Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 29, 2006 ARC Commission minutes REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBERS March 29, 2006 The Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 1:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 29, 2006, the Hon. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Holland, Smith, Colclough, Grantham, Hatney, Williams, Beard, Cheek, Bowles and Brigham, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Also Present: Steve Shepard, Attorney; Fred Russell, Administrator; Lena Bonner, Clerk of Commission. The invocation was given by Dr. Jan Blissit, Pastor of Reid Memorial Presbyterian Church. The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States was recited. Mr. Mayor: Dr. Blissit, we have something for you. The Clerk: On behalf of the Mayor and for [unintelligible]—this is the Mayor’s pastor— Mr. Mayor: Yes, this is my pastor, everybody. The Clerk: On behalf of the Mayor [unintelligible] we’d like to thank you for being with us today imparting that petition to heaven on our behalf and in honor [unintelligible] Chaplain of the Day. Thank you for being with us. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Jan. [unintelligible] We will next move on t our delegations. The Clerk: DELEGATION A. Mr. John Small RE: Unity and catching the vision. Mr. Mayor: Delegations, if you could remember it, please keep it to five minutes. Mr. Small: Thank you very much, Mayor, Commission. I love this town. This town means a lot to me. I grew up here on a dirt road. We had nothing, hardly, but [unintelligible] go on and represent this city in all-start games and become a three time All American from the Citadel. But I’m very, very, very saddened over certain things. And this is nothing personal against anyone. But here’s what I’m going to say. This is 1 the last time—I came one time and some of you committee members met with me so we could discuss the things that go on and when people don’t do right and there aren’t righteous things done. We’re either going to be in this town a bridge builder that takes cares of the expanse from the poor to the rich and we build that bridge working together, or we’re going to build that bridge with barriers up. And that’s what’s been happening here in this committee. In the past, if you’re true to yourself and not lying before God, because I believe in the 66 books of the Bible—I’m a born again believer, I don’t mind witnessing. I’ve dealt with gangs and I’ve dealt with the homeless in this town. And it’s a shame because our greatest natural resource, folks, is our children. It’s not the Savannah River. It’s not dirt. It’s not air. It’s our children. And when we start fighting for our children, doing the right thing, living the right kind of life, this city will be a city of excellence. Not a city where we play golf. Not a city where we play golf. Not a city where I feel good [unintelligible] in me. Folks, we’ve got to start [unintelligible] with these kids. Mr. Cheek, I like you and I want to help you. I want to help you because here’s why. You had a situation where you had a DUI. You came aboard this Chamber and you apologized. But that means the fact is you don’t have a seat on this Chamber because your DUI proved that you cannot handle yourself in making decisions. But I’m willing to help you because my father was an alcoholic and I [unintelligible] since I was eight years old. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Small, please, not personal issues. Mr. Small: Well, personal issues is representing people on this committee and so I’m willing to talk to you, whatever I can do to help you. Because that DUI is still there and no apology can erase it. And Commissioner Beard, Mr. Marion Williams—excuse me, Ms. Beard—I want to ask you this. Are you a man of bricks of hope? Are you a man who wants to build barriers? Because every time I’ve been in this Chamber all I’ve heard is you putting your hand up against different things that are very common sense. You guys took a trip to Hawaii. You didn’t need to do that. You haven’t used that information yet. And if you’re willing to go with me, let’s go to Greenwood, South Carolina and I’ll show you how a black mayor takes care of getting the [unintelligible] done and over with in a very short period of time, where they’re working for the city. So are you a bridge builder or a barrier builder? Mr. Williams: That depends on how you want to look at the situation when you talk about [unintelligible] building a bridge, it depends on who is building the bridge, where it’s built at, and what is it connecting to? Now, I don’t know about Mr. Cheek but I’m not going to sit here and answer any direct questions. Now, if you want to talk to me I got no problem is talking to you and anybody else. But to question my ability on what I do as a Commissioner, I think you ought to be on this podium before you can sit here and judge any of these Commissioners. Mr. Small: I’ll tell you what I’ll do. Mr. Williams: No, no, you don’t tell me. You tell the Chair. Talk to the Chair. 2 Mr. Mayor: Talk to the Mayor, please sir. Mr. Small: [unintelligible] run for your seat. And I’m not going to take any pay for it. As a matter of fact [unintelligible] give it back to the city so we can help the kids and the homeless. But I will move in your neighborhood [unintelligible] and I will run against you. Mr. Williams: You can have my seat. You don’t have to run against me. Mr. Small: Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Order. Thank you for the presentation. We will now go to our second delegation. DELEGATION B. Ms. Elizabeth Vukovich RE: Garbage Fees The Clerk: Mr. Mayor, our second delegation has requested that she be th rescheduled until our April 18 meeting, on our addendum agenda. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We will then reschedule. We’ll first start off with the consent agenda. The Clerk: The consent agenda consists of items 1 through 4, items 1 through 4. Mr. Mayor: Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: I’d like to pull item 1. Mr. Mayor: Okay, item 1 pulled for discussion. Do we have any additions to or further items to be pulled for discussion? Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, can we add item— Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: Can we add item 6 to the consent agenda, along with item 7? PUBLIC SERVICES 6. Approve expenditure of SPLOST IV funds dedicated to the new central library, in the amount of up to $86,963.00, for environmental engineering services needed to abate hazardous materials in the abandoned candy factory at 823 Telfair Street, prior to demolition. Demolition of this structure is needed to prepare the 3 building site for the new central library approved in SPLOST V. Earth Tech, Inc. has been selected following evaluation of responses to RFP #05-138. 7. Motion to approve a resolution to authorize an application to be filed with the Georgia Department of Community Affairs for a Local Development Fund Application for improvements to Brookfield Park. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I got no problem— Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: I got no problem adding item 6. I’ve just got a question. The amount that we got [unintelligible] there, is that for the service that’s going to be done or is that the amount we going to be working up to, have we selected a person? I mean I understand that work has got to be done, but the amount of money that we already got approved, I don’t see where we approving a firm to do it, a business to do it. So I just— that’s the only question I got about it. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, with the consent of the Chair, 9 and 10 look like that should be passed on to the consent agenda as well. ENGINEERING SERVICES 9. Approve additional funding in the amount of $16,400 for the purchase of wetland mitigation credits to offset wetland areas disturbed during the Sewer System Improvements, Upper Butler Creek Extension Project. 10. Approve funding in the amount of $10,200 for the purchase of wetland mitigation credits to offset wetland areas disturbed during the Butler Creek-Belair Hills Subdivision Sanitary Sewer Collection System project. Mr. Colclough: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Colclough? Mr. Colclough: I also need some clarification on item number 6. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Item number 11, that has been under consideration. We still have not received any information from the legislative body regarding [unintelligible]. We’re going to delete or— 4 The Clerk: You want to— Mr. Grantham: We can just continue it. OTHER BUSINESS 11. Consider action taken by legislative members regarding elected officials pay raises. (Deferred from the March 21, 2006 Commission meeting) The Clerk: Okay. Mr. Grantham: With that done [unintelligible]. The Clerk: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: Back on item 6 [unintelligible] speak to that. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beck? Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, what was the question again? I didn’t hear what the question was. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: I think Mr. Colclough said he had some. Mr. Mayor: Excuse me. Mr. Colclough? Mr. Colclough: Mr. Beck, is this $86,963 for the environmental engineering to clean up the place or what is that amount of money for? Is that just for environmental services? Mr. Beck: That one is not mine, Mr. Commissioner, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Colclough: That’s number 6. That’s number 6, that’s what we’re on. Mr. Munger: What was the question? Mr. Colclough: The question is, this $86,963, is that for cleaning up some hazardous stuff or what is that for? Mr. Munger: That is to assess the hazardous contents of the building and to create an abatement plan. Once that’s done, it will be cleaned up. Mr. Colclough: Are we talking about the old library? 5 Mr. Munger: This is the old candy factory, where the library is going to be built. That building is going to be torn down but we have to first clean it up. Mr. Colclough: Have to clean it up before you tear it down? Mr. Munger: Yes. Mr. Colclough: The cost— Mr. Munger: Yes, we do. Mr. Colclough: The cost is almost $87,000 to tear it down? Mr. Munger: No, sir. Mr. Colclough: What’s the [unintelligible] of hazardous waste, if I can ask that question? Mr. Munger: We had a phase I environmental assessment done before we purchased the property and there were asbestos materials and lead paint identified in the building. You don’t normally do an extensive assessment and create an abatement plan with a phase I environmental so this is sort of follow-up to that. It is required by EPD regulations that we do this. Mr. Colclough: So we’ve got asbestos in the building and some other stuff? Mr. Munger: We have some asbestos, we have some lead paint and we may have some PCBs. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Yeah, Mr. Mayor, I was just questioning the amount as well as Commissioner Colclough, and I think I’m hearing that the $86,963 is for the firm to do the—for someone to come in and assess the building; that’s not doing any work. We got to come back in for the work to be done. That’s for the firm just to— Mr. Munger: Yes, sir. Mr. Williams: --tell us what’s there. Mr. Munger: To define. Basically to define what environmental work has to be done. Mr. Williams: Was that a bid process thing? This the lowest bid, you’re saying? 6 Mr. Munger: This was an RFP. They were the low bidder, yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Anybody have any further questions on that one? Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: Maybe the rest of the Commissioners doesn’t want this information but I’d like to have always when there is a bid thing going out, the listing of those bids, to include the lowest bid, if you don’t mind. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Any further discussion on that agenda item? Are we okay with putting that on the consent agenda now? Mr. Colclough: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Is there any further to be removed for discussion or added to the consent agenda? Mr. Williams: I’d like to [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Clerk? The Clerk: Items 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, and the deletion of 11 and rescheduled to the next meeting. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I believe we asked for item 7. The Clerk: Mr. Williams had some questions. Did you have some questions? Mr. Williams: I had some questions on number 6, it was. Mr. Mayor: 7 I don’t think there were any questions on. Mr. Brigham: I believe 7 was asked to be added, it wasn’t on the list. Mr. Mayor: Okay. The Clerk: To the consent? Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. Mr. Mayor: So I’ve got 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 and 10. Is that correct? Do I hear a motion to approve the consent agenda? Mr. Cheek: So move. Mr. Hatney: Second. 7 CONSENT AGENDA ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2. Motion to approve "Mothball" Ordinance which sets standards for temporary securing and storage of structures prior to rehabilitation. (Approved by Commission March 21, 2006 - second reading) APPOINTMENT(S) 3. Motion to approve the appointment of Alan Venable to the unexpired term of Anna Avrett representing District 10. 4. Motion to approve the following appointments representing District 7: Augusta Ports Authority - Wayne Hawkins, Augusta Canal Authority - Jo Granberry, Daniel Field - Randy Sasser, Historic Preservation - Mark Lorah, Library - N. Staten Bitting, Jr., Dr. Ralph Walker - Personnel Board, Roger Davis - Tree Commission. PUBLIC SERVICES 6. Approve expenditure of SPLOST IV funds dedicated to the new central library, in the amount of up to $86,963.00, for environmental engineering services needed to abate hazardous materials in the abandoned candy factory at 823 Telfair Street, prior to demolition. Demolition of this structure is needed to prepare the building site for the new central library approved in SPLOST V. Earth Tech, Inc. has been selected following evaluation of responses to RFP #05-138. 7. Motion to approve a resolution to authorize an application to be filed with the Georgia Department of Community Affairs for a Local Development Fund Application for improvements to Brookfield Park. ENGINEERING SERVICES 9. Approve additional funding in the amount of $16,400 for the purchase of wetland mitigation credits to offset wetland areas disturbed during the Sewer System Improvements, Upper Butler Creek Extension Project. 10. Approve funding in the amount of $10,200 for the purchase of wetland mitigation credits to offset wetland areas disturbed during the Butler Creek-Belair Hills Subdivision Sanitary Sewer Collection System project. To Delete/Reschedule for Future Meeting: OTHER BUSINESS 11. Consider action taken by legislative members regarding elected officials pay raises. (Deferred from the March 21, 2006 Commission meeting) Mr. Mayor: Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Clerk, let’s go to the addendum agenda. 