HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommission Meeting June 19, 2007
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
JUNE 19, 2007
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:05 p.m., June 19, 2007, the Hon.
Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Holland, Smith, Harper, Grantham, Hatney, Williams, Cheek, Bowles
and Brigham, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
ABSENT: Hon. Betty Beard, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
The invocation was given by the Reverend David Kruse, Our Redeemer Lutheran
Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited.
The Clerk:
RECOGNITIONS
Employee of the Month
A. Mr. Randy Blount, Augusta Utilities Department
May Employee of the Month.
Presentation made to Mr. Randy Blount.
Retirements
B. Ms. Ann Lark, Executive Secretary, Augusta Transit Department, 25 years of service.
Ms. Mary Jo McNeely, License Clerk, License & Inspections Department, 24 years of
service.
Presentation made to Ms. McNeely.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to the Delegations.
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS
C. Ms. Janice Jenkins. RE: Community Affairs/Hyde Park.
Mr. Mayor: Lots of people are no shows today. I guess we’ll go onto the next
delegation.
The Clerk:
1
DELEGATIONS
D. Ms. Lynn Reed, President Buckhead Neighborhood Association. RE: Interstate
moving/litter/clean-up of debris.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am, if you could come up to the microphone and just state your
name and address for the record please.
Mr. Reed: Hi, I’m Lynn Reed. I’m here with Fran Stewart. She’s the West Augusta
Alliance President. I’m the Buckhead Neighborhood Association President.
Mr. Mayor: And if your could just keep it---
Ms. Reed: I reside at 3124 Greensboro Way, Richmond County.
Mr. Mayor: And if you could just keep it to five minutes, please, ma’am.
Ms. Reed: Yes, sir. Actually I have a power point presentation I’d like to show the
commission. Commissioner Bowles and I discussed the problem that we have with the
maintenance of the easements and areas around Augusta near the Interstate exchanges um, uh
should I just stay here? Okay, go ahead. This all started in 2001. I sent a letter to Commissioner
Shepard showing him the cigarette butts and trash across from Bobby Jones Ford near the mall
area stating that I thought that something needed to be done. We had talked and the Department
of Transportation was supposed to take care of that but it hasn’t been done for 15 years. Go
ahead. So I talked to Commissioner Bowles. That’s in 2006. I sent him a whole bunch of
pictures and I’m going to show you some of those pictures right now. We have been trying to
get this maintained and cleaned for quite a long time. Since Mayor Copenhaver has been Mayor
these have been mowed on a fairly regular basis. So they don’t look quite that bad right now but
let’s go on. This is what we have to look at every day as we go to work, dirt, trash, over grown
grass over the curb. That’s just a close up of really what all of these show. Go ahead. The
ditches, the signs from working from home, signs just trash in the ditches. Go ahead. Now these
are the signs everybody sees all over the place but we are suggesting that we try to at least have
the people that put those up there have someone call them and tell them that if they don’t remove
the signs, their phone number’s right there on the sign, we could have someone call them and
have them removed. Just like we do the political signs. Um, this is an area, median on
Wrightsboro Road and Bobby Jones, which is a premier area for the new Augusta Mall. This is
what it looks like today. We have corn growing in the median. The sides of the Interstate look
like a third-world country, something or another. It just always looks this bad. And even when
they mow it, the prisoners come out and mow both medians on the end but they never really
clean them up. They’re never ever nice. Um, I’m suggesting that you know people are afraid to
get off of the Interstate exits in Augusta because it’s so dirty and scary looking compared to what
I’ll show you in South Carolina. That we’re losing money from travelers and businesses who
don’t want to set up their companies here because it looks so dirty. Thank you. Go ahead.
That’s the underpass again. Go ahead. You’ll see up in the top right that’s on our 520. That’s
what all the sewage ditches look like on the side of the road. They’re compacted with dirt and
trash. You can see of the lining of signs and pieces of tires and things like that on the Interstate,
which is not picked up regularly by the Department of Transportation. It’s dangerous, go ahead
2
um, more litter and over grown grass. As you can see it’s just piled up, it just collects over the
years. It’s been there probably 10 years. Go ahead. There’s some more examples of the center
medians overgrown, overpasses not mowed and the sand builds up on the side of the road so the
grass grows out over it and collects even more cigarette butts and trash. Go ahead. Now ask
yourself. Would you want to get off here? This is our exit at Washington Road off of I-20.
Commissioners, this is sad. This is Washington Road exit. That is actually right at the very end,
you can see the sign there for downtown saying, “Come to the Weed City”. Okay. There’s
actually a sign on this sign that says Scenic Highway, Adopt a Highway Litter Control. As you
can see it’s very over grown and that’s not very inviting to me to want to pull over and get dinner
there. That’s right past Washington Road um, Historic Districts, Riverwatch Parkway. You can
see the debris on the side of the road.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Ms. Jenkins, I’m sorry to cut you short but that was five-minutes.
Ms. Reed: Oh, okay.
Mr. Mayor: You might come back another time and finish ---
Ms. Reed: I’ve got three more just to show you ---
Mr. Mayor: No ma’am I try to keep it five for everybody and so ---
Ms. Reed: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: --- and it states that ---
Ms. Reed: It’s just such an amazing ---
Mr. Mayor: I know what you’re speaking of. I’ve seen it so thank you, ma’am.
Ms. Stewart: Lena, could I get Lena just to give you my third attempt to be in a healthy
habitat, healthy city ---
Mr. Mayor: That would be perfectly fine. But I appreciate you bringing that information
in front of us, and those pictures.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor:
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, we’ve had a very important point brought before us today. One
of the issues that the public and the Commission should be concerned about is the fact that over
the past several years we’ve had a hiring freeze which has impacted our Trees and Landscaping
and Public Works Department that it has us working one deep in many locations. And so as we
talk about a rollback of taxes or other things, it’s very important for the image of this city, the
help of this city that we staff the positions that are necessary to prune the trees, to cut the grass
3
and to clean up the litter before we go rolling back taxes and leave the city in the same state that
we find it. Also one of the other thing’s I’ve noticed is storm water runoff. We will soon be
under EPD and EPA governance that will require a removal of suspended solids such as debris,
the trash and debris that you see in the storm water runoff and if we fail to comply with those
standards of storm water runoff we will be fined very heavily in the not to distant future for
failing to maintain that and that which speaks to a storm water utility being something that we
should seriously consider in the not to distant future. But before we begin to talk about
rollbacks, before we begin to talk about cutting and further cutting within the government we
need to talk about taking care of the city and I hope the Commission will consider that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Cheek. Madame Clerk, I guess we’ll go on to the
consent agenda and I believe we do have one other item to consider to be added to the agenda.
ADDENDUM
53. Receive report from the Financial Advisor regarding the bond refunding and the
termination of the agreements concerning the swap transactions. (Requested by
Commissioner Brigham)
Mr. Brigham: I make a motion that we add.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second to add the additional agenda item. If there’s
no further, does everybody have that in front of them? Okay. If there’s no further discussion
commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Apparently we don’t have any objections so it’s added.
Mr. Hatney: I have a question.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Dr. Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: I just ask the commission. What is the urgency (unintelligible)? Why does
it have to be added?
Mr. Mayor: It’s ---
Mr. Hatney: We’re trying to get away from this. Somewhere along the lines we’ve got
to make up our minds.
Mr. Mayor: I agree with you and I’m, this is the first time I’ve seen this, Dr. Hatney.
Commissioner Grantham.
4
Mr. Grantham: I’ll try to enlighten you a little bit there, Mr. Mayor, and help you but this
was voted on at our last commission meeting to look into the SWAP transaction that we would
go back to the fixed rate in regards to the bond that was issued. And what was requested at that
time was to try to do it within a 30-day period of time which I think at that time our Financial
Adviser indicated to us that statement was somewhat difficult and she wanted to come back to
this meeting to explain to us the method or the process that we would have to go through in order
to do the reversal of the SWAP. And so that’s what she’s asking that we allow her to do today is
to give us the information in that regard which, since we were not having a meeting at the end of
this month or only one meeting in the month of July the way these interests rates and bond rates
are going right now we would be smart in taking action on this and listening to what she has to
say as well as giving the approval to go forward and bring us back the recommendation that we
th
would need in our July the 10 meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, it makes sense to me. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I got no problem with supporting adding the
agenda item but I thought it was to receive information. If we’re going to take action now, I’m
hearing that we need to make a move so the counsel and go ahead and get something in process.
I thought I was going to hear this information. When you’re talking about bonds and money you
know, I think we need more than a meeting like this to discuss it and then make a decision as to
which way we’re going to go. So are we receiving information or are we going to have to make
---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham, just to clarify that. We’re receiving the
information today on which we will make our decision at a future meeting. Is that correct?
Mr. Grantham: That’s correct. And I think what we need to do, Mr. Mayor, is to ask Ms.
McNabb if she would in as brief a time as she can to explain to us what we’re talking about.
Granted I know a little bit about it but not enough to give you all the information that is needed
in that regards because I don’t work in that area.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Grantham: I think she could do that. If the information purpose only is to give us a
method in which we need to move forward with. And I think that’s what she wants to do today.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Grantham: If you’ll ask Ms. McNabb I believe she could explain that.
Mr. Mayor: Well, first we need to get the agenda added before we can address. But I
believe everybody’s fine with adding this on to the agenda. And we will go through the consent
agenda. Okay. Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. I’ve got Mr. Kuhlke here today.
I have a written report in reference to the progress of the Judicial Building Subcommittee. Mr.
5
Kuhlke is available if you’d like to ask questions or have him give that in a verbal format and
then receive the written information. If so we would need to add that to the agenda as a report
from the subcommittee. If not I can give you the written information.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, in light of the fact that we’re losing thousands of dollars per
month to construction costs and delays and that this is an essential step perhaps in getting this
thing rolling I for one would like to hear it presented and have it added to the agenda for the day.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have unanimous consent? Is everybody good with receiving
the report from Mr. Kuhlke? Okay. We’ve got unanimous consent on that. Now we will move
on to the consent agenda.
The Clerk: The consent agenda consists of Item 1-42. Items 1-42. For the benefit of any
objectors to our Planning Petitions once the petition is read if you object would you please
signify your objection by raising your hand.
Item 1. Is to approve a petition for a change of zoning from a Zone R-1 (One-family
Residential) to a Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) affection property located 3745 Old
Waynesboro Road.
Item 2. Is a request for a change of zoning from a Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) and a
Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) to a Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property located
on Cherry Street, 107, 109, 111, 113, 115 and 117 Cherry Street.
Item 3. Is a request for a change of zoning from a Zone A (Agriculture) to a Zone LI (Light
Industry) affecting property located on South Suffolk Drive.
Item 9. Is a petition for a change of zoning from a Zone A (Agriculture) to a Zone LI (Light
Industry) affecting property located at 2337 Gordon Highway.
Item 10. Is a petition for a Special Exception to establish a Family Personal Care Home at
property located at 4919 McCombs Road.
Item 11. Is requesting a Special Exception to allow use in a P-1 (Professional) Zone affecting
property located at 349 Greene Street.
Item 12. Is a Special Exception to establish a Family Day Care Home affecting property located
at 2812 Ridgeview Drive.
Item 13. Is requesting a Special Exception in a B-1 (Neighborhood Business) affecting property
located at 2872 Tobacco Road.
Item 14. Is a petition requesting a change of zoning from a Zone B-2 (General Business) to a
Zone LI (Light Industry) affecting property located at 2029 Gordon Highway.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to those Planning petitions as read?
