HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommission Meeting April 17, 2007
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
APRIL 17, 2007
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:05 p.m., April 17, 2007, the Hon.
Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Holland, Smith, Grantham, Harper, Hatney, Beard, Williams, Cheek,
and Bowles, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
ABSENT: Hon. Brigham, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
The invocation was given by Dr. Rusty Newman, Pastor Curtis Baptist Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited.
Mr. Mayor: Pastor we have a little something for you.
The Clerk: On behalf of the Mayor and members of the commission, Pastor, we just
want to say thank you and a belated welcome to Augusta. It’s a pleasure to have you with us and
parting those words to heaven on our behalf. And God bless you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madame Clerk, let’s move on to the recognitions.
The Clerk:
RECOGNITION(S)
A. Mr. Robert Mobley, Augusta Utilities Department, March Employee of the Month.
The Clerk: Dear Mayor Copenhaver. The employee recognition committee has selected
Robert Mobley as the March employee of the month for the City of Augusta. Mr. Mobley has
been an employee with the City of Augusta for eight years. He currently works as an Assistant
Water Operations Manager at the Hicks Water Treatment Plant. Mr. Mobley was nominated by
fellow employee Debra Horne. Mr. Mobley was nominated for his dedication to providing the
best possible services to the community. He was awarded the award of Top Operator in 2006,
District 6. His leadership abilities and firm guidance makes him an excellent role model for all
employees to follow. The committee felt that based on this recommendation and Mr. Mobley’s
dedicated and loyal service to the City of Augusta we would appreciate you joining us in
awarding Mr. Robert Mobley, Robbie Mobley employee of the month for the month of March.
Congratulations. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Hicks: I would just say that certainly we are pleased to have Robert win this award
today to be recognized in this manner. We have a quite a dedicated crew, Debra Beasley who is
the superintendent of the Hicks Plant and the ground water supply. We’re glad to have her here
this day also to stand with us and we appreciate this recognition. As we said before we’re a
family and we’re a team and we appreciate when one of our members gets recognized. Thank
you very much. (APPLAUSE)
1
Mr. Mayor: Top operator. That’s a good term. Okay, Madame Clerk, I believe we’re
going to go ahead and take the consent agenda first. I think there are a couple items on there that
people are here to speak to and we will get to the delegations bearing in mind how the consent
agenda goes.
The Clerk: I call your attention to our consent agenda. Our consent agenda consists of
Items 1-50, Items 1-50. For the benefit of any objectors for our Planning Petition, when the
petitions are read if there are any objectors would you please signify your objections by raising
your hand.
Item 1. Is a petition for a change of zoning from a Zone A (Agriculture) to a Zone B-2 (General
Business) affecting property located at 1400 Powell Road.
Item 3. Is for a change of zoning request from a B-1 (Neighborhood Business) zone with a
special exception regarding property located on Walton Way Extension.
Item 4. Is a petition for a Special Exception to operate an inert landfill affecting property located
at 3011 Old McDuffie Road with conditions.
Item 5. Is for a Special Exception to establish a mineral exploration and to establish an inert
field at property located at 3020 Old McDuffie Road.
Item 6. Is for a Special Exception to establish a new church affecting property located at 3423
Milledgeville Road.
Item 7. Is a Special Exception to establish a sales office at Brookstone Subdivision at 1250
Brookstone Way.
Item 8. A petition for a change of zoning from a Zone A (Agriculture) to a Zone B-1
(Neighborhood Business) affecting property at 2802 Old Hwy 1.
Item 9. Is for a Special modification from a zoning Z-06-88 affecting property at 2205 Highland
Avenue.
Item 10. A change of zoning request from a Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to a Zone B-1
(Neighborhood Business) affecting property located at 1940 Olive Road.
Item 11. Is a petition for a change of zoning from a Zone R-1 (One-family Residential) to a
Zone R-1B (One-family Residential) affecting property at 3103 Bransford Road.
Item 12. A change of zoning from a Zone B-2 (General Business) to a Zone R-1A (One-family
Residential affecting property at 609 Telfair Street.
Item 16. A Special Exception to establish a Family Day Care Home affecting property at 2914
Cumberland Drive.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to those planning petitions? Objectors for Item 3.
Did you count them in the hall? While they survey the hall for the objectors for Item 3 I will
proceed with the alcohol petitions.
Item 17. An on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license affecting property at 2906
Peach Orchard Road.
Item 18. Is for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to used in connection
with 1365 Gordon Highway.
Item 19. Is for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with 1901 Gordon
Hwy.
2
The Clerk: Are there any objectors those alcohol petitions? Okay. So we have how
many objectors. Are they finished canvassing the hall?
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a number from the hall yet?
The Clerk: So our consent agenda is Items 1-50. How many? Twenty-one.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do we have any additions to the consent agenda? Commissioner
Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: Add to the consent agenda to be in order Item number 63 where we
would recognize Resolution of Condolences for former Councilwoman Carolyn Usry.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have any further additions to the consent agenda? Commissioner
Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor I think Item 62 ought to be one that, we ought to be able to
add to the consent as well. Sixty-two along with sixty-three I believe.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: And sixty-one. I got no problem with sixty-one being added to that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Beard.
Ms. Beard: Uh, I don’t have a problem with 53, and 56 and I’m wondering if we could
add uh, the addition with Howard for um, the Richmond County Canal Authority representing
District 1.
Mr. Cheek: You do not have unanimous consent for that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Any further ---
Mr. Bowles: I’d like to discuss number 53, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Any further additions to the consent agenda? Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to add number 60 to it.
Mr. Williams: There needs to be some conversation then, Mr. Mayor, I’ve got ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any further additions to the consent agenda? Okay, could
you read back the additions to the consent agenda, please, Madame Clerk?
Mr. Grantham: (INAUDIBLE)
3
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: --- a request from Mr. Page to review the request that he has.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Grantham: I think that’d be in order to put on the consent agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
The Clerk: We need to add it in. Okay. Well, we can allow the motion to be all-
inclusive --- all of that so then we can do it.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I don’t understand ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: What are we doing with 59?
The Clerk: Mr. Page has requested that the item be deferred to the next commission
meeting and we were wanting to get that added to the agenda and then as a deletion.
Mr. Williams: Okay. I just wanted to make sure we were on the same duck, that’s all.
Mr. Cheek: Can we have with fifty-nine ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, just to research from staff on the records of tax payments in a
timely manner and other code enforcement issues associated with this property before we
consider it.
The Clerk: You don’t have any objections to it being ---
Mr. Cheek: No, ma’am, I’d just like that additional information.
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madame Clerk, could you read back the additions to?
The Clerk: Consent agenda consists of Items 1-50 with the addition of Items 61, 62 and
63.
The Mayor: And didn’t we have 56 and 59 as well?
4
The Clerk: Well, we did have, Mr. Bowles wanted to discuss Item 53, 56 is added, right?
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do we have any items to be pulled for discussion? Commissioner
Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull Item 10 for discussion, Item 20, 37 and 38 and
44 and 45 for discussion. Just to get some clarity on that please.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Pull twenty-three, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: (INAUDIBLE)
Mr. Mayor: Do we have any further items to be pulled for discussion? Hearing none I
would look for a motion to approve the consent agenda.
Mr. Cheek: So moved.
Mr. Williams: Second.
CONSENT AGENDA
PLANNING
1. Z-07-43-A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond county Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Randy Snyder, on behalf of Marshall Taylor,
requesting a change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-2 (General Business)
affecting property containing .8 acres and is known under the present numbering systems
as 1400 Powell Road. (Tax Map 039 Parcel 059-01) DISTRICT 3
2. FINAL PLAT-HANCOCK HILL PLANTATION, SECTION 2, REVISED-S-599-REV.
– A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to
APPROVE a petition by John E. Dykes Surveyors LLC, requesting final plat approval for
Hancock Mill Plantation, Section 2. This revision is to correct the ownership of the
retention pond that is part of this residential subdivision.
3. Z-07-33-A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE with the conditions listed below a petition by Forum
Development Group, on behalf of James F. Mills, Cobs Nixon, et al, requesting a
modification of condition #5 which required that the development of this property by
consistent with the concept plan submitted as part of Z-01-01 requesting B-1
(Neighborhood Business) zoning with a Special Exception to establish a group of retail
buildings which would exceed 15,000 square feet of area per Section 21-2 (a) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County. The modification of
the previously submitted concept plan is requesting inclusion of a mixture of commercial,
professional and residential land uses affecting property containing six land parcels
totaling approximately 47 acres. (Tax Map 16 Parcels 055, 052, 052-01, 052-02, 052-03, 052-
5
04, 051, 051-01, 050) DISTRICT 7 1. There shall be no development or other
encroachment in the 100-year floodplain except for connections to sewer lines if necessary;
2. The only access to the property shall be a new intersection on Walton Way Extension in
the vicinity of Hebron Court to be paid for by the developer of the subject property. This
intersection shall be signalized and the cost of equipment and installation shall be borne by
the developer of the subject property. If the new signalized intersection is determined not
to conform to the AASHTO standards, then the new zoning classification shall revert back
to the previous classification. 3. There shall be no access to Walton Way Extension except
at the new signalized intersection. An additional right in, right out access point that serves
the entire development may also be permitted. If our parcels fronting on Walton Way
Extension are created there shall be no access easements placed on plats and deed of such
parcels. 4. Illumination at the rear of the complex is a potential impact that can be
mitigated by the following: ? A fence, wall or solid vegetation screen shall be located along
the entire floodplain at least six (6) feet above the elevation of any retaining wall or fill at
that location. ? For building walls facing the floodplain on the creek side of the property,
all building wall lights shall be directed down the building, not outward; ? In the rear
parking area there shall be full cutoff lighting that does not shine into the floodplain. 5.
That the only development of this property other than development allowed in the R-1 and
R-1A zones shall be an upscale shopping center consistent with the concept plan submitted
and on file in petition Z-07-33. If site plans for such development are not presented within
two years of approval of the rezoning then the zoning of this property reverts to R-1A. If
development of the property does not begin within three years of approval of the rezoning,
then the zoning classification reverts to R-1A. 6. That the Storm water system shall be built
to detain a 100-year storm and release it at no more than 90% of the predevelopment rate.
4. Z-07-42 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Augusta Green Wood and Mulch, on behalf of
Simmons Management LP, requesting a modification of a condition placed on a Special
Exception per Z-98-29 to operate an inert fill area on 16 acres of an approximate 34 acre
tract that was granted a Special Exception with a condition that limited the use of that 16
acres for ingress and egress to the inert fill area to now allow a scale, office and ingress and
egress on this property; per Section 26-1 (o) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for
Augusta-Richmond County affecting property known as 3011 Old McDuffie Road. (Tax
Map 083 Parcels 317 and 097-01) DISTRICT 5
5. Z-07-35 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE with the following conditions 1) no disposal of inert material
shall be permitted on this property and 2) the use of the property shall be limited to
mineral exploration and the grinding, coloring and sale of mulch and related materials; a
petition by Augusta Green Wood and Mulch, on behalf of Henry William Cameron Jr.,
requesting a Special Exception to establish mineral exploration per Section 7-2 (a) and to
establish and inert fill area per Section 26-1 (o) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing 14.7 acres and is known
under the present numbering system as 3020 Old McDuffie Road. (Tax map 083 Parcel
107-01) DISTRICT 5
6. Z-07-37- A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Allen Gay, on behalf of New Frazier Temple
Church of God in Christ, requesting a Special Exception to establish a new church,
6
including day care activities, per Section 26-1 (a) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing 2.08 acres and is known
under the present numbering as 3423 Milledgeville Road (Tax Map 069-3 Parcel 082)
DISTRICT 5
7. Z-07-39 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Tee Tollison, on behalf of Richmond Development
Partners, requesting a Special Exception to establish a sales office in the clubhouse of
Brookstone Subdivision, a part of The Lakes at Raes Creek per Section 8-2 (f) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property
containing .28 acres and the clubhouse was assigned an address of 1250 Brookstone Way.
(Part of Tax Map 040 Parcel 046-03) DISTRICT 3
8. Z-07-40 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Robert Collier Sr., on behalf of MRD Investments,
requesting a change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood
Business) affecting property containing .70 acres and is known under the present
numbering system as 2802 Old Hwy 1. (Tax Map 118 Parcel 008) DISTRICT 5
9. Z-07-41 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Hope House Inc., on behalf of R.W. Allen,
requesting a modification of a condition from zoning case Z-06-88 thereby extending the
time period for the sale of the property to be completed to October 30, 2007, affecting
property containing approximately 6.65 acres and is known under the present numbering
system as 2205 Highland Avenue. (Tax Map 056-3 Parcel 007-01) DISTRICT 5
11. Z-07-44 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Logan Nalley III requesting a change of zoning
from Zone R-1 (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1B (One-family Residential) affecting
property containing .52 acres and is known under the present numbering system as 3103
Bransford Road. (Tax Map 03303 Parcel 104) DISTRICT 3
12. Z-07-45 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Matthew Aiken requesting a change of zoning
from Zone B-2 (General Business) to Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) affecting
property containing .28 acres and is known under the present numbering system as 609
Telfair Street. (Tax Map 047-1 Parcel 250) DISTRICT 1
13. PLACEMENT OF MARKER/MONUMENT ON PUBLIC PROPERTY – A request
for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE
a public hearing to consider a request by the Woodmen of the World Georgia
Jurisdictional Convention to place a polished marble bench near the existing World Wars
monument in the median of the 1200 block of Greene Street to honor veterans of all wars
and conflicts.
14. ZONING POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS – A public hearing to
consider the adoption of policies and procedures which govern the calling and conducting
of zoning hearings and the standards governing the exercise of the zoning power.
15. ZA-R-179 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition to consider an amendment to the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County which would amend Section 35 of the
Ordinance entitled “Amendments to this Ordinance” by bringing it into conformance with
the Georgia Zoning Procedure Law (OCGA 36-66) and other laws.
7
16. Z-07-38 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Jocelyn Shelton requesting a Special Exception to
establish a Family Day Care Home per Section 26-1 (f) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing .29 acres and is
known under the present numbering system as 2914 Cumberland Drive. (Tax Map 107
Parcel 454) DISTRICT 5
PUBLIC SERVICES
17. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 07-17: A request by Patrick
Hawkins for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in
connection with Steps Jazz Unlimited located at 2906 Peach Orchard Rd. District 6. Super
District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 9, 2007)
18. Motion to approve a New Application: A.N. 07-18: A request by Joe Lewis Foreman
for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with
Primetime At Relax Inn located at 1365 Gordon Hwy. There will be Dance. District 2.
Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 9, 2007)
19. Motion to approve a New Ownership Application: A.N. 07-19: A request by Jayesh
Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Jaiyogi, Inc.
located at 1901 Gordon Hwy. District 5. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services
Committee April 9, 2007)
21. Motion to approve a contract with Fruit and Juicy Concessions for food and beverage
operation for listed parks in the Recreation and Parks Dept. (Approved by Public Services
Committee April 9, 2007)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
22. Motion to approve the assessment tool for evaluating employees reporting directly to
the Mayor and Commission. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee April 9,
2007)
24. Motion to approve change to Housing Rehabilitation Program Design. (Approved by
Administrative Services Committee April 9, 2007)
25. Motion to approve of the final proposal for the Fire Department hiring procedures.
(Approved by Administrative Services Committee April 9, 2007)
26. Motion to approve the reprogramming of $60,000 in Year 2007 CDBG Funds from the
Brigham Center Tennis Courts to the Brigham Senior Center Expansion Project.
(Approved by Administrative Services Committee April 9, 2007)
28. Motion to approve return of 2002 HOME Funds by Laney Walker Development
Corporation. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee April 9, 2007)
PUBLIC SAFETY
29. Motion to approve and sign Annual Support Agreement with SunGard Bi-Tech, Inc.
for the period covering January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007. (Approved by Public Safety
Committee April 9, 2007)
30. Motion to approve Standard Software Maintenance Agreement with New World
Systems, Inc. for the period covering January 1, 2007 – December 31, 2009. (Approved by
Public Safety Committee April 9, 2007)
31. Motion to approve a Resolution to reaffirm the necessity of the 911 and enhanced 911
charges. (Approved by Public Safety Committee April 9, 2007)
8
32. Motion to approve the Director of Animal Services proposed out of county fees.
(Approved by Public Safety Committee April 9, 2007)
FINANCE
33. Motion to approve renewal of Public Official Liability coverage with current carrier,
Landmark American Insurance, for $85,523 for April 19, 2007 to April 19, 2008.
(Approved by Finance Committee April 9, 2007)
th
34. Motion to approve funding for Special Election in 10 Congressional District.
(Approved by Finance Committee April 9, 2007)
35. Motion to approve declaring the items on the attached list as surplus and available for
public auction on May 5, 2007. (Approved by Finance Committee April 9, 2007)
36. Motion to approve the purchase of 2 pickup trucks for the Sheriff’s Office, one F-250
and one F-150 which will be purchased with Homeland Security grant funds. (Approved by
Finance Committee April 9, 2007)
39. Motion to approve a request from Mr. Joe Neal, Jr. regarding a rebate of homestead
exemption on property taxes for 2006 at 2240 Kings Way. (Approved by Finance
Committee April 9, 2007)
40. Motion to approve a request from the Sheriff’s Office for the replacement of Three K-9
Vehicles using grant funds and forfeiture funds. (Approved by Finance Committee April 9,
2007)
41. Motion to approve refund recommendations from the Board of Assessors for 2
accounts. (Approved by Finance Committee April 9, 2007)
42. Motion to approve a request from Mr. Jody Smith of the Modjeska regarding an
abatement of penalty for taxes on property at 811 Broad Street. (Approved by Finance
Committee April 9, 2007)
43. Motion to approve renewal of contract with CONCERN: EAP (EMPLOYEE
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM) for a two year period May 2007 to May 2009. (Approved by
Finance Committee April 9, 2007)
ENGINEERING SERVICES
46. Motion to approve award of construction in the amount of $2,155,625.50 to DS Utilities
Company for the 630 System 36” water main project. Bid item #07-077. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee April 9, 2007)
47. Motion to approve Capital Project Budget Change Number 3 (CPB# 323-04-
296823516) to authorize the allocation of funds in the amount of $55,600.00 to complete the
design for the Windsor Springs Road Improvements Project. Funds were approved for
this project in Phase I, II, and III, Special One Percent Sales Tax and are available in the
Project Contingency Account. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 9,
2007)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
48. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Augusta Commission held
March 28, 2007 and Special Called Meeting held April 9, 2007.
