work for this government that’s going to come on board, that comes on board? Have we hired anybody? Mr. Ladson: No, sir. We are currently working on that right now. We’re also working on that in-house. Mr. Williams: But wasn’t it the proposal for these firms to help us, who had the expertise to know what we needed in this city? Is that part of that? Mr. Ladson: That is part of that. Mr. Williams: I wanted to make sure. I’m just trying to figure out where we are. I see where the money—it’s plain where the money went. And if we done spent $61,000 91 and got $13,000-something left, but I just don’t see where we achieved what we paid the money for. Mr. Ladson: The JJ&G contract is for—there is an individual that they are actually doing the work of the project manager. Mr. Williams: And that’s the project manager out of their firm? Mr. Ladson: That’s correct. Mr. Williams: But that’s nothing to do with nobody that’s going to be work for us? That’s a different thing; right? Mr. Ladson: That’s correct. Mr. Williams: But on the other side, Mr. Mayor, if I’m [unintelligible] process was supposed to been a process to help us find the qualified expertise that we needed to work for this government. Where are we with that? Mr. Ladson: Currently they’re looking at the applications that were sent in previously and maybe the next couple of weeks we’re going to screen those people and actually interview them. Mr. Williams: That’s all, Mr. Mayor. I don’t know no more but that’s all. Is there a motion to receive this as information? Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Colclough: So move. Ms. Beard: Second. Mr. Mayor: Any more discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: APPOINTMENT(S) 52. Appointment to the Savannah River Regional Diversification Initiative due to the resignation of Mr. Keith Kreager for a four-year term. Mr. Mayor: Did we already—I didn’t have 50 having gone through. Did we? The Clerk: Oh, I’m sorry. We did. 92 50. Receive a report from staff regarding the transitioning of CH2MHill from the Utilities Department. (Requested by Commissioner Williams) Mr. Mayor: Is that—okay. I just wanted to make sure. Go ahead. Mr. Hicks? Mr. Hicks: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, each of you will find before you a copy of this report. It’s called Benchmark 2010. It’s an overview of the capital improvement program to date. And in answer to what Commissioner Williams had asked, last year Commissioner Cheek had also asked that we do an update on the capital improvement program. So for all of the Commissioners, new and existing, this is a review of our capital improvement program to date. If you’ll notice on the first page, it gives the 1996, 2000, 2002, 2004—those are the years in which we issued bonds and we have the funds from the bond proceeds and then you’ll see when it’s all said and done we will have spent a total of $453,803,000. The next page shows the current status of the projects. You’ll notice that there’s 81 projects completed, 15 under construction, 19 completing design, and 15 beginning design. There’s separate little packets also lying there at your desk. It gives the names of all of those projects, all 130 projects you’ll find listed there and also the dollar value of each one. Now, the next page shows the projected monthly expenses. And this is where it gets into addressing the question that Commissioner Williams was asking indeed. If you’ll notice that this page particularly, it shows the funding per month. In other words, if you were to look at the index on the left, goes from $1 million to $9 million. And then of course along the bottom it gives the dates. And you’ll notice that where in 2006 we’re going to [unintelligible] up to where we’ll have the Highland Avenue plant and the Messerly plant under construction, as well as some of our other large dollar sewer lines. The main interceptor the two phases of Butler Creek. So you’ll notice that—and you can from that tell about how many million dollars we’ll be spending each month. Now, in order and answering the question that Commissioner Williams brought up, right at this present time CH2MHill is expending about fourteen man years per year. That’s roughly the rate that they’re using. At the end of—rather, in January of 2007 the [unintelligible] will be down to nine man year. So about five less than we have this year. And then in January of ’08, down to eight man years. Then ’09, six man years. And you’ll notice that the construction is ramping down so their efforts in maintaining the program management will of course ramp down. There won’t be as many projects nor will there be as many projects under design. If you’ll notice, back on that second page, completing design and beginning design is only 34 projects. When I say only, that’s compared to the 96 that have gone on before. It takes a lot of man hours to handle a program with 96 projects and spending an average of $24 million a year. As it gets on into the remaining projects it will be 34 projects spending an average of $40 million a year. So it will take less manpower to handle that. We anticipate adding this year—it’s been approved previously in our budget—we have actually, we could add—we could rather have a total of nine engineers. We now have two. We’re going to add two during this year. That will bring us up to four. And then we’ll look at the other engineers as we need them in the ensuing years as [unintelligible] ramps down and we ramp up. But also, like to add more land surveyors. We’ll be coming to you with that proposal during the year 2006. But you can see from the expenditure of the funds, you can how that we’ll go along and then about mid-year of ’09 93 it will really begin to drop down and then significantly as we reach the end of our benchmark 2010 capital improvement program. So Commissioner Williams, that’s the meat of where the people are needed at this time. Insofar as program management, insofar as our engineers, we’ll be adding engineers. We will be having a total of four. We’ll see if we need to move on up to the total of nine. We don’t plan to add them if we can have our staff perform to the level that we’d like for them to. Now, if you look on the next page it has project control. This is one that is kind of dear to our heart and one that Commissioner Colclough I know will recognize. This has to do with the change orders that we had going in our 1996 program before we actually implemented. That’s this next page where it says project control. We actually had 6.5% change order rate by contract value. If you’ll notice that, after we brought the program manager on, got everything on board, doing as he should do, having the proper personnel reviewing and monitoring, our change order value is now 1% on $167 million so we’ve really pulled it down. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: If I can just shorten Max up a little bit, the second page is interesting. Eighteen projects completed. Mr. Hicks: Right. Mr. Williams: I’d just like to know— Mr. Hicks: 81 projects complete. Mr. Williams: I’m sorry. 81 project. 