Mr. Russell: None noted, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Russell.
6
The Clerk: I call your attention to our Public Services portion of the agenda for the
alcohol petitions. If there are any objectors to the alcohol petitions would you signify your
objections by raising your hand.
Item 15. Is for a retail Beer and Wine license to be used in location 3040 Meadowbrook Drive.
Item 16. Is for and on premise Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with
property located at 2075 Old Savannah Road.
Item 17. Is for a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with a
location at 2075 Old Savannah Road.
Item 18. Is for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection
with 214 Seventh Street.
Item 19. Is for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection
with the Red Lion Pub located at 1936 Walton Way.
Item 20. Is for retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with a
location at 3745 Peach Orchard Road.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to those alcohol petitions?
Mr. Russell: None noted, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, Madam Clerk. And I would first go to do we have any
items to be added to the consent agenda? Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor I don’t see why we couldn’t add Items 46 through 49 to the
consent agenda and to waive the second reading on those items. They are --- items.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor I need some clarity on 46-49 before we do that. That’s the
pension changes we’re talking about and I’d like to before we vote on that I’d like to know what
those changes are going to be. So I think that we need to look at that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Boudreaux, do you have any?
Mr. Boudreaux: Yes. Mr. Shepard was going to address those and not being on the
consent agenda we plan to do those when they were called.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ll just wait to address those. Are there any further items to be
added to? Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, Item 49. I don’t know, that does not pertain to any of the
pension funds. That is an addendum to an ordinance we already have in place that would allow
the motorized golf cart to be operated on Pine Needle Road, the short distance from the Five
Points here up to Forest Hills Golf Course so I didn’t know if Mr. Williams thought that was part
of the ---
7
Mr. Mayor: You okay with that one, Mr. Williams?
Mr. Grantham: --- pension plan or part of something else.
Mr. Williams: Yeah, I got no problem with that. I was thinking it was part of that entire
group but I’ve got no problem letting that go on the consent, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor, Items 46, 47 and 48. The young man did say the attorney was
going to address these but for my benefit I would like to see the persons who’s going to be
managing this and explain what they’re talking about here. In particular what we’re talking
about doing a merger to include ‘77. Not the other two but ‘77. So I need the individual’s who’s
going to be working with this, the consultants to explain this to me. I just don’t believe I can get
what I need from the Attorney.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We’ll wait to get to those agenda items. Any further additions to?
Okay, are there any agenda items to be pulled for discussion? Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor I’d like to pull for discussion Items 26 and 37 please.
Mr. Mayor: That was 26 and 37?
Mr. Cheek: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull Items 2, 16 and 17. Two, 16 and 17 just to find
some clarity. There’s another item, Mr. Mayor, while I’m speaking that was on the Public
Services Committee I think. The airport wants to do something. I didn’t see that. Is that on this
agenda? Is that here at all? I don’t see it here now about going to the Internet to do us a bid.
The Clerk: Item 21.
Mr. Williams: Item 21? I need to pull Item 21 as well.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Are there any further items to be pulled for discussion?
Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: I need to pull number 22, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Any further items to be pulled for discussion? Madam Clerk, could you
repeat back the items that have been pulled for discussion?
The Clerk: Yes, sir. Items 2, 16, 17, 21, 22, 26 and 37.
8
Mr. Mayor: With 49 added to.
The Clerk: Added. Yes, sir. 49 added to the consent agenda.
Mr. Mayor: If there are no further items to be pulled or added to I look for a motion to
approve the consent agenda.
Mr. Cheek: So moved.
Mr. Bowles: Second.
CONSENT AGENDA
PLANNING
1. Z-07-62 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Russell Waites and Larry Doolittle, on behalf of
Evelyn and Edward Sikes, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1 (One-family
Residential) to Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) affecting property containing
approximately 15 acres and is the remaining portion of 3745 Old Waynesboro Road. (Tax
May 170-2, Parcel 054) DISTRICT 8.
4. FINAL PLAT – AUBERN AT SANDRIDGE – S-756 – A request for concurrence with
the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by H.
Lawson Graham & Associates, on behalf of Marshall Homes, LLC, requesting final plat
approval for the Aubern at Sandridge. This residential subdivision is located on
Pepperdine Drive, at the terminus and contains 15 lots. (Reviewing agency approval 5-31-
07)
5. FINAL PLAT – THE RESERVIES, PHASE II – S-659-ii-REV – A request for
concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission to APPROVE a
petition by James G. Swift & Associates, on behalf of Peter Budwick, Paramount Homes,
requesting final plat approval for the Reserves, Phase II. This residential development is
located on Reserves Lane, adjacent to the Reserves, Phase I and adds 17 lots.
6. FINAL PLAT – GRANITE HILL, SECTION 5 (FKA BARNETT CROSSING,
SECTION 5) – S-748 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Southern Partners Inc., on behalf of
Crowell & Co. Inc., requesting final plat approval for Granite Hill, Section 5. This
residential subdivision is located on Madison Lane, adjacent to Barnett Crossing, Section 4
and Buckhead Section 5-A and contains 63 lots.
7. FINAL PLAT – LOTS 1-8, MADRID DRIVE, GORDON WOODS EXPANSION,
PHASE I – S-2007-002 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County
Planning Commission to APPROVE a petition by Promise Land Community Development
requesting final plat approval for Lots 1-8 Madrid Drive, Gordon Woods Expansion Phase
I. This residential subdivision is located on Madrid Drive at Luxemborg Drive. (Pending
City Engineer Approval by 6-19-07)
8. FINAL PLAT – AYLESBURY COMMONS, PH. II (FKA AYLESBURY LANDING) –
S-710-II – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by George L. Godman & Associates, on behalf of LPB
9
Properties, Inc., requesting final plat approval for Aylesbury Commons, Phase ii. This
residential subdivision is located on Aylesbury, Phase I and contains 50 lots.
9. Z-07-53 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Robert Shearer requesting a change of zoning
from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone LI (Light Industry) affecting property containing
approximately 6.5 acres and known under the present numbering system as 2337 Gordon
Highway. (Part of Tax Map 067 Parcel 004). DISTRICT 3
10. Z-07-55 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by James Kirk, Sr., on behalf of Debora Benson,
requesting a Special Exception to establish a Family Personal Care Home per Section 26-1
(H) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting
property containing 1.83 acres and is known under the present numbering system as 4919
McCombs Road. (Tax Map 353 Parcel 022-01) DISTRICT 8
11. Z-07-56 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE with the condition that there by only one residential unit in
addition to the professional use in the building; a petition by Douglas Day, on behalf of
Martha P. Toole, requesting a Special Exception to allow a residential use in a P-1
(Profession) Zone per Section 20-2 (b) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for
Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing .09 acres and in known under the
present numbering system as 349 Greene Street (Tax map 047-2 Parcel 260) DISTRICT 1
12. Z-07-58 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Chawan Cooper, on behalf of MDI Properties, 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 .37 acres and known under the present numbering system as 2811 Ridgeview
Drive (Tax Map 039 Parcel 154) DISTRICT 3
13. Z-07-59 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE with the condition that the zoning be for the specific
development of a “Fred’s” store; a petition by James and Marianna Daskal requesting a
Special Exception in a B-1 (Neighborhood Business) zone to allow a commercial building
that would exceed 15,000 gross square feet of area per Section 21-2 of the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing 1.48 acres
and is known as 2872 Tobacco Road. (Tax Map 128; Parcel 014-02) DISTRICT 8
14. Z-07-61 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Lehman Lord, on behalf of Benjamin N. Murray,
requesting a change of zoning from Zone B-2 (General Business) to Zone LI (Light
Industry) affecting property containing 1.00 acres and is known under the present
numbering system as 2029 Gordon Highway. (Part of Tax Map 069 Parcel 027) DISTRICT
5
PUBLIC SERVICES
15. Motion to approve a New Ownership Application: A.N. 07-27: A request by Falgini
Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with J B Food Mart
located at 3040 Meadowbrook Dr. District 5. Super District 9. (Approved by Public
Services Committee June 11, 2007)
10
18. Motion to approve a New Application: A.N. 07-30: A request by Michael Anglin for an
on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Tipsey
McStumbles, LLC located at 214 Seventh St. There will be Dance. District 1. Super District
9. (Approved by Public Services Committee June 11, 2007)
19. Motion to approve a New Application: A.N. 07-25: A request by Emily D. Watkins for
an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with the
Red Lion Pub located at 1936 Walton Way. There will be Dance. District 1. Super District
9. (Approved by Public Services Committee June 11, 2007)
20. Motion to approve a New Ownership Application: A.N. 07-26: A request by Chol A. Yu
for a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Overpass
Package located at 3745 Peach Orchard Road. District 6. Super District 10. (Approved by
Public Services Committee June 11, 2007)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
23. Motion to approve Retirement of Ms. Mary Jo McNeely under the 1977 Pension Plan.
(Approved by Administrative Services Committee June 11, 2007)
PUBLIC SAFETY
24. Motion to approve continuing the contract with Gold Cross for an additional year at
the same cost. (Approved by Public Safety Committee June 11, 2007)
25. Motion to approve the selection of Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy & Ecker P.A. for
RFO Item #07-119, Legal Services for Rebanding Process for 800 MHz Radio Frequencies.
(Approved by Public Safety Committee June 11, 2007)
FINANCE
27. Motion to approve Georgia Administrative Services (GAS) as the Third Party
Administrator (TPA) for Augusta, GA’s Worker’s Compensation claims. (Approved by
Finance Committee June 11, 2007)
28. Motion to approve the acquisition of one hydraulic excavator for the Utilities
Department-Construction Division from Stafford Equipment, Inc. of Lawrenceville,
Georgia for $71,725.00 (Lowest bid offer on bid 07-093). (Approved by Finance Committee
June 11, 2007)
ENGINEERING SERVICES
29. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #052-0-115-00-0 3910
Carolyn Street, which is owned by Eugene Burley, for 499.6 Sq. Feet of Temporary
Easement. PW Project: Belair Hills Subdivision Improvement Project. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee June 11, 2007)
30. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #052-0-165-00-0 3915
Carolyn Street and Property #052-0-166-0-00 3917 Carolyn Street, which is owned by
Evelyn V. Walker Turner, for 2,999.58 Sq. Feet of Temporary Easement. PW Project:
Belair Hills Subdivision Improvement Project. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee June 11, 2007)
31. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #015-0-099-00-0 Lincoln
Street, which is owned by Mattrice Matthew Scott, Jr., Joan Scott Ruff, and Jobyna M.
Scott, for 995 Sq. Feet of Right of Way and 509 Sq. Feet of Temporary Easement. PW
11
Project: Belair Hills Subdivision Improvement Project. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee June 11, 2007)
32. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #051-0-039-00-0 Powell
Road, which is owned by Mattrice Matthew Scott, Jr.; Joan Scott Ruff; Jobyna M. Scott;
Esther Lee; and Robert Gabriel, for 924 Sq. Feet of Permanent Easement and 1, 412 Sq.
Feet of Temporary Easement. PW Project: Belair Hills Subdivision Improvement Project.