9
APPOINTMENTS
49. Motion to approve the appointment of Mr. James Scott to a four-year term on the
Richmond County Tax Assessors currently held by James Norris representing District 10
effective April 25, 2007.
50. Motion to approve the appointment of Rita Washington to the Augusta Housing &
Economic Development Department Citizens Advisory Board representing District 4.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
56. Motion to approve the recommendation to offer Mr. Chester A. Wheeler, III the
position of Housing & Community Director at the salary of $97,500.00. (See attached
employee agreement draft).
PETTIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
61. Approve agreement for Indigent Defense Contract with Public Defenders Office
(02/02/2007-12/31/2007).
62. Motion to ratify the letter of authorization to seek legal services regarding EEO Title
VI grievance.
OTHER BUSINESS
63. Resolution of Condolences for former City Councilwoman Carolyn H. Usry.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Brigham out.
Motion carries 9-0. [Items 1-9, 11-19, 21-22, 24-46, 28-26, 39-43, 46-50, 56, 61-63]
Mr. Mayor: Okay. For the commission, Item 3 of the consent agenda we had objectors
on but it was not pulled from the consent agenda so I would look for a motion to reopen the
consent agenda so that that item can be pulled for discussion due to the fact that there are
objectors here.
The Clerk: Motion to reconsider Item 3.
Mr. Mayor: Motion to reconsider item 3.
Mr. Speaker: Mr. Mayor, may I speak?
Mr. Mayor: Sir?
Mr. Speaker: May I speak, sir?
Mr. Mayor: Um, yes, sir, that’s, but the item, the body has spoken and the item’s been
disposed of.
Mr. Speaker: Mr. Mayor, we’re on the agenda ---
10
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir and we will when I go to the delegations we will allow you your
time to speak. I will go ahead. I’ll go ahead and let you go first. And if you could keep it to five
minutes please sir.
Mr. Speaker: Mr. Mayor it was my understanding that the proposed developers were
going to speak prior. I had some discussion with them this morning, evidently they had some
discussions with, with the city attorney and uh, in fact we’ve got a procedural mix-up here as to
what should occur.
Mr. Mayor: Well, we addressed it in proper fashion. We addressed the consent agenda
first and the body was willing to pull it from the consent agenda nor were they willing to make a
motion to reconsider so ---
Mr. Speaker: Well maybe they’ll make a motion to reconsider after I speak.
Mr. Mayor: Well ---
Mr. Speaker: Mr. Mayor, procedurally just to give you some brief history on this matter.
As you well know that this particular item was ---
Mr. Holland: Excuse me Mr. Mayor, who’s speaking?
Mr. Speaker: My name is Randy Frails ---
Mr. Mayor: Name and address please.
DELEGATIONS:
C. Mr. Randolph Frails RE: Foxhall Homeowner’s Association’s objections to the Forum
Development’s proposed zoning modifications.
Mr. Frails: My name is Randy Frails and I represent Foxhall Homeowners Association.
th
My address is 211 Pleasant Home Road, Augusta Georgia, 30907. On the 5 of May 2006 Judge
Fleming issued an order concerning this matter. Zoning this property B-1. Specifically he zoned
it commercial. I believe that prior to that the commission had voted to deny the zoning and as a
result of that order Judge Fleming put in certain stipulations and I’m, since I only have five
minutes I’m going to be brief with the stipulations. First of all he stated that the highest and best
use of the property would be commercial. He further said that there were certain stipulations as
far as the zoning was concerned, they had to be adhered to and those stipulations would be that
the zoning shall be an upscale shopping center consistent with the concept plan. The developers
have now went back to the commission and alter their concept plan. They have a new concept
plan that includes mixed- use development, apartments and fee simple townhouses that would be
at least three stories in height. This is a significant change to what was approved by Judge
Fleming. It was a significant change to what was presented before the commission and because
of that significant change the question before the commission today is will they be in compliance
with the judge’s order, because it laid out specific facts. The specific items that were supposed
11
to be included and those items have not been addressed at zoning nor have they been addressed
at this commission. Furthermore the order specifically said that the utilization of the property for
other possible uses such as high-density apartment buildings motels and high-density residential
housing however could have a far more intrusive effect than the low-rise self-styled proposed
Forum Development. And that’s what we have here. That’s what they’re presenting they’re
presenting that this place be rezoned for apartments and it also be rezoned for condos along with
the commercial development, the big box retailers. With this significant change we feel that it’s
important that the commission table this issue at a minimum and determine whether or not they
are in compliance with the judge’s order that the commission decided not to appeal. Because
based upon the new development plan it was a significant change. The Planning Commission
decided that it was important that it come back to the Planning Commission and to come back to
the Augusta commissioners and, Mr. Mayor, because of that significant change we don’t believe
they’re in compliance with the judge’s order and we request that you uh, specifically uh, re-
entertain a motion to reconsider this.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m going just address this as simply as this redevelopment
strategy is consistent with what’s being done in Hammond’s Ferry across the river. The houses
over there are going $250 - $400,000. There basically, this is the cutting edge of development of
communities to include residential and retail in the same space to recreate the town center
concept. I fully support the change. I think this is something the reason downtown is struggling
right now is because of the absence of a law or a rule that require the upper floors to be
converted to residential as is the rule in North Augusta and Aiken. Aiken now requires three
stories to be constructed as a minimum with the top two floors being residential which
guarantees a customer base for the stores in that downtown area. These are the types of
developments that are occurring and welcomed with open arms across the country. These are the
types of developments that are being constructed across the country and welcomed with open
arms and is the case across the river on a 125 acres that is being heralded as North Augusta’s
River Front and one of the gems of development in this area. So I think that the detriment while
may be a concern to the citizens of this area will find that in the long run this will be an addition,
a positive addition to this community.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, Mr. Cheek. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I do note that the Attorney says about 21
opposers and I assume that the opposers will get a chance to speak we actually went through this
issue and I didn’t realize that nobody pulled it. I thought the opposers being here that we would
hear. I hadn’t seen that plan. I hear the changes but I had not seen as Commissioner those plans
to either go up or done on it. I would love to have had the opportunity to look at them myself
and then make a decision what I was being, what I was capable of knowing what I was looking at
or not, I would’ve liked to have that privilege. I hadn’t had anything here except the stipulation
that was written and what the attorney just stated and what the judge has stated. I would like to
see the difference in what’s proposed then and what’s being propped now. If I need to make a
motion to reconsider I don’t have no problem doing that. I’m, I just want to get all of the facts
before I cast a vote and know what I’m voting for.
12
Mr. Mayor: Okay, are you making that in the form of a motion?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Holland: I’ll second that, Mr. Mayor, and may I ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Holland: Go ahead.
Mr. Hatney: I’d like to ask Mr., where is he, Shepard.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Hatney: --- listen to the Attorney make the observation of the judges ruling. Are we
in compliance in this or have you taken a look at it?
Mr. Shepard: That’s why my office suggested that he be heard first and then the other,
the presenter be heard first then the objectors so that we are in my opinion in compliance. My
opinion is that the matter should be heard today.
Mr. Hatney: My question to you is, sir, are you aware of the judge’s decision restricting
certain uses of these properties as was outlined by the Attorney. That’s my question to you. If
that’s the case, if there are restrictions that’s not applicable here than we are, would be in odds
with the judge. That’s my question. Do you know whether or not we would be in compliance or
not.
Mr. Shepard: Judge Fleming ordered that we rezone it in a constitutional fashion and we
did rezone it to um, I think B-1 with the conditions ---
Mr. Hatney: Mr. Shepard, I’m not trying to disrespect you but you’re not answering my
question.
Mr. Mayor: And let me say and try to clarify that Planning and Zoning has unanimously
approved this, correct?
Mr. Shepard: That’s what I was trying to determine ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Shepard: --- from the record below, yes and I have done that.
Mr. Mayor: And I agree with Reverend Hatney are we, were they in compliance to
approve it?
13
The Clerk: According to the judge’s order.
Mr. Shepherd: I have read the judge’s order and I’m of the opinion that we, we are in
compliance because we had the opportunity to reschedule it in a constitutional fashion.
Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor, I do think due to the fact that our Attorney can not answer my
question this item needs to be tabled until we can get legal information as we should. Because
we should not vote on this not knowing whether or not we’re in compliance with what the
judge’s ruling on.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Hang on, Commissioner Williams. Actually Commissioner Holland was
next.
Mr. Holland: Yes, Mr. Mayor. My concern was that I wanted to know whether or not
the neighborhood association had an opportunity to meet with the developers and have some
input on this prior to them coming up here and making the changes for that particular area.
Mr. Frails: Commissioners, this is a, Dr. Jacob Malone ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay, let me recognize you first. We’re going to go by procedure on this so
please state your name and address for the record.
Mr. Malone: Jacob Malone, 2933 Foxhall Circle. We have had an opportunity to talk
with the, with Forum Development.
Ms. Speaker: But not before they made the changes.
Mr. Mayor: Please, ma’am.
Mr. Malone: We did have an opportunity to talk with them after the changes had been
made and uh, they came by to tell us what those changes were and that’s the reason why we have
objections.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, and let me just state for the record my concern with this is that if we,
and I agree that we need to get the legal questions answered but are we putting ourselves back in
the same situation where we are before that we would potentially deny zoning, be sued and have
to do it anyways and cost the taxpayers money in having to deal with a law suit. So that’s my
personal opinion but, Reverend Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: If we table this to get further information there’s no way we can be at no
risk. We need to know what we’re voting on.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
14
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Taxpayers on both sides, whether we get sued
and there’s folks in line suing us so I just got to be concerned about the people that are before us
now. We got two attorneys now, I mean between the two of them somebody ought to be able to
tell us whether or not we’re in compliance or not. But they had to put their heads together
outside or under their desks.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: We ought to be able to get ---
Mr. Mayor: And I would like to hear from, I believe the attorney for the development
group to give everybody equal time. Could you please state your name and address for the
record.
Mr. Rice: Mr. Mayor my name is Pat Rice. I’m a local attorney. I live at 3129, 3126
Montpelier Drive in Augusta, Georgia. My office is in downtown Augusta in the SunTrust Bank
building. Ladies and gentlemen of the commission and Mr. Mayor let me set the record straight
for you if I can. Judge Fleming did not zone this property. Judge Fleming had no authority
under the law and no jurisdiction to rezone the property. The extent of his authority was to tell
the City of Augusta that the existing R-1 and R-1A zoning on the property at that time was
unconstitutional and to instruct the City of Augusta to zone the property in a constitutional
manner and that is what this commission did. Now let me tell you what this hearing is all about.
I’m not going to fully argue my case.
Mr. Mayor: It’s not a hearing.
Mr. Rice: Thank you. I forget where I am. This commission put five or six conditions on
this zoning, which went from R-1 and R-1A to B-1 and if you’ll look at your agenda, and you
look at Item 3 in the consent agenda that condition is at the very bottom of your page if you can
find that. Let me see it’s one, two and it’s actually three pages, the third page in and you will
note on that page if you look carefully, about in the middle of the page there is another one on
the left hand margin which begins the conditions that this city commission put on the rezoning.
The only one which is in question today, and this is not a rezoning procedure, the only thing
that’s in issue today is that we have brought a new development plan to this commission
pursuant to Item 5 as you directed us to do. And Item 5 says that the only development of this
property other than development allowed in the R-1 and R-1A zones shall be an upscale
shopping center consistent with the concept plan submitted. We have a new concept plan and I
thought all of you had one in front of you, if you don’t we’ll get it to you in a moment. The only
thing we’re asking is that if we can substitute the original concept plan with a new concept plan
and the only thing that is not already authorized by your previous zoning condition number 5,
notice that the first thing it says is, the only development other than development authorized in
R-1 and R-1A what’s authorized in R-1 and R-1A is residential zoning, we’re asking you to
approve some residential zoning, a condominium and a few townhouses and some office space
both of which are permitted under that zoning. So that’s not and issue. We also have a few
apartments that we we’re going to add above the stores. All of these are going to be above the
existing retail stores but there will be some apartments on the I-20 side. We felt because of that
15
language that was not authorized specifically by the language as we read it and so we’ve come
back to you as good citizens should and said we got a new plan here that involves something that
you did not approve the first time around and we would like to submit that new plan to you. This
is not a rezoning. Judge Fleming’s order has nothing to do with this. It’s simply whether or not
you folks will let us substitute a new plan that has one variation in it, which you haven’t already
approved. Thank you.
Mr. Frails: Mr. Mayor, may I respond just briefly?
Mr. Mayor: Very briefly. I believe you’ve got about a minute left.
Mr. Frails: Mr. Mayor, item 5 specifically says that the only development of the property
other than development allowed in the R-1 and R-1A zones shall be an upscale shopping center
consistent with the concept plan in the file not the concept plan submitted. That is a significant
change. Additionally Mr. Mayor the judge’s order specifically took into account utilization of
the property for high-density apartment buildings motels and high-density residential housing.
Specifically the order says that that was not the best use of the property and here that’s we’re at
today. I don’t believe that the commission should properly vote on this issue today until we can
find out whether or not there’s absolute clarification that what they’re submitting is consistent
with this order. Even though it’s not a court hearing today it does have an effect upon what was
approved by your Honor Judge Fleming.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I definitely don’t think it’s fair for two attorneys to
come in here and tell the developer what the best use of their land is. I think the developer buys
land and they determine what the best use for that land is. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second to reconsider. Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: I just, I’m going to say this Mr. Mayor. Looking at these pictures this is
almost identical to what we’re doing, what we’re seeing done across the river. The old
dilapidated neighborhoods that have asbestos sided homes on them have almost tripled in value
in the last two years as a result of this type of development going in on swampland. Now to
deny this would be to run people that are trying to bring value added to our community to
somewhere else and potentially set us up to lose another law suit. We’ve all seen this. This is
good.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second to reconsider. I believe the issue has
been adequately discussed. If there’s not further discussion commissioners will now vote by the
usual sign.
Mr. Smith, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Grantham, Mr. Cheek and Ms. Beard vote No.
Motion fails 4-5.
Mr. Mayor: The agenda item has been disposed of. Madame Clerk, where ---
16
The Clerk: Well, we’re back at the delegations if you want to take up Item 27, I believe
that was, Item 23 that was pulled?
Mr. Mayor: Twenty-three, it was pulled?
The Clerk: Commissioner Cheek pulled that one.
Mr. Mayor: We’ll next take agenda item 23 and we’ll hear first from the ---
The Clerk: Let me read the item.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
23. Motion to deny a request for a Resolution of Support and the adoption of the
Redevelopment Plan from the Augusta Affordable Housing Corporation (Augusta Housing
Authority) regarding its Deans Bridge Road Project. (Approved by Administrative
Services Committee April 9, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Okay, I believe we’ve got ---
The Clerk: Do you want to hear from the delegation?
Mr. Mayor: Yeah. If we could hear from the delegations on these? I believe we’ve got -
--
The Clerk: I call your ---
Mr. Mayor: --- four. Go ahead.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
DELEGATIONS
B. Mr. Bobby G. Hankerson. RE: Augusta Housing Authority/Progressive Redevelopment,
Inc. Deans Bridge Road Project.
Mr. Mayor: And I believe we know who you are but if you could state your name and
address for the record.
Mr. Hankerson: Bobby Hankerson, Bobby G. Hankerson, 3312 Balkcom Drive, Augusta
Georgia.
Mr. Mayor: And if you could keep it to five minutes, please, sir.
17
Mr. Hankerson: Yes, sir, we’ll try to be less than that. To the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem to
the commissioners I come to represent the community that I have been living in for the, since
1996 and we have other residents here, three-fourths or more of this audience and also in the
hall. And I’d also like to present petitions here from the community, if I could pass that on. And
I speak today because of the fact that the residents of Breeze Hill Subdivision, Breeze Hill
Estates. We’re concerned we know that many voices have spoke and in our support,
commissioners have spoke and have spoken in our support but we want to make sure, as being a
former commissioner, we need to make sure that no stones are left unturned. We are stake-
holders in the community and we’re very concerned about our community that we live in. We
want to go on record to say that we’re not against affordable housing, we’re not against any
individuals but we think and we know that this is not the best use of this property, of this land.
First of all we were blind sided about it and the last time I remember that I was blindsided I
bought a house when I was twenty-one years old. I thought I was doing pretty good. And one
morning I woke up and the Housing Authority was next door almost. I know the results of what
happened in that community. We worked hard to revitalize that community and was successful
about it. And so today we don’t want the same thing to happen again. I know that we visited
Atlanta and saw mixed-use communities but mixed use communities to me, it depends on what
you’re mixing it with. Mixed use communities if it mixed with affordable housing that’s good.
Mixed use communities that you probably observed where they mix use with subsidized housing
or whatever, or section eight. That’s the question. Now we live at the gateway of Fort Gordon,
Gordon Hwy and Deans Bridge Road. We worked very hard. When I was a commissioner the
last four years I worked with Housing. Worked very hard with Commissioner Jimmy Smith and
others for Deans Bridge Road for revitalization, to bring life a little bit back to Deans Bridge
Road. Businesses have left, banks have left and we’re on a path now to bring those businesses
back, fine house like Hampton Subdivision and Breeze Hill, Breeze Hill Estates. Taxpayers that
are paying thousands of dollars each year for their properties are well controlled and have good
neighborhood associations. I read not to long ago 11,000 employees are coming to Fort Gordon
and also that Fort Gordon is the largest communication center in the United States. Is this what
we want at the gateway of Fort Gordon? Is this what we want people to read about, don’t go
down Deans Bridge Road or Gordon Hwy, make a right when you leave Gate 3 and go over into
Columbia County on Dyess Parkway. Don’t come downtown. No we don’t want that. We want
the freeway US 1 to be developed and revitalized so, in essence we don’t think that this is the
best use for this property. So I’m asking that the commission today to deny the request for the
Resolution of Support. Not only that I think some other things can be done. We can build it in
the inner city. There’s properties in the inner city. We spent money for demolition and so forth.
