Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-10-1997 Meeting I I I PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE ROOM - November 10, 1997 4:00 P.M. PRESENT: Hon. Larry E. Sconyers, Mayor; Mays, . Chairman; Kuhlke, Zetterberg, members; Bridges, Commissioner; R. Oliver; Administrator; J. Wall, Legal Counsel; G. Greenway, Finance; R. Sherman, S. Walker, L. Harris, License & Inspection Dept.; M. McCauley, Transit Dept.; Lena Bonner, Clerk of Commission and Belinda Brown of the Clerk's Office. ABSENT: M. Todd, Commissioner. ALSO PRESENT: Stacy Eidson, Metro Spirit. CLERK: We have a request for two addendum items: 1. Motion to approve an award of bid and contract to Blair Construction, Inc. for $555,732.00 for the Lake Olmstead Park Improvements. 2. Approve adoption of Ordinance amending the Augusta- Richmond County Code Section 6-7-10 so as to delete the limit on authorized taxi cabs. Mr. Zetterberg: So move. Mr. Kuhlke: Second. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion: A request to establish guidelines for imposing penalties (probation, suspension or revocation) for violations of the alcohol ordinances. Mr. Kuhlke: So move. Mr. Zetterberg: Second. Motion carried unanimously. New Ownership: Consider a request by Lisa D. Sanchez for a consumption on premise liquor, beer & wine license to be used in connection with Veracruz Mexican Restaurant located at 3044 Peach Orchard Road. There will be Sunday sales. MS. SANCHEZ: Lisa D. Sanchez, 3044 Peach Orchard Road. MR. WALKER: This restaurant requirements for an alcohol license approved by License Department and the are objectors. application meets all and Sunday sales has Sheriff's Department. the been There Objector: Raymond J. Howell, 2018 Fleming Dale St. Mr. Kuhlke: Second. I Mr. Zetterberg: So move. Motion carried unanimously. Renewals: Renewals includes Discussion: Approval of 1998 Alcohol Beverage License for license holders in Augusta-Richmond County. This dance and Sunday sales. Mr. Kuhlke: So move. Mr. Zetterberg: Second. Motion carried unanimously. A request from the Attorney to approve adoption of the Ordinance amending the Augusta-Richmond County Code Section 6-7-10 so as to delete the limit on authorized taxi cabs. MR. WALL: In combining of the Code the City had a limit and the County had a limit and what we did, basically in the adoption of the code was that there would be no more than had been previously authorized under the City and the County. We recently had someone come in and make application which brought the problem to the forefront again and in talking with Mr. Walker and othersl and the Sheriff's Department and there does not appear to be any justification for restricting the number and so it's recommended that it be deleted. We had previously in consolidation of the Code Book deleted any limitation as far as limousine service is concerned. Mr. Kuhlke: So move. Mr. Zetterberg: Second. Motion carried unanimously. A request from the Transit Director to approve a change in the Washington Road Bus Route. Mr. Kuhlke: So move. Mr. Zetterberg: Second. MR. OLIVER: This will pull us out from under PSC regulation for transit services, because we will not be in multiple counties. Mr. McCauley has indicated to me, however that we have to do it in stage pulling that back to insure that we do it at the proper time so we don't make it more than a certain percentage, but he has insured that we can make this change by 12/31/97. I MR. MCCAULEY: The change basically will take place at an unspecified time after PSC has approved the letter. What we need I I I the Commission to do is to approve us sending PSC notification that we would like to pullout and at that point they basically tell us when we can do it. MR. KUHLKE: What if any would be the financial impact positive or negative by removing that route does it have on the Transit Department? MR. MCCAULEY: By pulling that route out of Columbia County we will lose about 30% of the ridership on that particular bus. It will affect the riders in Richmond County. MR. OLIVER: One of the other things we will be dealing with this through the budgetary process is we had budgeted $900 and some thousand dollars in subsidy from the federal government, we've only gotten $300,000 in subsidy, this year, so we've taken a beating on the federal subsidy portion. This does not address that. But by not being under PSC regulation it gives us greater flexibility. MR. KUHLKE: I would like to amend my motion, I would like to move that we approve Mr. McCauleys request that he notify PSC, but that he come back to this Committee with a revised routing that he will be using up there, with March 31, 1998 being the deadline. After further discussion; Mr. Kuhlke: I that I would like to amend my motion again that we receive this as information. Mr. Zetterberg: Second. Motion carried unanimously. A request from the Recreation Director to approve the design and construction plan for the Natatorium to be built on Damascus Road. MR. BECK: Earlier this year you approved an exciting project for this city and to proceed with the construction of a new swim natatorium and at the same time you also approved a design team to get us to the point that we are at today. Our goal today would be to approve these plans unless we have some modifications that you think need to be made to the plan. At this time I will turn it over to Steve Virgo and Dave Markey. At this time Steve Virgo and Dave Markey give a visual display of the plans. Mr. Zetterberg: I move approval. Mr. Kuhlke: Second. Motion approved unanimously. A request from the Recreation Director to approve an award of bid and contract to Blair Construction, Inc., for $555,732.00 for Lakel Olmstead Park Improvements. MR. BECK: This is an addendum we did open bids for the Lake Olmstead improvements that we have presented to you that you did approve in concept. We did go out for bids and received three competitive bids in for the project. Blair Construction was the low bid on the project. We did have a menu of five alternatives on the job and we are requesting that we do accept add alternatives of 1, 2 and 3 on the job, which brings the cost of the project to $555,732.00, which is in budget for the project. It will leave us with a contingency of 