(Approved by Engineering Services Committee June 11, 2007)
33. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #051-0-240-00-0 3943
Barrett Street, which is owned by Pioneers, Inc. (5/6 Interest) and Dorothy Dicks (1/6
Interest), for 1,000 Sq. Feet of Temporary Easement. PW Project: Belair Hills Subdivision
Improvement Project. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee June 11, 2007)
34. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #051-0—079-00-0 1706
Orange Avenue, which is owned by Pioneers, Inc., for 3,413 Sq. Feet of Permanent
Easement and 2,296 Sq. Feet of Temporary Easement. PW Project: Belair Hills
Subdivision Improvement Project. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee June 11,
2007)
35. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #051-0-078-00-0 1708
Orange Avenue, which is owned by Pioneers, Inc., for 2,539 Sq. Feet of Permanent
Easement and 3,632 Sq. Feet of Temporary Easement. PW Project: Belair Hills
Subdivision Improvement Project. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee June 11,
2007)
36. Motion to authorize condemnation of a portion of Property #052-0-088-00-0 3920
Barrett Street, which is owned by Rayburn Karl Whigham and Marjorie G. Whigham
Desir, for 633 Sq. Feet of Permanent Easement and 663 Sq. Feet of Temporary Easement.
PW Project: Belair Hills Subdivision Improvement Project. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee June 11, 20007)
38. Motion to approve the deeds of dedication, maintenance agreements, and road
resolution submitted by the Engineering, and Augusta Utilities Departments for Hancock
Mill Plantation, Section Two. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee June 11,
2007)
39. Motion to approve Proposal from Midwest Maintenance Inc., to Execute Exterior
Renovations to the Municipal Building, including re-roofing, resealing cladding and
replacement of existing windows in accordance with RFP 07-125. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee June 11, 2007)
40. Motion to approve an Option for Easement between ATC Development Corp., as
owner, and Augusta, Georgia, as optionee, in connection with the 60112 Rae’s Creek Trunk
Sewer Replacement, Phase IV for the following: (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee June 11, 2007)
PIN 031-4-120-00-0: 6,203 sq. ft., more or less, of permanent utility, access and
maintenance easement and 5,624 sq. ft., more or less, of temporary construction easement;
and
PIN 031-4-121-00-0: 374 sq. ft., more or less, of permanent utility, access and maintenance
easement and 1,238 sq. Ft., more or less, of temporary construction easement; and
12
PIN 031-4-128-00-0: 6,077 sq. ft., more or less, of permanent utility, access and
maintenance easement and 5,529 sq. ft., more or less, of temporary construction easement;
and
PIN 031-4-129-00-0: 1,213 sq. ft., more or less, of permanent utility, access and
maintenance easement and 972 sq. ft., more or less, of temporary construction easement:
and
PIN 031-4-130-00-0: 9,353 sq. ft., more or less, of permanent utility, access and
maintenance easement and 8,140 sq. ft., more or less, of temporary construction easement;
For a total purchase price of $27,521.00.
41. Motion to approve Supplemental Agreement Number Five (5) with PBS & J in the
amount of $77,000 for evaluation of potential sources of contamination associated with
underground storage tanks and hazardous waste sites concerning the Wrightsboro Road
Improvements from Jimmie Dyess Parkway to I-520, CPB#323-04-296823309. Funds will
be transferred from the Project Right of Way Account to the Project Engineering Account.
(Approved by Engineering Services Committee June 11, 2007)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
42. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Augusta Commission held
June 5, 2007)
ATTORNEY
49. Motion to approve an Ordinance to amend and restate the Code of Augusta Richmond
County regarding the operation of a motorized cart in a public street, road, or highway; to
correct an error to a reference to the O.C.G.A.; and to repeal any conflicting ordinances.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual
sign.
Motion carries 9-0. [Items 1, 4-15, 18-20, 23-25, 27-36, 38-42, 49]
Mr. Mayor: All righty, Madam Clerk, let’s go on to the pulled items first.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
2. Z-07-63 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond county Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Spiro Papadopoulas requesting a change of zoning
from Zone R-1C (One-family residential) and Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) to Zone
B-2 (General Business) affecting property containing 1.63 acres and known under the
present numbering system as 107, 109, 111, 113, 115 & 117 Cherry Street. (Tax Map 011
Parcels 008, 009, 010, 011, 012 & 013) DISTRICT 7
13
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams, was this your pull?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, and I said Item 2 and I apologize. It was Item 3, Ms.
Bonner. As District 2 I pulled Item 2 but it’s item number 3 that I needed pulled. I’ve got no
problem with item 2.
Mr. Cheek: Motion to reconsider Item 3.
Mr. Brigham: Well, first we’ll do a motion to approve Item 2.
Mr. Cheek: Okay. I’m ahead of myself.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ve got a motion and a second to approve Item 2. Is there any
further discussion? No, two was pulled accidentally by Commissioner Williams so we’re
approving two and we’re going to go back to reconsider three. If there is no further discussion
we will now be voting to approve Item 2.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: And I would now entertain a motion to ---
Mr. Cheek: Motion to reconsider Item 3.
Mr. Williams: 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.
Mr. Mayor: Okay Madam Clerk, Item 3.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
3. Z-07-64 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta-Richmond County Planning
Commission to APPROVE a petition by Brian Besson, on behalf of Scott D. Gunter,
requesting change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone LI (Light Industry)
affecting property containing 1.5 acres located on the east right-of-way line of Mike
Padgett Highway, 810 feet, more or less, south of Suffolk Drive. (Tax Map 099-3 Part of
parcels 011 & 014) DISTRICT 2
14
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I apologize for that two and three error there
but I need some clarification as to what we’re doing Bob, out on Mike Padgett. Where is it
located?
Mr. Hunter: It’s a minor expansion of the project, Marion, project seats.
Mr. Williams: Just an expansion of ---
Mr. Hunter: A minor expansion of project seats, yes.
Mr. Williams: Okay and that’s out on Mike Padgett. We’re about 800 feet, that’s the
present location where they are.
Mr. Hunter: The project’s there and this is just a piece of land just to the north ---
Mr. Williams: Okay, I’ve got no problem ---
Mr. Hunter: --- of the existing plan.
Mr. Williams: --- I’ve got no problem but shouldn’t that already be zoned though Bob?
Mr. Hunter: It’s on agricultural.
Mr. Williams: So this piece that they’re in ---
Mr. Hunter: The property they’re on is already zoned, yes sir.
Mr. Williams: Okay but this ---
Mr. Hunter: They’re expanding.
Mr. Williams: Okay. My motion is to approve, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Ms. Beard out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item, Madam Clerk.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, if I may?
15
Mr. Mayor: Oh, excuse me. Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: If we could do his item next.
Addendum
52. Report from the Judicial Center Sub-Committee.
Mr. Mayor: That would be fine. I will call Mr. Kuhlke for his report.
Mr. Kuhlke: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Commissioners. I just wanted to give you a brief
report on the activities of the judicial committee. We’ve met four times since our initial meeting
in May. Two of those meetings have been with Turner and Associates the architects that we are
working with. Yesterday we had a meeting. The architect presented us with a program that
includes a project schedule, preliminary costs and a proposal for the pre-design work. That cost
is $96,720.00. The total time of the project is estimated to take three years and two months. The
architect will furnish us a contract this week for review by Jim Wall and we anticipate giving the
architect a notice to proceed in signing a contract next week. The project size has been reduced
from 297,000 square feet initially down to an estimated 206,000 square feet and could be
reduced further depending on the final estimate. Our budget for the project is $54 million
dollars. The pre-design stage of the contract will last eight weeks from the notice to proceed. I
will tell you this. During that eight week period of time we have some work we have to do on
our end. We have to get the final survey done, we have to have a topo done, geo-technical tests
have to be made and we need to have a study on where, what utilities may be under the roads
that we’ll be closing. The other thing that was discussed in our meeting yesterday is we would
like to see that total time cut down. So in the next two months while they’re doing the pre-
design work we’re going to be looking at different approaches to proceeding with the contract
that will speed up the time frame that has been presented to us by the architect. So that’s where
we are at this point. All of the parcels have been bought, I’m not sure that we’ve closed on all of
them but I think we have a contract on all of them and we’re ready to move ahead. And I’ll
entertain any question.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Bill. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Hey, Bill!
Mr. Kuhlke: Hey, Marion!
Mr. Williams: I’m just glad to know we’re moving, glad to know that things are finally
getting off the ground. In fact it’s kind of swift compared to the time we’ve been waiting. But I
received the package, and I had some conversation about the DA offices being left out of this.
Does this include or not including the office. I just need to know that.
Mr. Kuhlke: No, and I’ll tell you because of the reduction in the budget, because of what
Mr. Cheek said we’ve had increased costs over the last couple of years. We are only going to
have in this facility are going to be courtrooms and the Clerk’s office. One of the charges that
16
we’ve given to the architect is for him to look at this design so that um, uh that we can be added
on to, to bring all of those other offices in to that facility with the hopes that when the next
SPLOST comes up, if the voters decide to fund giving us the opportunity to consolidate all of the
judicial functions that we can basically continue to move on.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can continue? I don’t know who decided on that plan,
Bill, but I would have thought it would’ve come back to this body and before anything was
finalized. Now you know we’ve been talking about how much rainwater been coming in on the
DA’s building, how much we had to repair and what we had to do. I don’t believe in building a
house twice. I mean you know I proposed a 26-7 story building and they thought that was crazy.
Said that we didn’t need that much but you can always shell it out and as you need it you go up
with it. But I’m a little bit disappointed that a decision like this has been made and then nobody
come to this body and say, hey this is what we’re proposing, this is what we’re going forward
with. It just says this is what y’all going to do. And I’m disappointed in that Bill and me and
you we had several conversations and I agree to disagree but I just don’t think that this body
ought to sit here and approve something that we have not had the privilege to look at and to
make a decision on whether we need to get more money or take less money. Now the project’s
being slowed down for whatever reason and we’ve been requiring land and you know we’ve got
the last piece of property. I was on that same committee you was on, didn’t have the first
meeting, now everything is fast track and I think it’s time to get fast track. But I totally disagree
with us setting up a building such as what we’re trying to build now at that magnitude and not be
inclusive and not have to back and find more money or do whatever we got to do. I just totally
disagree. That’s my comment, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Kuhlke: Well, let me add ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kuhlke.
Mr. Kuhlke: --- Marion, this way is, I came back to you as quick as I could. We didn’t
get this report from the architect until yesterday. So this is a quick as I could come back to you.
Mr. Williams: If I can, Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: --- Bill, you know we talked about changing the architect. We talked
about where, the last meeting I remember is that we were in here discussing about what we were
going to do, whether we were going to continue with the same architect or not. Now I thought
y’all was going to go back and meet and decide if we were going to continue with this architect.
But if we got an architect that slow and we’re paying him, something’s wrong. We’re ought to
be driving this train. They’re getting paid. We ought to be able to tell them what we want, what
we expect and when we expect it. I totally disagree now but we do that quite often, that’s no
problem.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Bowles.
17
Mr. Bowles: Mr. Kuhlke, I’m, it’s my understanding are we still proposing non-superior
court, courtrooms?
Mr. Kuhlke: No, we have reduced that down. If you’ll just give me a second and while
I’m looking for this what you’ve got to understand is we went from $80 million dollars down to
$60 million dollars and with some of the land costs and so forth we’re down to $54 million
dollars. So we’ve had a substantial reduction in the cost.
Mr. Bowles: Yes, sir, and while you’re looking for it I tell you where I’m headed.
Mr. Kuhlke: Okay.
Mr. Bowles: It seems to me that we could you know kind of model ourselves after
Columbia County and not designate court rooms, Superior Court, Juvenile Court or Magistrate
Court and have court room sharing like Columbia County because the first estimate I saw from
your committee was an additional fifteen court rooms and if you walk downstairs on any given
day they’re generally empty.