We can build that; we can find a place in the inner city. Next thing I’m asking that maybe we
can appoint, you can appoint a committee of citizens, residents that live in the area that they can
have some conversation and some input on where this money should be spent, where the next
development should be. I’ve heard all my life that you cannot unscramble eggs. I realize that.
But we’re asking that you take the eggs back and serve another platter and that we can all digest
it and live happy. Please do not support this resolution because the community here and Breeze
Hill, Breeze Hill Estates do not want this. We don’t think it’s the best use of the property.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Reverend Hankerson. And we’ll hear, Madame Clerk, from the
next delegation that will speak to this issue.
18
Mr. Hankerson: Mr. Mayor, would somebody ---
Mr. Mayor: I’m the servant but I got to run a meeting so I can’t pass out papers right
now.
DELEGATIONS
E. Ms. Asia L. Adams, Vice President/The Hampton’s Homeowners Association. RE:
Augusta housing Authority’s proposed public housing project on Deans Bridge Road.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am, and if you could just keep it to five-minutes as well, please.
Ms. Adams: My name is Asia Adams. My address is 3325 Hampton Circle. Mr. Mayor
and fellow members of the commission my name is Asia Adams and I’m the Vice President and
community liaison of the Hampton’s Homeowners Association. As I stand today I represent the
30-plus homeowners who make up the subdivision where the proposed Deans Bridge Road
Housing project is to be planted. A subdivision where the average home cost more than
$160,000 and with homes that range in value over $200,000. Our subdivision was marketed as
the newest sensation in South Augusta. A subdivision that started off as a gated community with
the promise of upscale living but just a few short weeks ago we were awakened by the media
giants who patrolled our sleeping community to let us know that our quiet paradise was
threatened because of the quiet sale of our Phase II and III of our subdivision. Yes, what was
once heralded as the best thing Blanchard and Calhoun was is doing in South Augusta is now the
proposed site of a subsidized housing project. Over the past few weeks the developers on the
Augusta Housing Authority has tried to force feed us a project that is done nothing but soured
our stomachs. How can we swallow paying mortgages more than $1,200 a month for homes that
we own purchased by the sweat of our brow when literally in our back yard there will be renters
paying not even a tenth of that. What is even more sickening is that we’re expected to dumb
down and believe that our property values will increase by the invasion of this unwanted
projected. Please do not be misled. We do not mind the addition of affordable housing to this
city; we just do not want this type of housing in our back yards because if we wanted that we
would have purchased homes near that type of housing. However, if you searched in Augusta
you will not find comparable homes near housing of that sort. These are the facts. The site for
this project is not a blighted or unimproved area. This site is in the center of commercial and
residential activities. There’s a Wal-Mart and other bustling commercial outlets throughout the
area. Additionally, the Hamptons was marketed as a three-phase subdivision. As late as six
months ago our neighbors who are purchasing homes were still being told that there would be
additional phases of homes. The proposed project will sit on site of what was supposed to be our
Phase II and III. Also we are not forecasting that our property values will go down, we are
already experiencing it. We have homes for sale in our subdivision where the media coverage of
this project has caused potential buyers to pull out of their contracts. We understand that we
were hoodwinked and bamboozled buy the developers and builders, however we implore the
commission to deny and disapprove any resolution for this project to go forward. We’re relying
on your conscience, we are praying for your integrity and we are counting on you as our
representatives to turn down this proposal with a resounding no so that hard working
homeowners, many of them first time home buyers will not see their investments go up in
19
smoke. Please also be assured that we will not forget this day and we will not continue to sleep
quietly into the night but we will prepare for the continued fight to save our homes and
community by any measures we deem necessary in the coming weeks. Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Please y’all hold your applause we’re trying to get this
settled. Next delegation to speak to this issue, Madame Clerk.
DELEGATIONS
H. Mr. Sam Nicholson, Counsel for The Hamptons, Breeze Hill and Breeze Hill Estates
Subdivisions regarding the Augusta Housing Authority’s Proposed Public Housing Project
on Deans Bridge Road.
Mr. Nicholson: Thank you, Madame Clerk.
Mr. Mayor: Can you please keep it to five-minutes as well.
Mr. Nicholson: Yes, I will. My name is Sam Nicholson. I reside at 2805 Peachtree
Place here in Augusta. I am a practicing attorney. My office is located at 4137 Columbia Road.
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Mayor I represent the neighborhood association for the Hamptons
and for Breeze Hill and Breeze Hill Estates. The first point I want to make is an issue of
fairness. As this young lady has said when they were approached to buy lots out at the
Hamptons they were told that this was going to be an elaborate project. Several phases and to
show this to you, I went and got the original site plans for the Hamptons. Here’s where the
original part is right now. This is the area right here, which was Phase IV that was supposed to
be developed. This area over here Phase III was supposed to be developed. There was supposed
to be a commercial area here, commercial area here. All we’re left with now is this one area
right here, these lots right here. This is what’s going to go to the proposed public housing right
here. This we don’t know what’s happened to it. It’s just been abandoned and of course the
commercial part here has been abandoned. All of this has been abandoned. So as far as what
these people bought into, when they bought these houses, it’s not even close. So is that fair to
these people? Is that fair to people that have gone out and invested their money, paying a
mortgage every month, is it fair to them to then see their investments go up in smoke because
when the idea of putting public housing right next to their property the values go down and
they’re experiencing it right now, they’re living it. Now why are we saying this is public
housing only? Well they have presented a nice project and they have presented it to the housing
authority and I don’t cast anything against the members of the Housing Authority. They’re
volunteers they do a good job but I believe these developers have presented this in a misleading
fashion and let me tell you why. In the mixed-use site, which they presented in their material,
their promotional material it gives a time line for the multifamily okay, May 2007, September
2007 all right? Then when are they going to start completion? They even give you where
they’re going to get the money from, all right? This is for the apartments, public housing. Get
over here to the next phases. Senior housing. Apply for funding 2008. Single family.
Construction. Completion in line with multi-family completion. Commercial. Following
completion of housing phases. They don’t even you a year or within five years when it’s going
to start and I submit to you ladies and gentlemen that what we’re going to end up with here is
20
just public housing. Now look at this material they put out on the project narrative, Deans
Bridge Apartments. Deans Bridge Apartments is the first component of the development which
is proposed will also includes commercial, single-family and senior housing developments in
later phases, okay. All this nice stuff the single family and all these things they’re talking about
that are in conjunctions with the community out there comes at a later time. That later time is
th
unknown. Just this, just this day, this week April 12 in a letter to the Mayor and this is
something I really object to because I think this is misleading. In this letter they say despite all
the attention given to the 40 units of public housing much of the project is purely market driven.
According to the most recent census data the median value of an owner occupied house in the
Deans Bridge area is $116,000. But I submit it’s more than that. But this is the part that really
bothers me. We would expect that the single-family houses proposed in Phase I will be put on
the market in excess of that amount. There are no single-family houses proposed in Phase I.
That is not anywhere in their material. This is misleading ladies and gentlemen. They’re going
to get those millions of dollars out of Washington, come down here build this public housing and
I submit to you by virtue of reading their own material that’s going to be it. It’s not right.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Nicholson: Thank you very much.
Mr. Mayor: Your five minutes is up. Thank you, sir. (APPLAUSE) Please y’all no
applause. Hold your applause until the end. Next delegation, please.
DELEGATIONS
I. Mr. Sammie L. Sias, President Richmond County Neighborhood Associations Alliance,
Inc. RE: Augusta Housing Authority/Augusta Affordable Housing Corporation/PRI
Development on Deans Bridge Road.
Mr. Sias: Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners.
Mr. Mayor: And please keep it to five-minutes as well.
Mr. Sias: No problem, Mr. Mayor, I won’t need that long. My name is Sammie Sias,
3839 Crest Drive. Mr. Mayor, Commissioners I had written up something that I wanted to say to
y’all today concerning this particular development, this project but I don’t need to do that. I’m
going to be very brief. The first thing I want to do is thank all the folks who worked hard to
present their case and let you know how the community members felt about this project. Mr.
Mayor with your permission I’d like every one here that opposes this project whether you’re
inside our outside please stand.
The Clerk: We need to get a head count.
Mr. Sias: Mr. Mayor, commissioners this is the Richmond County Neighborhood
Association Alliance, West Augusta Alliance and members of the neighborhoods. Thank you.
21
Mr. Mayor: You can just raise your hand. It’s hot in here so we don’t want y’all to have
to stand for too long.
Mr. Sias: Do we really need a count?
Mr. Holland: There’s several people in the hall too.
Mr. Mayor: We’re getting a count in the hallway as well.
Mr. Sias: These organizations of these people are being counted. We were not consulted
nor were we informed when this project first came out. Now if they had done that Mr. Mayor,
commissioners we might not be in this situation today. They’ve invested money but is that the
fault of the homeowners? No it isn’t. That’s the fault of miscommunication. Now can
miscommunications be saved by saying now, well this is what I done, this is what we need to do
now, no, that’s not the issue. If the communications had been there they would’ve known these
objections beforehand, before purchasing any land. We said it and we’ll say it again, the Mayor
has quorums the commissioners have quorums, the Augusta Housing Authority they’re going to
look to spend this much money they should’ve had a quorum. PRI the primary developer, they
told us exactly what they did in Atlanta about neighborhood associations and committees. They
went out and talked to them. But if they are here in Augusta doing the same type of project why
couldn’t they talk to the folks here? They are here, we have associations, they did it in Atlanta.
Why couldn’t they do it in Augusta? That’s not that difficult. Next we talk about phases. You
heard the attorney mention phases but I’ll tell you what came out of the developer’s mouth and I
quote him. “I do not expect the money to be around in 2008 to do these types of projects”. So if
he could not wait one year to do Phase I, how can he do Phase II, III if says he doesn’t expect the
money to be there and I quote him on that. Mr. Mayor, commissioners we ask you to deny this
Resolution of Support, we also ask you to deny the other redevelopment plan. The
redevelopment planning included the areas that are already been developed. Why do it need to
be redeveloped again? Mr. Mayor, commissioners we ask you again to deny this. We know this
is not the end. They’re going to proceed forward. But we ask that this type of project would
have been great in another location. The Hamptons didn’t need any help. Breeze Hill didn’t
need any help. We have commissioners and legislators who say they have areas in their districts
that this project can benefit, would very much benefit this city. So in closing the Neighborhood
Alliances, West Augusta Alliance and folks together, that’s all we ask Mr. Mayor,
commissioners. Talk with us. We are for the city. We are for progression. That’s why we
work. That’s why we come down here and get involved. We ask your support. Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Y’all please hold the applause. Okay now I’d like to move on
to that agenda item, please, ma’am.
The Clerk: Commissioner Cheek had ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
22
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m going to stand and I stand with the neighbors in
the Alliance. This is a map of where the project should go. I live near and travel near Deans
Bridge Road on a regular basis. We are in the process in this city trying to find ways to help the
Bethlehem community in the areas along Martin Luther King Boulevard. There are several large
open areas and dilapidated warehouses in this area along Martin Luther King Boulevard. This
would anchor and help what is being done in Villa Grove, what is being done by ANIC along the
Laney Walker corridor and provide stimulus and investment and people with disposable income
into an area where there are nothing by vacant lots that are nothing by health hazards and
continual cleanup problems for the City of Augusta. This is where this needs to go. This puts
the residents that we’re planning on relocating if that is the case, near hospitals near community
services they are accustomed to, on public travel lines and it utilizes vacant bombed out space
that has been abandoned for decades. This would help revitalize and give a kick-start and put
millions of dollars back into the corner of Bethlehem and move us forward towards the
redevelopment of that area. The city frankly would like to move forward with it but we don’t
have the money right now. This would be a good chance to start and get that investment going
and perhaps in the meantime we could come up with the additional funds to assist ANIC, Villa
Grove and anybody else who wants to turn that area of our city around. Instead of leaving a
vacant lot it’s become a dumping ground. Let’s move the site there. Let’s leave Deans Bridge
Road as it is. After all, the south side of Augusta has had the promises of public housing. We
have some on Richmond Hill Road, we have some in other areas of my district and quite frankly
the Housing Authority could do a better job of policing their properties. Secondly ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Cheek: I’m not, Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: You’re right at the two-minutes though Andy and I’m sorry ---
Mr. Cheek: I’ll hold it at two minutes and revise and extend my remarks for my second
time around.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, as the commissioner of District 5 I’d
like to commend those persons who have come forward today to share their thoughts and their
objectivity with this particular project. This is indicative of the kind of people that we have
living in the South Augusta area. And when I say South Augusta I mean all of South Augusta.
And this particular project will affect South Augusta so it behooves all of us to think about these
kinds of projects when they’re brought to your neighborhood to think and become involved.
What we have had here is a total breakdown of communication. Had we had the kind of
communication that we were supposed to have had a year ago we would not be sitting up here
discussing this particular item today. So I’m going to ask once again Mr. Mayor as the
commissioner of this particular district, as the one who came forth and shared this with all the
ones in that district. In that district in South Augusta who started the first meeting with Senator
Ed Tarver to involve my constituency and I want to thank the West Augusta people for coming
in and being a part of this to inform them and let them know that this kind of project was being
23
challenged and this kind of project was almost being dumped in the South Augusta area. As one
of my colleagues’s always said, don’t put anything in my neighborhood that you don’t want in
your neighborhood. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, are you going to make a motion with that or are you ---
Mr. Holland: Yes, sir. I make a motion that we deny this resolution deny the
redevelopment and the entire program for the Augusta Housing Authority.
Mr. Harper: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, prior to moving forward, where’s our, Mr. Jessup, is it proper to make
a motion? Is the redevelopment plan on this agenda?
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: It is on this agenda as well? Okay. We have a motion and a second.
Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: I’d like to hear from the development company, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do we have a representative who can ---? State your name and
address for the record please sir.
Mr. Foil: My name is Aidan Foil. I’m with Progressive Redevelopment. I’m the project
manager. I think everybody’s really familiar with what the proposal is. I’m not going to speak
to all the different comments we’ve had to that. These are still a lot with this information out
there. So I’d just like to, two real brief things. Phase I is a $13.5 million dollar investment that
we’re looking at making in this community. This is a mixed-income development. It is partially
public housing it is partially market rate and there are single-family homes scheduled to go in at
the same time as the apartments. But right now I’d like to ask Helen Tankersley to speak.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Tankersley.
Ms. Tankersley: Good evening.
Mr. Mayor: State your name and address.
Ms. Tankersley: My name is Ms. Helen Tankersley and I live in Peabody Apartments on
Walton Way and I am here to speak on behalf of the Deans Bridge Road mixed-income
development. I truly believe it would be an asset to the community. I do not think it would
devalue the properties or anything. And as I speak I speak for the Advisory Board, Ms. --- is
going to pass you out some brochures there that has been signed by our petition for our, to go on
with the redevelopment. I’m the past president of the residents association and I currently serve
as treasurer for the association and I’m a member of the Advisory Board. The primary function
of the --- community is to fill the gap in communication ages, ethnics and also social
24
background. We will not put people in there that does not have economic opportunities. That
means that everybody will have to have a job of some kind earning their own way in order to go
into this development. Excuse me. I am in favor of this because I do ask that this, this is a very
cause for your support and I ask you if you would please consider giving each and every one a
better way of life. It will improve the quality of life for our citizens. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Okay, Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and I’ll try to keep it to two minutes. While I, Mr.
Mayor I’m concerned about the loss of investment that could potentially benefit a blighted area
and therefore at the conclusion of my remarks I’m going to say and make a substitute motion that
we deny it going on Deans Bridge Road that we endorse or encourage the developers and
Housing Authority to look at these vacant properties off Martin Luther King. They will be
vacant as we’ve seen with Regency Mall for another decade unless we have something potential
investment come along and this may be the best shot at having something on those properties in
the next decade or two. Mr. Mayor we do have mixed income housing in South Augusta. On
my street alone there are several Section 8 properties that are rent subsidized. So we have the
mix that is so highly touted. Two or three years ago we did an overlay of the Section 8
properties managed by the Housing Authority and the crime map of the same area and it was a
one to one comparison between the problems, the police calls in the Section 8 properties. Again
I’ll go back to say that, that somebody ultimately the people who have authority and jurisdiction
over this program don’t do a good job of managing it. The subsidized apartments, we all know
are not beneficial to the surrounding communities and here again we went back to Olmstead
Homes instead of building a new and bright concept for that area. We rebuilt the same cracker
boxes and there’s nothing historic as Marion said about a shotgun house or a cracker box. And
my great grandmother was a resident there some fifty years ago. Mr. Mayor members of the
commission this area has been abandoned, burned out warehouses for several years. It is worth a
look see, the investment dollars that could come into this area and if it is indeed mixed income
we have people coming in with jobs and disposable income could spur ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Cheek: --- business within that area. It is worth a look-see. I’m going to make a
motion ---
Mr. Mayor: Substitute motion.
Mr. Cheek: --- substitute motion that we deny the Deans Bridge Road portion of
this and that we encourage the Housing Authority and these developers to look at these
vacant lots off Martin Luther King Boulevard as a potential site to locate this particular
development.
Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Actually, is there a second?
25
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Beard and then I’ll come back to you, Commissioner
Holland.
Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, I wonder if that would be possible with this particular project.
Mr. Foil: You mean as far as planning to get it in this development. It’s not, this
rd
development goes in on May 3 is the application deadline so there’s not enough time to
substitute a site.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to make sure that it’s understood that this, that
this resolution is completely denied by this commission. I want it understood that the whole
thing, Item 23, I want it completely understood that it’s totally and completely denied and uh,
that we’re not in total support of this.
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk, that is the original motion on the --- okay.
Mr. Cheek: That’s intended the substitute motion as well.
Mr. Mayor: And the substitute motion covers that but also just simply adds to look in the
Bethlehem area?
Mr. Cheek: Look at the vacant warehouse spaces along Martin Luther King Boulevard.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay. We have a substitute motion on the floor and Commissioner
Holland the substitute motion does contain exactly what you said the only portion that it adds is
to look in that area. If there’s no further discussion commissioners will now vote by the
substitute sign.
Mr. Bowles and Mr. Grantham vote No.
Ms. Beard abstains.
Motion carries 6-2-1.