8 The Clerk: The addendum agenda consists of the deletion and the rescheduling of a delegation: DELEGATION B. Ms. Elizabeth Vukovich (Requested by Ms. Vukovich – to be rescheduled at the April 18 Commission meeting) The Clerk: Our additions to the agenda: ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: ADDENDUM Item 1/16. Statement from Commissioner Calvin Holland, Chairman of Administrative Services Committee, regarding the ARC Housing and Economic Development Department. (Requested by Commissioner Holland) Item 2/19. A request by Jonathan Vick to add (2) days to his Special Events License (Beer) approved by Commission on March 21, 2006 for April 5, 2006 to include April 6th & 7th to be used in connection with National Hills Bar & Grill (in the parking lot) located at 2701 Washington Rd. District 7. Super District 10. (Requested by Commissioner Bowles) Item 3/18. Consider a request for city sponsorship through the purchase of tickets for the First Tee event on April 4, 2006. (cost of table $2,500.00) (Requested by Commissioner Cheek) Item 4/17. Discuss/approve resignation and appointment relative to the Commission's appointment to the Downtown Development Authority. (Requested by Commissioner Cheek) Mr. Brigham: Move we add. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, since the only addition to the agenda, item number 2, has been an item that we have voted on in a previous Commission meeting approving one day, and they’re requesting two additional days for the week of the Masters, I’d like to see that put in consent. 9 The Clerk: We’ve already— Mr. Grantham: Maybe we ought to start taking these up before we go and— Mr. Mayor: You’re right. Mr. Grantham: Well, we’ll just take it up [unintelligible]. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Let’s go through that addendum agenda first. The Clerk: ADDENDUM 16. Statement from Commissioner Calvin Holland, Chairman of Administrative Services Committee, regarding the ARC Housing and Economic Development Department. (Requested by Commissioner Holland) Mr. Holland: Thank you, Ms. Bonner. Mr. Mayor— Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland. Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Ms. Beard and other Commissioners. As you know there have been some concerns about our Economic Development Department and of course we’ve had an opportunity to take a long look at that particular department since we’ve been on board as Commissioners. And I’d like to share with you some information. I had an opportunity to sit down and talk with Mr. Russell and some other people in our department, with the Administrative Services Department in order to take a long look at the Economic Department so there can be some changes. What I’m going to share with you today at this particular time is a position statement that we’re going to be working on in order to try to make some changes within this department and try to bring it back to fruition like it’s supposed to be. Now, some of this information has already been shared with the Administrative Services Committee members and of course with the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem. And we set up a schedule with other Commissioners to come in that were not able to get here, but we will be more than happy to share this other information with you at your leisure. Now, our st position statement at this particular time is that on January 31 the Mayor, Commissioner Colclough, Paul DeCamp and I went to Washington, D.C. to consult with HUD officials regarding the timely expenditure of community development block grant funds and the potential loss of $1.2 million. In light of this potential loss of funds for the development of this community and the many issues that have been previously identified in the Housing and Economic Development Department I feel as Administrative Services Committee chairman I am obligated to take measures to work on resolving these issues. In a progressive move to improving these services provided to our citizens in our community, I am proposing that we evaluate the overall goals of this city’s community development program and restructure the Housing and Economic Development 10 Department to be best met with all of the goals that are necessary. I will be working with the Administrator and the Commission on the action plan to put us back on track of revitalizing our community. Members of the Administrative Services Committee are aware of this, as I’ve already stated, and of course the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem. And I’m hoping that in the near future that we would get our Economic Department back on track in working with this particular program. This is what we will be doing, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland, I’d just like to personally applaud your efforts. I know you’re doing a great job with that and I just—I love seeing you be proactive. Mr. Holland: I appreciate that, Mayor, but it’s a team effort and one cannot do it alone and I’d like to make sure that all the members of the Administrative Services Committee and of course Mr. Russell, Ms. Allen, Mr. DeCamp, are applauded also. So we’re going to work on this together to make sure that we are back on the right track. Mr. Mayor: I think the rest of the Commission will join me in applauding everybody for their efforts. Mr. Holland: Thank you very much. Mr. Mayor: Do we need a motion to receive that as information? Mr. Cheek: So move. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. The Clerk: Mr. Sherman. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Sherman. Mr. Sherman: ADDENDUM Item 2/19. A request by Jonathan Vick to add (2) days to his Special Events License (Beer) approved by Commission on March 21, 2006 for April 5, 2006 to include April 6th & 7th to be used in connection with National Hills Bar & Grill (in the parking lot) located at 2701 Washington Rd. District 7. Super District 10. (Requested by Commissioner Bowles) Mr. Sherman: Mr. Vick, give your name and address for the record. 11 Mr. Vick: Jonathan David Vick, 2613 National Woods Drive, Augusta, Georgia. Mr. Sherman: The Sheriff’s Department and License Department have reviewed this request to add these two days and we recommend that they be approved. Mr. Brigham: So move. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? The Commission will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Hatney abstains. Motion carries 9-1. The Clerk: ADDENDUM Item 3/18. Consider a request for city sponsorship through the purchase of tickets for the First Tee event on April 4, 2006. (Cost of table $2,500.00) (Requested by Commissioner Cheek) Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, this event is a growing event. It’s for a very worthy cause. I guess in light of budgetary constraints at this time what I would like to do is ask the Commission to offer in-kind services wherever necessary in the support of this event. It is certainly a growing event and another wonderful attraction during Masters Week. Certainly the per table cost is a chunk. Mr. Mayor: I agree. Mr. Cheek: So I’d just like to make a motion that we do extend on behalf of the City to First Tee offer of assistance in-kind, for in-kind services as needed. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Is there a second? Mr. Bowles: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Any further discussion? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? 12 Mr. Williams: Are we buying tickets [unintelligible]? Mr. Mayor: No, sir. Mr. Williams: So we’re just going to buy tickets for those who— Mr. Mayor: No, we’re just going to offer in-kind services if necessary. Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] we been buying tickets to other events and [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Do you want to— Mr. Cheek: I mean we can amend it but the— Mr. Mayor: If you want to go, Mr. Williams, I bet I can get you some tickets. Mr. Cheek: The— Mr. Mayor: Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, [unintelligible] I think we’re getting to a point now with so many of these requests coming in and we are facing a budget deficit. And particularly on an item like this I think we need to address these on a one-to-one basis and if the Mayor has discretionary funds that he wants to use in this regard, then I think that’s fine. Otherwise I think we need to do in-kind services as has been mentioned and that’s the way that we can support these efforts and let them know we’re behind them. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Grantham. Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: I’m just trying to make sure that we using the same standard of purchasing with everybody but if we don’t have the funds and we can do in-kind—I mean I’m in support. I’m not trying to derail this project. But I just want to— Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell? Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, I am more comfortable with our former policy of buying tickets for individuals that would like to go. As you’ve noted, when we open the door for in-kind services, you are giving me somewhat of a vague—a vague path to walk down at this particular point in time and I’m fearful of the cost to provide in-kind services would way outweigh whatever we would be able to do with relationship to buying tickets for those individuals that particularly want to attend events. You know, I’ll be more than happy to look at that but as you open that door you’re really opening a door that I’m not too sure we really want to walk through at this particular point in time. Mr. Mayor: Would you consider it a Pandora’s box? 13 Mr. Russell: Pandora’s box or Pandora’s door or the house of mirrors on occasion. Mr. Mayor: Duly noted. Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, just for the record, the general admission should we choose to do as we’ve done in the past, general admission is $25; hospitality tickets are $75; and VIP tickets are $375. So that’s a chunk any way you slice it. Mr. Mayor: Would you like to amend your motion or do you want to let the motion stand as it is? Mr. Cheek: I can amend it but I’d really rather take you up on your offer. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: When you speak of in-house, who is going to be doing it? Mr. Russell: That’s— Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell? Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, if I may, that’s the exact question I have, is what kind of in-house, what kind of in-kind services they might be attempting to secure and the potential that that would cost more than even to purchase the tickets, if they want security or a whole plethora of things they might ask for that I would find expensive to have to provide. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, in light of the commentary by the Administrator, I can amend the motion to be the purchase of tickets at some level for those who want to attend, as we do with other events. Mr. Colclough: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and second. Commissioner Holland? Mr. Holland: I just want to agree with Mr. Grantham to a certain degree because say we’re going to start doing this, and if we’re going to do this in-kind and start working with First Tee—I can understand that, I worked with the First Tee last year and I thought it was a very good program. It’s growing, it’s getting bigger and bigger. However, we want to think about the future, especially in reference to the James Brown Music Festival, because there are going to be some other people coming in here. So if we’re going to be fair about this, let’s think about these other music festivals and these other programs that 14 are coming through so we can think about working with them and being fair with them also. I have no problem working with First Tee and helping with the First Tee, but just make sure that we stay fair and do what’s best for the people in Augusta. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: Can we make sure what the motion is? Mr. Mayor: Ms. Clerk? The Clerk: The motion was—Commissioner Cheek deleted the in-kind service portion of that motion and to purchase tickets as our usual for those wishing to attend. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: I just wanted—I mean Mr. Cheek mentioned three prices [unintelligible] tickets. Is that—what level? Mr. Mayor: I’m saying minimum. Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] before we vote. I don’t want then not knowing. Mr. Mayor: To clarify, Mr. Cheek, that you need the cheap seats? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I will either way be sitting in the crowd with the folks at general admission. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. The Clerk: ADDENDUM Item 4/17. Discuss/approve resignation and appointment relative to the Commission's appointment to the Downtown Development Authority. (Requested by Commissioner Cheek) 15 Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, in light of the folk that it’s a 60 mile round trip and they have their meetings every second Thursday of ever month, I’m going to request of the Commission that they allow me to resign this position. I’ve talked with several Commissioners. I’d like to recommend Rev. Hatney for the position of Downtown Development. Mr. Mayor: Is that motion all inclusive? Mr. Cheek: All inclusive. Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Clerk, we have somebody that’s requested that has to get back to work, that we move item number 13 up on the agenda, if that’s— The Clerk: OTHER BUSINESS 13. Discuss taxicab restrictions at Bush Field Airport. (Requested by Mayor Pro Tem Marion Williams) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had this item put on. We approved the taxicab to increase their fees for this season, the golf seasons, the Masters. And then it came to our attention that the taxicab owners do not have the authorization to pick up anyone from the airport. And when I checked into that, Mr. Mayor, I found out some . really disturbing stuffI see Mr. Johnson at the podium. We talked about this before and I thought it had been handled. But only at this time of year when this gets pressing and when this gets probably the attention that it should get, but especially at this time of year. I found out that there is a contract that renews itself every sixty days and been going on for the last twenty years where Radio Cab has had the privilege or the right to be the only cab that can pick up a person from the airport. Every city I been in, and even when I went to Hawaii there was all kind of taxicabs and all kind of people picking up from the airport and everywhere else because that’s business. And, and, and I think we done turned our back on this and looked the other way for too long. I really want to make a motion but I want to see if anybody got a comment, where we have allowed one company to dominate the fares and the money being raised or the money that could be made from 16 the airport. If history repeats itself, Mr. Mayor, you could find out that some of the taxi drivers was stopped by the Richmond County Sheriff and made to let the passenger out to get in a Radio Cab to leave the airport. And that’s sick, Mr. Mayor. That’s really sick. And I’m upset about it because this ain’t the first time, this ain’t the second time, it’s probably the third or fourth time that we brought this issue to this body and try to get this issue resolved so everybody can work together. Now, you know we talking about business and growing and doing some things but we limiting some folks. So before I make my motion I’m going pause to see if anybody else got any other comments cause I think that’s truly wrong and I think we know what’s there. I see Mr. Johnson, if he’s got an explanation why this has been this way or why we still looking at the same thing, I’d love to hear it at this time, Mr. Mayor. But I do have a motion I want to make. Mr. Mayor: Like to hear from Mr. Johnson of the Aviation Commission. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Commissioner Williams. I can’t say it’s an honor to be here to talk to you today because you’re correct that that contract was signed in 1985. But I do need to correct some of the things that you were saying. Cabs can bring—other cabs other than Radio Cabs can bring people onto the airport. They are not limited to brining people on. If a person makes a phone call and calls a cab, he or she can call any cab that they want and that cab can come out there and pick a person up. Yes, sir? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Johnson, I understand if you come from China and you don’t know no cab company to call and you walk in—and I lost my bags at that airport on one trip and when I picked up the first phone I saw it automatically dialed Radio Cab. Now didn’t anybody tell me. I did that myself. Cause I thought I was picking up a phone to the airport where I could let somebody know that my baggage didn’t come in on the flight. But it automatically said Radio Cab. Now, I did not say that the cab company couldn’t bring anybody onto the airport. What I said was that taxicab drivers have been made to put their passengers out of their cab to let them get in a Radio Cab to leave the airport. If I call a cab from my house, you can’t tell me I can’t come on the airport when they arrive, so I didn’t make that statement. They can deliver a passenger to the airport. But they cannot wait in line, they cannot pick anybody up. They have been asked to leave the premises after they make their drop. And I think it’s unfair. I can prove all this I’m talking about now. I don’t—I just want to know what are we going to do to change this today? Mr. Johnson: Let me—I still think you, in my understanding, the research I’ve done, if a customer calls XYZ Cab, XYZ Cab can come out there and pick them up. But they’re not made to get out of their cab and go anywhere. They can do that. You know, one of the issues, and I’m going to try to get it very quickly—okay. The solution is making sure that our customers are serviced. Not just two weeks of the year but 52 weeks of the year, when the Masters is not here, and [unintelligible] just informed me she worked on a committee I guess a couple of years ago and the problem was trying to find 17 cabs who would be willing to come out there 52 weeks a year and service through not so busy times. Now, the solution—and I talked to one of the cab drivers today—the solution that I propose and propose to y’all is to let us talk with some of the cab drivers, let’s give them the opportunity to be in a rotation out there. I mean we can give 30 days notice to the contract but it’s not going to help for Masters week because that’s going to pass, and try to work out something where we can get people involved that want to be involved. The other issue, too, that happened a while back, was making sure that all the cabs are up to standard. You know, we had a problem a while back with some of the cabs that were other than Radio Cab breaking down and not being able to get people to where they should be taken to. So we have no problem in being inclusive at the airport but our primary goal is making sure that we take care of the customers. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, we have just for better understanding, we have a competitor of Radio cab here that could probably shine the light on how this is impacting other companies. I’d like to hear from him if we could, please. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Sir, could you come forward and state your name and address for the record? Mr. Lavine: Mark Lavine, 2912 [unintelligible] Lane, Augusta, Georgia. I represent USA Cab Company. Like Mr. Williams said, this has been going on since 1985. I spoke with Mr. Johnson briefly. It’s really not—and I think that I represent six or seven companies speaking up here. It’s really not that--the bidding process is not what we want. We’ve been held off of this thing for 25 years. We just want to be able to bring our cabs out there, to have them inspected, and to be able to work the airport. I will put my cabs up against any cab Radio Cab’s got and it’ll pass. We want to be able to work the airport. We want to be able to get some of that money out there that we have missed out on for over 20 years, with a contract automatically renewing for sixty days. That’s a lot of money. It’s been brought up before. Mr. Shepard here, Mr. Mayor, was a Commissioner, back when all of this stuff was going on before. It’s been going on a long time, a very long time, sir, this has been going on. And I spoke with Mr. Johnson out in the hall. Putting it out for a bid process would be something that we would consider halfway fair, but what about the 25 years that we haven’t been able to work it. And understanding y’all want me to enlighten you all, I can enlighten you. For an independent cab driver such as myself with my company the only money that I make is on the weekends, from Friday night to Sunday at 6:00 o’clock when the GIs go back to the base. The rest of that money from Monday through Friday is being made at the airport, at the Army base, by Radio Cab. So you’re looking at 20 years this has been going on. I’m willing up to open up my heart and my mind to any kind of solution, to get some type of something, some type of dialogue, but we don’t want just a bidding process. We want it just like Mr. Williams said, at every airport you go to—my father’s been a taxicab driver for 50 years in the city of New Orleans until he moved up here. He’s here with me now. And I have ridding in a cab with him all of my young life and I have never seen one cab company nowhere in the south monopolize an airport. That’s just my take 18 on it. I’m open for dialogue and these other companies we represent are open for any kind of dialogue and we appreciate y’all’s time. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to make a motion but let me say I agree with Mr. Johnson, the cabs should be inspected. I don’t expect a cab to get a passenger, whether they are from out of town or local, to break down on the highway. I mean that’s not feasible. But the only solution I see is to have the market open so anybody can get in line. If you wait your turn, you ought to be able to take the next passenger out. But for too long, and this gentleman is right, this ain’t the first time this event come up. We’ve talked about it several times and I thought it had got resolved. But until today when the fees came, and I asked some of the taxicab drivers about the fees, they didn’t know the fees was being raised. Cause they been inquiring about how to raise the fees. But Radio Cab came down here and raised the fees and they said what fees? And asked the question was it including everybody? They said yeah. Well, the people going to airport is the only ones going to be included cause the rest of the folks don’t go out there. They can’t raise the fees on the local people. They don’t get the chance to go to the airport. That’s another trick. And that’s underhanded. And my motion is going to be that we as of today, we get those cabs that pass inspection through Rob Sherman or the Police Department or whoever inspecting, ought to have the right—they been held out for 20 years or more, they ought to have the right if they pass inspection to be able to get in line with any other cab company out on the airport and wait their turn. Not to get ahead of anybody, but have a fair opportunity to get in line and work. And that’s my motion, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Johnson, right, quick, and then— Mr. Johnson: The only thing with your motion, Commissioner Williams, if we let them do that and we hold nobody responsible for being out there on those off times, so if they decide not to be there or something comes up, then we’re not properly covered and then our passengers suffer. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can respond? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Johnson, you said yourself if anybody called a cab they got a right to come. Now, I’m not saying [unintelligible] stay there. I mean some folks probably just pull up and squat all night long. But if they call a cab, if you got numbers available, you got a way to call—right now, I can’t tell you whether Radio Cab lives there or got somebody 24/7 but there’s a phone that you don’t even have to dial the number on that you can get Radio Cab. All you do is pick it up. And it hops straight through to Radio Cab. That’s unfair. And for 25 years, or 20 years at least they been 19 doing this, and we talking about the second largest city and moving forward and getting along and all this other stuff people been preaching around here but they ain’t doing— talk is cheap. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I’m wondering if Radio Cab pays any type fee for the privilege. Mr. Johnson: Yes, ma’am, they do. They pay $50 a month for the 12 cabs that they have available out there, which comes out to $600 a month. $600 a month. Mr. Mayor: All right. We have a motion. Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland? Mr. Holland: This is a two-part question I have here. The first one is that one of the things I think really need to take place out at the airport, and I think we’ve discussed this, and that is a list should be placed out at that airport with the names of the cabs that are available in the city of Augusta besides Radio Cab. The phone numbers, so when someone get off the plane, they don’t have to just call Radio Cab, they can call Johnson Cab, they can call Monopoly Cab, they can call Bob’s Cab. The next thing is this. Was a process made by which these cabs or these cab drivers were extended an invitation for them to bring their cabs in to have them inspected so that they would then have the opportunity to take their cabs out the airport? Was a process in place for them to do that? Was a short length of time given to them to let them know that you have six months, two months, three months, you get your cabs inspected, once your cabs are inspected then you may bring your cabs out to the airport. Did this happen? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson? Mr. Johnson: Not that I know of. This was before my time, when the initial contract was out. Mr. Holland: Now, Mr. Mayor, we see why, you know, these cab drivers are so upset. And you know why the people of Augusta are so upset. It’s really unfortunate and it’s really unfair. However, I feel that Mr. Johnson and members of his committee are going to do everything they possibly can to make some changes because we need to move forward. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Mr. Brigham, do you have a— Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I don’t believe we have a second for the motion. 20 Mr. Cheek: I seconded it. Mr. Brigham: I didn’t hear it. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The Augusta Aviation Commission has by Code taken charge of the airport. They’re meeting tomorrow. I would think it unwise to interfere with a contract which is presently in force. I think they could be tasked to come back with a recommendation in this area. They are the committee that functions over this area. We use our committee system and I just make this as a suggestion because they charged under our existing ordinances with—the Code uses the words taking care of this airport. And they could come back, give me a chance to look at the contract as well. So I would make that suggestion in order not to interfere with the present contract. We can establish a process, if necessary rebid that contract, end that contract, whatever we need to do for the convenience of the public. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Handy? Mr. Handy: My concern with the statement the Attorney just made is that the last time we met, Radio Cab came before us to get an increase. They did not go before the commission, they came before us. I’m kind of mixed up here. How did they come get a higher rate, they’ve got to come to us to get that, but we can’t [unintelligible] something else [unintelligible]? [unintelligible] and [unintelligible] was [unintelligible] when they came down here that day. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Well, I think rate setting does belong properly in this body but to change without utilizing any termination clause in the contract, do something today and put competition out there, may end up in a suit which would be brought by Radio Cab. Mr. Handy: And? Mr. Shepard: And it would be brought against this body, sir. Mr. Handy: Okay. If you doing wrong 20 years, if you’re doing wrong 20 years, you worried about a suit? You’ve done wrong 20 years. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: If I could respond? Of course the bill for those 20 years would have to come due in this budget year and so—in the form of attorneys fees we may have to pay, should have to pay, if you just summarily take action today. I think that the recommendation here, given the relationship of the Augusta Aviation Commission and this body, would be to refer to them and have them make a recommendation and 21 terminate the contract as it’s provided for in that contract. And I haven’t seen it. It wasn’t attached to the material here, Rev. Hatney. I just advise, sir. Mr. Hatney: My concern— Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: My concern—one way or the other, it doesn’t matter to me—but I’ve been here now, this is my fourth month going on, and I noticed this body pick and choose what they want to take. Stuff they want to do, they do, come hell or high water. Stuff they don’t want to do, they always pick and choose. Something wrong with that picture. There shouldn’t be no argument that these folks should have equal chances out there. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, first of all, I take issue with the Attorney who recommend, who work for this body, suggesting that somebody else can sue us. Now, if you talking about legal stuff, you going to talk about legal stuff, we need to talk about legal in legal. Now, maybe we going to be sued. And I ain’t got no problem cause we got folks in line already. But I don’t think that’s your job as an Attorney to suggest to anybody that they might be, you know, in favor of suing this government. I tend that the contract been null and void because it’s been out of compliance, Mr. Mayor, for some 20 years ago. Every sixty days a contract automatically renew, had this issue come up, not come up this time, it may be still going for another 20 years. So really we ought to be at the mercy of the taxicab drivers who ought to be talking about suing, if anybody going sue, because this government has sit here and for 20 years with a previous Commissioner who is now an Attorney for this government sit on this bench and then let this kind of stuff go. So if anybody going to sue, that group ought to be suing. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: My motion still stands, Mr. Mayor, that we let them go and get it—be inspected and get in line as of this day, be qualified when they get their vehicles inspected to be able to go to the airport to work like [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Mr. Williams. We have a motion and a second. Mr. Smith? Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, it seems to me that we haven’t I want to make a substitute motion that heard all the information that we need on this. we allow the Airport Commission to come back at the next meeting and make a recommendation to this body and give us all the facts. I don’t believe we’ve heard all the facts. Mr. Grantham: Second. 22 Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: We ain’t heard nothing in 20 years. I don’t think you’re going to hear nothing next week. I think that we need to go ahead and make a motion— Commissioner Hatney made a statement a little while ago, he’s 100% correct. We pick and choose. Now, how much does it take to figure out whether this is right or wrong? Now, if you can’t figure this one out, I got a problem with some other issues we done had, Mr. Mayor. If you can’t see the handwriting on the wall with this event and what’s been taking place, then going back 30 days is going to put these businesspeople out of commission for this particular season for the Masters. If we wait 30 days, next year, then ain’t no telling what’s going to happen. I think we need to be proactive. Mr. Mayor: We have to vote on the substitute motion, though, first. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Hatney: One question. Mr. Mayor: Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: Commissioner Smith, when you’re saying have them come back do you mean with the corrective type activity, the whole package, to include all those persons who have not been included? What are you asking them to do? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith? Mr. Smith: I’m asking that they give us a review of actually what is taking place [unintelligible] and what their recommendations are. All the facts. Mr. Hatney: Come back with a recommendation to be inclusive? Mr. Smith: Yes, sir. Mr. Hatney: If that’s what you are suggesting I can vote for that. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland? Mr. Holland: Yes, sir. I believe Ms. Sams may have something that she would like to add to this and probably open our eyes a little more in reference to this particular situation. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Sams? 23 Ms. Sams: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, as it relates to the terms of any contract—not just the airport contract—if it’s renewed, renewable every 60 days then the process would simply be to find out when the last 60 days it was renewed and then decide whether or not the contract would be renewable for the next 60. Now, in all of the business that I have done on the [unintelligible]—I’m not an attorney, but as it relates to procurement regulations—it is not a standing policy to award a contract for an indefinite period, from 1960 until infinity. There has to be an end date on all contracts. And in this case, because it’s such an old contract, the only thing we as a city would have to do would look at the terms of the contract and not renew the next 60 days from that period. Are there any questions for me? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I got a question to you, Mr. Mayor. Not Ms. Sams. I need to know as the Mayor of this city what would you tell the business owners, the taxicab owners that’s here, who have waited for 20 years for a contract that’s already null and void, that they had to have a ending date, what would you say to these people? Would you say wait till the next Masters come, when the visitors come to town? What would you say as the Mayor, as the leader, as the head of this government? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, I think that’s getting personal as opposed to dealing with the motion at hand. I honestly believe in being fair but we have fully discussed this issue, we have a substitute motion on the floor. And a second. We have—everybody has been given more than ample time to discuss it. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, a roll call vote on the substitute motion, please, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Hatney: Can we hear the substitute motion again, too, please? Mr. Mayor: Yes. The Clerk: The substitute motion was to allow the Airport Commission to come back with recommendations next week. Mr. Grantham: Next meeting. The Clerk: Next meeting. The next Commission meeting, which is April 18.. Mr. Mayor: And that’s a roll call vote by alpha. Mr. Holland: Excuse me, that next meeting will be after the Masters, right? Mr. Williams: That’s right. 24 Mr. Hatney: Question. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir? Mr. Hatney: Are you saying in the meantime they cannot function this Masters? Mr. Williams: That’s right. Mr. Hatney: That’s not fair. You can instruct them to function while you work on all the other stuff. If we can’t, if we don’t have the authority to do that, then we need to close up. But they have to get their vehicles inspected, though. But for the Masters, that’s seven days, a lot of money. I don’t have no problem with the motion but we also should authorize these folks who have not been able to go out there to do so whose taxicabs need inspection. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Smith, would you be willing to amend your substitute motion to include that? Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Handy had a point. And I heard Mr. Johnson make a statement that there is an Airport Commission meeting tomorrow. Why couldn’t the Airport Commission make the decision to allow them to work this week, based on inspection and based on approval and then still come back to us with the type of report that’s being asked for in the substitute motion. And let the Airport Commission make the decision on the inspection and on the authorization of their working in the 2006 Masters. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney? Mr. Hatney: Will you allow that to be tacked on to your motion? Mr. Smith: Yes. The Clerk: You would—allow the Airport Commission to— Mr. Hatney: They meet tomorrow. Mr. Johnson, you’ve got a meeting tomorrow? We’re trying to get through this thing and go on. [unintelligible] the idea is that from—[unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: He’s amending the substitute motion so let’s hear the amendment to the substitute motion. The Clerk: I’ll give it a shot. To allow the Airport Commission to come back th with a recommendation at our April 18 meeting and to allow the Airport Commission to make a decision at their meeting tomorrow as to whether they can—the cab companies can function this year, leave that up to the Airport Commission— 25 Mr. Hatney: [unintelligible] Airport Commission. Mr. Mayor: And we have had a roll call vote called for. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, I think it’s been fully discussed. Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, but y’all amended your motion now. You add something to it and I got—when you added something to it [unintelligible] and I got no problem with amending the motion. But the problem I have with it, if the airport meets tomorrow, and they been meeting for 20 years and Mr. Johnson, you wasn’t there but they been meeting for 20 years and didn’t do anything. If they do something tomorrow how would these people know? But the time these men and women that run these taxis get the word, the Masters already over with. Now, let’s don’t truck these folks. [unintelligible] same thing, why can’t we approve it today, get it inspected and that they meet the inspection they got a right to get in line. Not ahead of anybody, get in line with everybody else. But if you go out here tomorrow morning and approve something and these workers out in the taxis, they got to ride to the airport, try to call [unintelligible], try to call Cedric to find out did y’all do it, where we have to go? That don’t make good sense, Mr. Mayor. This business. Mr. Mayor: I understand that, Mr. Williams, and I think there would be ample time for the Aviation Commission to share the information. Mr. Johnson, would that be that case? Mr. Johnson: [unintelligible] newspaper. And what I would suggest, cab drivers that are here today, if we can get them to sign something, with phone numbers, so that we can call them. And we can put it in the newspaper and put it on the radio. Mr. Williams: What a difference a day make. Lord have mercy. One day— Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] same opportunity to have the same result tomorrow to where they can participate and make money during the Masters. Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, just briefly. It’s my understanding that the Sheriff’s Department or one of our governmental entities does a compliance audit on all taxicabs and what I’m hearing here today is that everybody else—there’s a second level of inspection that’s required or are we just going to let the Sheriff’s Department inspect these and give them all the same set of rules to work by? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson? Mr. Johnson: I can’t tell you. Maybe Rob can tell you about that. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Sherman? 26 Mr. Sherman: I can address the inspection process. The Sheriff’s Department inspects the cars early January so that the cab drivers can get a business license at the first of the year. The cars are also re-inspected halfway through the year, come June. Now, I’m not sure if Mr. Johnson is talking about additional inspections that the airport does. If not, the cars are inspected and they have a decal on them that indicates that they have been inspected by the Sheriff’s Department. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek. And this is really been fully discussed. We have a— okay. We have a substitute motion on the floor. Mr. Johnson, do you— Mr. Johnson: We’re not talking about any other additional inspection. If they’ve already been inspected that’s all we require. Mr. Cheek: If they’re licensed—if I may, Mr. Mayor—if they are licensed in the city of Augusta then they’ve been inspected and they should be able to do business anywhere in the city of Augusta. Mr. Johnson: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a substitute motion on the floor. Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign. Mr. Williams: No, sir, we had a roll call, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Excuse me. Roll call vote. By alpha. Ms. Beard: Yes. Mr. Bowles: Yes. Mr. Brigham: Yes. Mr. Cheek: No. Mr. Colclough: Yes. Mr. Grantham: Yes. Mr. Hatney: Yes. Mr. Holland: No. Mr. Smith: Yes. Mr. Williams: Present. Motion carries 7-2-1. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I just hope that we, we, we don’t send this message to all over the world that we can’t even handle taxicabs. Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can finish, please, sir. I just hope we don’t send this message all over the world that we can’t handle taxicab business. I mean we got 27 [unintelligible] issue, people who have been mistreated for over 20 years. We discovered that and we are not putting the blame on anybody but we got to go through a whole bunch of changes just to say they have the right to come out and they already been inspected, they already working, and we here at the front door of the business they going to make, if they ever make any business, right now and we going to try to derail that. I’m ashamed to be [unintelligible] on this board. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, I will just say with regards to that issue, you had made the point earlier about not bringing something that we needed to make a big decision right away on the SPLOST dollars and this, I think we could have dealt with this earlier as opposed to having it on the agenda the week before Masters. But the business is done, let’s move on to the next agenda item. Mr. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, I have one— Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson? Mr. Johnson: Because I think this is very important. The Aviation Commission is a volunteer commission and those people on that board have worked very, very hard to make sure that everybody was inclusive. In 2003 our DBE participation was 19%. 2004 was 23.9%. 2005 it was 25.4%. I dare to say that those percentages are probably better than any other department or any place else in the city, so I don’t want anybody to think that we’re not trying to work with everybody, small businesses, local businesses, and DBE businesses, but I would be negligent if I didn’t mention that and the hard work that that commission does. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Ms. Bonner? Mr. Williams: Ms. Bonner, if I can have put on the Administrative Services Committee the contract for the airport that’s present now for next committee meeting so we have time to look at it? Cause I ain’t going to let this one die. It like to died two or three times. But we going to make sure that we stay on this, the airport. The Clerk: Yes, sir. What number? Mr. Mayor: I believe we’re going back to number 5. Excuse me, number 1. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 1. Motion to approve an Ordinance providing preferences to local businesses doing business with their local government. (Approved by Commission March 21, 2006- second reading) Ms. Beard: I so move. 28 Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: I have one question. After looking at the ordinance they have put together, my question is can it be inclusive of a statement? When you talk about local vendors could that include “and minorities”—I’m asking-- Mr. Mayor: Do we have somebody—Commissioner Bowles? Mr. Bowles: Mr. Mayor, Yvonne Gentry is in here. She and I spoke about this earlier. I believe it is written in there that it does include the DBE office in that 1%. Ms. Sams is here. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Gentry? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, while Ms. Sams is coming, we talked on last meeting about changing the language with the DBE officer where the best effort and words such as that wasn’t getting what we needed. This item may need to go back and look at what we got with our DBE program and to make sure it’s included versus saying what our best effort is. I think our program is a good program but we don’t have any teeth in it to get And I think just to go back, get with Ms. the contractors to be able to do anything. Gentry and make sure that the language is there for not just local participants, but disadvantaged business as well. And I make that in the form of a motion. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion? Mr. Smith? Mr. Smith: Would you read that motion? I didn’t hear it. Mr. Mayor: The motion to send this back to committee, I believe, for inclusion— The Clerk: We didn’t get a second. Mr. Hatney: I seconded it. Mr. Colclough: Dr. Hatney seconded it. Mr. Mayor: Dr. Hatney seconded it. The Clerk: You seconded Mr. Williams’ motion. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, was there a second to the original motion? The Clerk: No, sir. 29 Mr. Mayor: Sir? Mr. Brigham: Was there a second to the original motion? Mr. Hatney: No. Mr. Brigham: Is the original motion still on the table? Ms. Beard: No, it’s not. Mr. Mayor: There wasn’t a second to the original so— Mr. Brigham: There was never a chance for anybody to discuss the original motion or second it, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: We have— Mr. Brigham: We had a motion made, no discussion, we had a substitute motion with the first motion, before the original motion was even seconded. Mr. Mayor: Well, here again, the first motion was not seconded and discussion proceeded and there was a motion made. But could you read back, Ms. Bonner, the motion from Mr. Williams? The Clerk: As I understand it, this motion was to send this ordinance back to committee for further review. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, does that— Mr. Williams: Right. Mr. Mayor: That is your motion? Mr. Williams: With the DBE person and make sure the language in there we need. We talked about the language last Commission meeting, the best effort and those words were not getting what we needed to do and want to make sure that [unintelligible] had included what they needed to be able to get [unintelligible] everything at once. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Is there any further— Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? 30 Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, is this—I believe this is the second reading of this ordinance so are we going to—what is the process after this? Will this come back at any time and will it always be the second reading or will it have to be two readings again or what? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard, would you like to— Mr. Shepard: You’re sending this ordinance back to committee. That is the motion of the Mayor Pro Tem, is that correct? Mr. Mayor: Yes. Mr. Shepard: The—with contemplated revisions. When it comes back it is my opinion that it will be a new ordinance [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item? The Clerk: PUBLIC SERVICES 5. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 13: A request by Tsegai T. Wasse for a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Lion Package located at 2102 Martin Luther King Blvd. District 2. Super District 9. (No action vote by the Commission March 21, 2006 - requested by Commissioner Betty Beard) Mr. Mayor: Mr. Sherman? Mr. Sherman: Mayor, Commissioners, this was on the agenda the last Commission meeting. There was no action taken. The License & Inspection Department and the Sheriff’s Department have reviewed the application. This is an existing location. The business has been there from what we can determine back at least 1970. It’s continued to operate as a liquor store, package store. Mr. Wasse purchased the property in late ’99, thereabout, he applied for an alcohol license to operate the store. In 2001- 2004 he leased the property to Mr. Murray, who got a license and operated a store for a couple of years. There was a license at this location until through 2005. Mr. Murray died. Mr. Wasse is applying to continue operating the business at this location. The objective criteria that we have to review in making our presentation to you or our recommendation to you is the zoning of the property, that it meets the distance requirements, and the character of the applicant. The property is now grandfathered in because it has been there for all these years. The property is presently zoned B-1. The 31 applicant, we reviewed his application and the Sheriff’s Department also reviewed the application. Based on that we’re recommending that it be approved. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, we had this application come up last Commission meeting, as Mr. Sherman has stated, and I think some of the neighbors are here now. We tried to meet, I think. I wasn’t able to make the meeting but I think they tried to meet and work some things out. The applicant, the business had been closed down for a while. I think about four months, five months, something like that, and they only tried to reapply. But the neighbors, our government is at fault in a lot of this because we okay the day care to be built or to be opened next door to this facility. Not behind it, not on the next street, but right next door. The only thing that separating it is the street dividing the two buildings. And there is no guidelines in our books that we have anything to go on. I talked to License & Inspection and they said there is no guidelines to govern a day care from an alcohol establishment. But the neighborhood association is here now. I’d like to get a count of those and get their speaker to come up and say why they are opposing this. Mr. Mayor: Can we get a count of those that are here to oppose this and have a representative of the neighborhood association to come forward? Could you please stand and raise your hand? Opposed? Against. If you oppose it. [24 objectors noted] Mr. Mayor: Could we hear from a representative? Yes, ma’am? Ms. Speaker: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Would you like to speak for the neighborhood association? And if you could just please state your name and your address. th Ms. Clark: My name is Belle Clark. I live at 1103 7 Avenue, Turpin Hill, Augusta, Georgia 30901. Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, this is not our first time here. We was here last week. So Turpin Hill Neighborhood Association come back today and requesting and singing the same old tune for you to vote no to owning the package store, th to sell liquor, beer and wine on the corner of 10 and Martin Luther King. Vote no to give those licenses. The store is closed. So let it stay. In the 80s and the 90s this package store was quiet. We didn’t even want it then but someone railroaded us down here and it passed. We didn’t want it then but it was a quiet store during the 80s and the 90s. But in the 2000s things changed. It’s a new day. Folks standing all around the store, loitering all around. They stay all day long. There are no bathroom facilities. So with a day care coming you can imagine some scenes that I have seen and some of the neighbors have seen, when there are no bathroom facilities around, what happens to the loiterers. We know. I will not say any more about that. But it’s a terrible sight for our neighbors to see. And it’s a terrible sight for our children, our young children going to school by the package store every day, coming back. It’s a terrible sight for our older 32 people who cannot—when they loiter so bad around there they cannot sit on their porches and they cannot work in their yards with their flowers because it’s too many people who do not live in that area. There are several churches in that area. One block, I can count four or five right in a block, right around that liquor store. And we should think about— Turpin Hill is trying to become a better society. We work hard to get a very fine—thanks to you and to the Recreation Department—a beautiful recreation building there a block away that is very used, like I told you last week, by our children and our seniors. And we worked hard to get there. And then you come right back there and you’re going to put a liquor store right on the corner. Degrade our community. We are tired as—some folks would say sick and tired, sick and tired—of living in a community that have a liquor store. I work hard, and my neighbors, they work hard for their places, their homes—they are beautiful homes. Some are teachers. I’m retired from the Medical College of Georgia. We work hard. I look forward to the day that I could come home and just enjoy the community and enjoy going down Martin Luther King, named after Dr. Martin Luther King. How do we decorate his street? A fine man like him, if he could come back and see how we are destroying our neighborhood with liquor license and other things going on in the community that should not be, no one come to our rescue—we should be a caring community. So it is that we stuck together. You stuck together with the Curtis Baptist Church when they came down here. We are requesting the same action. Worked with them. We ask that you work with us. We are tired of looking at things that are untidy in our neighborhood and we are requesting today, Mr. Mayor and the Commission—true, you’re thinking about a dollar sign. You can use that building for something else. It can be used for a fine, little restaurant, sell chicken and fish. You make good money. And you can have a little ice cream there for the kids. You can make good money. The liquor store, no. I’m requesting as a [unintelligible] citizen, we say no. And I’m sorry that Rev. Fryer [unintelligible], our president, he was unable to be here. He’s working in the school system so he cannot be here today. So we’re just thankful that you are listening to our request and we ask that you take it to heart and understand our problem. If you walk out your door, what do you want for your children, your grandchildren to see on your street? I don’t want to make it personal, but just think about it. We work hard like everybody else so we deserve to have the right places in our community. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Commissioner Colclough? Mr. Colclough: This is for Mr. Sherman. Mr. Sherman, after we issue these licenses, how is the place monitored? Ms. Belle said there is a lot of loiterers all around the store once they purchase the alcohol. I mean isn’t it against the law for a business to sell alcohol and then [unintelligible] drink, people loiter around the store? Mr. Sherman: That’s correct. Mr. Colclough: If that happening, can’t that license be revoked? Mr. Sherman: That’s correct. 33 Mr. Colclough: So it there anywhere License & Inspection or the Police Department monitors these places that have these liquor licenses? Mr. Sherman: The Sheriff’s Department does monitor them, and more particularly if they receive a call they’ll respond to the call. Mr. Colclough: But the neighbors have to call if somebody is loitering in front of a store that sell beer and liquor once they purchase it, once the people purchase it? If we give the license, isn’t it up to monitor that place and make sure that this business owner is complying with the law? Mr. Sherman: That’s correct. Mr. Colclough: Then they shouldn’t have to call the police department and say that this person is selling alcohol and there’s a bunch of people standing on the corner, and like the lady said there’s no bathroom facilities, I guess they’re urinating against the building or whatever the case may be. But who monitors these places once we approve these licenses? Mr. Sherman: If it’s during the day and one of our inspectors is riding by then we would be the ones who are monitoring it. Otherwise it would be the Sheriff’s Department who is riding by. Mr. Colclough: But evidently that is not happening, according to what the neighborhood association president is saying. We’re issuing licenses in neighborhoods and communities and nobody’s monitoring. Mr. Sherman: Specifically about this property, we asked the Sheriff’s Department if they’ve had any calls there. There were several calls in the area. There were calls to the property in the past few months after the former owner died. People were breaking into the building and stealing the alcohol. Mr. Colclough: But that’s not what we’re discussing. Mr. Sherman: But as far as the loitering, I can’t answer your question. We had not responded to that property with a complaint for loitering. Mr. Colclough: But the neighbors shouldn’t have to call the police department nor your department saying there is a bunch of people milling around outside of this package store and not buying anything, or drinking on the property. I mean that’s strictly against the law, but who is monitoring it? No one is monitoring. Mr. Sherman: We—well, we and the Sheriff’s Department will be monitoring. 34 Mr. Colclough: I’m hearing the neighbors say that once they purchase the alcohol there’s a bunch of people milling around and I guess using bathroom [unintelligible] outside. Mr. Sherman: And also, that would be the responsibility of the applicant, the license holder. Mr. Colclough: That’s what I’m saying. Mr. Sherman: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney? Mr. Hatney: One observation. I think Mr. Colclough talked about a monitoring and there is a place on Laney Walker Boulevard across East Boundary going toward South Carolina where some of us used to frequent. It was named the Cool Spot back in those days. But the new owner bricked it up. There is no way to get into the building other than go in the liquor store and buy it. You have 150 cars parked out there from Thursday to Saturday night midnight. Folks sitting all over the place, drinking liquor. Nobody said nothing about it. The sheriff ride by there regular than I do. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith? Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I would ask Mr. Sherman—Mr. Sherman has the applicant met all the legal requirements? Mr. Sherman: Yes, sir. Mr. Smith: If we turn it down it could be brought [unintelligible] courts [unintelligible] responsible for the [unintelligible]? Mr. Sherman: That of course would be a legal question but I suspect so. I mean being a non-legal person I would think that he has a vested interest in the property. Mr. Smith: Legally there is no reason for you to say turn it down? Mr. Sherman: Based on what we consider in making our recommendation, no, sir. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you. I’m going to answer Mr. Smith’s question. I’m not an attorney either but I associate with one so long I know the law just like he do. The law states that we as a government body can decide we got enough. Now, we don’t have any legal reasons, but Commissioner Hatney talked about East Boundary, but two blocks away, up on MLK, you can’t get through there on Friday and Saturday night. This 35 gentleman don’t have a license to have people hanging out, either. I done reported it to Rob Sherman, I done reported it to the Sheriff’s Department, I mean that’s another [unintelligible] area. Plus [unintelligible] is standing back there, his church sits in the middle of both of these. There’s three or four other establishments that sell it [unintelligible]. So my point is, Mr. Smith, yeah, we can legally turn it down and the answer to the judge would be that we can say we’ve got an abundance of this kind of stores and business in our area and we don’t need no more. Now, we had one Commissioner on this board that wouldn’t vote for a beauty salon to be put in his neighborhood cause it’s going to cause problems, going to bring the neighborhood down. Now, people are tired, these people have come and spoke. Now, I thought we going to be able to do this and do it sensible. The neighbors done spoke out. The neighbors have dealt with this for 400 years and they tired now. They can’t take no more. Now, if you can’t have a day care in your yard, if you can’t have a beauty salon in your neighborhood but you can agree to even think about being in guideline with a liquor store that the neighbors say they don’t want—I make a motion that we disapprove the license, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, over and apart from this issue, one of the things I’ve heard from Laney Walker Neighborhood Association and I’m hearing it from Turpin Hill, Rev. Hatney, I brought up the same problem that you mentioned earlier for years now. We have a problem with lack of enforcement for on-site consumption of alcohol across this city. And I urge apart from this issue that we go out and ask the sheriff to begin aggressively enforcing these people. They’re not paying for on-site consumption licenses nor are they maintaining—we’ve heard about the Galleria and other places that are impacted by this kind of loitering and drunkenness. It’s time for people to go by these stores, get whatever they’re going to get and go home and not hang out. So I’d hope we’d take this up another day. I’m going to make a substitute motion to approve. Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute. Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, just so the Commission is informed of the additional considerations that can be considered, in addition to your distance requirements, there are additional considerations from our ordinance which include the location, the number of licenses in the trading area, the congregation of minors in the vicinity, and evidence that a substantial number of incidents requiring police intervention have occurred within a square city block of the proposed location. So if the motion is to deny, it should state those reasons as set forth in this ordinance. Mr. Williams: So move in my motion, Mr. Mayor. 36 Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a substitute motion and a second. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, can we get a roll call vote? Mr. Mayor: On the substitute? Mr. Williams: On all the motions. Mr. Mayor: Okay. The substitute motion is to approve, by Mr. cheek, and seconded by Mr. Grantham. Ms. Rosier: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am? Ms. Rosier: I’m here to represent [unintelligible] Baptist Church. My name is Vivian Rosier. My pastor is Dr. Robert E. Williams. This is a very interesting topic and I really have something to say. I’m a former school teacher, I’m a parent, and I’m a grandparent. And we join with the Turpin Hill Neighborhood Association about this issue. This is a very serious issue. Now, our church is located at MLK and [unintelligible] Road. There are other members here in attendance. We would like to see this community in a very positive light where families can raise their children without being exposed to glamorizing alcohol and tobacco and other negative messages that our children so often see. Never have so many children been permitted to rely on so many negative influences as they do today. And I know each one of you know this. All you have to do is pick up the daily paper, turn on TV, watch C-SPAN. This is a serious problem. As a parent, grandparent, neighbors, religious congregations and schools for protection and guidance, we must protect our children against these challenges. We must do this. Now, to our elected officials, Mayor Copenhaver, Mayor Pro Tem Marion Williams, elected officials, now we hope God will guide your feet, mind and soul to reclaim this community, and not just this community—communities throughout the city of Augusta. Reclaim our children. We talk about security. Please let’s mean it because our children need a sense of security and ability to dream. But if they must pass by package shops every day coming from school, as Ms. Clark said, getting off the bus and seeing people in street intoxicated, this is not good for our children. Let’s think about the children. Let us be models of truth. And I’m talking about with a capital T. And goodness. Let us protect our children who suffer from poverty. Because people who can afford it, in most communities they would not allow this. And we know it. You know it. It’s about time that we stand up and protect children who cannot protect themselves. Too many children, also young adults, are victims of drugs and alcohol abuse and [unintelligible]. Go into the classrooms. You know about it. And you don’t have to go too far. Even elementary school now. You cannot just play with this thing. We ask you to vote against this license for the operation of this business to see alcoholic beverages. Last, but not least, I found some research on this. The paper [unintelligible] Substance Abuse by Alice B. [unintelligible]. She says addiction continues to be one of society’s most complex and prevalent problems. In the 2002 [unintelligible] National Survey on 37 Drug Use and Health revealed that an estimated 22 million Americans aged 12—12 years or older—suffered from substance dependence or abuse due to alcohol, illicit drugs, or both. Today substance abuse disorders continue to proliferate in alarming numbers, especially in the African American community. African Americans comprise approximately 12% of the population in the United States, yet in 1999 they accounted for 23% of admission to funded substance abuse treatment facilities. Now just think about that. Mr. Mayor: Ma’am, that’s five minutes. Ms. Rosier: Thank you. But please take this into consideration. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. We appreciate that. Ms. Rosier: We need to get rid of these places out of the community. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am, but I believe now the applicant would like to speak and we will hear from the applicant and then we will vote on the substitute motion. Mr. Wasse: Mr. name is Tsegai Wasse. I live [unintelligible] Drive. Mr. Mayor: Speak into the microphone, please, sir. Mr. Wasse: Because I have [unintelligible] statements, please allow me to [unintelligible] facts. I am the owner of the building. I have [unintelligible] and I [unintelligible] liquor license. I run that store about three years [unintelligible]. And [unintelligible]. I am back again because [unintelligible] has died. So it was—when I purchased that commercial building it was a liquor store [unintelligible] four years in that business. So then [unintelligible] before. It has taken me so many years and I had to be working to save that money and purchase this building. If you decided to take away the fruit of my work, let it be known that you are decided on my fate of my family and [unintelligible] two children. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. There is a substitute motion on the floor. Ms. Clerk, for the benefit of the Commission, if you could read back. The Clerk: The substitute is to approve the application. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign. Mr. Williams: Roll call vote, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Excuse me, Mr. Williams. The Clerk: Ms. Beard? 38 Ms. Beard: I’m wondering if I could vote last. Mr. Mayor: I believe in a roll call vote it’s by alpha. Ms. Beard: In that case, I’m going to offer two things. I’m going to recuse myself if they have enough votes so that if there’s a change there is a conflict of interest it will be taken care of. If they do not have enough votes and need it, I vote yes. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: A roll call vote has been requested. I think I hear an abstention for financial reasons or some other reason. I think you’re going to have to choose at this point how you vote. Abstain would be appropriate if you have some sort of interest, Ms. Beard. Otherwise, you have to vote. It’s a roll call vote and you’re first on the roll call. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: I will recuse myself. Mr. Mayor: Okay. (Vote on substitute motion) Ms. Beard: Abstain. Mr. Bowles: Yes. Mr. Brigham: Yes. Mr. Cheek: Yes. Mr. Colclough: Present. Mr. Grantham: Yes. Mr. Hatney: Abstain. Mr. Holland: No. Mr. Smith: Yes. Mr. Williams: No. Motion fails 5-2-3. Mr. Mayor: No action taken. Ms. Beard: In that case I would like to change my vote to yes. I think it has to be with approval of the committee. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Ms. Beard: I make a motion to reconsider. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to reconsider. 39 Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, we’ve got another motion on the floor. But I think the Attorney needs to— Mr. Mayor: I would have to agree that—but is the vote going to turn out any different in the— Ms. Beard: Steve, why don’t you go on and do what you need to do? Mr. Mayor: Ms. Bonner, we voted on the substitute motion to approve and now we can go to the original motion to deny. Okay, prior to proceeding there was no action taken on the substitute motion, we will now vote on the original motion. Ms. Clerk, could you read it? The Clerk: The original motion is to deny the application. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. The Clerk: Roll call. Mr. Mayor: Excuse me, roll call by alpha. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Madame Clerk, the motion to deny included the reasons? The Clerk: The reasons, yes, sir. Mr. Shepard: Could you state it for the record, please? The Clerk: Yes. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Williams, do you wish me to state that? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. Mr. Shepard: The additional considerations would be as enumerated in our ordinance: the location—the location being the location for which the license is sought, as to traffic congestion, general character of the neighborhood, and the effect such an establishment would have on the adjacent and surrounding property values. The other criteria are the number of licenses in the trading area, the number of licenses already granted for similar business in the trading area, the place for which the license is sought, and there are two others—congregation of minors, any circumstances which may cause minors to congregate in the vicinity or the proposed location, even if the location meets the distance requirements under Section 6-2-263(b), and prior incidents; evidence of a 40 substantial number of incidents requiring police intervention have occurred within a square city block of the proposed location. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote on the original motion by the usual sign. By roll call, by alpha. (Vote on original motion) Ms. Beard: No. Mr. Bowles: No. Mr. Brigham: No. Mr. Cheek: No. Mr. Colclough: Present. Mr. Grantham: No. Mr. Hatney: Abstain. Mr. Holland: Yes. Mr. Smith: No. Mr. Williams: Yes. Motion fails 2-6-2. Mr. Cheek: Motion to reconsider. Mr. Brigham: Second. Mr. Williams: Mr. Parliamentarian, I’m going to need a ruling from the parliamentarian as a conflict of interest and the person need to withdraw their vote from this particular agenda item. Now, I been trying to be as understanding as I possibly can. But this is a very serious issue. And I stated last time that I understand the owner and what he proposed to do. He don’t know all of the history. I understand he’s coming in. He’s been here for a few years. But the community has spoken. Now, these Commissioners who I’m hearing voting for it, who wouldn’t allow a day care to have six children in their neighborhood, but they going to vote to put a beer and wine, a joint—not just a— Ms. Beard: It is not a joint. Mr. Williams: A joint. Mr. Mayor: Through the chair. Ms. Beard: I think I’ve heard enough. Mr. Williams: So Mr. Mayor, I’m trying to be as understanding as I possibly can. But there’s other Commissioners on this same board who wouldn’t put a beauty salon in their neighborhood. Now, what are you telling these people? I don’t understand that. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard and then— 41 Mr. Williams: Need a ruling from the Attorney. Mr. Shepard: Financial interest of any Commissioner in this matter should disqualify that Commissioner. Mr. Williams: Okay. Ms. Beard: What is that, Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: I said the financial interest of any Commissioner in this matter should disqualify that Commissioner from voting. Ms. Beard: Okay, you’re going to have to explain that. When you say that, what do you mean? Do you mean if I am a bank and I am holding a note then that is reason for me to—that is a conflict of interest? I do not have any ownership. I have not been running that store lately. For fifteen years, I can imagine. Now, what are you saying? Mr. Shepard: Well, I— Ms. Beard: You know, I’m not going to let you—I’m sorry, I hate to do this. But you’d better know what you’re saying this time. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Beard, please. Mr. Shepard? Ms. Beard: [unintelligible] say anything you want, but we say what is convenient at the time. Now, I am saying if there’s a conflict of interest, rather than the owners who have done nothing but purchased a piece of commercial property, I’ll settle it in court. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Shepard: My understanding of the facts are that you hold the mortgage and you are drawing income which is generated from this property and therefore I consider that a disqualifying event. You have a financial—you have a financial stake in this and I think you should properly recuse yourself. Ms. Beard: And I think all of you should know one thing. It would be to my advantage for him to have to give up his store because he has made over 40% of the payments. So I—I—the only thing I’m doing is attempting to help someone who qualifies for a store and I think it was awfully smart of Mr. Williams to ask for this roll call vote. I really can’t believe this but if I am able to vote, even with what you have said, I am voting. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Ms. Clerk, do we have—wasn’t there a motion to reconsider? Mr. Cheek: There is a motion and second, Mr. Mayor. 42 Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to reconsider and a second. Any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Hatney, Mr. Holland and Mr. Williams vote No. Motion carries 7-3. Mr. Cheek: Motion to approve, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: I think it would be importance to announce the vote is 7 in favor and 3 against. It’s unnecessary to count the vote of Ms. Beard. Mr. Hatney: But she voted, though, for the record. Mr. Mayor: Okay. The Clerk: They can’t hear you, Mr. Shepard. Mr. Shepard: I said the motion is carried. The motion carried, the motion to reconsider carried and you can count the votes. It carries with six votes. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay. We have a motion to approve and a second. Mr. Williams: Roll call vote again, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: I [unintelligible] attorney, now he’s made a ruling and— Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: I believe under our rules you have to rule whether or not Ms. Beard has the right to—is to abstain or not and I am requesting you make that ruling. Mr. Mayor: I would rule that she does have the rule to abstain in this situation. It is as instructed by the Parliamentarian. 43 Mr. Williams: I don’t think that was Mr. Brigham’s question, was it, Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: [unintelligible] whether or not she has to. Mr. Mayor: Whether or not she has to abstain? Mr. Parliamentarian? Mr. Shepard: If she votes I think the Chair counts the votes and announces the results. So if she attempts to vote I think the Chair would not count the vote. The safest thing would be for you to abstain for financial reasons. Ms. Beard: I’m going to—can we move that this tabled at this time and voted [unintelligible] later? Mr. Cheek: Move to table. Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Parliamentarian? Mr. Shepard: I think a tabling motion is in order. I don’t think that—it’s in order if it’s somebody who’s qualified to make it, they make it. Otherwise— Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do I hear anybody that would like to— Ms. Beard: Are you saying I’m not qualified? Mr. Shepard: I think you have an interest in this matter and I’m not— Ms. Beard: Okay, dear, come on, help me out. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Shepard: --on any aspect of this motion, Ms. Beard. Mr. Mayor: Is there anybody else that would like to make a substitute motion? Mr. Shepard: It would be a motion to table, is what she suggested. Is any other member of the body wishing to make a motion to table this? Mr. Mayor: Is there any other member of the body wishing to make a motion to table? Mr. Cheek: I’ll go ahead and make a motion to table it, Mr. Mayor. Maybe we can talk this out. 44 Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to table. Is there a second? Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Mayor: Any further discussion? On the original, do we need to vote on the original motion? Mr. Shepard: The motion to table [unintelligible]. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Williams: This is the motion to table, isn’t it? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: We’ve got church and communities and neighbors and teachers and doctors and everybody out here waiting on us to make a decision and we going to table a event until whatever time and hold these people up to do nothing. And right now I’m really disappointed at the way things are going with this particular meeting. But these people have come down, took their time to come down, to stand against an issue that they have the right to stand against, and we won’t make a final decision to go ahead and do what is necessary to do. But I’m, I’m [unintelligible]. Mr. Williams votes No. Mr. Holland abstains. Mr. Hatney not voting. Motion carries 7-1-1. Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item? The Clerk: ENGINEERING SERVICES 8. Approve funding in the amount of $261,155.00 to Stevenson & Palmer for the engineering design of the Fort Gordon Water and Sewer System Interconnections. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hicks? Mr. Hicks: Members of the Commission, this is a request for the approval of an engineering contract and funding thereof for design of water and sewer interconnections on Fort Gordon. As you are aware, we have been selected to provide the water and wastewater commodities for the fort and in order to provide that we will be making a tie 45 on the fort with regard to the 18” water main and also we will be constructing a sewage pumping station and a 5-1/2 mile force main on the fort property in order to pump the sewage from there to our Butler Creek sewer line. Butler Creek sewer line has been sized to take this load, and anticipating eventually such a move would take place. The work on the fort is unusual in that if you’re going to work on government property like that, there’s a lot of environmental regulations and requirements. We have a gentleman in our employ in the Utilities Department who used to be public works out there so he’s very good in coordinating that. And then Mr. Wiedmyer, who is with Stevenson & Palmer, he was out there for some while and so he’s very familiar with these regulations on the fort, as far as regulations for environmental, plus being a good engineering firm. And they are local. So we recommend approval. That amount is 6.6% of the estimated construction cost which is well within the percentages that you’d expect for a project of this type. So we would urge approval of this contract. Mr. Colclough: So move. Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: Mr. Hicks, you may know, some of the other folks may know, [unintelligible] contract, have the entire amount there? You said it’s about 6% but we don’t see that figure. Mr. Hicks: Okay, the entire amount, sir, is on over—if you’ll look at the backup data, if you look—there’s—go over a few pages and there’s this preliminary opinion of probable cost. Mr. Hatney: Okay. Mr. Hicks: And down there you’ll see the 6.64%. Mr. Hatney: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Hicks: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Hicks: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item? The Clerk: 46 OTHER BUSINESS 12. Discuss Robert's Rules of Order as it relates to the Rules of Procedures for the Commission. (Requested by Mayor Pro Tem Marion Williams) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Since we had a ruling from the judge and got back, we have not talked about this issue and I needed a ruling from you or the Attorney as what, what rule [unintelligible]. In the finding the judge sent back said that you had the authority, [unintelligible] Robert’s Rules to govern. And Robert’s Rules will govern if we have no rules. But when I looked up Robert’s Rules it also said the same thing as our state legislature rules that were put in place. And I just need to know what rules are we going to play by and what is abstention. It can’t be a yes or no, it’s got to be one or the other one. If it’s going to be a no then it ought to be a no. If it’s going to be a yes then it ought to be a yes. But Robert’s Rules says on page 70 that an abstention is just that, a zero. It cannot be counted as a yes, it cannot be counted as a not, it is a zero. So I just need some guidelines as to what we going to go by when the last Commission meeting we voted on an issue, might have been the same subject we just left when we had one Commissioner who voted present and one abstained but there wasn’t no ruling. And I’m trying to figure out what an abstention is going to be because our guidelines that we adopted in 1996 and again in 2003 said that you can abstain without a reason. Now, I had a good reason and when I did my little homework and checked Robert’s Rules on page 70 it says that you have the right to abstain, especially when it comes to a conflict or where it’s going to be monetary gain or performance increase, Mr. Mayor. So I don’t want to assume we working by the state rules that the people voted on and we were not working by them. I don’t want to assume we’re working by Robert’s Rules and we’re not going by them. I just need to know who rules that we going use. Because I think they both same the same thing. But I just thing this body ought to be clear so we’ll know what rules we ought to be prepared for or operating under because I’m really not certain. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If you look to our rules, which you’re correct, Mr. Williams, were adopted in 1996 and again in 2003, there is the last—near the end section, it talks about parliamentary authority. And I want to read that into the record for the benefit of all of us. It says that the latest edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern meetings of the Augusta Richmond County Commission in all areas in which it is applicable and which it is not inconsistent with these rules adopted by the Commissioners or with higher law. So it is a—Mr. Williams, it is a—and Mr. Mayor—it is a fallback so that if you don’t have the question answered by these rules or by the Georgia legislature, in other words, we have in the charter the requirement that there be six affirmative votes for there to be passage of any bill or nomination or agenda item on this Commission. Therefore, we have also had an interpretation of our rules by Judge Overstreet. And Judge Overstreet’s ruling was in favor of all the defendants. It was favorable as to the issue of holding over, it was favorable as to the issue of 47 mandamus, and was favorable as to the issue of declaratory judgment because there was no right that the parties had that was taking a risk of undirected future action. So where does Robert’s Rules fall in all of this? It falls, in my opinion, as the matter of last resort and the judge has let it be known if it comes back before him—he didn’t find the issue properly [unintelligible] this next time but he found in our rules [unintelligible] the power of the Mayor to read into the rules a vehicles for ruling on an abstention. And I’m trying to—pardon me for flipping through the pages—but the Chairman/Mayor authority comes from Section 1.03 according to Judge Overstreet. And he says that between the rules of calling for the vote, which is 1.03.01(f) and announcing the results of each vote, which is 103.01(g) then the Mayor has the power to determine that abstention, if not for a financial reason, is the no. And the other interpretation of that is that that was a hypothetical ruling and it would have to come, it would have to come from another case. So I’m saying to you that our rules have been interpreted by the Superior Court, and that Superior Court ruling would apply, I would think if it came back before Judge Overstreet in another case. Now, the only other way out is if there are other lawsuits, could be decided differently by different judges. And so therefore if another issue came up where this abstention was questioned, and I’m talking about, as I told the Court, I think all abstentions for financial reasons—I think you just agreed with me in the last debate—should be counted as abstentions. But an abstention when it is not supported by a financial reason is an abstention that the Mayor could choose to construe. And he can construe that I think as a—he could deem that, as we say, a no. So the rules of procedure are where we are— that’s our primary rules of government. And then if there is no answer there, the Court, then go down to Robert’s Rules of Order. That’s how I see it. Mr. Williams: I understand perfectly what the judge have sent back. In fact I met again with my attorney, Mr. Shepard, talked with him at some length about what was— what came back. And I explained to him that the same scenario that we doing now. Now, the judge cannot tell the, the, the, law to change. The law has already been in placed. And I think what the reading is or what the reading came back to was that if there was no rules in place, you can revert to Robert’s Rules. Well, when I reverted to Robert’s Rules, like I said, it don’t say anywhere in Robert’s Rules that you can count a no as anything, abstention or anything but a zero. It don’t say a no. It don’t say a yes. In fact it says in words you cannot count it as a yes or a not. It’s only a zero. Z-E-R-O. That’s what it got in the book. So I need to know from your position as the Attorney are we going to work under the state rules that was voted on by the people that we still being governed by—my abstention if I choose to do so, can only be counted as a 0, a zero. Not a no, N-O. Not a yes. It can only be counted as a zero. By the judge’s order. Robert’s rules. [unintelligible] made a copy for anybody that need a copy of it. That’s what it states right here. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, could you and Mr. Shepard discuss this? Mr. Williams: No, sir, I need the Attorney. He get paid. I don’t get paid. I’m not going to discuss it. He need to tell me [unintelligible]. If he says we’re not ruling by these, we ruling by the state legislature, the charter been put in place, that’s fine. If he say we’re using [unintelligible] he need to tell me which one we are abiding by. As a 48 Commissioner I want to know what rules to govern. I want to go through the Chair, I want to do what’s right. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: I can’t do it with two sets of rules out there. Now, we got two different rules for some folks but it ain’t going to happen for me. We going to have one set of rules for everybody and I need to know what they are. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: The Superior Court, when it considered this case, chose to rule on the basis of our rules of procedure. So we have an opinion at a level higher than Robert’s Rules. When statutes are interpreted by courts, the [unintelligible] of the court’s ruling is on statute and therefore we have had a ruling from the court on the rules before you get to the default position of Robert’s Rules. And so I defended, I defended this case, Mr. Williams, and my opinion was that we had—I think you read my brief—it was an expression of an abstention was what you just said. It was a zero. But the court followed, basically followed my opinion that I held on all those counts until he went to the abstention and when he had an opportunity to give us an advisory opinion he did give us an advisory opinion and that advisory opinion was that the expression of an abstention is a no, and he found that authority in our rules, which our rules say are superior to Robert’s Rules. So I have to say that the judge, the judge’s ruling has intervened in our analysis. If we didn’t have that ruling then I would go to Robert’s Rules [unintelligible] zero. That’s the problem. Mr. Mayor: Rev. Hatney? Mr. Hatney: My question, Mr. Shepard, are you suggesting in your findings of whatever the judge says that if I happen to abstain and the other—there there’s five votes or six votes and my abstention ends up with it being five, or four—in other words, you’ve got a 5-4 vote and I abstain. Are you saying he can take my vote and add it to no? Because I have voted. I vote once. But he takes that vote and vote twice. Because if you take my no, my vote changes to a no, that’s a 5-5, which he has a right to break the tie. Not in this country. You don’t do that. Mr. Shepard: Well, sir— Mr. Hatney: That’s not constitutional now. You know that. You can’t do nothing with my vote because it’s mine. It’s a sacred trust. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: I— 49 Mr. Hatney: You know that, Mr. Shepard. You know that. Go ahead and smile. You know I ain’t lying. Mr. Shepard: I have never said you were lying. Mr. Hatney: Okay. Mr. Shepard: But there are interpretations. That’s why there are court cases. And this was serious enough to go to the courts and would it be possible for the abstention to be deemed by the Mayor under the authority that Judge Overstreet cited, yes, that would be possible. Mr. Hatney: But Mr. Shepard, let me ask you. In this country, this is a democracy. From my perspective the Supreme Court does not have the authority to do something with my vote after I’ve cast it. Mr. Shepard: Sir, I’m— Mr. Hatney: Once I cast my vote, sir, the Supreme Court can’t change my vote. Mr. Shepard: Well, the point is that the abstention was—I think we just said was a nothing and—I think the Superior Court has advised us that abstentions is interpretable, or whatever work you want to use, is deemable as a no under our rules so that there would be then a tie [unintelligible]—if it’s nothing then it’s not a vote. Mr. Hatney: [unintelligible] Mr. Shepard: Well, I think— Mr. Hatney: [unintelligible] Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek? Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m going to agree with Commissioner Williams in that the abstention should be counted the same way consistently on every interpretation or ruling that comes from the Chair. The whole bottom line on all of this is the current rules the government is operating under are not the rules approved by the state legislature nor the Justice Department. They current rules were adopted, without any verbatim minutes, it states without any guidance as to what an abstention would mean under than everybody has the right to abstain. Another section in the consolidation bill did give language to what an abstention would be counted as but it was removed and later found later this year that it would be counted as a no vote. The thing that concerns me the most is that as I said earlier a vote is sacred. The consolidation government was designed to give the Mayor the vote, the right to vote to break the tie. The current use of the abstention as has been attempted and been wrongfully done all of these years put the position, one of us on this Commission in the position of being able to deny the Mayor 50 the right to vote, which is strictly illegal and against the Voting Rights Act and every other good thought of conscience that all of us should have. Mr. Mayor, I ask the Chair to rule on the abstentions when they’re not for legitimate conflicts of interest [unintelligible] but I will contend as I said in the past that yes, there are other grounds that can be brought up and substantiated that would prove to the public that we continue to cling to an illegal system of counting abstentions as zeros. Abstentions as zeros for the purpose of blocking the right of the Mayor to vote to break a tie is illegal. According to Section 15 of the consolidation bill, in order to change the voting structure in a way that would adversely or affect the right of any member of this Commission to represent their delegation, their body, would require 2/3 votes, seven voted from this body. [unintelligible] passed in 1996 with six votes did not garner the necessary votes to change the form of government, of the representative abilities of any member of this board, is therefore illegal. We can bring that up in court but the fact of the matter is, is anybody that stands by a person’s right to deny you or anybody that sits in that change the right to break a tie cannot stand for any other type of voting right of any kind because they would deny you the right they so strongly cling to. Mr. Mayor: Let me just say a little point on this. I had a Girl Scout sitting in Commissioner Colclough’s seat when they visited the Chambers recently and she asked me the question, Mr. Mayor, what does an abstention mean? And I said it means different things to different people. I think we’re seeing evidence of that. I just, I think we need to move along with this issue. Mr. Williams, we have spent, we as a body have spent so much time and energy arguing this issue. We’ve got bigger fish to fry. We’ve got bigger issues to address. Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: I wanted to address a couple of issues, Mr. Mayor. First of all the attorney, if he keeps reading, he’s going to read where the judge said if the Commission didn’t challenge him with Robert’s Rules that [unintelligible] use those. But that’s not my point. The charter also states that in case of a tie that the Mayor can vote. It doesn’t say you create a tie for the Mayor to vote. It says in case of a tie the Mayor has the right to vote. The Mayor knew what that seat held for voting stuff when, not just this one, but all the previous Mayors. But I just want the Attorney to tell me are we going to use Robert’s Rules or are we going to use the rules that we been governed by already or we not going to use them? That’s all I’m asking, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams— Mr. Williams: We been talking for 20 minutes about nothing. Abstention is still a zero. Mr. Mayor: Mr.— Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] one thing and one thing to somebody else. They can call it what they want. A abstention is a 0. 51 Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, but you’ve asked the attorney several times and I know it sounds like legalese but— Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] simple Steve. That’s all I want. Mr. Mayor: But are we, are we getting anywhere on this issue? Is it moving the business of the body forward? And I honestly don’t see where we’re going with this. I still think it would be best for you and Mr. Shepard to get together as opposed to sitting here while there are—I mean it’s pointless to me and that’s just my own— Mr. Williams: I understand, Mr. Mayor. It may be pointless to you but you was not the one to have to go before the judge to talk about— Mr. Mayor: I sat up there with you. Mr. Williams: But you, you, you, you wasn’t one that was singled out, for whatever reason, and I— Mr. Mayor: [unintelligible] Mr. Williams: When the order came back and it stated that the Mayor could use those if the Commission didn’t challenge him, I think that’s in there as well. I just need to know from the attorney are we going to use Robert’s, are we going to use James, John, Tom— Mr. Mayor: Mr. Attorney, would it not be safe to say that we are, that we use the rules that were adopted by this Commission? Mr. Shepard: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: And Mr. Mayor, that could have been answered 20 minutes ago. We been going around. I asked a simple question. Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to receive this as information? Mr. Cheek: Point of clarification on what was just said. Does that mean we’re going to ignore what the judge said? Mr. Mayor: No, I— Mr. Cheek: [unintelligible] Chair making a ruling on abstentions? Mr. Shepard: I don’t think we’re going to ignore what the judge said, Mr. Cheek. 52 Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to receive this as information? Mr. Holland: So move. Mr. Smith: Second. Mr. Williams: Mr. Cheek had a valid question, though. Mr. Cheek had a valid question, Mr. Mayor. I mean [unintelligible] this is business now. If you can’t handle business don’t run for office. Mr. Mayor: I can handle business fine. Mr. Williams: [unintelligible] question. I need to know that same answer. Ms. Beard: Did we have a second on that? Mr. Mayor: We do have a motion and second. Ms. Beard: I call the question. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. The question has been called for. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign to receive it as information. Mr. Brigham and Mr. Bowles vote No. Mr. Williams abstains. Mr. Hatney out. Motion carries 6-2-1. Mr. Brigham: Call for the order of the day, Mr. Mayor. Let’s go to the next item. Mr. Mayor: I believe the motion to receive as information passed. The Clerk: Yes. Mr. Cheek: Can we change that to receive as partial information? Mr. Mayor: Just keeping the peace, my friend. Just keeping the peace. The Clerk: Are we going to back to the table, take it off the table? Ms. Beard: Yes, I’d like to move—you’d like to move that it be taken off the table? Mr. Cheek: Motion to take the item off the table. PUBLIC SERVICES 53 5. New Ownership Application: A. N. 06 - 13: A request by Tsegai T. Wasse for a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Lion Package located at 2102 Martin Luther King Blvd. District 2. Super District 9. (No action vote by the Commission March 21, 2006 - requested by Commissioner Betty Beard) Ms. Beard: And we’d like for the vote to be in reverse alphabetical order. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do we need a motion, a second to take it off the table, Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Yes? Mr. Shepard: To bring it back on the table. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to bring it back on the table. Do we have a table? Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Williams: Ms. Beard asked for a vote in reverse order, she just said. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: First motion was to bring it back on the table. Get that done. Mr. Williams: That’s what she asked for. She didn’t go no further. She just asked for that now. Mr. Shepard: And I think my previous ruling was when you wanted to vote in any way other than alpha order that was subject to the objection of any Commissioner. Now, we take roll calls in alpha order. Now I haven’t heard any objection yet. Mr. Williams: What are we voting on? Mr. Shepard: Alpha order is what we use for roll call vote. Mr. Williams: That’s right. Mr. Shepard: We’ve established that. She’s requested a reverse alpha. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Well, let’s see. We have a motion to remove the agenda item from the table. Commissioners will now vote by the usual. Mr. Williams: Wait, wait. 54 Mr. Mayor: Excuse me? Mr. Williams: She asked for reverse— Mr. Mayor: On the motion. Mr. Shepard: And with unanimous consent of the body I would say that that would be fine. But if one of you wants to vote in alpha order then I think you have the right to have the body vote in alpha order. Mr. Williams: This is on, to put it back on the table. That’s on—this is not on the item. Mr. Shepard: This is not on the item, Mr. Williams. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second to bring the item back off the table and it has motioned that this vote be done in reverse alpha roll call fashion. Talk about mental linguistics. Mr. Shepard: Does Ms. Beard still desire a reverse alpha vote? Ms. Beard: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: I believe we have an objection; do we have an objection from Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: No. Mr. Mayor: Not on this; okay. The Clerk: The motion is to take it off the table with a roll call in reverse order. Mr. Grantham: Correct. Mr. Williams: That’s right, take it off the table. The Clerk: With a roll call on reverse item for this item, to take it off the table; right? Ms. Beard: No, no, no. We’ll just vote to take it off the table. We won’t— Mr. Mayor: Okay. This sounds like some sort of [unintelligible] with a huge degree of difficulty. The Clerk: Would you repeat your motion to take it off the table? 55 Mr. Cheek: let’s just take it off the table and then we’ll dispense with the voting patterns, methods, whatever. Mr. Mayor: we have a motion and a second to take it off the table. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Williams votes No. Mr. Holland not voting. Mr. Hatney out. Motion carries 7-1. Mr. Mayor: Y’all, let’s decide on it one way or the other. Mr. Williams? Mr. Williams: I make a motion that we deny this applicant the license to go back into the neighborhood cause the community don’t want it. Mr. Holland: I second it. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second to deny. Mr. Grantham? Mr. Grantham: Substitute motion, a motion to approve. Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute motion to approve. I believe that this has been adequately debated. Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, there has to be a motion in place in order for it to be tabled. Mr. Mayor: Excuse me? Mr. Cheek: We took it off. It was up for discussion. For it to be discussed and to be reconsidered and discussed there needed to be a motion to place on the table. Mr. Mayor: Thought we did that. Mr. Cheek: I’m just saying we may have three motions out there, one dangling somewhere, but let’s go with what we’ve got. The Clerk: Is there a second to Mr. Grantham’s motion? Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: Roll call vote, Mr. Mayor. 56 Mr. Mayor: Okay. We will have a—Ms. Bonner, so everybody knows what they’re voting on, read back the substitute motion, and it has bee requested that we have a roll call vote on the substitute motion. The Clerk: The substitute motion is to approve a new application request for a retail package beer and wine license to be used in connection with Lion Package, located at 2101 Martin Luther King Boulevard. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote on the substitute motion by the substitute sign. Excuse me, roll call. The Clerk: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: I said roll call reverse order. Mr. Cheek: Inverse alphabetical. Ms. Beard: Inverse alphabetical. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: I understood the motion previously to be for an inverse alphabetical vote on the procedural motion. I thought. Now I hear Mr. Williams asking for a roll call vote, which absent any further direction from Mr. Williams that would have to be an alpha. So therefore we need to call the roll in alpha order. Mr. Mayor: Okay. The Clerk: Ms. Beard? Ms. Beard: One moment. Mr. Cheek, are you absolutely certain this can be done. Mr. Cheek: Roll call [unintelligible] any alphabetical or any reverse alphabetically as long as all are called. Mr. Shepard: It is alpha. Mr. Mayor: Y’all please be patient. We’ll get through this. Ms. Beard: I made the substitute motion and I think it’s only fair. Mr. Williams has had his way throughout this. Mr. Williams is trying to keep me from exercising my vote. And this is that. The only fair thing is to do it in the reverse alphabetical order. Mr. Williams: Get a ruling on that? 57 Ms. Beard: It hurts no one. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: When the alpha—when the roll call is requested it has to be in alpha order unless you have gotten unanimous consent to do some other—and you do not have that. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams did request that this vote be a roll call vote. The Clerk: Shall I proceed? Mr. Mayor: Yes. Roll call vote: Mr. Hatney out. Ms. Beard: Abstain. Mr. Bowles: Yes. Mr. Brigham: Yes. Mr. Cheek: Yes. Mr. Colclough: Yes. Mr. Grantham: Yes. Mr. Holland: No. Mr. Smith: Yes. Mr. Williams: No. Motion carries 6-2-1. Mr. Mayor: How many were here for that hour and 45 minute meeting we had last week? Steve, do we have legal? Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I move we go into legal session for the purposes as stated. Mr. Speaker: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 10-0. [LEGAL MEETING] LEGAL MEETING A. Pending and Potential Litigation. B. Real Estate. C. Personnel. 58 Mr. Shepard: The motion that you sign, the closed meeting affidavit, that we discussed the subjects of real estate, personnel and pending and potential litigation. 22. Motion to approve authorization for the mayor to execute affidavit of compliance with Georgia's Open Meeting Act. Mr. Grantham: So move. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 8-0. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: One more add and approve. I’d ask that the Commission add and approve authorization for my firm to seek a temporary restraining order in the Landgas case in the event that circumstance of the release of gas or being necessary to have that action taken. ADDENDUM 20. Motion to approve authorization for seeking equitable relief including temporary restraining order in the case of Augusta vs. Landgas. Mr. Brigham: So move. Mr. Cheek: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Hatney and Mr. Williams out. Motion carries 8-0. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard? ADDENDUM 15. Motion to approve settlement in case of Augusta Estates, et al. versus Augusta Richmond County, et al. Mr. Shepard:Mr. Mayor, I’d also ask for an addition to the agenda and approval of a proposed settlement in the case of Augusta Estates vs. Augusta Richmond County in which there has been tax money escrowed with the following disbursements: $152,064.28 to the Tax Commissioner for ad valorem taxes of 59 $9,824.66, that the balance of our half be applied for solid waste fees in the amount of $56,707.48, that the monies after that be refunded to the taxpayer in the amount of $76,532.14, that all penalties and interest be waived and that each party pay their own lawyers. Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion? Mr. Cheek: So move. Mr. Colclough: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Hatney and Mr. Williams out. Motion carries 8-0. ADDENDUM 21. Motion to approve settlement of case of Regency Condos vs. Augusta. Mr. Shepard: That this body approve a consent order where we set the values in an assessment case adopting—this is in the matter of Regency Condos versus August Richmond County Board of Tax Assessors, that we set the values for 2001 equal to the values accepted already for 2002, and that because of a billing error that 2002 penalties be abated. Mr. Cheek: So move. Mr. Grantham: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Williams and Mr. Hatney out. Motion carries 8-0. Mr. Mayor: No more business, Mr. Shepard? Mr. Shepard: No more business. Mr. Cheek: Move to adjourn. Mr. Mayor: We stand adjourned. 60 [MEETING ADJOURNED] Lena Bonner Clerk of Commission CERTIFICATION: I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Augusta Richmond County Commission held on March 29, 2006. ________________________ Clerk of Commission 61