Mr. Kuhlke: We uh, we had moved to the program of sharing court rooms and we’ve
gone from twenty-one court rooms down to fifteen. And before um, well the existing situation
we had we have seven court rooms and we had seven hearing rooms and we’ve eliminated the
hearing rooms and we’ve reduced the total down to fifteen.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Kuhlke, can you give us a guesstimate on your part as to what you
think the earliest possible completion date is for this. I know you gave us a timeline of three
years but is it possible to complete it quicker than that?
Mr. Kuhlke: Sir, I think we can, it depends on the approach that we take as far as
awarding the contract whether we go with the CM approach. If we go with a hard bid approach
we’re probably, the time frame that I gave you is probably going to be the timeframe. Nobody
on the committee is happy with that time frame and so we want to look at other approaches to
come back and suggest to you to see if we can move along those lines.
Mr. Brigham: Do you have any idea what the shortest time period would be on the other
approaches?
Mr. Kuhlke: Well, I would think if you went to the CM approach you could cut probably
six, maybe six months off the timeframe.
Mr. Brigham: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland.
18
Mr. Holland: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In view of the fact Mr. Mayor that, as Mr. Kuhlke
has a good report here but in view of the fact that there have been some changes that have been
made wouldn’t it be more feasible that we have an opportunity to have a meeting and give all of
the commissioners an opportunity to sit down and discuss this with Mr. Kuhlke so that the
commissioners can have some input on these changes that have been made so we can all be on
the same page. It appears now that there is some kind of a conflict here so all of us need to know
exactly what’s going on with these different changes that have been made. That would be my
suggestion.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Kuhlke, is it, but we would still have to approve the final plan. Correct?
Mr. Kuhlke: Well, I think what you would, you know I don’t know whether you want to
look at the plan our not but I think the final budget is something you’re going to have to approve.
Mr. Mayor: Exactly.
Mr. Kuhlke: What the pre-design part of it is, is actually putting the program together.
We’ve decided that everybody needs to be on the same page when we get ready to go out to bid
or either award a CM contract. But it’s going to take the architect that eight week period of time
to come up with a pre-design that will locate where every area is going to be, what size it’s going
to be and so forth. We’re working on just guesstimates at this point. But I think the
commissioner’s right. When we get to that point so that we can intelligently tell you what we’ve
got programmed in would be an appropriate time for the committee to have a meeting with the
commissioners.
Mr. Mayor: Exactly. Commissioner Hatney, did you have? Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My concern is that we’ve spent several months in
the past on the definition phase of this project. My concern is while there’s been some
discussion about the building that we’re going to build within the budget we have that there is a
disconnect in the definition of what the commission is expecting which is a consolidated building
with perhaps more like nine courtrooms instead of sixteen and sharing as Commissioner Bowles
has said. Building in economy is to the utilization of these courtrooms that we have to heat and
cool whether they’re occupied or not. But I think all of us would like to see a consolidated
facility where we have the Sheriff’s and DA’s office in appropriate judicial elements located on
that campus. We’d like to see this built and whether it’s this contractor or another we need to
come up with a and have clarity of thought between us and the committee building the facility.
But we need to get this thing built. If it’s this contractor or another give them a dollar amount
and a list and let them, let people bid on it if necessary to build it within the budget. Columbia
County’s designed and built their facility in the time we’ve been talking about this one. North
Augusta will have built their new courthouse before this is completed and they just now broke
ground. We need to move on this but again I think there needs to be clarity of thought and
purpose. While the judges utilize this facility we’re the ones tasked with funding it and making
sure it serves the greater good of the public for the longest period of time and that’s not
something that falls in the hands of the judiciary. It falls in the hands of the legislative branch,
which is us. So I concur with Mr. Holland that we perhaps need to get together and make sure
19
that we have um, we’re all on the same page with our definition of what we expect the
committee to go out and talk to the architectural firm to do.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’m concerned. I’m thinking now what we voted on what the
SPLOST said that we would vote to build and what we told the people we were going to build.
And actually we can build out a goal but we need to take and make sure our resources are used
wisely. We need to make sure everybody’s inclusive. I’m just disappointed that we didn’t know
this before this came to this point as if we’re up against the wall and then we got to respond.
And I think that’s what happened. When you get up against the wall we end up making a knee-
jerk reaction but e and my colleagues I think we need to look at it.
Mr. Mayor: Well, I think everybody’s made some good points and I think that we do
need to get back together with committee but I think the point that Mr. Kuhlke was making is
that they just received the information yesterday so this was, he was trying to get it to us as
quickly as he could. But um, if there are no further questions, Bill, thank you for, or if you’ve
got any further comments.
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor, I you know, with the comments made because I really don’t
think that we’re going to know exactly what we’re going to have in the courtroom. We’re not
going to know the exact size of it for two months, okay. That gives us two weeks to review
before they start going into design work. We are committing to spend $96,000 and if the
commission concurs with us to make that move I think we need some ratification on the
expenditure of that $96,000.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, so you need approval on the $96,000 today.
Mr. Grantham: So moved.
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I’m just concerned if we go off down this path in moving
forward with this and I’ve been the one pushing to get it done. That again we have clarity of
thought between the committee and the design firm and the commission before we move down
the path and have another building designed or conceptual plan in place that is a departure from
what we the governing body having jurisdiction want.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, just one other comment.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Williams, I did get you twice. Commissioner Hatney.
20
Mr. Hatney: One question. Did the, did we ever go to the design portion before?
Mr. Kuhlke: We are able, the committee has decided to stay with Turner and Associates
simply because they’ve done an awful lot of work on this and as a result of that, trying to come
up to meet the budget we were able to take the, the uh, definition phase that they went through
and look at what we reasonably could take out to get the size of the building down to meet our
budget. So um, there’s some economies in staying with the architect that we already have.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, and Mr. Williams, I did get you twice as I said.
Mr. Williams: I need a parliamentary ---
Mr. Mayor: Parliamentary procedure? Okay.
Mr. Williams: That since there’s been a motion being made and a second, Mr. Mayor,
there’s open to the floor again. I just want mention. That question is how much have we paid
Turner and Associates to this point.
Mr. Kuhlke: We’ve paid the architect almost $575,000, Mr. Williams.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, if there’s no further discussion commissioners will now vote by the
usual sign of voting.
.
Mr. Hatney: I need to ask one question
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: We’ve spent $575,000 already on what, to Turner Architects?
Mr. Kuhlke: Well, Mr. Hatney, this is before you came on the commission when we
initiated this thing ---
Mr. Hatney: Excuse me, I need to know what we spent $575,000 on.
Mr. Kuhlke: We investigated almost seven sites. We moved around. Mr. Williams, Mr.
Cheek was here, I mean it was the initial part of it and um, there was an awful lot of investigative
work done before we decided on the site we’re on.
Mr. Hatney: $575,000.00
Mr. Kuhlke: And it was a lot of work done, a lot of project definition done, engineering
work. In a situation like this you really have to build a team and our real judicial experts came
from New York and they’re still on board here.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, is everybody going to vote?
21
Mr. Williams, Mr. Harper and Mr. Holland vote No.
Dr. Hatney abstains.
Motion fails 5-3-1.
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor, if I could ask on behalf of the committee we need some
direction because we’re dead in the water again.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, can we make, if it’s in order?
Mr. Mayor: Hang on y’all. We actually have voted on this issue and I think the only
thing we can look at is coming back before the next commission meeting unless we have a
special called meeting.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, Point of Parliamentary Procedure.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve, Commissioner Cheek ---
Mr. Cheek:
We’ve made a motion. It’s up to the Chair to rule to where we’ve
I’d like tomake a motion that we convene a
dispensed with the issue and if it’s in order,
meeting between the committee and the commission within two weeks todiscuss the
definition and make sure that we’re on the same page before we lose two months on this.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second.
Mr. Grantham: Meet when?
Mr. Mayor: Within the next two weeks.
Mr. Grantham: A special called meeting?
Mr. Mayor: Yes. We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion
commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Thank you, Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Yes, sir.
Mr. Kuhlke: Mr. Mayor, if I could ask this question. Will the commission ---
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. Kuhlke: --- will the commission set up the meeting date?
Mr. Mayor: Yes.
Mr. Kuhlke: Thank you.
22
The Clerk: Mr. Grantham, are you voting?
Mr. Grantham: I don’t want to.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Madame Clerk, next agenda item.
The Clerk: Items 16 and 17, they’re companion items. Mr. Williams, can we ---
Mr. Williams: That’s fine.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
16. Motion to approve a New Ownership Application: A.N. 07-28: A request by Luciana
Martin for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in
connection with Luci’s Lounge located at 2075 Old Savannah Rd. There will be Dance
subject to the monitoring of the business for problems with loitering. District 2. Super
District 9. (Approved by Public Services committee June 11, 2007)
17. Motion to approve a New Ownership Application: A.N. 07-29: A request by Luciana
Martin for a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with
Corner Stoop Liquor Store located at 2075 Old Savannah Rd. subject to the monitoring of
business for problems with loitering. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public
Services Committee June 11, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams, were these your pulls?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, and I’m in support. We talked about them in
committee but I want License and Inspection who I think the applicants have agreed to uh, heed
to the rules of this county about the loitering around this property. I think after it happened once
or twice what ever the procedures are I think the applicants need to understand we’re trying to
clean up. We’re not trying to prevent business but there’s and eyesore, a negative impact been
over the past 25/40 years Rob. And we want them to know we support their business but they’ve
got to go in there with a broom and make sure they clean up and make sure that it’s not going to
continue to happen over there, that they’d be able to change that. If they’re willing to do that
I’ve got no problem with supporting it but I want that to be known that we’re not opposed to the
business but it’s a negative eyesore for that community, Gordon Highway is a gateway and uh, if
they’re in agreement we’ve got no problem.
Speaker: Yes, we have um ---
Mr. Mayor: And if you could state your name and address for the record please.
Ms. Martin: Sorry. Luciana Martin, 2008 Maryland Avenue, Augusta, Georgia.
23
Mr. Mayor: Okay, go ahead.
Ms. Martin: We have started putting that in place. We’re policing the area up. We’ve
actually started moving all of the little benches and everything that are out there out of the way
and here in the near future once this has been approved we are looking to have security and the
Sheriff to try to help us to control that area.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor I make a motion to approve
and I still say we’re in support
but we’ve been trying our best to get a handle on that. Not just that area but several areas in
District 2 like that and we want the same thing everybody else wants.
Ms. Martin: Right.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, this is a motion to approve 16 and 17? Okay, is there any further
discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
The Clerk: Who seconded?
Mr. Mayor: Oh, excuse me. I don’t know that we did get a second.
The Clerk: We did? Mr. Grantham. Okay.
Mr. Hatney abstains.
Mr. Bowles and Mr. Cheek out.
Motion carries 6-1.
Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item, Madam Clerk.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
21. Motion to approve the use of Internet auction service and authorize the administrator
to sign the agreement between Augusta and GovDeals.com. (Approved by Public Services
Committee June 11, 2007)
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: --- asked for this to be pulled and I’ve got no problem supporting the
Internet and trying to auction this off but some of this equipment, some of those are boats, some
of those were fire equipment that other surrounding counties may be able to use and I would love
to give the citizens of Augusta-Richmond County along with the adjacent counties around here
the opportunity. We have people contacting us all the time about police cars or fire equipment
and different stuff. Hopefully if we can’t sell it and it was mentioned in the committee about
24
bringing it to the city stables or to the shop to let people look at it. But I think we have
advertisers out there and people don’t come and just one day to give them an opportunity to bid
My motion is to have it advertised and try
on it and if not then we can put it on the Internet.
to sell itout there then if not then put it on the Internet
like we intend to do here. But at least
give the taxpayers of Augusta-Richmond County the opportunity to bid on it. That’s my motion.
