HomeMy WebLinkAboutCalled Commission Meeting February 19, 2009
CALLED MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER – February 19, 2009
3:00 P. M.
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 3:00 p.m., Thursday, February 19,
2009, the Honorable Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Holland, Smith, Mason, Grantham, Hatney, Beard, Johnson, Jackson
and Brigham, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
ABSENT: Hon. Bowles, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
1.Present/Discuss/Approve Special Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) Phase VI
Project List.
rd
Mr. Russell: The next important date after today will be March 3 at our regular
Commission meeting. At that point we will have the referendum in front of you which is the
language that actually begins the process. It needs to be approved and gotten to the Board of
Elections and the Department of Justice. Today we will attempt to pass the project list that we’ve
been working on for the past several months and as we move forward with that, that is the target
rd
for today is that project list passed so that we can write the referendum for the March 3 meeting
at this particular point in time. You have in front of you the challenge grant requirements that
we’ve talked about in the past. This formalizes that language that we talked about to insure that
the individual people that are involved in the grants, the outside agencies, actually have money
that’s available to them that has a match that we voted on last time of 25% and that we move
forward with that. That language reflects the conversation that we had last week and that’s for
your information since you already voted on that. Last week you also came back with a request
that we look at a $181 million dollar cap. We started out with $647 million dollars, $647,359
(sic) as initial items that were requested by not only our departments but members of our
community. After several weeks and several attempts to put that down to a number that was
manageable, we came back with a recommendation on 12-17 of $185,305, a recommendation on
2-5 of $184,724. After some discussion last week about that, you asked me to come back with a
recommendation of $181,000 million dollar cap. I think that was based on some of the numbers
that we’d looked at as far as collections and some concern that it would be a little trouble
reaching those particular cap numbers. We are based on a dollar amount; the time frame would
be the significant issue and how we collect the dollars as opposed to the cap number that is there.
Staff, after several attempts to draw that down to that 181 number without having a negative
impact on the majority of the programs, has made the recommendations that we reduce the cost
escalation reserve to zero which saves us $1.5 million dollars, reduce the cities of Hephzibah and
Blythe to $4.5 million which saves us $1,224,000 and reduce the stormwater utility program
$500,000 and reduce the Municipal Building dollars by $500,000. This gave us the $3,724,000
to get us to the $181 million dollar cap. That required hard work to get there and that is what the
staff recommends if you go with the $181 million dollar cap. Staff would again go back to our
recommendation that we made on 2-5 that has the $184,724 million dollars. We feel that this
best meets the needs of our community. It funds the levels of Hephzibah and Blythe that are
important for them to move forward. It keeps the money in this building and the stormwater
management program and it actually brings a five-year program to fruition. That would be the
staff recommendation that we go with the list of 2-5-09. If there are any questions, I would be
happy to respond.
Mr. Grantham: Did you look at other areas where reductions could be made?
Mr. Russell: Yes. Staff looked at different scenarios where reductions could be made.
We looked at the areas of the outside agencies and others and chose those that were big enough
to make a difference.
Mr. Grantham: You’re looking at giving Blythe and Hephzibah more and I’m not saying
we shouldn’t give them more but we have taken away from the majority of the others. I’m more
inclined to believe we’re going to have to address the water problems in the future anyway so if
we’re going to have to pay for it in the future, why not wait until that future comes to do that? I
am majorly concerned about the economy, the way that the collections have been reported in
December. We do not know what the collections will be like for January and the rest of the year.
I think we are not being prudent in our recommendation as far as the taxpayers and the people of
Augusta to not try to address these few issues that you have pointed out where we can do a
reduction and at least show that we have made a conscientious effort in reducing our SPLOST
package from $184 million to $181 million.
Mr. Russell: I think we have taken a SPLOST package of needs for our community of
$647 million and because of the issues you’ve mentioned, we’ve reduced it down to $184 million
that is an appropriate number for us to deal with.
Mr. Holland: I was also skeptical about the first package that was presented to us but
after looking at the package we have now, I think we should commend Mr. Russell and his staff
for coming back with a package that I think the people should be able to live with.
Mr. Russell: The people who have worked with me, both staff and volunteers, have
done a good job on this.
Mr. Mason
: I just want to thank you for the work you’ve done on this trying to get it to
a point where the taxpayers can feel reasonably comfortable that we’ve done our due diligence.
I’m going
There are a lot of unknowns out there and this has to be voted on by our citizens, but
to go ahead and make a motion that we approve the Administrator’s February 5, 2009
recommendation list of projects for SPLOST Phase VI for $184 million and some change
with the following changes: $1,000,000 in additional funding for the Rocky Creek
Drainage Plan and $500,000 in funding for the Garden City Beautification Initiative for the
Gateway Projects. The funding for these projects will be from Commission Projects – Cost
Escalation Reserve.
Mr. Holland: Second that motion.
Mr. Brigham: I want to commend the staff and volunteers for their work on this project,
but we have a responsibility to the taxpayers and that’s why I asked along with some other
Commissioners for a reduced amount. These projects, when voted on, will be at least 18 months
away after they’re voted on before we ever start funding them. We don’t have any idea what that
economy will be like. I would much prefer to see us reduce this money, and I will support your
recommendation even though it is not my first choice.
Mr. Russell: Thank you, sir. I don’t disagree with your concerns and I would hope that
we as a community can move forward. The challenges are there and we understand that, but I
think we need to meet those challenges facing forward and moving quickly taking advantage of
our own strengths. I appreciate your concerns.
Mr. Grantham: I’m not opposed to the SPLOST program or even the SPLOST package.
It’s just that we can never make everyone happy within the total package that’s being presented,
and my only effort was to try to at least make some indication of reduction in that amount that
was being proposed to us.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: I want to commend the Commission. I have been told that this has been the
smoothest process for SPLOST that most people have ever seen.
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Lena J. Bonner
Clerk of Commission
nwm