Mr. Mayor: Now the next item that I do not believe that we have anybody to speak to
this issue agenda item 27, I believe is it, the last one that we have the crowds here for?
The Clerk: Yes, sir, we have a delegation here for that. Do you want to give me a
minute to clear the chamber?
Mr. Cheek: Recess for two minutes.
Mr. Mayor: I’m going to call for, literally commissioners a two-minute recess as we
clear the chambers. All right everybody ready to get back rolling? Okay commissioners two-
26
minutes is about up. Any commissioners out there in the hall? Exactly. I know y’all can hear
me, we got speakers out there now don’t act like you’re hiding. Any commissioners within the
sound of my voice come now!
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, may I?
Mr. Mayor: What’s that?
Mr. Cheek: May I?
Mr. Mayor: May you what?
Mr. Cheek: Quorum call?
Mr. Mayor: Yeah, please.
Mr. Cheek: Quorum call. All commissioners’ quorum call report to chambers.
Mr. Mayor: Well done.
Mr. Cheek: I only get to do that for eight more months. Got to make the best of it. Eight
months and twelve days. Who’s counting? Life is good. We’ve been here an hour and twenty
minutes and we got two items done.
Mr. Mayor: I’m going to go ahead and call the meeting back to order. Madame Clerk,
the next agenda item that we have a crowd here for.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
27. Motion to approve petition to merge the 1998 Pension Plan, the 1977 Pension Plan, the
GMEBS Pension Plan, Employees with no pension plan and submit a 180 day notice of
cancellation to GEBCorp/Nationwide. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee
February 26, 2007) (Deferred from the March 6, 2007 Commission meeting)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I had asked that this be pulled in order to
have further discussion regarding this. We had a what I call a --- meeting last week that gave us
enough information that was in view of the fact what the costs would be for our government in
order uh, put these plans together and I’m convinced and I’m certainly supportive of a retirement
plan for our employees one that I feel we must do in order to retain people of this operation as far
as employment goes. But I still cannot be satisfied with what has been presented and I’m going
to present just a couple little items if you don’t mind. I think this is extremely important not only
what the taxpayer’s consider an employee of this government and we need to look at the
actuary’s computations, which is the underlying foundation, the amount of financial obligation to
27
the city and the retirement benefit for the employee. We need to verify the --- by GMEBS to
determine that our plan will be the most beneficial to the city and the employees. Right now we
are at $14-16 million dollar shortage in funding our retirement program and that is not the final
figure. It can go as much as $23 million when you get to the final figure and I now that some of
you may not agree with me out there but what you need to do is get into the books and look at it
and find out exactly where we are. This is too wide a range for us to feel a comfort zone in order
to put these three plans together right now. In conjunction with the retirement plan we received -
-- information and I call it --- regarding the health coverage that I think is extremely important
for retirees of this government.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Grantham, that’s the two ---
Mr. Grantham: I’m going to come back if you will.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor, I think we have someone to speak?
Mr. Mayor: Let me hear from the commissioners first. Commissioner Cheek and then
Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Cheek:
Mr. Mayor, I’m going to say that the reason if there is a deficit it’s because
with every retirement package I’ve seen it’s been, what’s uh, I don’t know it just seemed to be a,
something that’s done as a token more than a service to the employees. I’ve talked about and all
of us have talked about doing something, combining these plans and making something happen
for our employees to retain our employees. The hidden cost is about $25,000 a year to train
police officers and fire fighters not to mention heavy equipment operators and everybody else
that does something for the people of this city. It’s time to do something and putting this off and
putting it off, we’ve put off consolidating so many parts of our government I wonder if I’ll still
. So I’m going to make a motion that
be alive when we actually consolidate the city of Augusta
we approve the plan.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don’t think there’s any commissioner that does not
want our employees to have a pension or health insurance however we hadn’t heard an
independent report on this. I really feel like that we need have a report from and independent
audit before we get into this because it’s a lot of money on down the road. It looks good right
now but in five years it’s going to be a different story and I recommend that we look at this real
strong before we vote.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Beard.
28
Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor, we have two other pension plans. I’m wondering why they
aren’t included.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Burns.
Mr. Burns: The two pension plans that were not included, the benefits in those plans are
better than what are proposed for this plan and the costs of making this plan the same as the other
two that are better would be more. The work was reviewed by an outside consultant. Buck
consultants is not in anyway tied to GMEBS or the Segal Company and they did review this
work and the numbers are good.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Mr. Mayor the only, the only information that Buck Consultants reviewed
was the medical insurance. They did not review the pension analysis.
Mr. Burns: Yes, they did.
Mr. Bowles: Not according to their report, Mr. Burns.
Mr. Burns: They did.
Mr. Bowles: It’s not anywhere in this report. Furthermore the numbers used in this
report represent a 7.3% investment on the county and city’s part whereas right now we’re
th
investing 6%. It’s a 1 3/10 percent each pay period difference. It was admitted to last week.
We don’t have an independent analysis on done on this plan. We don’t even know where our
Gatsby 45 post retirement debt is right now which is somewhere between $65 and 85 million
dollars. Where are we going to get that money Mr. Burns? It’s going to be a tax increase that’s
all this is and I think doing so without all the hard facts and information is a disservice to our
taxpayers.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you. Mr. Burns, as the department head I imagine you have uh,
this report been reviewed all of it or just the medical part?
Mr. Burns: Buck Consultants reviewed our plans. They didn’t do an official study
because we didn’t pay them but I did send them all of our numbers. They have every document
that we have and they have reviewed them. They did not do an official study.
Mr. Williams: Okay uh, Mr. Mayor, here and we are talking about funds again and we,
we won’t do things that’s going to generate money coming in this city but then we’re going to
talk about how much stuff’s going to cost. We need to some things that’s going to generate
some money. I mean I’m in support of the plan and I think we got to do something. We’ve been
procrastinating we’ve been talking about it we got people that’s retiring and uh, even um, want to
retire but and can’t afford to retire because they don’t have anything in place. We’re losing
29
people, Commissioner Cheek you were right, we’re losing people cause they got better work
plans at other job sites than we have here in the City of Augusta. Every city ought to have a
good plan and I think this is what we can do right now. I don’t think it’s the best but I think it’s
something we can work with and I’m in support of it.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: Two questions. One is I’d like to ask Mr. Burns is that did we have any
information coming from anyone as it was pertaining to auditing and reviewing our plans and to
make a recommendation to what they thought would be best. Let me finish my question please.
Who is not already making money off this?
Mr. Burns: Mr. Joiner is not making any money off the plan but he, we were told to get a
study performed by ---
Mr. Bowles: Mr. Mayor, point of clarification, please?
Mr. Burns: --- by this company ---
Mr. Mayor: Hang on. Hang on. Let me finish with this
Mr. Hatney: Okay, my question is did we have an independent individual do this other
than these other folks who are already managing portions of this or folk who have potentials.
My concern is that I know we need to do something but it’s taken this long I think what we need
to do we need to be done whereas it don’t have to be done again over and over and over.
Because each time you do this it’s going to cost more money. But without and independent audit
independent study and a recommendation as to what’s best for our employees it’s going to be
hard for me to support this today.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I do believe GMEBS would be making money off
it if we voted on this is that not correct, Mr. Burns, and the management fee?
Mr. Burns: That’s correct.
Mr. Bowles: So I do not believe he’s an independent party.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Grantham, the second half of your first portion.
Mr. Grantham: The most important I think point of this question is I’ve had is in regards
to health insurance, health insurance for our employees. That is the key. Right now we have I
think we were told something like 1900 people that are not on any type of plan so therefore what
kind of coverage would they have? Right now we don’t know what the health insurance cost is
or what the participation for the employee would be based on our health coverage. And by not
30
having that but I was told last week that if we incorporate this plan then we’re going to spend %5
million dollars a year on health coverage. Now was that guy right?
Mr. Burns: That was the Buck estimate of cost.
Mr. Grantham: That’s 100% coverage for all employees based on retirement that we
would have to spend %5 million dollars a year.
Mr. Burns: For the retiree medical.
Mr. Grantham: For the retiree medical. So my point is right now health coverage is
costing us $2.3 million dollars based on the present plan we’re in. We’re going to add $5 million
dollars just for insurance. I can’t see voting on something like this when these employees don’t
know what they’re going to get or how much it’s going to cost them. Mr. Mayor, thank you, I’m
done.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, as I previously announced the ’77
pension plan is a form of an ordinance. I think this would have to be, if you voted through it
would have to be a consensual direction to prepare the appropriate ordinance. The called
meeting, I pulled the minutes and there was no, no direction although I talked to Mr. Joiner
afterwards and we indicated that Mr. Jessup and I and Ms. Angela Nixon who is the counsel for
the pension plan, the GMEBS would conference a call and she was not there at the last meeting
because of her duties at the Legislature. She is also today engaged in the last three days of the
Legislature. My recommendation would be that, the direction be that our offices coordinate and
bring back an appropriate ordinance, number one any ordinance that is already been pre-cleared
by the IRS and number two any changes you want to make. But we need to pass I think the
ordinance as restated by our pension counsel who is Paul Hastings in and forwarded to the next
meeting along with the re-statements of the 1945 and 1949 Acts we have completed.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I think that the employees know very well what they have. If any
of them in the ’77 and ‘98 plan are here today because those plans don’t provide them with a
working retirement plan that they can live without working for the rest of their lives. And we
can mess around with this, this is kind of like the budget, we can nitpick it to death but I for one
am tired of nitpicking. This, I’m ready to do something for our employees. I don’t think that a
lot of these other plans, if I’m correct carry health care insurance over into their retirements
anyways. So dealing with that at a future date might be something we need to address but the
reason employees are here today is because of the plans currently offered to them were token
plans and not retirement plans and I for one am ready to give our employees at least something
that they can have in their old age to help them enjoy life a little bit after so many years of
service.
Mr. Mayor: And, Mr. Bowles, I’ve actually gotten you twice.
31
Mr. Bowles: No, it’s just once.
Mr. Mayor: No cause I recognized you the second time so I have gotten you twice.
Mr. Grantham: I’d like to make a substitute motion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor: The substitute motion would be not to vote
against but not to vote in favor at this time right now but to bring in an independent audit to seek
and to question the cost to what the cost of this is going to be based on what’s been presented to
us so we will know exactly what the bottom line is and that’s the question I asked last week,
what’s the bottom line net cost of this. I don’t think the substitute motion can do that we
continue the dialogue to make sure that we support and supply a retirement program for our
employees that’s going to be good for them not something that we’re going to have to change in
two years and either increase taxes or do away with something else. I think we need to do this
and that’s in the form of a motion.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay a substitute motion. We have a substitute motion and a second. Is
there any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign.
Mr. Williams, Mr. Harper, Mr. Cheek and Mr. Holland vote No.
Motion fails 5-4.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Cheek: Point of clarification, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: This package we’re about to approve, does it include health coverage in
retirement?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Burns.
Mr. Burns: Health coverage is not a part of the plan but we did give costs if we were to
add the health insurance. That’s the study that was presented by Buck Consultants yesterday.
Mr. Cheek: The package we’re voting on today has that information but it’s not included
---
Mr. Burns: It’s not a part of the plan. But we would like it to be part of the plan.
32
Mr. Cheek: I would too and we’ll have to address that another day.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor, that’s why this plan is not prepared to be voted on. You don’t
have enough information. It’s not enough here. You see bits and pieces of something that’s
been done the last forty years then you come together with a comprehensive plan that would be
inclusive, not just for retirement but health and all of that stuff that’s necessary and you can only
get that done by getting information or getting somebody to pursue that from a uh, a level
whereas they’re not going to worry about whether they’re going to get their premium or not. I
just don’t think it’s ready because we’re talking about half the stuff. We need to get the whole
thing together. We don’t have half employees we got whole employees. They need to be made
whole.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: It’s been kind of quiet these two minutes have been floating around here
and I said I’m going to adhere to it but I’m going to have my two minutes right now. I think ---
Mr. Mayor: Enjoy ‘em.
Mr. Williams: --- we need to go ahead and do something. Now I hear Commissioner
Hatney and saying it’s not complete but if this is not going to be effective we can always put the
health part of it in. But we need to go ahead and do something for these employees now.
They’re not getting any younger, they are getting older in fact we’re working them pretty hard.
But we need to do something for them and if this ain’t perfect it’s something. Now if, to not
have anything that don’t make good sense to me. I know a lot of stuff y’all do that don’t make
any sense but I’m saying we need to, we need to have something here to provide for the
employees to show them that we do care about them. Now we’ve been talking and talking and
talking. Commissioner Hatney you’re right. Forty years we’ve piece-mealing and I’d rather
piece-meal and not do anything and then keep talking about it. Maybe because we’re forty years
in it but we’re going to keep talking and keep talking we need to go ahead and approve
something for these employees and let them know, then we ought to be smart enough to do some
things that’s going to increase the revenue in this town to bring some money to it. So I call for
the question, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. There’s a motion and a second to approve. Commissioners will now
vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Hatney, Mr. Smith, Mr. Bowles and Mr. Grantham vote No.
Motion fails 5-4.
Mr. Cheek: Point of clarification, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek, I believe you’ve already had one.
33
Mr. Cheek: Point of clarification is something ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay Mr. Cheek. Go ahead.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, just a point of clarification. If it took us eleven years to get to
this point, consolidating these plans does that mean we’re going to collect information for
another eleven years or do we have a window of closure for collection of information and
another vote on this that includes the total package.
Mr. Mayor: No I would just say personal opinion, Mr. Cheek, no action has been taken
but we’re not done with this yet. I think it is the commitment of the body to do better by the
staff. I just think certain members of the commission have expressed concerns on whether its
was fully ready to be voted on so no and I will continue and I hope you would as well in joining
the commission in pushing this forward but that’s --- Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I just want to give the Clerk some instruction to put it back on
the agenda for the next committee meeting, and that’s, well let’s go back to full commission, I’m
sorry. Go back to full commission with it. Now you may not vote it up or down but you’ll see it
every week for the next eight months and twelve days, is that right, Andy?
Mr. Cheek: That’s correct.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madame Clerk, um, ---
Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor, I think Mr. Burns has something to say.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Burns.
Mr. Burns: Could you give us some direction, let us know what information you need
and how you need it and we will get the information for you.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: The only thing I’m interested in, sir, and it doesn’t take that long to do this,
is that you get an independent individual to audit not only just,
Mr. Burns: (INAUDIBLE)
Mr. Hatney: Is he independent? Is he on the payroll now?
Mr. Burns: Is that a question?
Mr. Hatney: You asked me what you needed and I’m about to tell what I need okay?
What we need, what I think we need is to have an independent individual to not only audit this
activity here to include those other two, because the problem we’ve got, we’ve got scattered stuff
all over the place and somebody’s --- I know there’s got to be some action here and they’re to do
34
that but it can be done. But it needs to be coupled with the health coverage and the costs also
need to come forward. So you vote on something you don’t know how much it’s going to cost,
that’s crazy.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Hatney: I’m talking about including the health coverage so all these things I think
need to be put together in one package. That can be done in thirty days.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. This agenda item has been disposed of for this week with no action
taken. Okay we’ve got a few more delegations here to speak today. And then it got very, very
quiet. Madame Clerk, next delegation, please.
DELEGATIONS
D. Mr. Gary Allen. RE: Transit
The Clerk: It appears Mr. Mayor that Mr. Allen is not in the chamber so we’ll proceed
with item F.
Mr. Mayor: Okay Item F.
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS
F. Mr. Leo Charette. RE: Economic Development
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Charette, if you could state your name and address for the record
and keep it to five-minutes please.
Mr. Charette: Leo Charette, 1151 Fifth Street owner of Leo’s Produce and Classic
Performance Auto Shop. Good afternoon everyone. I come to you to see if I can get the taste
thth
back of the drag strip that was passed on December 9 and then December 14 we lost the
property. I come in behalf of the automotive industry, different merchants and people in the
Richmond County area, parts houses such as Auto Zone, O’Reilly’s. I could list all of them. It
would just take me a long time. Automotive shops, Turners Automotive and Dukes Automotive,
wrecker services, golf cart manufacturers that people use for vehicles around the track, restaurant
owners and managers, general managers looking forward to the economic impact that the two
feasibility studies has already confirmed and just different automobile dealerships, and machine
shops I mean the list just goes on of the people that are waiting for the drag strip, hotel owners,
managers. I’ve got a few facts that I dug up that I feel that you folks ought to entertain. The two
closest tracks, Carolina Drag Way and Orangeburg Drag Way, Carolina Drag Way from where
we’re standing in sixteen miles. Orangeburg is eighty miles from where we’re standing.
They’re both in South Carolina. Carolina Drag Way was built in 1957 and it’s a very successful
track. In September of 2005 when the first feasibility study was presented by HRA it was uh,
that same weekend, the weekend before the commissioners meeting, they had a record crowd
there, over 12,000 showed up and they had no place to park. That’s you know something that
35
you can check on at the Chamber of Commerce to verify. The town is, the population is around
1700 from what I’m gathering a study done in 2005. People come from New Jersey, Texas,
Florida all over the country. They got a big race this weekend that got canceled because of the
wind. They’re going to reschedule this weekend. Anybody interested in going out there you’ll
see the crowd. Orangeburg Drag Way. Just been rebuilt last year. State of the art facility that I
would hope that if the city does move forward to build that would be a model for what we would
build, it’s incredible and it’s in the middle of nowhere. Orangeburg County. I spoke with the
owner this past weekend. My children had a race there, both my sons first and second place.
I’m proud of them. They do also drag race, junior cars. The facility is on 80 acres of land, it’s
state of the art, or course ours would be a little bit bigger providing we can get the land. Mr.
Mayor, Mr. Commissioners, Ms. Commissioner please consider this question. Why can the
tracks exist for all these years, these two tracks in small towns if there is no need to race then
why are they there? There is a great need for family involvement in this sport as well as in every
sport. Augusta has tennis facilities, horse riding, horsing events, baseball, football, hockey, we
got boat racing. I understand the uh, the river race is getting ready to come back. I’m hearing
that from different business owners already. We’ve got bike racing through the city here, you
know there’s some danger in all the sports, there’s danger in drag racing. How about drag
racing? Why can’t we have a facility? I go out of town almost every weekend with my children
now. Crossville, TN, Albany, Reynolds, Valdosta, Hope, FL, Commerce, Jackson, Orangeburg,
these are tracks we attend out of town. At my family there’s four of my children are racing and
myself, my better half, in-laws and grandparents and we flock to the race track for the weekend.