Mr. Holland: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: I’d like to hear from Mr. Crowden as to whether that’s practical or not or,
since he’s going to be running the auction.
Mr. Crowden: Yes, practicality is depending on who is making that interpretation. Um,
we could, we could separate non-airport specific items um, and bring them up and have them in a
public auction. I think the items that Mr. Williams is referring to are transportable. I think we
had a concern; Mr. Boshears and I had a concern on airport specific. The tugs and so forth,
which are very heavy. They’re not operational. It would be an exorbitant amount to move them.
We could do it either way. I think the airport is primarily interested in getting that area clear. It
is in their maintenance area, it is taking up a lot of space and it restricting their ability to do their
jobs. I think that was what their concern was.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Boshears.
Mr. Boshears: We also would like to get as much money as we can and the indications
are that stuff sold over the Internet brings more money than it will at a local auction. Fire trucks
specifically mentioned, those fire trucks are set up for airport operations they wouldn’t be
suitable for a community fire truck.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, could you read back
the motion for those of you who just. Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Are you going to, are we going to make an amendment to the motion to
separate the airport equipment from the public safety equipment or not or if the other items, if
that’s acceptable.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams, are you willing?
Mr. Williams: Yes, that’s acceptable. Just give the taxpayers and opportunity and if they
don’t ---
Mr. Brigham: Right.
25
Mr. Williams: --- we’ll put it on the Internet still. At least they’ll have an opportunity.
Mr. Brigham: And I agree with you, Marion, but I think we’ve got a problem with the
airport side of this in moving the equipment there to do it.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Brigham: What I’m hearing anyway.
Mr. Mayor: The motion has been amended. Correct, Mr. Williams? Okay, if there’s no
further discussion commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Grantham: What’s the amended motion?
The Clerk: To separate the public safety from the airport equipment.
Mr. Brigham: We’re talking fire trucks as public safety or fire trucks as airport
equipment?
Mr. Grantham: Good question.
Mr. Mayor: I would, Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: Didn’t you say they can’t be used for public activity anyway?
Mr. Boshears: They are, the fire trucks that are set up for airport use.
Mr. Hatney: So what you’re concerned about that’s part of the airport activity.
Mr. Boshears: Right.
Mr. Hatney: So that would be part of the airport stuff.
Mr. Boshears: They’re part of the airport stuff but Public Safety ---
Mr. Hatney: I don’t see where we need to even mention that. Airport stuff is airport
stuff.
The Clerk: To be used ---
Mr. Hatney: To be used.
The Clerk: --- by the airport, right? Specifically?
26
Mr. Hatney: If it’s specifically airport part of the stuff. So it’s part of the stuff so I don’t
see the need to separate that because it goes with the rest of the stuff out at the airport.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, is everybody ---
The Clerk: Okay, the motion carries. Dr. Hatney, are you going to vote?
Mr. Hatney: Yeah.
The Clerk: Okay, you did. Mr. Grantham?
Mr. Grantham: I don’t like to vote on that.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Williams: And, Mr. Mayor, I want to clarify something. And this is not that difficult
---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: --- but there may be someone that could use it for forest work. Now
unless it’s got wings if it’s a truck and got water on it or got accessibility, someone maybe able
to use it.
Mr. Mayor: All righty.
Mr. Grantham: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to have a report ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: --- on this coming back to us as to how many people go out and bid on it
as people look at it and how many buy this equipment on a local level.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Next agenda item.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
22. Motion to approve change order to contract with J&B Construction and Services, Inc.
for unforeseen demolition work associated with the Candy Factory subject to the review of
the contract. (Approved by Public Services Committee June 11, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We have, first our contract went over a quarter
million dollars next to the next bid and since that time we’ve had change orders continually
27
coming and to me this does not pass the smell test. We have a garage that was torn down and
could have been done in a way that you polyurethane in one of the roll offs and do it in a bulk
package to the landfill and it was said that the landfill would receive the debris from this and our
records indicate that none of it has been carried out there. So we didn’t get the benefit from any
of those funds for demolition. So I want to make a motion that we freeze this contract and allow
them to finish it as they agreed to do in a manner that we feel that’s gone far enough and I think
the change orders are up to $78,000.00. That may not be exactly right. Mr. Administrator, you
can correct me if I’m wrong.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second?
Mr. Grantham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner, I’ll come down the line.
Commissioner Bowles, did you have your?
Mr. Bowles: Yeah, I did. I wanted to ask the Administrator first if it was written in the
contract that they wouldn’t use the landfill because I do not believe that was explicit in the
contract.
Mr. Russell: To my knowledge it was not written in the contract. There was some
discussion on whether or not they would use the landfill or not. It was indicated that hey would.
Also to my knowledge it is not specifically designated as stuff going in the landfill. And the
question that was asked of our landfill operator was can we identify stuff from this particular
demolition going into the landfill and the answer was no, we had no record of that. It’s highly
possible that other, that it was brought under a different amount, it wasn’t specially numbered for
this particular account and it could be brought in other items there. We have not researched that.
Mr. Bowles: And with that, Mr. Mayor, I note that there are a lot of valid points that
everybody’s going to argue with but every project we have has change orders and in order to get
I’m going to make a substitute motion to approve.
this library built and speed this process up
Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute motion. Is there a second?
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: A substitute motion and a second. Commissioner Cheek, did you?
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, we had a host of folks come through here to speak to us and we
voted on this initially that and they basically represented to us that the landfill would be used. It
would be about a $200,000 offset to the cost and that this would be just about a wash as far the
higher bid versus the lower bid and it’s a positive impact against that cost to the city by the use
of the landfill. We were represented, it was represented to us that this would be done and I for
one am very disappointed to find out that, and without putting the staff to a lot of work to do
research on this, that that’s not clearly shown that these things did come back and we received
the type of publicity we have on this when we could have avoided it by just going back out for
28
bids. But I’m very much like Commissioner Bowles I want to see us move forward on this.
Like Commissioner Smith I have deep concerns about continued change orders and a breach of
at least what we were told versus what’s in the contract and you would think that a word would
be a bond like it used to be in the old days. But I don’t guess that’s the case anymore.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In my eight years of sitting up here I don’t think
there’s been one contract that comes through that didn’t have several change orders, in the
thousands of dollars. But I’m not making excuses for change orders but from my information
that who’s going to use the landfill and from what I’m under the impression of right now is that
they served the work out and it didn’t come through one name but it went back to the landfill
anyway. I mean it’s amazing how we, we look at something but don’t look at them all. I for, if
you’re going to open up a door let everybody come in. You can’t just let some come in. And I,
Mr. Bowles made a motion I agree with that I think we need to get the library built. We’re
paying somebody to look over the contract as it goes and I think we paid almost $200,000.00 to
date just to be the supervisor so to speak to make sure things are going well. They recommended
this. We need to look at all the pieces of the puzzle and not just some of them. But I think
we’ve been having change order, after change order, after change order and everything this
government does and I think it’s been done legally and right, I think we serve the work out, I
think it went to the landfill, you want to check everyone who goes through there I think we can
do that too, Mr. Mayor. That’s my comment.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion and a second. Is there any further
discussion? Madam Clerk, could you read back that substitute motion?
The Clerk: The substitute motion was to approve the change order.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: I think when we’re building something change orders are in place and should
be but when you’re tearing down something I don’t know how in the world you can say change
orders should be allowed.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. If there’s no further discussion commissioners will now vote by the
substitute sign of voting. Andy, you going to vote?
Mr. Cheek: I’m thinking, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Brigham, Mr. Smith and Mr. Grantham vote No.
Motion carries 6-3.
Mr. Mayor: Next agenda item, Madame Clerk.
29
The Clerk:
FINANCE
26. Motion to approve the award of the contract to modernize the three Municipal
Building traction elevators to the low bidder, Premier Elevator, with a base bid of
$398,747.00 and Add Alternate 1, an additional $13,959.00, for a total of $412,706.00 to be
funded from SPLOST Phase III. Also, award the annual maintenance contract for these
same three elevators to Premier at the completion of the work in the amount of $11,970.00
for the first year, $12,497.00 for the second year and $13,247.00 for the third year, to be
funded from the annual General Fund operating budget for the Municipal Building.
(Approved by Finance and Engineering Services Committees June 11, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Whose pull was this? Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: My question on that is that there’s such a difference between the bid that
we’re awarding today and the second bid. Are we getting the same services and is this going to
completely rehab these elevators. Is the staff confident with these folks?
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Yes.
Mr. Cheek: Motion to approve.
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.
Mr. Mayor: Let me just say that I think everybody that works in this building is thankful
for that.
Mr. Cheek: As long as it works.
Mr. Mayor: As long as it works.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
37. Motion to approve Capital Project Budget Change Number One (324-04-201824110)
and Supplemental Agreement One with URS Corporation in the amount of $580.737.58 to
provide subsurface utility evaluation and design plans for the broad Street portion of the
30
downtown traffic signal and streetlight upgrade project. Funds are available in SPLOST
Phase IV in the project contingency account. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee June 11, 2007)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, I asked to have this pulled because we had a interesting
presentation of the residents, patrons, the businesses owners and so forth given to us by the
former members of Main Street and other people. The people of Augusta want Broad Street to
be safe and clean. My concern is I received information while it is seemingly not part of this that
the money that was put in to have some benches and trash cans and new street lights added was
part of this fund that um, now I understand that DDA is craw fished and perhaps will not build
our benches and trash cans which was part of the agreement. The commission asked the
Administrator and our traffic engineer to get together and come up with a compromise that
would have us providing quick service to give us more trash cans for cleaner streets, better
lighting perhaps uh, and some benches to enhance, immediately enhance the downtown Broad
Street corridor. I just wanted to get a status report on that. I can get second hand information up
here. I just want to make sure that while we are spending this down that we don’t take the
interests and needs and desires of the people and neglect those in favor of additional studies that
we may not be able to fully fund the work for years to come.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, members of the commission. I did in fact meet with
representative of both Main Street and Downtown and our traffic engineering and other
associated people. On one occasion in which we spent about an hour and a half or so looking at
this program and making sure that we did cover the bases as best we could with what we’ve got.
We’ve got a commitment from the Downtown Development too and it should be on their
committee meetings next week to fund money for the trashcans and for the benches that Mr.
Cheek is talking about. In addition to that they are looking for some private funding to go ahead
and sponsor benches to add to that. It was the general feeling of everybody in that room that the
study you’re looking at here today is necessary to continue to move forward with both the streets
lights and the stop sign, stop light applications that are necessary to include that. In addition to
that we spoke at some length about the downtown condition itself. One of the things we could
do to not only take care of the infrastructual needs but take care of the esthetic needs of that
particular area. We are looking very closely and if you notice if you’ve been down there lately
we are painting the lines, repainting the parking places and taking care of some of those esthetic
kinds of issues. I was assured by Downtown Development that the benches and the trashcans
that were requested in part of that presentation would be funded and I have done my homework
to count the votes to make sure that’s going to happen. If not I would be very surprised and very
disappointed but I believe we’re moving forward with everything Commissioner that you raised
concerns about and that we’re going forward in a way that is both constructive without being
destructive.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
31
Mr. Cheek:
Just as a follow on that. I will trust that. I do not trust the DDA in the
following through of their word. They have a long track record of um, I won’t say anymore than
that. But the thing about it, Mr. Mayor, is that we have heard from and told and worked to bring
back data to this commission that the citizens want. This is in fact necessary. It’s something that
has to be done before we do any work. But also it’s an immediate need that we improve the
view of downtown and Main Street. And also something Commissioner Williams brought up
before is trimming the trees. And survey while we can’t do lighting maybe immediately for a
few dollars if we just trim up the trees we can get some light down on the sidewalks and make
them appear safer. So I just want to make sure those things are continuing to be in our collective
I’ll make a motion to
consciousness and that we follow through on making sure those are done.
approve.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Russell had his hand up.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: I did make a presentation at the DDA meeting and it was warmly received
and do plan on being at their committee meeting to make sure that they follow through with that.