7%. After further discussion; Mr. Kuhlke: So move. Mr. Zetterberg: Second. Motion carried unanimously. A request from the Recreation Director to approve the Augusta Golf Course Improvement Plan in the amount of $1,731,084 (with debt service paid from golf course revenues), to hire James G. Swift & Associates for all professional services for the project in thel amount of $137,014 and to approve a resolution of intent to make capital improvements financed in the form of tax exempt revenue bonds. MR. BECK: At the last meeting a couple of issues were brought forward as to some of the concerns with the improvement plan. One of which was the concern about the funding avenue for it and how it might be funded and I guess with that I'll let Jim or Randy address the legality of the funding and what sources it could come from. MR. WALL: I had concerns, but the revenue bond does provide for golf links which I deem to be a golf course, so from a revenue bond standpoint you could issue revenue bonds and the revenue from the go golf course operation would be the source of repayment. MR. OLIVER: And we would be looking totally to the golf course to repay any borrowing that we did. MR. WALL: Let me explain the resolution that is in the agenda book as well. There is a time period and a window, if you were to approve this and go forward with spending funds the adoption of this resolution would simply say that at such future time if you chose to issue the revenue bonds to recoup that then it would be an includible item in the revenue bond. In other words, if you all decided to go forward with less than the full project, as one idea or decided to go forward with the architectural work or furtherl plans then this insures that you could add those cost back into the overall bond issue, that's the sole purpose of the resolution. You may recall that we did one at one point in so far as the landfill I I I is concerned when they talked about the possibility of issuing revenue bonds and the resolution was adopted but we've never utilized that resolution, so that's the purpose behind this. MR. KUHLKE: I think that there is some concern on the part of some members of the Commissioners that this is a prerequisite of privatizing this golf course and I've had some conversations with Mr. Beck and that's farthest from the truth. But it appears to me that what you are trying to do is to maximize the potential of what we have up there. Even though we are talking about increasing the rate to play the golf course, you're not talking about increasing the rate to play the golf course, you're not talking about giving the existing members something for their money. In my opinion you have a good plan to move forward with. From a timing standpoint considering the '99 games that are coming to this community, having a first class natatorium, a tennis facility up there, you'll have a lot of exposure in that period of time. But my concern in talking about this is how you would go about financing. In talking with the bankers this is a little bit of an unusual situation from the standpoint of revenue bonds. I did talk back with Rema Brinson today who is the banker that you and Randy talked with about trying to put together a consortium of banks that would go along with this. They will go with the revenue bond situation. Under this scenario, they feel like they would have to hold that loan in their portfolio, they don't have any collateral, so they think they would have a hard time going out and placing it privately. But he said by doing that the rate structure would be a little bit different than a general revenue bond and he threw out the number of the range for me from 5.3/4 up to 7%. But if you take the best case scenario your debt service on that would be $172,000 a year, your worse case scenario would be $186,000 a year, which is considerably lower than what you proj ected. The other thing is that we've talked about this, if you look at Forest Hill and you look at Goshen and you look at the number of rounds that they are playing at those two golf courses, to me your projection on increased play with a nice facility up there is low. The other thing that I think we can't bank on this but I would hope that as we go down the road and if the Commission feels like this is the appropriate way to go, that they next sales tax issue that we try to plug it in as an item and that we could wipe it out. MR. KUHLKE: And to payoff bonds. So potentially we've got a window, say three to five years down the road that we could wipe out this debt and really have something that would make a contribution. Not only to the people that are playing up there, but working with the Convention and Visitors Bureau with having a nice facility that's compatible with the other two facilities that we have up there. I'd hate to see us to it piece meal, I think that we would make a mistake by doing it that way. But, my concern was how we could structure the financing part of it. What I would like to do is to make a motion that we approve this proj ect, subject to the appropriate structuring of a financing vehicle to move forward with it. After further discussion; Mr. Zetterberg: Second. I MR. MAYS: If this is going to be financed, if we are going out for a bond program then I want to see a written and this is hard to do, I want to see a written guarantee. I don't want us to get into a program where we inject the money on a public side, get in debt and then all of a sudden we find out then that we are not generating enough. If the mechanics can be worked out, if there is going to be a guarantee that this is going to be a publicly run golf course from the standpoint of at least until whatever debt servicing you got will be dealt with, or until you transfer it over to sales tax. I don't have a problem as an individual supporting it. Mr. Kuhlke: I would like to amend my motion to read that we approve the plan as presented, subject to working out suitable revenue bond financing on this fund and that as long as we have a debt service on this golf course that it will remain a public golf course. Mr. Zetterberg: Second. Motion failed 2-1 with Mr. Mays voting present. I With no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned. Lena J. Bonner Clerk of Commission bjb I