Just this past Saturday after the Orangeburg race about six thirty we went on into Orangeburg
and ate at a Fatz Café, eleven of us at the table.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Charette, your five-minutes is up.
Mr. Charette: I didn’t know it was five-minutes already, I’m sorry.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. Charette: I did want to ask this question, though. The commission voted to build a
thth
track on the 9 on the 14 it was uh, I guess the property wasn’t available and I wanted to know
if we still have the excitement in the commission and uh, if we did find some land would that uh,
you know would this track get built?
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, sir. Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, this is my understanding that this was passed by the commission
and if we were to come up with some land that was suitable that we could pursue it so I think the
will of the body has been to pursue it. Mr. Mayor just of note the drag strip in Orangeburg was
purchased, it was falling down it had about $3 million dollars invested. The two gentlemen that
bought it became celebrities on the cover of Entrepreneur Magazine. On a normal day if you go
look at the Orangeburg newspaper on a normal it made front page, it had over 10,000 people
who will show up for a non quote “big race day” at about ten bucks a head. If you look at the
state economic development initiatives for this year they include building another mega site like
we have on Hwy. 56. Our site is not even being promoted. It’s going to sit there another ten
36
years. If we have land available, Mr. Charette, I for one as a commissioner will pursue any and
all means for us to build this. It’s a shame that we probably won’t get enough land to build a dirt
track and a road race course which we could’ve done on that original site and create another
Augusta motor sports park. Mr. Mayor this is something that is again a growth of an economic
development arm of this city as has been said thousands of people attend these things weekly and
if you will notice the so-called highly touted second sound study that was done evaporated
because the results were identical to the first. The noise did not travel to the nearest house.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, and, Mr. Charette, I would say if memory serves me correctly we
have instructed Mr. Russell to look into other sites after the Development Authority site was not
made available. So I know that Mr. Russell still has that direction. Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to say to Mr. Charette that he was
instructed and I think the Administrator’s looking. But we asked that once this facility was built
that two dollars out of every ticket sold would come back to the City of Augusta and part of that
proposal that we made about building the drag strip. Commissioner Cheek is talking about
10,000 people at a non-big event, not a large event that people are flocking to, the racetracks as
you well stated. But if we were looking at monies for retirement, we’re looking entities that
need help and we need to do some things that are going to create monies. We got the libraries
we got the museums we got the all of the tourist type situations that’s coming to us. We need to
do some things that’s going to create some money but, Mr. Charette, I gave up on the idea I don’t
what’s going to happen. Like Commissioner Cheek I too am in support but uh, but for whatever
reason six votes have voted to do this but it’s been lying dormant for all this time. But I
appreciate your effort. I appreciate your time.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I’d just like to say that you know in
my little travel I happened to stop and talk with people about different things that are happening
in their cities and one of the things we’ve talked about is, especially around the Florida and those
southern areas is the racetracks. And they always ask me when is Augusta going to get a
racetrack. I get that question all the time. And here we have an opportunity to put a racetrack in
this city with an investment of a little more than $4 million dollars with a return of between $20
and $25 million dollars. These are funds that can come into this city that can help build that
stadium we’re talking about. These are funds that can come in and help do the things in this city
that we are trying to get built, libraries and other things that we need to build in this city. I keep
saying we got to step outside of the box and if we don’t think and step outside of the box this city
is going to stay stagnant with all of the potential that it has it’s going to stay stagnant and we will
never move. We got people coming in for the Masters, we’ve got people coming in for the boat
regatta, we got people coming in for the futurity. So there’s different strokes for different folks.
So there’s a number of people that enjoy racing and these are, it’s a diverse group of people and I
had the opportunity to travel around and see all of these people. I am not what you call a street
racing fan but I enjoy watching it. I see all that money coming in and that’s what it is, it’s green
and that’s what we need, green. We need money and we can’t get it if we don’t step outside of
the box and be innovative and make some projections and do some things for this city that’s
going to bring funds into this city. And that’s what we need to do and this racetrack, you know
37
this racetrack idea it’s a win, win situation and I don’t know why we just keep pushing it off,
pushing it off and pushing it off. You know I’m in total support of this because you know as we
move around and talk about some of the other things we need in this city, this is the kind of a
project that’s going to support this city ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Holland: --- and this is the kind of project that’s going to bring money into this city
Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay:
Mr. Holland: --- and that’s what we’re trying to get. We’re trying to get money for that
stadium.
Mr. Mayor: I agree but I would also like to share. I met with two development groups
yesterday and told them about the T-Mobile announcement, the ADP announcement and the
NSA announcement at Fort Gordon. That’s almost 3,000 jobs we’ve announced in the six-month
period. I would argue that we are moving forward.
Mr. Holland: And, Mr. Mayor, I would bet you half of those people are race fans.
Mr. Mayor: I’m taking no ---. Commissioner Harper.
Mr. Harper: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My first concern is economic impact. I come from
a city similar to Augusta if you had yesterday’s USA Today it was on the front page, Jersey City,
New Jersey written up number two next to New York, clean green and growing. And if you read
the article you’ll see why that city was a success. You have to keep creating revenue streams T-
Mobile is fine, ADP is fine but being in the hospitality industry, when people come to my hotel
they ask me what is there to do in Augusta? And I have to stop, pause and think instead of just
shooting it out. I know we got the Riverwalk, we got the mall we got Daniel Field if you want to
look at some airplanes, we got Bush Field. We got the Civic Center if something’s down there at
that time and I can’t think, well you got the Golf Hall of Fame but that never pops into my mind
first. So we as a government is going to really serious create new revenue streams to make this
whole thing work and when you create those revenue streams this city grows. Now I urge
everybody who didn’t get yesterday’s copy of USA Today try to locate it and look at the front
page. There’s a small town overlooking the Hudson River called Jersey City, New Jersey, that’s
my hometown and see some of the things that was done in that city to make them number two
next to New York. They call us now the suburb of New York and it’s nothing but an urban city.
People are growing. They’re growing all over this country. They create revenue streams. We
seem to be standing still. We get the jobs in but we don’t get the entertainment. We don’t have
the revenue. We bring the revenue in we can get some thing’s done for the city. If we don’t
we’re going to keep spinning our wheels with the pension, with the budget, over with the buses,
over and over again it’s going to be never ending cycle.
38
Mr. Mayor: Okay, so any further discussion? Mr. Charette, thank you and we’ll move
on to our next ---
Mr. Charette: I appreciate it. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Yes sir.
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS
G. Reverend John A. Lockhart. RE: Tom Beck and Recreation Department Operations.
Mr. Mayor: And if you could keep it to five-minutes, please, sir.
Rev. Lockhart: Good Afternoon. Mr. Mayor, commissioners I don’t think it would take
me five-minutes because a lot of what I got to say has been said here today either in action or in
word. The handling of the personnel matters hurt the credibility of this commission. We have
double standards for the employees of the county. If my, if the palm of my hand is burning I
treat it one way. If the back of my hand is burning I treat it another. So we need to have some
consistency instead of all the inconsistencies that flows in the commission. In the credibility had
been destroyed. The integrity of the commission is questionable because of the personnel
problems that we have in the commission. Even the governor seems reluctant to give support to
this commission. We have a problem with Medical College going to Athens and the governor is
standing behind it. He seemed to think that this commission don’t have any credibility. The
procrastination by the commissioners causes some of these problems. We talk about doing stuff
and when you look around we don’t see it. Mr. Beck had some stuff to come up, we gave him a
hand slap now we have --- books being found in the recreation Department, cell phones going in
to the prisons, being found in the Recreation Department. What is it going to take for something
to be done. Will be have to have a prisoner get guns from the Recreation Department and hijack
somebody’s loved ones, rape them or whatever. We need to do something while the cow is still
in the pasture and close the gate, not wait till the cow get out of the pasture and close the gate.
It’s time we build some credibility in this commission. And I saw a bumper sticker on the way
down here today that says I can’t wait till 2008. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Madame Clerk, next agenda item.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
10. Z-07-42 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Jerry Lewis, on behalf of Shawn Lewis, requesting
a change of zoning from Zone R-1A (One-family Residential) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood
Business) affecting property containing .50 acres and is known under the present
numbering system as 1940 Olive Road. (Tax Map 072-3 Parcel 150) DISTRICT 2
39
The Mayor: You know I must have to admit that this is the first day I don’t remember
who pulled what. Whose item was this? Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’ve got no problem with this I just need to know, I looked at
the backup but I didn’t see what kind of development was going uh, there uh, changing from
residential to a business. What type?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty.
Mr. Patty: Yeah, this is on Olive Road in an area that is mixed commercial and
residential probably close to 50/50 residential and commercial and he wants to do a beauty shop.
Mr. Williams: Okay, I’m sorry?
Mr. Patty: Upscale salon, I’m sorry.
Mr. Williams: Okay, upscale salon.
Mr. Lewis: Excuse me. It was once ---
Mr. Mayor: Please state your name and address.
Mr. Lewis: Jerry Lewis, 2929 Celeste Drive. It was a family business that we had years
ago, Lewis Drapery Center and it’s now owned by my son and we’re going to do an upscale
beauty salon.
Mr. Williams: Okay I’ve got no, I’m not opposed. I’m going to make a motion to
approve ---
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Williams: --- I didn’t know what was coming and before I approved it would have
loved to been abreast of what it was but Mr. Mayor I make a motion we approve. There’s other
beauty salons in that area ---
Mr. Lewis: Yeah.
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 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Magnanimous. I like hearing that. Rolling now.
The Clerk:
40
PUBLIC SERVICES
20. Motion to approve a contract with Fruit and Juicy Concessions for food and beverage
operation for listed parks in the Recreation and Parks Dept. (Approved by Public Services
Committee April 9, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I pulled this one as well. I was looking at the
backup of it and I remember in committee when we talked about this. I thought this was just
going to be for the Diamond Lakes but it’s going to be several other parks. Is that right Mr.
Beck? In committee I thought we was talking about they bidded on, on the concession that
Diamond Lakes Park but in the backup I think it’s shows um, several parks, I’m underlining my
things Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Williams: May Park, Fleming Park, Eisenhower Park, Diamond Lakes, Regency
Park.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Beck.
Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the commission. That’s correct and that what was
presented last week. This is the same contract that we have had since 1999 with the three parks
that were just mentioned Fleming, May Park and Eisenhower. This adds Diamond Lakes to that
list.
Mr. Williams: And I think you stated that wasn’t any other vendors to bid on it, just that
one single vendor bidded on it?
Mr. Beck: No, sir, there were two.
Mr. Williams
: There was just two. Well, Mr. Mayor I don’t oppose I just notice that
when we was in committee I was under the impression we was talking about this vendor had
bidded on Diamond Lakes. I didn’t understand that there was three other parks as well and this
If nobody else bidding what that bid process I make a motion to
will be an addition to it.
approve
---
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Williams: --- but I certainly like to know that it was advertised so that all of the
vendors had an opportunity to do that I see Ms. Sams nodding her head but I certainly need to
know that went through our procurement process the way it was supposed to and not just uh, a
single source.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. So you’ve made your motion to approve?
41
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, I’ve made my motion.
Mr. Mayor: We had a motion to approve and a second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Mayor: Did you need something on fourteen?
The Clerk: Yes, sir, we can reconsider that item.
The Mayor: Okay, Madame Clerk, I’ll recognize you regarding item number fourteen.
The Clerk: Yes, sir, I ask the commission for a motion to reconsider item fourteen ---
Mr. Williams: So moved.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
The Clerk: --- to make a clarification ---
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
14. ZONING POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS – A public hearing to
consider the adoption of policies and procedures which govern the calling and conducting
of zoning hearings and the standards governing the exercise of the zoning power.
The Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, just a quick question. The uh, these changes though do not in
any way impact the reversionary clause of the Zoning and Planning Board.
Mr. Patty: No, sir.
Mr. Cheek: Okay, that’s very important and dear to me, as you know.
Mr. Mayor: Would you like to make a motion to approve?
Mr. Cheek: Yes sir, so moved.
42
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Any further discussion? Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Mayor: Were that they were all that easy.
Mr. Cheek: Amen.
The Mayor: Next agenda item.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
37. Motion to approve a request that the Commission declare the 1994 Simon Duplex
Aerial Truck excess and authorize the Fire Department to market the truck for surplus
sale with the proceeds going towards a newer aerial truck. (Approved by Finance
Committee April 9, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had this pulled and I’m in support of what the
general item says but I’m trying to figure. Are we going to do something differently or are we
going to wait until our option time come and then we auction off or are we going to go out of the
realm of that and do something. I see Chief Willis back there. I need to find out, I mean if, well
whoever, it don’t matter, Fleet Management, Chief.
Chief Willis: The intent here is to market it for the highest sale value not to put it in
public auction because we don’t think we’re going to get the maximum amount. The truck still
has a good value to it and I don’t think we’re going to reach that and it was the desire of the Fire
Department to go out and actually market this truck in order to maximize the profit potential.
Mr. Williams: Well, now I don’t know now, I don’t understand that. If we’re going to
do that and you’re going to go out for the market rate I guess to try to get what the truck is
valued I mean how will we do that? I mean because when we take our end of the year inventory
and we, we try to market it through the bid process. So how will we determine that we’ll get the
best ---
Chief Willis: Chief, you probably have more experience with that.
Mr. Mayor: Chief.
Chief Willis: After advertising through different departments, through agencies to let
them know that this truck is on the market for open bids we, that’s the way we would do it. If we
43
put it up for auction we’re not going to get the total value of the truck. Someone will come in
and make a bid on it and it will be well under the value of the truck actually and if we can get the
best bang for our buck you know, that’s what we want to do.
Mr. Williams: Well, I’m not against it. Chief Willis, what I’m just trying to do that
policy is that we do the same thing every time for everybody. I mean if we take this one now
and do it is that going to open up another door for IT to say hey, we’ve got a piece of equipment,
because we take our surplus equipment and we sell it at the end of the year through a bid process
through an auctioneer. Now and, I’m just asking the questions. I mean I’m going to make a
motion to approve it but I don’t want to change the, see I’m tired of folks changing balls Ron
when they pass them in, it’s still a steel ball. When I pass them a rubber ball they can bounce. I
can’t bounce no steel ball. If we’re going to do it we got to do the same thing every time with
everybody and that’s all I want to do is continue to hold it to that. If we’re going to do this when
another department come up, not with a fire truck but with some other equipment we can get
more money for it, are we going to lose the uh, scenario that we’ve been using ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: --- with the ---
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Williams: --- bid.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: My motion ain’t been ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay. But you see why? That’s why I try to get, do the same thing to
everybody with the two-minute ruling with recognizing him twice.
Mr. Williams: I understand but, Mr. Mayor, we’re not getting to that now cause that’s a
whole different ball game. You can hold a commissioner to two minutes and you give a
constituent to five minutes. You can’t do that. That’s a good suggestion but that’s something
you can’t do.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Does that come with a motion?
Mr. Williams:
Yeah, that comes with a motion. I ain’t got my answers if we’re going to
that’s a motion to approve it.
stick to the same rules and do it with everybody yet but I still
want to know, are we going to do the same thing when somebody wants to sell a car that’s got
performance to it our value to it different from anything else. If you’re going to play the game
play the game the same way every time, that’s all.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
44
Mr. Williams: And with government I don’t think you can deviate from that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: If my colleague is prepared that comes with a 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 9-0.
Mr. Williams: I’d like to have that brought back to this commission what that truck sold
for, Chief and Ron.
Chief Willis: We can do that. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
38. Motion to deny the recommendations from Administration regarding enhancements to
the James Brown Statue. (Approved by Finance Committee April 9, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We just through a scenario a little while ago
about monies and what we need to do. We’ve been talking about something that would do,
would help the tourist attraction in Augusta. We talked about how much we want to promote
tourism and how many dollars that brings in. Since the death of James Brown I think we have
seen an increase of people coming down and taking pictures with the statue. The proposal was to
put maybe three or four lights, stage type lights, he’s an entertainer he’s still entertaining as he
rests in his grave right now but uh, put four type stage lights up there with some kind of sound
that we could have a, a machine that would take either paper money or coins to enhance that
light so people would be able to take pictures with it. That’s another part of tourism for the City
of Augusta. That statue has done a lot. We raised it up cause it sat flat on the ground. People
road by it and couldn’t see it for the shrubbery. We raised it up on a stage like area. People are
down there as we speak right now taking pictures with it. Even in the wind they’re down taking
pictures so I make a motion we approve to uh, have the Administrator follow those guidelines
Mr. Mayor and try to enhance that statue to draw people to Augusta.
Mr. Cheek: I’m going to second that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Commissioner Cheek.
45
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m just going to say this. In addition to what has been
mentioned here that we have a marvelous landmark over on James Brown Boulevard, the Old
Red Star where many of the black entertainers stayed when they were not allowed to stay in the
white hotels that the roof has literally collapsed which would make a marvelous museum. We’ve
probably had every big name and major entertainer for the past 100 years stay in that place and
it’s a shame to see that fall and I certainly hope that we at some point would try to save that
building for it’s historical significance and turn it into a living history museum of those who
came through Augusta and entertained us but were not allowed to stay among us.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Smith, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Grantham and Ms. Beard vote No.
Motion fails 5-4.
The Mayor: Next pulled agenda item, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
44. Motion to approve the acquisition of one (a) stump cutter for the Public Services
Department-Trees & Landscape Division from Vermeer Southeast, Inc. of Savannah,
Georgia, for $25,987.00 (Lowest bid offer on bid 07-098). (Approved by Finance Committee
April 9, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, did you remember I pulled that did you just see me lean up?
Mr. Mayor: No, I remember, at one point I remembered that you pulled everything. That
you pulled all the items that were pulled!