Mr. Cheek: Point of information, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Quickly, that DDA has informed us more than once that they do what they
want to and they’re not accountable to us. I just want to make sure when they promise they
follow through.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: I believe that closes out our consent agenda. On to the regular agenda.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
43. Discuss the County Attorney’s breach of the confidentiality of a city employee’s EEO
complaint. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
Mr. Mayor: And I do want some clarity from our Attorney in the room, Mr. Boudreaux.
Due to the fact that this deals with employee misuse, would it not be proper to discuss this in
Legal?
32
Mr. Boudreaux: Yes, it would. We would make that recommendation.
Mr. Williams: I’ve got no problem with that, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: We will take this when um, I’d look, do we need a motion to move this?
Mr. Williams: So moved.
Mr. Bowles: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second to take it in Legal. If there’s no further
discussion commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
44. Update from the Administrative Services Recreation Study Subcommittee regarding
the investigative process relative to the recent reports of theft, drugs, and cell phones
regarding RCCI and Recreation Departments.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: --- as subcommittee chairman we met several times and had someone
come in from Recreation and RCCI and it’s been determined that theft had taken place at the
Recreation Department from equipment, riding lawnmowers, pushing lawnmowers, weed eaters,
gas cans even carried over to another county. There’s been cell phones that was found in the
Recreation Department in their attic or in their office area where these inmates was dispersed in
the morning time to go out to do this. A cell phone was found in the RCCI Correctional
Institution, drugs, one inmate had been hallucinating, had a overdose of drugs within, inside of
the institution, walking around with a cell phone talking. Well not only that there was other cell
phones and cell phone cards found. Now this is a very serious issue. Mr. Russell informed us
that there was a criminal investigation going on and we didn’t want to cross those lines so we
didn’t want to step over any boundaries that the Sheriff or any other agency was doing. So we
met with the DA, Danny Craig who checked into it and said there was not an official. There
were some polygraph services done with the Sheriff’s Department. But anything this serious,
Mr. Mayor, I think needs to have an investigation by a law enforcement agency that will not do
what we might do and botch things up by not knowing the professional way to do it. So I
brought that back to this committee, it’s got so in-depth it’s got so serious. People have called
and gave up information about correctional, that we see on the news how the correctional officer
let the inmates just kind of roam free. But it’s been brought to my attention that the, some of the
33
correctional officers were asleep, the inmates would wake them up when somebody comes. I’m
saying all that to say it’s a very serious issue Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: --- and we need to do something to ---
Mr. Mayor: Could we hear from Mr. Leverett on this or Mr. Russell?
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, as I stated before we are in the process of investigating that. I
did speak to Mr. Craig after Commissioner Williams had talked to him and obviously as you do
some of these investigations the district attorney is involved at a later date and others at this
particular point in time. In addition to that we have done polygraphs in the Sheriff’s office and
have actually completed the last one today. We have involved the Department of Corrections
and their investigative unit there and they’ve had an investigator down on one occasion and plans
on being back down towards the end of this week to follow up with interviews there. It’s not
unusual to investigate these things and unfortunately when you’ve got people in these situations
you have these kinds of problems that develop. I’m comfortable with the fact that we are doing
that. I’m comfortable with the fact that within the near future there will be a report that will be
given to the District Attorney so that he can determine whether or not criminal prosecution or
what other if criminal prosecution is appropriate at this particular point in time or if
administrative action through our internal procedures are appropriate. The individual that was
involved in the alleged thefts was arrested and is currently to my knowledge was incarcerated
and may still be incarcerated or awaiting trial in that particular area. It’s unfortunate when you
deal with these kinds of situations but we do deal with them. That’s part of the hassle of dealing
with inmates and dealing with correctional people as we go forward with that. I’m not
uncomfortable with the progress of the investigation. I do anticipate having that wrapped up
within the next week in front of the District Attorney to determine whether other charges may be
appropriate or not and if that is not appropriate than I feel the appropriate administrative action
will be taken, to deal administratively with those people if necessary once we get with the
Department of Corrections and have the district attorney review those facts. I can understand
Commissioner Williams’ concern with the speed of this but if you look at the progress of the
investigation and the breadth of what we dealt with I think we’re probably on target with that
issue.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek and then Commissioner Williams I’ll take you.
Mr. Cheek: Just to say, Mr. Mayor, that if we do find someone that is, that likes the
inmates so much they’re going to provide them with drugs and cell phones I hope we can find
them a bed in that institution right next to them.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams:
Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I agree with Mr. Cheek but this has been on-
stth
going since the 21 or the 20 of March and we have just gotten to be able to get six people
maybe seven people polygraphed through the Sheriff’s Department. I don’t think we can let
34
Recreation nor can we let RCCI investigate themselves. I think there ought to be another agency
I’m going to make a motion that we
or a criminal investigation done by a professional agency.
ask the DA, or ask the GBI to investigate to look at this facility
and look at all of the
information that’s been brought forth to us so we won’t cross over into that. We, like
Commissioner Cheek said if somebody’s providing cell phones or pornography, I mean a list of
stuff, contraband all kinds of stuff was provided. Suppose that had been reversed. Suppose there
had been some worker or some employee or some taxpayer either criminally hurt or exposed to
something or done something. This is too serious for us to stand back and act like it didn’t
happen. Now since March and we’re still trying to investigate. Now I think that ought to be a
fast track. I think that we got agencies that can do it, so my motion is to get the GBI to go in and
investigate and to look at this wholeheartedly and then give us a report back either through the
DA’s office or how ever they want to report back. They didn’t have to report back through the
district committee they can give it back through the Administrator how ever but somebody needs
to look at this and not investigate our own selves. That doesn’t make any sense.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Is there a second?
Mr. Holland: Yes, sir. I second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Holland: Also may I ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: One of the things that concern me in reference to this particular
investigation. Of course Mr. Williams as the Chairman of the Subcommittee, I’m just appalled
at the fact that we don’t have enough commissioners that’s interested in a situation like this when
it comes to drugs, when it comes to cell phones being used, when it comes to theft of property.
We have these subcommittee meetings and we extend an invitation to the different
commissioners to come by and sit down and be a part of these investigations and a part of these
interrogations. There’s four of on there and only two of us have been showing up and of course
perhaps they’ve had a reason not to show up. But I just think as commissioners we need to
become more involved in what is happening around this city so that our taxpayers will know that
we’re concerned about what’s happening in the community. We looked on the news and we saw
where there were some inmates being unsupervised. I’m sure that there’s a reason for that and
I’m sure that Mr. Leverett can handle that but the taxpayers need to know that as commissioners,
as elected officials that we are concerned about what is happening in the community especially
when it comes to drugs, theft and cell phones. Those could’ve been some weapons that were
dropped out the there. There could, some innocent people could’ve been hurt. So I’m just going
to ask the commissioners to become more involved in reference to this, these kinds of incidents
and I think we do need an outside, to come in and investigate so we won’t have any partiality
being shown in reference to these different departments.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
35
Mr. Russell: Well I respect your concern and your desire to look into these issues
basically but when you look at Corrections and the operation thereof you’re looking at situations
where unfortunately across the country you’re dealing with a fairly standard kind of investigation
that occurs not only here but every place else. And we deal with contraband and those kinds of
issues basically. We have the ability to investigate that. We have the ability to present that to
the District Attorney for his decision on whether or not charges should be placed. In addition to
that we have asked for the expertise of the Department of Corrections in investigating these
issues not only in local prisons but throughout their own particular area that occurs on a fairly
regular basis too. You know its’ something that occurs with contraband, you investigate it.
We’ve got a history of pursuing criminally people that violate the law and provide contraband to
individuals who violate the law. We regularly do that not only in this area but other areas that
we have. I think we’re rolling along in the general practice of what we do. Based on my
numerous years in both corrections and law enforcement I’m not uncomfortable with the process
that we’re, with the speed of the investigation, the process of what we’re doing. If you feel like
another outside agency in addition to the Department of Corrections needs to come in and take a
look that’ find but you know we’re doing what we do and doing it in a manner that’s both
professional and appropriate at this particular point in time.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there, Commissioner Williams, I
believe I’ve recognized you twice on this issue.
Mr. Williams: We’ve got the motion, Mr. Mayor. I just want to make one statement.
th
Thanks to Sylvia Cooper on Tuesday June the 12 there’s an article in the paper and it said,
“Deputy is suspended”. And says former deputy admits to lying but Ronny Strength makes a
statement. He says if an acquisition is made against any of my folks instead of investigating
myself we get an outside agent to come in and investigate. That’s what the Sheriff said and I
think that’s right. I don’t think you can investigate yourself when you’re talking about that kind
of thing. So think Mr. Russell, I think Mr. Leverett along with Recreation got good intentions
but anything this serious we need to have an outside agency ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: --- come in versus our own people coming in doing.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion
Commissioner will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Holland: I believe Mr. Leverett wanted to share some information.
Mr. Mayor: Okay actually the vote has been taken and ---
Mr. Brigham, Mr. Smith and Mr. Grantham vote No.
Motion carries 6-3.
The Clerk: Item 45.
36
Mr. Mayor: Hand on, Madam Clerk. In deference to Ms. McNabb who has come in
from out of town I’d like to go ahead and address the addendum to the agenda item on the bond
swap.
The Clerk:
ADDENDUM
53. Receive report from the Financial Advisor regarding the bond refunding and the
termination of the agreements concerning the swap transaction. (Requested by
Commissioner Brigham)
Mr. Mayor: Ms. McNabb.
th
Ms. McNabb: Thank you, it’s good to be here again. When I was here on the 19 we
discussed bringing today the analysis of the refunding and a parameters resolution. Upon further
discussion with the city’s bond council they didn’t have enough time to prepare, would not have
enough time to prepare that so we will be bringing that to the July meeting. However what I
would like to have considered today is regarding the $160 million dollar Deutsche Bank swap.
th
On the 19 I presented information that we had gotten the week before indicating, or two weeks
before indicating that the swap was worth over a million dollars. In that particular week of the
th
19 it had dropped in value down to $800,000.00. This past week I think on Wednesday the
value of that swap to the city went back up over a million dollars. So you can see it’s fluctuating
pretty drastically and in consideration of what I think, what I took away was the commission
preference to realize a million dollars from that particular transaction, that termination, and
considering that that particular contract is not in any way integrated into the refunding of the
bond and in consideration of the fact that all the termination requires in a phone call. That’s the
extent of the requirement to terminate. A resolution has been presented that would authorize I
believe the Mayor to execute that termination upon my advice and limited to the ability to net at
least a million dollars from that termination.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, any questions or --- Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess I’m the one who speaks on this subject
as much as anyone but I find that Ms. McNabb has really given us a good synopsis of the
position we’re in and has illustrated the variations that we encounter from the standpoint of the
fluctuation of what these bonds are doing and what interest rates are doing and what they will be
doing I think for the next year, year and a half anyway. I feel like we should move forward as
we indicated in our last meeting. She has certainly brought us a classic example of derivatives
and what they can do and will do for you and to you. So it’s I think my best interest is to vote in
favor of reversing these bonds that she has spoken about and to bring in a million dollars for the
government and then move forward in doing the other swaps that are necessary in the future. I
did talk aboutus not bringing this to a vote but I think we need to have an issue on that right now
based on the variations that we have within these interest rates and what we have so I’d just like
the floor to be open for further discussion and then if we feel like and I think a motion would be
in order, I’d be happy to make one.