81 projects completed. I mean with the transition that we’re doing with 81 projects completed, how many, how many staff persons have we hired and have we transitioned from? If we got 81 projects that’s completed—I heard you talk about two engineers and you going to get two more but I’m hoping we got more than two engineers with 81 projects completed. I mean all this other stuff got to go to 2010 but 81 completed, I been waiting to hear something, Max, about we done hired 40 people that working for this government, that been transitioned from [unintelligible] in position now and they took off with this side of it. I ain’t heard that yet. Mr. Hicks: If we get into the administrative side of our operation, which is another thing that CH advised us in, and very well, the person who advised us in that regard has many years in experience in water and waste water. If you remember, we reorganized. When we first started it was just—I was director and Tom Wiedmeyer was assistant director. That vertical alignment just didn’t lend itself to getting things done. So we then reorganized to where we had four assistant directors and one director. That way, each assistant director was empowered to do what they needed to do. It greatly began to facilitate how things are done and it began to pick up and go and then just this last year, if you remember, we added one more, or we broke up the largest department and made an engineering and inspection department or engineering and construction, then 94 your one is the field operations or the water distribution and waste water collection department. So we have reorganized in that regard and in effect we added four assistant directors in that period of time. We brought on four engineers in house. At the time we first started this we had to support those engineers through bond funds. And that support of engineers through bond funds continued until about 2002, I think it was, 2004 maybe. So now we’re supporting those engineers strictly from our operations funds. And as I say we will maintain that level of four engineers. That’s what we’ve done. The thing—the personnel that we’ve added more of have been inspectors because that’s where we really need it. If you’ve got 96 projects under way you need inspectors out there watching those projects and we have added probably I want to say eight or nine inspectors, Commissioner Williams, so four engineers and about nine inspectors that we’ve added. Mr. Williams: Motion to receive as information. Thank you, Max. Mr. Hicks: Okay. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Mr. Colclough: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Commissioners, please vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: APPOINTMENT(S) 52. Appointment to the Savannah River Regional Diversification Initiative due to the resignation of Mr. Keith Kreager for a four-year term. Mr. Mayor: All right. Don, 52 is your item, isn’t it? Mr. Grantham: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We have a letter, a backup letter from the Savannah River Regional Diversification Initiative and they asked me—they did not include a name but Mr. Keith Kreager, who moved out of Augusta, had been on that commission and certainly has been a good, capable and able member. The request is I would like to nominate Mr. Rick Toole to replace Mr. Keith Kreager. that—and Mr. Mayor: Would you like to put that in the form of a motion? Mr. Grantham: Yes. Mr. Hatney: Second. 95 Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATOR 53. Approve severance package for Ms. Teresa Smith. (Deferred from the January 3, 2006 Commission Meeting) Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell? Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, at the last meeting you authorized me to negotiate with Ms. Smith an appropriate severance package. I attempted to make contact with Ms. Smith and had several unsuccessful phone calls. We did get back in touch with each other late last week. She was able to pick up my recommendation on Thursday. Today prior to the meeting I received a letter from Ms. Smith advising me that she would like to review that with counsel prior to making a decision? Part of our recommendation is that she be allowed—that she do that as part of the legal aspect of what we’re doing there and as part of the recommendation that she does review that with her counsel if she would so desire. Based on that I think we need to continue this process until she has the opportunity to review the offer with her counsel and move forward from that point. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. In that document that was given last time and I don’t have my copy, maybe somebody else does, but it stated in there that she would have a time period to seek legal counsel. Mr. Russell: Yes, sir, she does. That’s thirty days, sir. Mr. Williams: So we got to wait thirty days before— Mr. Russell: That would be my recommendation, we give her an opportunity to do that, yes, sir. Mr. Williams: So move, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Brigham and Mr. Bowles vote No. Motion carries 7-2. 96 Mr. Mayor: I believe we’re down to the final— The Clerk: One more. Mr. Mayor: One more. The Clerk: 54. Consider a request for sponsorship for South Augusta Marching Unit. Mr. Colclough: So move. Ms. Beard: Second. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: I think you better put that in the form of a contract for services to be rendered [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell? Mr. Russell: While I firmly believe that this is a wonderful opportunity for us to sponsor a unit, there is no money designated for this at this particular point in time and if you do decide to do that I would need a funding source or be directed to find a funding source, and I’d just like to remind you that we get numerous requests like this all for very valuable organizations that do a wonderful job with our kids. Mr. Mayor: That’s the disclaimer. Mr. Russell: Yes. But once again, this is not something that was budgeted, it’s not something that was considered in our budget. It’s something we’d have to find dollars for and we are starting a precedent that that we need to be careful about it. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: Yes, sir, I’d like to agree with Mr. Russell, Mr. Mayor, in a situation like this. Cause this is a group of young people that [unintelligible] diversity from all over the south Augusta area. They’ve had an opportunity travel all over the country and they been requesting money, they’ve been selling hot dogs, hamburgers, getting donations from different places to do some traveling. As a matter of fact they just came back from St. Petersburg and of course they led the Sugar Bowl Parade, representing the state of Georgia and representing Augusta. So I agree with Mr. Russell, whatever we can do to assist this particular group it would be very, very beneficial for them. 97 Mr. Mayor: Do we have a motion and a second? Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Bowles and Mr. Brigham vote No. Motion carries 7-2. Mr. Mayor: I would now like to look for a motion to adjourn. [MEETING ADJOURNED] Lena Bonner Clerk of Commission CERTIFICATION: I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of Augusta Richmond County Commission held on January 17, 2006. ________________________ Clerk of Commission 98