Mr. Williams:
I’m in support of this landscape division stump grinder that they want to
get Mr. Mayor but I pulled this item to make a statement that when we had this terrible wind
storm I had several calls about limbs down and they had nobody on call. They had nobody that
could be contacted and I’m hoping that approving this item and having them to bring back
something to it either Engineering Services or some committee about how we’re going to address
those issues. We weren’t the only ones suffering with that. A lot of counties suffered with the
wind such as what we had the other week. But we had nobody that was on call that we could
identify to talk with some people and Rick who was trying to get some situations done out there,
he got a private contractor to come in and uh, cut done some limbs. That’s going to be a liability
to this government. We ought to have somebody on call who ain’t riding around in a truck
waiting for the wind to blow but somebody that can go get a truck that we need to do that Mr.
so I make a motion to approve.
Mayor
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second?
46
Mr. Holland: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion
commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
45. Motion to approve the purchase of one (1) fifth wheel tractor truck for the Utilities
Department-Construction Division from Mays International Trucks, Inc. of Augusta,
Georgia, for $96,400.00 (Lowest bid offer on bid 07-095). (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee April 9, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess my first question is what are we pulling
with a fifth wheel type truck Max in the Water Department. Are we pulling tankers, what are
doing?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hicks.
Mr. Hicks: We’re pulling equipment like front end loaders, not front end loaders they
pretty well drive the streets but back hoes, both big and little that type of equipment that you
don’t normally drive along the road and the former city we like to drive them along the road and
they tend to bounce. If you’ve ever seen them going down the road it’s a lot better for the
vehicle and on the traveling public to put them on a lowboy like this and then pull it or put them
on a low-boy pulled by this fifth wheel tractor truck.
Mr. Williams: I’m going to make a motion to approve, Mr. Mayor, but looking in
the background and we I think we got, is that 218,111 miles Max?
Mr. Hicks: Yes.
Mr. Williams: Well, that tells me now that all the stuff I’ve been saying about selling
equipment with 89,000 miles on it that I was right on cause here we got a piece of equipment
that’s got over 218,000 miles and far as I know it’s still existing and it’s in the shape now where
we have to do something with it. But those other automobiles that I complained about get blown
out the window with 89,000 miles on them and the water department and other departments we
need to hold to the mileage just like this mileage here cause we pay $3 million a year for
preventive maintenance and we provide the maintenance service they’ll last a lot longer. So
.
evidently this has been maintained pretty good. My motion is to approve
Mr. Cheek: Second.
47
Mr. Mayor: Okay we have a motion and a second. If there’s not further discussion
commissioners will vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: I’m feeling the love on those unanimous votes.
Mr. Cheek: It’s all about love, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Absolutely.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
51. Z-07-36 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to DENY a petition by Sun C. Williams requesting a Special Exception to
establish a Family Day Care Home per Section 26-1 (f) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing .27 acres and is
known under the present numbering system as 2916 Norwood Drive.(Tax Map 053 Parcel
171) DISTRICT 3
Mr. Mayor: George? Excuse me, Mr. Patty.
Mr. Patty: This is a request to have a family day care, which is basically a babysitting
service for up to six children in the home. We had objectors, I don’t thing the applicant’s
present. We’ve got objectors with the petition. I don’t believe the applicant is present. We
recommend you deny it.
Mr. Cheek: So moved.
Mr. Bowles: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
52. Discuss the billing/budget of the County Attorney and Law Department. (Requested by
Commissioner Marion Williams.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
48
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess, I got some information here that I had
pulled and I need to know where we are with the two Attorneys I think. Last week Mr. Jessup
had John Manton, is that John’s last name, here for approximately five to six hours and I need to
know what are we paying him and what are we paying him for. He was here last commission
meeting for about four to five hours and I don’t know exactly how many minutes. The longest
commission meeting that was held, he was here and I needed to know first of all what rate are we
paying Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Jessup do you or Mr. Shepard is ---
Mr. Williams: I think Mr. Manton is still here.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. John.
Mr. Williams: What’s your rates an hour here John.
Mr. Manton: It’s my understanding they bill me at $115 and hour.
Mr. Williams: They bill you at $115 an hour. Mr. Mayor we had John here last
commission for, how many hours, John, were you here last week?
Mr. Manton: I’d have to go back and look.
Mr. Williams: Well, at $115 an hour had to go back and look well over five hours
wouldn’t you think?
Mr. Manton: Probably about three or four.
Mr. Williams: Okay at three or four hours and John brought us some information about a
situation we asked about and had to go out. I’m trying to figure out why we’re paying attorneys
to sit around here and not, not have our own attorney with that advice or get that advice for he
comes. Now the rest of that pool up here now is $65,284.93 as to what we paid so far and if we
got attorneys sitting around, standing around to answer a question and then leave or not leave
how can we continue to do business with this government at rates like that? We got Mr. Jessup
here than we got Mr. Shepard here then we got Mr. Manton here and if we’re paying, and Mr.
Jessup I think is on a salary, I think we got a set salary. How can we continue to operate when
we’re paying out these kinds of prices for attorneys to sit in these chambers? I need an answer to
that Mr. Mayor from the attorneys or anybody else, the Administrator whoever can verify that. I
just, if they need to see documents I got them right here. I asked the Clerk to have them pulled
for me so I can be---
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. As a member of the team that studied the legal
situation and recommended that we go through this period, the committee recommended that we
go through a one-year transition period and I think this is basically what that transfer period is.
49
Mr. Madden: I’m here to assist Mr. Jessup.
Mr. Williams: I understand but I don’t think, Mr. Mayor, that we need an attorney to
assist Mr. Jessup at a $115.00 an hour to stay here for four to five hours to answer one question
for us than leave. Now if there’s some business he needs to handle I’m sure that’s the thing but
in the adjustment period you talked about Mr. Bowles, we understand that. We’ve got staff
attorneys, Steve has got attorneys in his office over there when we go into Legal there’s another
set of attorneys come into that office to handle other situations that we deal with. We ought to be
about the taxpayer’s money and, and those answers have not been given. I think we need to let
Mr. Manton be called when it’s necessary not have him stay here and pay him at that rate. Now
Mr. Shepard’s got some figures over there. Maybe he’s going to tell me they’re not right or
something. If they’re not right you need to let me know, Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Williams, there was no backup so I didn’t know exactly what you
wanted me to speak to today but the bill is reviewed by me and viewed by Mr. Russell. He’s fine
with it and Mr. Manton is detailed from time to time to assist in the transition with Mr. Jessup.
He has certain knowledge that is beneficial to Mr. Jessup and we are sharing that as fast and
expeditiously as we can. Mr. Manton is billing at the associate rate, it’s four years old sir. That
rate has not been increased that is not an unreasonable rate. You may think so but I think if you
surveyed the profession you’ll find that it’s a reasonable rate.
Mr. Williams: Well this is no knock on Mr. Manton or you, Mr. Shepard, this is about
taxpayer’s money. I’ve seen Mr. Manton again bring today a bottle to Mr. Jessup. That’s the
only thing I seen him do and the last meeting he did the same thing, bring him another bottle of
water. But for a hundred and fifteen bucks an hour we can certainly do a lot better than that.
My, I guess agenda is about how can we save money for this government and not spend money.
Mr. Mayor: Would it be appropriate to refer to the next Administrative Services
Committee for a report from the Legal Department with regards to where we stand in the
transitional process and what the standard operating procedure is for attorneys covering
commission meetings?
Mr. Williams: I make that in the form of a motion that wedo that, Mr. Mayor,
but
let me tell you Mr. Jessup didn’t come with no experience now. It’s not like he’s a candidate out
of school and can walk in this building. He’s supposed to have some expertise already.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: He may not know the facts of this government in every detail but there are
some things that he already knows.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, I believe that would handle this issue more properly. Commissioner
Grantham.
50
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, in going along with your request I really feel like we’re
talking about dollars and budgets and costs and analysis we need to throw this to Finance
Committee and not Administrative Services.
Mr. Mayor: Okay we have ---
Mr. Williams: I think it needs to come to both those committees now I don’t think it
ought to go just to Finance. I think the process and everything else needs to go both of those
committees. I got no problem with it going to Finance but it ought to go to both of those
committees Administrative Services and Finance.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Is there a second?
Mr. Harper: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, be it of note to the record that when committee or commission
meetings run long you have many staff members that are here not of their own volition but
because they’re here to do the job they were hired to do. We are the ones that run late and it’s
not their fault and there are charges associated with them being here. Be they staff, local roll or
direct reports or subcontractors. They are here generally for longer hours than they would be
because our committees and our commission meetings run longer and we don’t get to the point
on a lot of things.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Bowles votes No.
Motion carries 8-1.
Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
53. Appoint Gaynell Bonner as coordinator of the community and faith based efforts to
organize repeat offender program in coordination with church and other community based
ministries and programs. (Requested by Mayor Pro Tem Betty Beard)
Mr. Bowles: Is this fifty-three, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes.
Mr. Bowles: I just had a ---
51
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: --- question. I was wondering if this was a budgeted position or is it a new
creative position? Does anybody know what this position is, number fifty-three?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Bowles, the way I was trying to fit it in was through unused salaries
which were not utilized from the general counsel’s position for the months from the beginning of
the year until Mr. Jessup arrived. The monies that were unused in the associate counsel’s
position which he is not yet here, and also I left a secretarial position in my office vacant, which
I think will be more than enough to cover that expense. So it is somewhat of a new position, it is
an experiment and I think that there will be no net outflow of salary dollars. And I asked Ms.
Williams to make sure of that and she will and give a supplemental report to the commission.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you, but before I could support this I’d have to see those other
positions eliminated before I support a new position.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: They’re not eliminated they’re just unfilled. That was the idea. The ---
Mr. Bowles: It’s growing our government.
Mr. Shepard: Well, Mr. Bowles, if I could ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: --- speak. The commission in the spirit before challenged one another to
come up alternatives to incarceration back at the meeting at the Government House in January
and this kind of thing that, I think we have to at least try for a year before we build more jails and
build more, hire more police officers and buy more police cars. I think it’s approximately
$100,000 gamble if you consider the benefits associated with this position I think it’s well worth
the risk of doing it.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney, did you ---
Mr. Hatney: Two things. One, I’m going to support this because of the individual that
needs the position. The question is, is there any way to look into the possibility of seeing how
much time this individual needs to retire and looking at that possibility because I know the city
has done that for many folks and for much longer periods. So that’s one thing, The other thing
that concerns me because like I said I’m going to agree to it. I’ve got a problem with the process
because I heard what Mr. Shepard just said that he has an unfilled position in his office. Your
secretary ain’t got nothing to do with the city budget. We don’t pay your secretary. We pay you,
you pay your secretary but we shouldn’t be.
52
Mr. Shepard: Now ---
Mr. Hatney: Let me finish now. Plus the idea of going into another, you see all this is
coming out of the Law Department and my concern is how did you assume responsibility of
doing this when this activity here, what department would this be under?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: If I could respond. I think it should be under the Law Department
probably, Dr. Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: I ain’t going be under the Law Department non-profit. Who we talking
about faith based under the Law Department?
Mr. Shepard: Well, the salary can be, the salary can be, if she’s going to work with these
non-profit and faith based and other charitable organizations, I believe you asked me how it
came about.
Mr. Hatney: I know how it came about. My point is --- (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Mr. Shepard: --- and she is, to answer the first question retirement option is not an option
and we looked at that. But uh, she uh, she definitely wanted to serve and assisted our office but
this new opportunity has developed since the transfer of her uh, of her, it was worked out
between Judge Jennings and my office and now we’ve found a real relevant use for the lady and
I think that she will do you a fine job.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’ve been told all my life two wrongs don’t make
no right and I don’t think that’s changed here today. I’d like to know how this position was
recreated without uh, first of all the knowledge of the commissioners, maybe some of y’all knew.
The next thing is I understand this, Ms. Bonner’s dilemma in what she’s in but I can’t support
this for a number of reasons. One is that if the position was created how can you create a
position then place somebody in that position without advertising, giving somebody else the
benefit of applying for the position. Now I don’t know about ya’ll but I’m not going to sit here
and act like I don’t see what this is and it ain’t got no color to it, it’s just wrong. But how can we
create a position and then put somebody in that position and then don’t advertise or give nobody
else an opportunity and then if it’s faith based position and faith based money’s not going to
handle it, government money’s going to handle it than it ain’t faith based. So if it’s a faith-based
money then it ought not to come under the attorney’s authority. So it’s coming, I can’t support it
Mr. Mayor, there’s too many unanswered questions and I think if the question was answered you
going to find that there’s going to be an illegal move being made and I can’t be a part of it.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
53
Mr. Shepard: The faith-based organizations finance themselves, they don’t finance the
position here, Mr. Williams, and what I did was I looked at the interdepartmental transfer rules
and I thought that was capable, it was possible to do that under what we call the
interdepartmental transfer rules so therefore that’s how it ---
Mr. Williams: I can’t hear you, Mr. Shepard. You’re sitting right there in front of me but
I can’t hear you. Maybe the rest of the folks got better ears than I got. Speak into the mike.
Mr. Shepard: Let me speak up, sir, and I said that it was done under the
interdepartmental transfer rules with the consent of Judge Jennings and myself and now that it’s
got a use that was not foreseen by myself, I had foreseen the need for a coordinator during the
transition between the Law Department and the County Attorney’s office and now I have come
back to the commission because I think the much more relevant need, much more positive need,
much more creative use of this person would constitute her being the liaison in a project access
type fashion with these faith-based organizations. Mr. Jessup and I encountered such an
individual on the steps of my office and we put a letter in your books to that effect so, Mr.
Williams, I’ll just refer you to the Promotions and Transfer Section and I think we’ve followed
that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Cheek, did you want to speak to it or does anybody
want to make a motion?
Mr. Cheek: Just the same question that has been asked is and I understand all that’s
happened and what we’re trying to do here. But it’s just, if we create a position how we don’t go
through the normal internal postings and other things to fill that position.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. I heard Mr. Shepard say that retirement was not an
option. Somewhere in the government sometime ago I believe someone had received time
served and the time purchased in order for them to retire and this has happened before. Now you
say it’s not an option. Can you explain to me why this would not be an option for Ms. Bonner?
You know I want to see her taken care of but why would this not be an option for her when this
has happened before and she doesn’t have that much time left?
Mr. Shepard: Well ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Commissioner, based on her representations to me
about her own pension I believe she withdrew part of the pension at some point. In other words
she did not have just a few years or months even though she’s been here thirty years. She didn’t
have just a short time left. That why I say it would be an impractical matter in the case you’re
referring to that seemed to be the most practical thing. There was eighteen months left and we
did credit that service. That’s how distinguished, it was much longer than and eighteen month
period and I’ll be happy to share that with you if you like.
54
Mr. Holland: Yeah I would like for you to do that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ve adequately discussed this issue. Can I get a motion either way?
Mr. Grantham: I’ll do that for you.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a motion to approve and a second?
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, if there’s no further ---
Mr. Williams: Substitute motion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Motion to deny ---
The Clerk: Who seconded? I didn’t get it. Mr. Harper or who?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Smith.
Mr. Williams: My substitute motion is to deny and hopefully the attorney can bring back
something that Ms. Bonner can retire with. I don’t think we can support uh, the way this has
been put together. This is not put together, it’s right in our face and we can’t sit here in all good
conscience and act like we don’t see what’s going on and motion is to deny.
Mr. Holland: Second the motion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion on the floor to deny and a second. If
there’s no further discussion commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign of voting.
Mr. Smith, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Grantham, Mr. Cheek and Ms. Beard vote Yes.
Mr. Hatney abstains.
Motion fails 3-5-1.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, our primary motion on the floor is to approve. If there’s no further
discussion commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Hatney, Mr. Smith, Mr. Grantham and Ms. Beard vote Yes.
Mr. Williams, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Harper, Mr. Cheek and Mr. Holland vote No.
Motion fails 4-5.
Mr. Mayor: No action taken. Next agenda item, please, ma’am.
55
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
54. Discuss the status of the DBE Office. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I had this put on the agenda because of the ruling from the
courts about our DBE program and uh, the DBE personnel have been still ongoing. I’m needing
to know where is our DBE Department? What, what supervision is she getting in fact, where is
she today I guess is a good word. As an elected official I got a memo in my package that she
would be out of town today, but if our program has been “zapped” I guess is a good word,
Sylvia, where, where are we now what is she supposed to be doing, who’s giving her direction,
who’s not giving her direction I guess.
Mr. Mayor: As the head of the department is not here to speak to the issue would it not
be appropriate to refer it back to committee?
Mr. Williams: Well, wait a minute. If Fred dies, I mean who’s going to speak for him
then, I mean head of the department is this body. He works for the Mayor and commission so
we are that department. We are the heads. I don’t think the Administrator could say anything
more than what we said. We need to get some direction I think Mr. Mayor as to what we want to
do. If our program is being put on hold for a reasonable amount of time until we get some legal
terms explained to us, I don’t see how we can continue and in my memo that I got, I don’t know
about the rest of you but I got a memo saying she was going to be in Atlanta today addressing
DBE type situations. If that’s the case how can that happen? I mean am I, something don’t add
up when the program is being halted and we’re continuing to work on it, continuing to do
something. So at this commission we need to make some direction as to give the Administrator
and I’m going to make a motion Mr. Mayor that we give the Administrator the authority to check
into that and to place that person under the Administrator until we can get our department back
together where we need to be at.
Mr. Holland: I second that motion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Hatney, did you?
Mr. Hatney: Yeah, I got a concern similar to Mr. Williams. I don’t understand how with
our DBE being in limbo as per the judge this person even thought they were authorized to go out
of town to discuss the same. I’ve got some real misgivings with that and I do know that
somebody needs to be assigned as that persons immediate supervisor, but I’m not sure it’s proper
for that person to be the Administrator when she really doesn’t work for the Administrator she
works for the Mayor and the commission so maybe Administrative Services or somebody needs
to do that. There needs to be a means by which this person needs to get permission to go out of
town. I think no employee no matter if you are a division chair. This chair’s going to be gone.
Something’s wrong with that picture.
56
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: I concur with Mr. Hatney. This person was hired and a charter was set
up with this individual as well as the EEOC and the Administrator would be under the
supervision of the commission. As this being the case I don’t see how we can make any
recommendations or changes to go ahead and put him under the Administrator at this time unless
this is coming back before and either they change within the charter or a change that would then
be a hole rule change which we can do. I think it’s something we would need to address on that
order and if we’re going to do that then I think we should put all department heads --- situation
under the Administrator and not just one as far as that goes.