37
Mr. Mayor: Okay and I’d just like to say I, Ms. McNabb, I appreciate you coming down
and I understand Commissioner Grantham talking about the fluctuations in the market basically.
If we can lock it in today at over a million dollars, which I think was the will of the body last
time that you came and presented to us. I think I would just have to say I personally would be in
favor of that. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you. Ms. McNabb, I thank you as well. I just wanted to go back to
my --- so I can understand it. If we did this what affect would that have on anything else if we
go ahead and sign off now.
Ms. McNabb: It would, you’re talking about on the refunding ---
Mr. Williams: Right.
Ms. McNabb: --- of the bond and the other parts of the transaction, it would have
absolutely no impact on the rest of that transaction.
Mr. Williams: Okay, now ---
Ms. McNabb: And I say the rest that’s a misstatement on my part. The two are totally
unrelated.
Mr. Williams: Okay, so if we did that it wouldn’t be any loss to us on any other side.
We would probably gain if we closed if we did this when the market was up where it is now. Is
there any way of locking in like the Mayor stated if we decided to vote today to lock in at the
rate it is now so we can make sure if you can be sure when it comes to bonds and stuff like that.
Is there any way that we can do that within the next 24 hours to be able to have? And I’m just
asking the question because you know ---
Ms. McNabb: That’s a good question. At this point, last I checked with my derivatives
person, the contract was valued at $1,045,000.00. So we’re right above that $1 million dollar
mark. I believe that I can negotiate with Deutsche Bank if it has fallen slightly below a million
dollars. I believe that I can negotiate with Deutsche Bank and get them back up to a million
dollars in order to execute that termination. As soon as authorized I can go out, I can leave and
take care of that termination. Now if for some reason that has dropped off while I’ve been sitting
here I can’t guarantee that and that’s why we were asking in the resolution to authorize the
Mayor. If it’s fallen back below a million dollars then I would propose to watch it every day and
that’s what our folks have been doing. They’ve been watching it everyday even during the day
to see when it hits that million dollars. And that’s why I’ve asked that there be a minimum of a
million dollars.
Mr. Williams: Okay, and ---
Mr. Mayor: And, Commissioner Williams, I think I can simple steed this for you and if
Ms. McNabb will listen, it’s basically you’re giving me the authority to, if it’s at a million dollars
38
right now we can go ahead and do it right now. If not then Ms. McNabb can watch the market
and when it hits a million dollars or over then I’d have the authority to execute the transaction.
Mr. Williams: And my last question, Mr. Mayor. Ms. McNabb, now you’re standing
before us now but when you leave and somebody says you know you had Ms. McNabb
yesterday but if you had me it had been a million and a half. Now do I know that, and I’m
asking straight. See these fellas are talking behind a bush but Steve’s talking here. How do I
know that this is the ---
Ms. McNabb: The correct amount?
Mr. Williams: --- correct amount, the way to go and what we should be doing I guess.
Ms. McNabb: Because you hired me as your Financial Advisor and I have a fiduciary
obligation to act in your best interest. I don’t make money based on terminating. I have a fee,
don’t get me wrong because I have liability for determining what that fair market value is and
that’s one way that we have the expertise. We are not a party to the transaction we’re not a
counter party in the derivatives. We’re independent. And sohopefully that explains. And you
know anybody can always come back and say, well if you had waited a day it would’ve been
worth this. Well if we had done it last week it would’ve been worth even more than a million
dollars. So you know every day is different.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: On the measures and indicators that lead to the trending on this, the up or
down. What are we projecting for the coming week? And I would rather see us authorize a
target range for the Mayor to execute this end. You know it’s just like a slot machine knowing
when you get your winnings when to walk away. And I’d really give you guys a range and
perhaps look at and if indicators for the week. For instance if we’re at a million today and the
indicators look good throughout the week we could end up with a $1.2 million and perhaps hold
off a day or two to maximize our gain on this. But I’d like to give you guys the latitude to make
that execution.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, members of the commission. I had Ms. McNabb come by my
office before she came over here and the resolution that we jointly collaborated on just says that
by this resolution the undersigned commissioners of Augusta do hereby authorize the Mayor
upon the advice of Dianne McNabb of A.G. Edwards who is the duly appointed and serving
Financial Consultant to Augusta to terminate the interest rate swap between Augusta and
Deutsche Bank entered in 2006. In the event that the termination yields a payment to Augusta of
not less than $1,000,000.00 net of all appropriate expenses and Dianne McNabb determines that
the trade is done at fair market value. And it has been represented by Ms. McNabb and others at
A.G. Edwards that she has consulted with for her due diligence that this is an ideal opportunity to
terminate the swap at a profit to this government.
39
Mr. Grantham: So moved.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Shepard: I ask that be put in the form of a motion.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. That was Commissioner Grantham
motioned and Commissioner Hatney second. Mr. Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: I guess you get to handle the city’s money for a week ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ve got a Financial Advisor. Don’t put that on me.
Mr. Bowles: I’d like to ask Ms. McNabb what the situation is with the other bond swap
that we’re $4 million upside down on.
Ms. McNabb: Um, as interest rates trend up and savings from the refunding go down the
cost of that termination payment obviously goes down. And so as it relates to the other swap
you’re still in a, what I would consider a good position because those two transactions are
inversely related.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you.
Ms. McNabb: So we kind of stay protected on that one.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Now that is not a bad deal for the city. Thank
you Ms. McNabb.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
45. Motion to approve GDOT Right of Way Mowing and Maintenance Agreement for
plantings and beautification on Doug Barnard Parkway.
Mr. Brigham: So moved.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Mr.
Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: I would just like to know who’s going to maintain these roads.
40
Mr. Brigham: Georgia Department of Transportation.
Mr. Bowles: Department of Transportation, so we can expect the grass to be cut twice a
year. I think this is part of our problem that we’re allowing DOT to maintain supposedly our
properties and they come in twice a year and cut it. And I think we’ve got to do something.
Mr. Mayor: Can you speak to that issue?
Mr. Greene: Mr. Mayor, commissioners. What this is is Doug Barnard is a state
highway. They maintain the road presently. This mowing and maintenance agreement is just for
the five selected areas where we’re going to have beautification projects for enhancements. We
will maintain that section where we’re planting the shrubbery, the flowers and etcetera. DOT
will still maintain the rest of Doug Barnard Parkway.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: And this is a project that’s being ---
Mr. Greene: We’ve been working on this for about six months trying to get the clerical
permits. They had to approve our plan and it went back and forth, back and forth. And we
finally got the plan approved with the plantings approved and what this is here is so the Mayor
can sign it and execute the document.
Mr. Mayor: And it’s through the, and partnership with the Salvation Army is enterprise
name and I believe all the plant material is donated?
Mr. Greene: We, everything that’s come through the regular budget if we have to buy
anything. But most of the stuff is donated.
Mr. Mayor: And it’s a pilot project that we can work on other areas in the city.
Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, for the record during I guess it’s been about three or four years
ago when we studied the amount of roadway we have in the city and the number of times we can
cut it with existing staff. We can only cut what we have if we approach the entire city on an
equal basis about three to four times a year. That’s all the 14 hundred plus miles. So it’s become
even more difficult I’m sure for Mr. Greene and his staff to maintain the roads and all during
these budget, tough budget times, hiring freezes and so forth. And again this reemphasizes the
fact that we need to get these guys up to staff and give them the tools they need to do their job in
order to maintain these areas.
Mr. Mayor: Absolutely. We have a motion and a second on this issue. If there’s no
further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
41
The Clerk: How are we going to handle the pension?
Mr. Mayor: Is Mr. Shepard? Okay.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, can we take Items 46, 47 and 48 at one time, jointly?
Mr. Mayor: We can. Madame Clerk.
Mr. Williams: I think, Mr. Mayor, that’s going to be kind of difficult because I think
each one of them as far as 47 is a different pension plan and I think, Mr. Brigham, I don’t know.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Shepard: Their failures are identified in three separate letters which you were sent
back in February, Mr. Williams, and they were then redrafted to correct all those failures. If
you’d like me to pass out all the letters again Ican do that but the ---
Mr. Mayor: Well we can, they are related but I think we can take them one at a time.
We’ll just start with 46. Madam Clerk.
The Clerk:
ATTORNEY
46. An ordinance to amend and restate the 1945 Richmond Employees Pension Fund Act
and any amendments thereafter to comply with the Internal Revenue Service Laws and
Regulations; to repeal all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance.
47. An ordinance to amend and restate Ordinance No. 6656, adopted February 20, 2002,
the “1949 City of Augusta 1949 Georgia Retirement Fund”, hereinafter referred to as the
Plan, so as to comply with the Internal Revenue Service Laws and Regulation; to repeal
conflicting ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance.
48. An ordinance to amend and restate Ordinance Number 6655, the “1977 Richmond
Employees Pension Fund”, hereinafter referred to as the “Plan” and amendments thereto
to comply with the Internal Revenue Service Laws and Regulation; to repeal any
ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
Mr. Shepard: Madam Clerk, you actually called out 49 so I can do that which is the next
item I believe. Item 46 is the Pension Plan for ’45. Now we received, this is a project that
predates my tenure as City Attorney. It’s been a process, which was begun under the former
City Attorney Jim Wall. The process was to qualify all of our plans with the IRS. We had to go
backwards. To be kind the last submission, which was one in 2002, was take these plans back to
all the applicable tax laws. And for that purpose we employ what is know as an Employee
Benefits Council. The Employee Benefits Council was Paul, Hastings and Jenofsky of
Washington, DC and they supplied us with compliance statements which we said, they said if we
agreed to these they would qualify our plans for tax purposes which are important to our
42
employees writing off their pension benefits and us having our accounting properly done. The
pension plan was submitted actually anonymously first under what they call the Anonymous
Voluntary Compliance Plan. They then determined they could be qualified. So the identity of
Augusta as the plans sponsor was identified and they sent us letters in March, excuse me in
February that said this is what you need to do and I in turn forwarded them on to you, the Mayor,
Mayor Pro Tem at that time, Ms. Beard, all the commissioners and the Administrator received a
memo from me which enclosed the list of failures. So we’ll just do the failures for the 1945 Act
first. And it said that on this date they found failure number one was it did not comply with the
applicable requirements of the Tax Equity and Physical Responsibility Act of 1982. That’s
called TEPRA and so they, The Employee Benefits Council inserted the appropriate dates and
appropriate code changes. Failure number two is a plan that was not amended to comply with
the applicable requirements of The Tax Reform Act of 1986, TRA ’86. The Unemployment
Compensation Amendments of 1982 and OMNIBUS Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. That’s
the COBRA Law. And these were not done properly.
Mr. Mayor: Oprah? I thought you said. I’m sorry, go ahead. All the legalese is a little
bit confusing.
Mr. Shepard: The legalese is, you asked me to go through all of these so, this is what you
get. You get failures enumerated in tax code rhetoric.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Shepard: And it’s, you just have to ---
Mr. Mayor: It’s just basically something that we need to update.