Mr. Mayor: Do you want to make a substitute motion?
Mr. Grantham: I make a substitute motion that we include the DBE and EEOC to be
under the supervision of the Administrator.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: My question is would it be inappropriate if the Chairman of the
Administrative Committee wouldn’t object to it to have those persons report to that individual
because that person is a commissioner I still have problems with a Mayor, commission or
managed entity being placed under anybody that’s not a commissioner. I think that being under
Administrative Services chair or the Administrative Commission works will fill that void in
particular while, until we get this situation in hand.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek, you had your hand up first?
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The reason we fill these positions is to have direct
reporting individuals to this commission. The job that can be and should be all along and I
believe that it’s on going is that the DBE officer is actually looking for ordinances in other cities
that have been tried and approved to bring back to us where we don’t find ourselves in the
quandary of being in the courts. The, and I remind this body of the delineation of responsibilities
ordinance passed by this commission that no one commissioner shall direct the work activities of
any employee, that it takes a full act of the commission to direct the work activities of an
employee and we have that ongoing and it’s a growing problem. This is something that will run
its course Mr. Mayor uh, when we get through the courts, this is an independent agency to make
sure that purchasing and every other group that deals with individual businesses is in fact not
steering, purchasing or contracts or anything else to any one side of the house, that it is done fair
and balanced and in accordance with best practices being legal ordinances or laws that are
utilized in other cities. That’s what I see as the mission and putting that under anyone else, if we
can’t trust them to report directly to us then we don’t need that individual and that’s true for
every direct report we have. And we seem to have no problem with any of our other direct
reports and then being autonomous. And I think this office is one to be trusted to do the same
thing that we expect of every other autonomous and direct reporting entity we have in this
government.
57
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Commissioner Cheek is right; the full
commission has to, has to have that authority. But that person can report just, can’t report to all
of us. And there is nobody directly that they report to and they’re kind of doing what they, so
we’re pleased. I’m not saying they’re doing anything wrong but we wouldn’t be in this situation
now that we’re in with the courts had some things been done properly or been, or was
supervised. You can’t take people and then just turn them loose with a situation such as this one.
Now you’re talking about putting the EEO person along with that person under the
Administrator. I think that those are two different entities that reports directly to the Mayor and
commission as well, but if you don’t have a person that they’re going to report to than they got to
report to all ten, they leave information for us and even today the Administrator is not here. And
now this is a very important meeting we have a lot of issues going on today. Unless the
Administrator is sick and deathly sick at that he should’ve be here at this meeting. I was
surprised that he was not going to be here saying that he’s going to be out for two days but unless
there was an emergency he needed to be here today. We’re handling government business and
you got to handle the business whether you like it or not. And we got somebody who’s not
handling the business than somebody’s got to be able to at least guide that person and show that
person in the direction they need to be. I say again we wouldn’t be in this position with the
courts had we been able to follow some procedures and Commissioner Cheek is talking about
getting some guidelines, somebody already done been at the wheel. There ain’t no sense in
reinventing it. But we didn’t take that. We started our own situation and he got himself in
trouble and I don’t like getting a letter in my box saying that this department ain’t going to out of
town. When I’m going to be out of town Sylvia Cooper tells the world about it before I go and
I’m criticized for that. But I don’t think we ought to be paying for it. I don’t make the money
that the DBE person makes and if they’re going to be out of town they ought to come through
this Administrative Services ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: --- Finance Services or Public Services somewhere and so we can give
that authority and not let them just do what the heck they want to do.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute ---
Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: --- what concerns me too more than anything else, and let me go back and
say this to is uh, if it’s necessary for the DBE person to report to me and if we can get that in a
motion and get that approved I’ll be more than happy to be her supervisor. But what concerns
me more than anything at this point is that the judge has made a ruling and since the judge has
made a ruling I think this particular individual should not at this particular time be uh, reporting
to any of these other projects trying to uh, bring businesses at this particular time. Now she’s
upped up and gone to Atlanta, put a letter in our box saying she’ll be out of town. So she can’t
58
get around to all six commissioners and get this permission. So at this particular time you know,
she’s what we might call in our program, what we might call dysfunctional. And until we can
get it back to being functional I think she needs to be placed somewhere where someone will
know exactly what she’s doing, and she can report to individuals and let them know exactly what
her schedule is before she leaves town because if not this government is going to be up under
another law suit if we do not watch this individual carefully.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, before I, let me just say and I will recognize you all as well, it would
make sense to me if you’re going to put it under the Mayor and commission, to put in under the
Mayor rather then head of any given committee because those heads of the committee will only
be there potentially for a couple of years just for some consistency and some continuity. I’d just
throw that out there on the floor. Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor um, I don’t believe that our DBE person is named in the lawsuit.
I think the methodology used to select contractors was the crux of the lawsuit. That fell under
the purview of the Purchasing Department. The program itself is well established throughout the
country and successful in the state, federal and other local municipalities. A workable solution
for our DBE needs can be found if we don’t if we don’t micromanage this particular department.
I remind the body that the Attorney, the Clerk, the EEO officer and I’m sure the Administrator
are all autonomous and report directly to the commission and that doesn’t seem to be the
problem. I can not imaging for the life of me us wanting to take any one of these qualified
professionals that we hired and pay a very handsome salary for their expertise and assuming that
we as any one individual commissioner unless we have a degree or years of experience in that
particular field has the capacity to supervise that individual effectively. Again I’ll go back to the
delineation of responsibility. We’re getting to a point now where we have individual
commissioners directing people in IT and other groups to go in and do direct work activities
apart from what they’re assigned to do. The commission has to have a vote of six members to
conduct business. No one individual on this body has the right nor authority to direct the work
activities of any subordinate personnel and if we are to direct the activities of our direct reports it
still takes an act of this body not any one individual apart from gathering information.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Ms. Beard, you had your hand up?
Ms. Beard: Yes, I did. I just want everyone here to know that I am very unhappy at the
way you have talked about this young lady. She’s a fine person, she tries to do a good job, she
tried to inform each of us in reference to what she was doing. She made calls. She could not
reach some and she has made decisions in reference to what will be proposed. She feels she has
spoken with those persons necessary to come up with what will be important in this situation. I
think we’re spending entirely too much time focusing on things that, focusing and making things
more difficult than they should be. Not with this justice but other things we have gone through
today. And you know think whatever you want to think of me but I’m saying enough is enough.
We need to work for what is in the best interest of this city and stop the pettiness. And I hope
I’m making it loud and clear. I think a lot of us are tired.
Mr. Mayor: Absolutely. Commissioner Williams I’ve recognized you twice. Gentlemen
I think we need to, are we ready to move forward? We have a substitute motion and ---
59
The Clerk: A substitute motion. I didn’t get that. I’m sorry.
The Mayor: Don, who seconded your motion? Jimmy?
Mr. Cheek: Can we have the motions reread, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: What’s that?
Mr. Cheek: Can we have the motions reread?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, if you would please, Madame Clerk, the substitute motion?
The Clerk: The substitute motion was to place the DBE and the EEO officer under the
direction of the Administrator. The original motion was to place the DBE office under the
direction of the Administrator, I think he said, until the court settles this.
Mr. Williams: Until we get some, some resolvement from ---
The Clerk: On the DBE program.
Mr. Williams: --- the courts as to where we are.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, there’s a substitute motion on the floor and a second. If there’s no
further discussion commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign of voting.
Mr. Williams, Mr. Hatney, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Harper, Mr. Cheek, Ms. Beard and Mr. Holland
vote No.
Motion fails 2-7.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a primary motion on the floor and a second. If there’s no
further discussion commissioners will now vote by, and the primary motion is?
The Clerk: The motion was to place the DBE office under the Administrator until the
situation is settled by the court.
Mr. Smith, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Grantham, Mr. Cheek and Ms. Beard vote No.
Motion fails 4-5.
Mr. Mayor: No action taken. Next agenda item, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
55. Discuss lease agreement with the Richmond County Department of Family and
Children Services (DFACS). (Requested by Commissioner Joe Bowles)
60
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles, this is yours.
Mr. Bowles: Yes, Mr. Mayor, due to pending and possibly potential litigation I’d like to
delete this item from the agenda and discuss it at our next legal meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Do we need a motion to that effect?
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Bowles: I’ll put that in the form of a motion.
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any ---
Mr. Cheek: I’ll second that.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: I’m just going to add this. Having personal knowledge of the lease
arrangements, management arrangements we have in this city we need a person to manage all of
the leases and it needs to be in-house in the Purchasing, not the Purchasing but in the Finance
Department. Yeah, well beyond our control but also managed in a yearly fashion. We’ve had
leases lapse for years that haven’t been managed that includes the insurance portions, the
maintenance portions and other aspects of lease agreements and if this is still ongoing that this
has been ongoing for years.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Joe. Next agenda item?
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
57. Receive status report from the AHEDD regarding a request from Mr. Willie Johnson
regarding the final payment on the property at 2745 Magnolia Avenue. (Approved by
Administrative Services Committee April 9, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. DeCamp.
Mr. DeCamp: Mayor, commissioners following last week’s Administrative Services
Committee meeting we did uh, draft and send a letter Mr. Johnson’s attorney and copied him and
several other folks in the city administration indicating our, our readiness to pay the, make the
61
final payment on this particular rehabilitation project. As I mentioned before, the cost of this
particular project was split in part between the department and uh, the uh owner of the property
Sandhills Urban Development, Inc. Sandhills has made their portion of the payment since the
committee meeting and the department subject to, I think it has received a copy of Mr. Johnson’s
final reimbursement request. We’re processing our portion of the payment this week so the
check should be cut to him from the department this Friday.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: I’d like to hear from Mr. Johnson, Mr. Mayor.
th
Mr. Johnson: I came to y’all on the 12 of last month.
Mr. Mayor: If you could please state your name and address for the record, please, sir.
Mr. Johnson: Willie Johnson, 3738 Woodcock Drive. You know I came, you know last
th
month around the 12 about the two CHDO’s that weren’t paying. Right now we’re down to
$15,000, less than $15,000. They’re holding that. One is holding for a backyard, I don’t
understand you know and Tim Behan come up with a check for a little over $4,000 this week. I
called Paul to try and get an answer from him. He passed it on to Cassandra, she don’t give an
answer back you know, so I don’t what’s going on. We get answers while we’re in here but once
we leave this door I don’t get anything.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: And we started with this as a committee and we found out that some
changes had been made not on Mr. Johnson’s side but on either the developer or uh, AHEDD
side. And I thought this was resolved. When we left the last time Paul indicated that everything
was all well and good, he was going back. I thought it was over with. I thought Mr. Johnson
would come in here today and say I’m satisfied I’m through with this. I need to know why can’t
we do what we got to do and get this over with and quit playing with it. What’s the problem
Paul? Somebody needs to answer.
Mr. DeCamp: Commissioner, there’s no problem from our perspective. We had to - Mr.
Johnson was represented prior to the Administrative Services Committee meeting by an attorney.
We felt it was out responsibility and given, to follow a certain process to respond in writing and
indicate our willingness to make this payment to the attorney. And frankly we had expected a,
we expected a written response from the attorney by now which we do not have. We’ve gone
ahead we’ve taken steps Mr. Wilson has made good on his portion of the payment. We are in the
process of processing our portion of the payment with the check being cut and being made
available to Mr. Johnson by this Friday at noon.
Mr. Williams: Now, Mr. Mayor, I think the problem that I see with this is we got a third
party here. I think the city needs to pay whatever Mr. Johnson’s needs to be paid and let the, the
62
CHDO or whoever, Mr. Wilson, who’s out there? Whoever it is needs to reimburse y’all. We
need to go ahead and get this taken care of. Now this is a businessman who’s done good work in
gook faith and good effort. When he came in here, this has been too long. Ms. Beard made a
statement a while ago that we’ll go around this room. Why not take him around this room. We
should’ve gone, went ahead and prepared a check, a letter saying this is final payment, this is all
that’s due. Whether his lawyer gets it or not, send it to his lawyer and if the lawyer burn it up we
done, we done what we supposed to do. But I’m ashamed that we have not been able to resolve
an issue that’s done come back to us to say that this man was right. And he ought not to suffer
And, Mr. Mayor, if I can make a motion we get Mr. DeCamp
because, because he was right.
to make a check out and a letter, send it to Mr. Johnson’s lawyer and whoeverelse.
It’s a
shame he had to get a lawyer to get to this point. Send a letter to the lawyer with the final check,
final payment, sign off on it and send it certified mail who we won’t have to come back here and
have this brought back to committee that we know it’s been taken care of. It’s been too long,
Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion. Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Yeah, I’d like to ask Mr. Decamp, what that would that do for your audit,
files if the auditors were to come in and see that you went around paying a CHDO and made a
check directly to a subcontractor?
Mr. DeCamp: Well, this is a contract first of all, not to belabor the point but this is a
contract between the CHDO and the contractor. We as a department are the, provide the
inspection services provide the, in any case provide arbitration if need be on this. Our financial
responsibility for this project ended early on in this project. We made the initial payments out of
our dollars for a portion of the project and then the CHDO picked up the, was to pick up the
remainder and those payments were coming from a loan being taken out with the bank. We are,
in fact, we’ll have to document our files because we’re actually as a result of this paying $2,150
more than we anticipated paying on this project. We’re covering, so we’ll have to properly
document our files and the best way to do that is for it to do this split payment. The cleanest way
to do that and to be able to show on the back end to HUD and to the auditors that you know, that
these were the circumstances that led up to this but, but that the, the uh CHDO under their
contract was clearly responsible and made payment as required under the contractors. Am I
making myself pretty clear? This is, I mean this is you know ---
Mr. Bowles: You’re making yourself perfectly clear as long as we never do business
with that CHDO again.
Mr. Johnson: Well, it ain’t just ---
Mr. Mayor: Hang on. Commissioner Bowles, wait to be recognized, please, sir. Um,
Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: I just, had we not finished up the conversation if not I’d like --- Ms. Bonner,
write this down I’m confused. This is the first time in eight years I’ve said that.
63
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we currently have a motion without a second on the floor.
Mr. Cheek: And I may second the motion but so what we’re saying is AHEDD paid its
portion to the contractor.
Mr. DeCamp: Right.
Mr. Cheek: The CHDO was required to pay the remaining portion, which is at contest
now?
Mr. Johnson: No, what originally happened ---
Mr. DeCamp: Uh, ---
Mr. Mayor: Sir, if you could wait to be recognized.
Mr. Cheek: I mean unless we got a Part 2, we got a Part A and B, a payment one,
payment two. We’re responsible for “x” dollars. The CHDO is responsible for “x” dollars.
Mr. DeCamp: Correct.
Mr. Cheek: Have we paid all of our portion?
Mr. DeCamp: We had paid all of, we paid all of the, yeah, all of our portion of the
contract.
Mr. Cheek: Now the CHDO has not paid all of their portion.
Mr. DeCamp: They have now.
Mr. Cheek: They have now so then there’s a Part C of additional costs or a change order
or something that’s causing this gentleman to be before us and ask for additional funds. Is that
correct?
Mr. Johnson: The CHDO hasn’t paid ---
Mr. Mayor: Sir, please, Mr. Johnson you need to wait to be recognized by the Chair.
Mr. Cheek: That’s the discrepancy is this gentleman here is telling us the CHDO hasn’t
paid, we’re saying that the CHDO’s paid so the CHDO has received the money from you guys
and then has it passed on to the contractor?
Mr. DeCamp: The funds they got from the CHDO had for this particular rehabilitation
project, they, they went to a bank and got a loan for those funds. Our portion of it was from
Home Funds, was from HUD provided money, okay?
64
Mr. Cheek: Okay, but where, and again and I think this ---
Mr. DeCamp: Yeah, let me try and clear it up if that’s okay. Um, the final pay request
was for total $6,460.00, Okay? The, under the contract the CHDO would’ve been liable for the
entire amount. In the course of arbitration we, we the department came to the conclusion that if,
you know ultimately if we provided a portion of that the amount that would’ve been liquidated
damages on the project that going towards that final payment that, that would resolve the matter.
So of the total final payment of $6,460.00 it’s split, $4,130.00 is coming from the CHDO and the
remaining $2,150.00 is coming from the department home funds.
Mr. Cheek: So we’re prepared to cover our portion.
Mr. DeCamp: Right.
Mr. Cheek: But is the CHDO prepared to cover their portion or is ---
Mr. DeCamp: They in fact have made that payment.
Mr. Cheek: So we can resolve this. And that’s the motion? That’s the motion to go
ahead and do that, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Could you read back the motion, Madame Clerk?
The Clerk: Mr. Williams’ motion was to approve allowing AHEDD to write the total
check and that that check be sent to the attorney of Mr. Johnson for final payment.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to make a substitute motion or a motion that we
allow staff to proceed in an expeditious manner and encourage the CHDO to proceed in an
expeditiousmanner to resolve this.
This gentleman has been here too many times as it is um --
-
Mr. Mayor: And just for point of clarification. I never do that. What is a reasonable
time frame for us to give you to have this resolved so that he’s not sitting waiting around and he
kind of knows when it’s going to be done?
Mr. DeCamp: Right, I mean as I indicated earlier out of my remarks the department is
prepared to process our portion of the payment this week with a check being ready for pick up or
mail ---
Mr. Mayor: Would you ---
Mr. DeCamp: --- by noon on Friday.
Mr. Mayor: --- incorporate into your motion by the end of the week?
65
Mr. Cheek: In that same deadline for the CHDO or we will review the CHDO’s um,
future business with this city.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second to that motion?
Mr. Bowles: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I just want to make sure that we understand each other now.
His lawyer and all this other stuff, that we got to mail stuff to, just need to be clear by the end of
the week with a check and a letter stating final payment, the amount ought to be agreed upon
where they’ll come back and say no we didn’t say that. This ought to be cleaned up and
finalized by the end of the week.
Mr. Cheek: And the CHDO too. I don’t want ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Holland abstains.
Mr. Grantham out.
Motion carries 7-1.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. Johnson: We started this thing up with two CHDO’s that I have problems with.
Some way of the other we put the other one to the side you know, and I don’t understand why.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Cheek: Do they owe you money?
Mr. Johnson: Yeah.
Mr. Williams: Well, Paul ain’t addressed that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, but we have disposed of the agenda item through a motion and a
second and a unanimous, well not a unanimous decision. Is Mr. Grantham gone?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, we resolved earlier through ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Excuse me. Point of parliamentary procedure we disposed of that portion of
this agenda item but the item itself has not been completely disposed of. We set this as
66
precedence a few meetings ago and I for one as a member of this body am interested in knowing
if there is a CHDO out there that hasn’t paid or fulfilled their financial and contractual
obligations for this individual, why not and how are they off the hook and if there is a reason
why they haven’t paid I’d like to hear that and if they’re not paying and not following through
with their contractual obligations I think it’s incumbent upon this city to perhaps delete them
from the CHDO list if they’re not taking care of their contractual obligations.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. DeCamp, is that the case in this situation?
Mr. DeCamp: What situation?
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second CHDO involved that hadn’t cut a check and paid their
bills and fulfilled their obligations?
Mr. DeCamp: Well, there is a issue with East Augusta Community Development
Corporation, between them and B & T Electric that is still outstanding related to some drainage
problems on a property on which a house was recently constructed. But it’s also a, I should say
there’s a second contractor who has an adjoining lot with drainage problems with regard to that,
that particular property as well.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Cheek, is that ---
Mr. DeCamp: The other thing I would add with regard to this particular issue is that um,
we are, with regard to the drainage problems the uh, we are waiting on an engineering report that
will provide information needed to address, to properly address the drainage problems on these
two properties. And both contractors have indicated a willingness to wait on that engineering
report.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I remember this is one where ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: --- the front yard was basically a bowl and it required some sand to be put in
to divert the water back to the street of to the rear of the property or to move it off of the
property.
Mr. DeCamp: Right.
Mr. Cheek: A truckload of sand ---
Mr. DeCamp: We observed after heavy rain, we personally observed problems in both
front yard and back rear yard of both of these adjoining properties on Magnolia Avenue and East
Augusta.
Mr. Cheek: I remember that picture and that was a problem.
67
Mr. DeCamp: Yeah.
Mr. Cheek: And the yard was graded lower than the road surface of the drainage way.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Just that, if that’s this man’s problem and the CHDO or the department
head had not addressed it and got it straight with him, why are we talking about a back yard?
We’re not talking about bricks and mortar we’re talking about something a tractor can do in ten
minutes. Why haven’t we resolved that? If it’s his problem and I think he’s saying it’s not his
problem and somebody else is saying it is but if that’s the case we need to get that resolved as
quick as possible. How can we get this resolved, Paul?
Mr. DeCamp: Well, that’s what we um, in discussions with East Augusta we determined
what was the best course of action and it was agreed to by the contractors was to have an
engineer develop a grading plan for these two lots to ensure that the properties were properly
drained that storm water would drain away from these two houses in a proper manner that they
would, the CHDO in showing, marketing the properties had gotten feed back from potential
buyers that they would not, were ready to purchase but wanted this particular issue addressed
before they committed to purchasing either one of the properties.
Mr. Williams: Now you’re talking about ---
Mr. DeCamp: We’re trying you know, we’re waiting on the engineering report.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ve taken a step forward we’ve voted it’s been approved to help
this gentleman and I think staff knows to expedite the process to deal with the other CHDO’s as
well.
Mr. Holland: Mr. Mayor, can I ask a question?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: Has Mr. Johnson received a check?
Mr. Mayor: No, but the motion that was passed was for him to receive a check by the
end of the week.
Mr. Holland: So he hasn’t received any money at all?
Mr. Johnson: Yes, I have.
Mr. DeCamp: Yes ---
68
Mr. Mayor: Yes.
Mr. DeCamp: --- he has as I indicated earlier. This is jumping back to the Magnolia
Avenue property, the property on Sandhills related to that project. He has received payment this
week on the, in the amount of $4,130.00 from Sandhills Urban Development for their portion of
the final payment on that particular contract.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Holland: Now his balance is?
Mr. DeCamp: The outstanding balance is $2,150.00 on that project.
Mr. Holland: And he will receive that?
Mr. DeCamp: He will receive that by the end of this week.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, the agenda item has been thoroughly discussed and disposed of. If we
can move on to the next agenda item, Madame Clerk.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
58. Receive a report of critical projects and a recommendation from the Administrator
regarding recaptured SPLOST funds that is available to help the Augusta Mini Theatre to
complete their construction project. (Approved by Finance Committee April 9, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: I know this was approved by the Finance Committee but I, Mr. Leverett, do
you have a report on this or? Okay. Donna I’m trying to ---
Ms. Williams: We’re good.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Ms. Williams.
Ms. Williams: The short answer to this question is there is approximately $20 million
dollars left over and most of that is in Phase III. It stems, I’m sorry this is Tim Shore from the
Finance Department. He tracks our SPLOST and he’s going to correct me every time I mess up
so get ready. That is mostly from two sources. It is revenue that came in during the period of
time that tax was collected that was over and above what was budgeted and then interest that was
earned on that amount. Now that being said, those projects were planned and budgeted for a
good long time ago. Finance and Engineering are in the process of evaluating what the current
costs of those projects is more than likely going to be and as soon as that is completed we will
bring back that information to you and there’s a pretty good chance that that $20 million dollars
or a good part of it will be laid claim to. So ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
69
Ms. Williams: --- that’s where we are.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and, so we’re not fully clear on the picture of where we’re going to be.
What would be the time frame on that? When would we know?
Ms. Williams: Where’s Abie?
Mr. Mayor: And once again I echo the sediments of where we want to know where we
are financially before we approve going forward. Mr. Ladson.
Mr. Ladson: What I actually have here, is on some projects that we actually um, that was
budgeted a few years ago and what those projects are actually coming in at today and, well for
2006/2007 and I’ll go ahead and pass that around. Anyway while we’re waiting, we actually
bidding a project on Thursday and we’re planning on bidding another project in a couple of
weeks and I would like to analyze those also and to include with this spreadsheet here. And
based on the numbers that we’ve been getting I mean this, it’s pretty high and actually the
percent difference on one of them was 106.25 percent. So um, like I said I would like to get
these, the other two projects in which would be in approximately two to three weeks. I would
like then once we get the bids on those and compare them also.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I remember late part of last year when the
Augusta Museum came in needing some money for the air conditioning system some $350,000
dollars and it ended up a million and some dollars and we found the money to go ahead and get
that up and going. I think that was a good thing. The mini theatre that costs, like you talking
about Abie is going up daily as they sit here. They done been here all day long, the came to our
last meeting they done worked diligently they done brought more money to the table than any
other entity that’s been come into partnership with this government and we’re still looking for
money. Now the Administrator just found $5 million dollars a little while ago Donna, where he
found that I don’t know. But the cost is going up on construction on everything that you’re
dealing with, it’s double with them as well and we need to have and I think we’re talking about a
phase now, I don’t think we’re talking about doing it, and I see Mr. Butler there, I don’t we
talking about doing the entire uh, project, we’re talking about doing a phase of it now. And if we
don’t get started with that we’re going to get further and further behind. Now, Mr. Mayor, I’m
sure there’s some recapture money whether is ’04, ’05, ’06, ’07 even ‘019. But there’s some
recapture money somewhere that we can use to help them with the money they already got to go
ahead and get this going. While we’re procrastinating with this on another week and another
week, every week goes by the construction costs goes up. They got another problem with our
library the same way, waiting on construction, waiting on people to do something.
The Mayor: Just make a motion to approve.
Mr. Williams: I make a motion to approve, Mr. Mayor.
70
Mr. Holland: I second the motion, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, my recollection of the budget uh, the mini theatre and I’ve
always been a supporter of the Mini Theatre, seventy-five percent of the money that has gone
towards this project has come from this government. And I’m looking at this list of proposed
construction Pinnacle Place, I mean we’re seeing backyards moved all of these East Boundary
drainage all these things. We don’t need to tamper with any of these. We need to find ways to
fund them and I have some money in Travers Plantation Road that can’t be fully funded that I’d
be willing to work with these projects but to say that this city hasn’t contributed mightily towards
the efforts of the mini theatre is not accurate. I dare say we do not need to tamper with any of
these projects. What we do need to do is look at recaptured money from Phase I and Phase II of
the sales tax from Recreations and other entities which we found seven or eight million dollars
last time we did a sweep and this has been three of four years ago from other sources and
completed projects or maintenance, listed as maintenance and things that had gone by the
wayside to cover these costs. And I’d be in favor of supporting that but um, I don’t want to see
public works tampered with. They’ve been beat enough this year.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and um, Commissioner Williams, when you moved to approve, I think
just to clarify your motion to move to approve the request of the Mini Theatre.
Mr. Williams: That was right, Mr. Mayor, and that’s not just with Public Works. That’s
to do like Commissioner Cheek said, a sweep with what other recapture money there is in
whatever year. Now we’re looking at one part when we could go ahead and do this and with a
sweep from whatever year is necessary to find those funds in those areas that we’re not using.
We still got a dollar waiting on a dime and that don’t make good sense, Mr. Mayor. We going to
enhance this government going to enhance this city and do some things and the Mini Theatre has
worked diligent Commissioner Cheeks I think we supported it but we let them, and I talked to
Mr. Butler about it, agreed to let money go elsewhere that’s supposed to went go the Mini
Theatre.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: I had a problem with that cause I was told it wasn’t going to be there
when we got ready for it.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney. Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the commission. For you information
a contract or agreement is ready for the signature of the officials of the Mini Theatre and is
applied $500,000 from SPLOST V and I’ll ask that I be allowed to assist the Finance Department
and Mr. Ladson’s Department in identifying those funds in a complete package for Mr. Butler’s
group the Mini Theatre because it’s ready to be signed, I would ask that this body approve that
subject to us finding the legal funding to make up the ---
71
Mr. Williams: So moved.
Mr. Shepard: --- unfunded --- to complete the project.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams has made that a part of his motion. Commissioner
Hatney, you want to?
Mr. Hatney: The information you’re talking about, is that the amount of money that
you’re going to need?
Mr. Mayor: Sir?
Mr. Hatney: Is that the amount of money that he’s going to need that you were talking
about?
Mr. Shepard: Your money?
Mr. Mayor: The amount the Mini - that the Mini Theatre is requesting.
Mr. Hatney: Does that complete this project is what I’m asking.
The Clerk: Yes. He asked for the seven hundred. That’s what he’s asking for.
Mr. Shepard: The unfunded balance is what you’re asking me about.
Mr. Hatney: Yeah.
Mr. Shepard: Well, that’s what we’ll identify appropriate sources to attain that ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Abie, how would this affect projects that we got
going out, already out there. How would distributing this money all at one time like that is going
to affect our dirt road paving?
Mr. Ladson: Well, I mean, with the projects that we’re going to have going out this year
and right now we’re on the ---
Mr. Holland: Talk to the mike, Abie.
Mr. Ladson: Right about now we got about seven or eight projects that we’re going to
have going out this year and these are like the large roadway projects and those projects were
initially budgeted at like maybe $2 million dollars and $3 million dollars. Now these projects are
going to probably some in at, I know for sure on a couple of them probably going to be at least
six or seven million dollars apiece and uh, so the sheet that you actually have in front of you
right now, these are the projects we actually bid and actually are under construction, you know
72
from 2006 and 2007. Now uh, in the far right column is the percent difference and that’s the
increase in the cost and those monies has actually come from recapture, where we got that
money to actually fund these projects to get them under construction.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Smith: I think my question is do we have enough money to do what we’ve already
started here and do this too?
Mr. Ladson: Yeah what we have on that we have enough money to do that because we
actually came to the commission and pulled those monies out of recapture but the issue’s going
to be with the projects we have coming up, the remaining of the projects we have coming up for
this year.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: My question is that the motion that’s on the floor. Is he in compliance with
what ---?
Mr. Mayor: Yes.
Mr. Hatney: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay we have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion
commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Smith, Mr. Grantham and Mr. Bowles vote No.
Motion carries 6-3.
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: And I know we’ve identified the source of the funds I guess I’m
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) I guess what my question’s going to be to (UNINTELLIGLE) and that
would be when we raise the --- in the original SPLOST V request at that time. And y’all please
allow me this cause I think it’s important.
Mr. Butler : The amount that we requested from the city?
Mr. Grantham: Right.
Mr. Butler: At one point it was 2.5 but then it got cut down.
Mr. Grantham: It got cut down.
73
Mr. Butler: Yes, sir.
Mr. Grantham: And I know you said you had raised something like two million dollars
that you had that much in the bank.
Mr. Ladson: Presently we have about 1.8. What you have and what Commissioner
Cheek mentioned about seventy-five percent of the funds from the city, what you’re looking at is
the fund balance.
Mr. Cheek: --- different phases of sales tax ---
Mr. Grantham: That was my fourth year. We’ve been allotted funds out of each
SPLOST, three four and five.
Mr. Butler: Three, four and five. Yes sir.
Mr. Grantham: --- which amounts to about a million ---
Mr. Butler: Maybe two.
Mr. Grantham: --- so we’ve actually raised maybe $500,000.
Mr. Butler: We raised at least five, at least a half million dollars.
Mr. Grantham: Okay, my point is that’s it’s come to a situation where I want to help you
and I want to give you what we can but I keep thinking once we start this we
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) When we go out into the general public, people like yourself the Arts
Council, anybody else will be coming in wanting the same thing. We’re sitting here talking
about recaptured dollars, I would certainly like to see us give you five if we could an additional
$500,000 and get you to raise $200,000. Do you think that’s possible?
Mr. Butler: Um, of course it’s possible, it’ll be difficult.
Mr. Grantham: I’ll make a contribution to you if --- I do think we’re in a situation and I
hope you understand the dilemma. If I have to vote for this today I’ve got to vote against it. If I
could vote for something to where you’re participating and being a part of I could feel more
comfortable in answering the question (INAUDIBLE)
Mr. Butler: Okay, I feel that we can do that.
Mr. Grantham: I’ve got a problem with a motion on the floor, the question’s been called
and I don’t if I can ---
Mr. Mayor: And the motion’s been ---
74
Mr. Grantham: I know it’s been actually voted but I wanted to make my point of what,
why I’m doing something, either to pass this or whether it’s good for you, if it doesn’t I’d like it
to come back for another approval.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. You can raise money. And please announce to Mr. Butler. He’s
probably wondering what happened.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
60. Discuss maintenance of Youngblood Lane. (No recommendation from Engineering
Services Committee April 9, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Okay, this came through Engineering Services with no recommendation.
Mr. Smith: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: Thank you. We have been doing the maintenance on Youngblood Drive for
a lot of years and uh, Youngblood Lane is as close to it as from here to that door and you have a
lot of houses on it, a lot of taxpayers. And we would love it if our commissioners could support
us with this thing. We have so much in South Augusta that’s not in the rest of the city and we
desperately need some help and I respectfully request that you support this.
Mr. Mayor: And the request is to approve the maintenance of Youngblood Lane.
Mr. Smith: Yes.
Mr. Holland: Is there a motion?
Mr. Smith: Yes, that’s a motion.
Mr. Holland: I second the motion.
Mr. Cheek: I’m going to make a substitute motion, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor I’m going to make a substitute motion and the substitute
motion will be that we proceed withmaintenance but that we request of the residents that
they acquire, go through and get a petition, acquire the right-of-way, if necessary work
with our Engineering Department if a right-of-way is necessary to meet current codes and
that this be added to the paving list to be paved at some point in the future where we don’t
have to spend years and years just scraping dirt, moving dirt around.
75
Mr. Williams: I’ll second that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay we have a substitute motion and a second. Is there any further
discussion? Commissioners will now vote on the substitute motion by the substitute sign of
voting.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Bowles: It’s a lot easier when you come on the back end of that agenda, isn’t it.
Mr. Mayor: Good seeing you.
Mr. Speaker: Thank you very much.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and I would hope we could go ahead and get the agenda item
unanimously approved in a hurry.
The Clerk: The add-on?
The Mayor: No, number, did 62 go on the ---
The Clerk: Sixty-two went of the consent agenda.
The Mayor: Okay. Shoot, I didn’t cross that out.
The Clerk: We had the add-on um, the appointment of Earnestine Howard to the Canal
Authority representing District 1.
Mr. Cheek: We do not have unanimous consent for that one.
The Clerk: Thank you. All right, a motion go into legal. Are you going to do that?
OTHER BUSINESS
64. Motion to go in Legal Meeting.
Mr. Mayor: I would look for a motion, Mr. Shepard, to go into legal session.
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Shepard can’t make no motion.
Mr. Shepard: I’m not going to make a motion. I’m going to suggest one of you make a
motion.
Mr. Mayor: No, but for, to address Pending and Potential Litigation, Real Estate and
Personnel.
76
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney:
Mr. Hatney: Could I offer a substitute motion and due to the fact we’ve been here all day
---
Mr. Bowles: Amen.
Mr. Hatney: --- that we do go into legal session but to hear the report from the EEO
Officer on pending situation that we need to hear from and appoint another time next week to
come in to finish the rest of the meeting ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Hatney: --- pass it on to the next commission, committee meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Bowles: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: We have summarily prepared at least one real estate item which should,
needs to be included on this, which would need to be published out here.
Mr. Hatney: Can you do it quick?
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir, I can.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, will you amend your motion to that effect?
Mr. Hatney: So moved.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second.
Mr. Williams: What was the motion, Mr. Mayor?
The Clerk: To go in ---
Mr. Mayor: Reverend Hatney?
Mr. Hatney: Read it, Madame Clerk.
77
The Clerk: The motion for a legal meeting is for one real estate item and to receive EEO
report.
Mr. Mayor: Okay we have a motion and second. Any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Williams and Mr. Cheek not voting.
Motion carries 7-0.
Ms. Beard: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Madame Beard.
Ms. Beard: I think we may able to reconsider the uh, question in reference to Gaynell if
it’s okay? We may have the six votes now.
Mr. Mayor: We’re in Legal now.
Ms. Beard: It’s okay. All right.
Mr. Hatney: Fellow commissioners, would you all please come on? Please, please.
[LEGAL MEETING]
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Lena J. Bonner
Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy
of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Augusta Richmond County Commission held on
April 17, 2007.
____________________________
Clerk of Commission
78
79