Mr. Shepard: What we had to do. I kept after the benefits council so that we finally go
the determination letters. They said we have to do these certain applicable things and then I said
well you have to further help us by preparing the appropriate amendments. So the appropriate
amendments were prepared and that’s what’s all of these lists, there are going to be about ten on
each one of these specifically listing how the plan has failed and um, it’s all in tax legalese.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Shepard: I can’t ---
Mr. Mayor: No, and I understand. But basically we need to update the plans or make
these modifications due to IRS guidelines.
Mr. Shepard: Correct. The IRS changes in the law. And also for the 1977 Plan in
particular we need to go ahead and have a version of it, which has a favorable determination
letter so that we can open it is our plan. The first order of business in bringing about the new DB
Plan that everyone is interested in is to get this back to the IRS. Now thankfully it’s an
ordinance and a second reading can be waived. The other two are local acts, which are a little bit
43
different. But I mean this is, this is the kind of thing that you have to go through and it’s all in
tax legalese. I’m sorry.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Hatney.
Mr. Hatney: My question about number 48, the 1977 Plan. What will the activity you’re
talking about doing have, what will the impact have on the merger with the ’77 with the other.
Mr. Shepard: If we do not do this we cannot merger with the other plans.
Mr. Hatney: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Shepard: Sir?
Mr. Hatney: It’s created a fallback.
Mr. Shepard: This will prepare it for that.
Mr. Hatney: For a fallback.
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir, for that.
Mr. Hatney: My concern was that something, this was not something was going to block
that?
Mr. Shepard: No, sir and, it must be done in order to pave the way.
Mr. Hatney: Okay.
Mr. Shepard: But these are the types failures. We can continue through all the plans but
the memorandum was sent out so that you could have a chance to look through all of this. It’s all
tax legalese Mr. Mayor and I’d be happy to continue.
Mr. Mayor: Lord, I don’t know how you read that stuff.
Mr. Shepard: Well, I wish there was a better way to do it but I don’t see that there is.
Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I guess my question is basically going around the ’49 Pension
Plan that uh, what we’re doing here, Mr. Shepard. Will that open up that plan, will that change
anything with than plan? That’s a very sticky situation there when it comes to the ’49. That’s
been a solid group I think their actuary is very good, they’ve got the funds and I’m just
wondering. When you vote on something you don’t understand it it’s too late to come back and
say you know I should’ve asked that question then and now it’s out. So what affect, what
changes will be made to the, I guess to the people in that plan, will anybody else come in that
plan?
44
Mr. Shepard: No.
Mr. Williams: Will that do anything to that plan? What I guess I need to know ---
Mr. Shepard: We have one question that we thought we should clarify and that was how
do we treat the people in 1949 who came in the plan as either a fireman or a policeman and so
we offered a suggestion that those people that continue to maintain their certification as a law
enforcement officer or a fireman be treated as a fireman or a policeman. And that way they
would have some as they came in so should they go out. So that was accepted by the IRS. There
was some question as to how to handle those folks so that’s what we did.
Mr. Williams: Okay and my last question, Mr. Mayor. The pensioners themselves, have
they been apprised to what we’re doing here now.
Mr. Shepard: Yes, sir, Mr. Williams. There was a mail out I believe about a year ago as
I remember correctly. We were, of the size of the plans that we had to send out because the
Department of Labor and Regulations we sent out a mass mailing to the employees that were
affected by these various plans. And so it’s something that, it’s really something you don’t have
an alternative. You need to pass the ’77 approval to move it, to move it forward so that you have
the possibility of amending it, bringing new people, bring in the no planners. I think Mr. Burns
will second what I’ve said up to now and I would just ask that you go ahead and pass the plan as
amended. The IRS has identified the failures; our Employee Benefits Council has identified the
corrective actions and have incorporated this into the new documents.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Grantham.
Mr. Grantham: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think in simple layman terms this thing is, is it
the first two plans ’45 and ’49 Acts which are statutes of the state. Your ‘77 plan is an ordinance
by you local government ---
Mr. Shepard: Right.
Mr. Grantham: --- which in turn what we’re being charged to do here today is to conform
to the regulations of the IRS. They have sent us the violations that have been in place based on
they changes within their law and so they’re asking us to update these particular pension plans in
. So I want to make a motion that we do that.
order to comply to the IRS rulings
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Would you make that motion to approve 46, 47 and 48?
Mr. Grantham: Absolutely.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
45
Mr. Shepard: Would the motion indicate that we would waive the second reading on the
’77 Act.
Mr. Grantham: Yes.
Mr. Shepard: And then we will be back with the other two are home rule matters. You
can’t waive those. I’ll see you again on that at the next regular meeting.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
50. Discuss the Commission’s censure of Commissioner Calvin Holland. (Requested by
Commissioner Marion Williams)
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I had ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: --- this placed back on the agenda and I want the note that if there was a
violation that I never heard, I never seen and I would like for that to be pointed out what that
violation was and if there’s not a violation I want to make a motion that we rescind that because I
think it’s unfair, I think it’s something that we did a knew jerk reaction to and I don’t think we
should’ve done that. I just think that if there’s a violation within the ordinance or within the
guidelines that were written it needed to be specified and if notmy motion is to rescind that.
Mr. Hatney: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there, Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, if this going to continue to come up on a regular basis I request
that future transactions and discussions include the text of all the communications with the
Attorney which in the end point to the activities leading up to where we are today, involving bad
business practices, actions that could throw this city into chaos with it’s operations. And in the
final communication instruct an employee to commit an illegal act by releasing information
governed by the privacy act. So I’d just like to if this comes up in the future have the whole
story and that be made a part of the public record to where the public will in fact know the entire
story and why this commission took action to stop this type of behavior on behalf of the citizens
of the City of Augusta.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Let me just share a couple of things with you, Mr.
Mayor. First of all I want to commend Mr. Williams for his persistence in trying to make this
46
change in reference to this censure. Everyone knows it was not done adequately. But my mind
focus was to make sure that I got my statement on the record and have it being recorded that I
made at the last commission meeting. And then of course the Attorney’s report and had it
recorded also for future reference because something of this particular nature may come up
again. And I would just share this with you, Mr. Mayor and the commissioners and those in the
chambers, and this just a note to express my sincere appreciation for the overwhelming support I
received from many of the people regarding the unjust commission six vote censure of me.
Many of you may know that I was completely exonerated by an outside legal counsel regarding
my request for information and I want you to know personally that I followed protocol in
requesting the information relative to Mr. Russell’s computer hard drive. While a few of you
may not have understood my emotional response to this total miscarriage of justice I say to you,
st
live on. 1 Samuel 167 says, “ For the Lord seeth not as a man seeth For man looketh on the
outward appearance. But the Lord looketh on the heart. In the words of Dr. King injustice
anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. And please note that I am committed to serving you
to the best of my ability, this government with dignity and pride and I will not be intimidated by
those who wish to silence me as I represent to the best of my interests. Many thanks to all of
those who called and sent me letters from all over the state from Washington, DC to Atlanta and
Florida. I thank them so very, very much. And I’m looking forward to meeting and talking with
a lot of these people who have contacted me and I want to let you know that I’m here to work
with this government because this government is of the people and by the people.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Holland: As I stated previously truth crushes the earth to survive again. Thank you,
sir.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioner Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, it’s all about truth and again I’ll go back to if we read the entire
text of the communication the truth is that this was a bad thing to do, the wrong thing to do and
this commission was right in it’s action. And if we read partial text and represent that as the
truth we are not being honest with the people and the facts are all the communications taken
collectively show that this was an activity not sanctioned by this the best operating practices of
this government and this government took action to say we work together as a team. No one of
us runs the commission.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m just a little bit disappointed why we just
can’t understand. This body has made mistakes before. We voted on stuff that we shouldn’t
have voted on and we came back and we changed it. Had Mr. Holland or any other
commissioner done something and I wish that would be brought out. Now Commissioner
Cheek’s talking about the record being added. I’ve go no problem adding the whole file cabinet.
You can’t just bring the record; bring everybody else’s record as well. I have requested the same
information and I wasn’t censured and I know ya’ll think I got a lot of mouth but that’s all I got
47
and nobody said anything to me. So if he was wrong I was just as wrong as well and I just want
to know what the violation was. He went through the Assistant Administrator who was in charge
and made a request. He in turn gave the request to somebody else. But we, we can hide from
this thing, we can run from it but we’re going to face it sooner or later. I mean today’s just as
good a day as any. If we can face it and get it over with or we can face it next ten, twelve how
ever five months and how many days, twelve days we’ve got left, Mr. Cheek.
Mr. Cheek: --- months and twelve days.
Mr. Williams: We’re going to see it again so we might as well see it today and put it
behind us. And I think that would be the best thing to do. So my motion still stands, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, if there’s no further discussion commissioners will now vote by the
usual sign.
Mr. Brigham, Mr. Smith, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Grantham and Mr. Cheek vote No.
Motion fails 4-5.
Mr. Williams: Madam Clerk, put it back on the agenda for our next commission meeting.
Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: The matter has been voted on. Let’s move on to ---
Mr. Cheek: Mr. Mayor, can we have also as part of that request the, all the
communications from the Attorney and this transaction being included as part of our back up ---
Mr. Mayor: That’s fine. Okay let’s ---
Mr. Holland: Also, Mr. Mayor, since I’ve only been recognized once.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Holland.
Mr. Holland: I just want to emphasize the fact that the censure does not stop me from
doing my job as an elected official ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Holland: --- and I’m going to continue to do what I’m supposed to do as an elected
official. And so this is just done to ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Holland: --- satisfy some egos because these egos ---
Mr. Mayor: The matter has been voted on.
48
Mr. Holland: I just wanted to make this egotistical mark. Let it be known.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s move on. And I would look for a motion to go into Legal.
LEGAL MEETING
A.Pending and Potential Litigation
B.Real Estate.
C.Personnel.
Mr. Cheek: So moved.
Mr. Mayor: For the purposes pending and potential, to see what you’ve all got.
Mr. Shepard: Acquisition of Real Estate, Potential Litigation and Personnel.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a motion to that affect?
Mr. Williams: I’ll second that motion, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual
sign.
Mr. Holland not voting.
Motion carries 8-0.
[LEGAL MEETING]
55. Motion to approve execution by the Mayor of the affidavit of compliance with
Georgia’s Open Meeting Act.
Mr. Mayor: All righty, I’ll call it back to order. Closed meeting affidavit. Did you ---
Steve, you want to.
Mr. Shepard: I asked for a vote to approve (Inaudible) affidavit where the topics
discussed were personnel, acquisition of real estate and pending and potential litigation.
Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to that effect?
Mr. Williams: So moved.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual
sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
49
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Shepard.
ADDENDUM
54. Motion to approve authorizing the County Attorney’s Office to pursue an appeal in the
Terry and Marilyn Brown case.
Mr. Shepard: Mr. Mayor, members of the commission, I’d ask that the following motion
be added and approved. That the county attorney’s office be authorized to pursue a appeal in the
Terry and Marilyn Brown case based on the statement Mr. Boudreaux explained about the
recreation property.
Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to that effect?
Mr. Brigham: So moved.
Mr. Cheek: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual
sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Hatney: Move for adjournment.
Mr. Mayor: No further business, Mr. Shepard?
Mr. Shepard: No, sir.
Mr. Mayor: With no further business we stand adjourned.
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Lena Bonner
Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy
of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Augusta Richmond County Commission held on
June 19, 2007.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
50
51