Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 1, 2011 Commission Meeting REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER FEBRUARY 1, 2011 Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 5:00 p.m., February 1, 2011, the Hon. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Lockett, Guilfoyle, Smith, Hatney, Aiken, Johnson, Jackson, Bowles and Brigham, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Absent: Hon. Mason, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Mr. Mayor: Before we get started, before I call the meeting to order I did want to, gentlemen, we have a young singer/ songwriter from this area who I met with yesterday who has a new CD out. The final song on the CD is called Augusta. I think it’s pretty good but he requested that I give all the Commissioners a copy of the CD. So I’ll be passing those down. Mr. Hatney: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Carey Murdock, so that everybody knows when he becomes big and famous. And with that I’d like to call the meeting to order. And prior to getting started I’d like for us to stand and have a moment of silence for Firefighter Antonio Jones of Station 19 who passed at 22 years of age. Thank you and I’d like to call on Reverend Brian LaFavor, Pastor of Crawford Baptist Church, for our invocation. The invocation was given by the Reverend Brian LaFavor, Pastor, Crawford Avenue Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited. Mr. Mayor: Thank you and, Pastor, if you could come forward I’ve got a little something special for you. And thank you for that wonderful invocation. Mr. Mayor: Office of the Mayor. By these present be it known that Reverend Brian LaFavor, Pastor of Crawford Avenue Baptist Church is Chaplain of the Day for his civic and spiritual guidance demonstrated throughout the community, serves as an example for all of the st faith community. Given under my hand this 1 Day of February 2011. Thank you. (APPLAUSE) Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to the presentations. The Clerk: PRESENTATION(S) A. Presentation from Mr. J. R. Smalls/Buffalo Soldiers to Augusta Recreation and Parks. 1 Mr. Smalls: Good afternoon everybody. Good afternoon. I’m going to get Mr. Beck to ride a motorcycle here pretty soon. You ready? All right. It gives us great pleasure to be here today. The first remark I want to make is to Mr. Joe Jackson. Our founder James Royce says to publicly thank you for your friendship and all the support that you have provided to the Buffalo Soldiers and him for the ten or so years. And we thank you. (APPLAUSE) I have a plaque here for Mr. Beck and the Richmond County Parks and Recreation. It says thanks for 10 years of outstanding support to the Augusta Buffalo Soldiers and the National Buffalo Soldiers Trooper Motorcycle Club of American. (APPLAUSE) Our own, we’ve got a little check. Where’s the little check at? Our little check goes to Karen Mays Center for $1,000.00. We hope this $1,000.00 helps Karen Mays keep the lights on for a while. (APPLAUSE) Where’s the real check? And again as usual we sent $2,000.00 to Richmond County Parks and Recreation for our youth so that they can have something to do to become productive citizens and stay out of trouble. We present a check for $2,000.00 as usual. (APPLAUSE) Thank you very much for your support. Mr. Beck: Thank you so much. And, ladies and gentlemen, there is no better organization in Augusta, Georgia than the Buffalo Soldiers because they do what they say they’re going to do. You know you have a lot of folks that might talk a big game and say they want to do some things and they all mean well. The Buffalo Soldiers produce and they’ve always produced for us for many years and we’re just glad to be their partner and their friends. So thank you very much. (APPLAUSE) The Clerk: PRESENTATION(S) B. Dr. William Bloodworth, Jr., President, Augusta State University. RE: A Report from Augusta State University. Dr. Bloodworth: Thank you, Ms. Bonner, and in making this presentation if I could possibly ask that The Mayor step down here again. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Dr. Bloodworth: I would appreciate that. He could step right over there in the middle. My report to you this evening is a very brief one and it hasn’t even the slightest hint of controversy to it. It considers and action only taken by the Augusta State University Chapter of the Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi. Phi Kappa Phi is this nation’s largest and oldest honor society that initiates members from all fields of study and higher education. There are some 300 chapters of Phi Kappa Phi around the nation at colleges and universities where students whose work has been only absolutely outstanding are invited to become members of the honor society. Chapters of Phi Kappa Phi may also invite a small and selective number or alumni and faculty members from their institution. So I stand before you this evening not just as the president of Augusta State University but also as the national president of the Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi in which role I help serve those 300 chapters around the nation and help to honor all the men and women who have been initiated into the Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi during the past 114 years. And so that’s why, because I have that role that’s why I can wear this really big medallion 2 at this time. Now at Augusta State University the Phi Kappa Phi Chapter has adopted the practice of capping persons chosen to be invited as members of the honor society and to do so in the presence of classmates or colleagues. It is my pleasure today on behalf of the chapter and of all chapters in the nation in fact to tap the person at Augusta State University Alumnus whom I certainly hope will accept an invitation to be a new member of the Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi. That person is the Honorable David S. ‘Deke’ Copenhaver, Mayor of Augusta through his accomplishments as a student at Augusta State University and as an alumnus of the institution have earned him an invitation contained in this envelope to membership in the Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi. And all of this, Mr. Mayor, is my tapping of you, which I’m honored to perform here in front of your colleagues on the Commission. And I do this along with Professor Janice Williams Whiting also a member of The Chapter. Janice, if you will step up here we’re going to tap our Mayor and give him this envelope congratulate him on what we certainly hope is his upcoming membership in The Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi. (APPLAUSE) Mr. Mayor: And you still kept it to five minutes. Thank you, sir. Mr. Bowles: Mr. Mayor, just a question. Were grades part of the criteria or just accomplishments? Mr. Mayor: They didn’t include my transcripts from the University of Georgia. Thank y’all so much. Thank you. Okay, next, Madam Clerk, on to the delegations. The Clerk: DELEGATIONS C. Mr. Ben Hassan. RE: Continued public discussion relative to the proposed reorganization plan. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hassan and if you could keep it to five minutes, please, sir. Mr. Hassan: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. It’s always a good thing to allow citizens to come before you and address this body. For the last three weeks or the last month or so you know we’ve been talking about the hiring and firing and the restructure and giving the Administrator the hiring and firing power. Mr. Mayor, for me personally on a personal level to the Commissioners as well that was not even an issue for me because all of the people that I’ve checked for the past couple of years 100% of them felt that a Mayor or the Administrator should have hiring and firing power. But they’re, but my concern in this issue was the process. And that’s what I was concerned with and that’s what got me involved in this. Because most of the time and I’ve heard this discussion I’ve heard well this is a delegation issue and another time I’ve heard it takes eight votes to make it happen. So at this time what really kind of disturbs me I don’t know how it went from a delegation issue to a eight vote super majority issue to a six vote issue. And so with that I began to do some investigation and I just came away with a whole different mindset a whole different perspective when it came to the end of the day. So before I go there I want to talk about the personnel policy that made the Administrative service chairperson or Commissioner Lockett has done a very admirable job in terms of going through that and Commissioner Hatney being there, Commissioner Corey 3 Johnson for some time, Mr. Smith and as well as Mr. Brigham being there done a fantastic job. And I think at this time, Mr. Mayor, it would be inappropriate to vote on that manual, that proposed manual simply because of so much progress was made Friday and Monday in terms of changes that needed to be made. And those changes really need to be made. And it was agreed upon by all parties as well as they decided to institute in that manual a EEO section in of itself. So by that manual not being complete right now it only makes sense to put that ticket off the agenda until the manual gets complete so it can be reviewed by those changes, necessary changes and then move forward at that time. That’s my recommendation for that. Also I say I was disappointed by the six votes to restructure and give the Administrator hiring and firing power as well as restructure the government. Previously like I said it’s always been eight votes or either it needs to go before the delegation but what has concerned here because I think if you, you’re creating a double standard. I’ve watched in the month of November early part of December last year 2010 where you were looking at the DBE Office, which is a charter issue, I’m sorry a House Bill 805 issue to establish that. And I watched twice during that time frame that you had intended to get eight votes to so that they could move the DBE office up under Procurement and you got seven votes both times. And as a result of that you’re still trying to resolve that so much so that’s it’s on the agenda today item 32 and item 33. With what you’re talking about giving the Administrator hiring and firing power which is also House Bill issue, which is also law and at the same time you reduce this thing you need six votes. That is a double standard there in both Equal Employment and it comes with the house bill in terms of what they can actually do. Now this is not a new issue about giving the Administrator hiring and firing power but it is as old as this government itself. To go back to 1996 you had a delegation to come in at that particular time and make a presentation because at that time Mayor Larry Sconyers invited them in to come in and give some clarity about that. They went away knowing without a shadow of a doubt there was no way possible of under House Bill 805 that you can give the Administrator hiring and firing power. Now I was of the mindset before I done my due diligence that with eight votes what we call home rule would come into play. But, Mr. Mayor, after some investigation I’ve come away knowing that I don’t think you have the ability to do that. And when I say we I’m saying the government here, the citizens of Augusta to make that decision without getting a delegation involved. Can I give you something to take a look at? Mr. Mayor: You can but let me first ask you, Mr. Hassan. Do you have a legal opinion on this issue? Mr. Hassan: I do. Mr. Mayor: You have gone to an attorney and you have a current legal opinion. Mr. Hassan: Can I give you something, please, if you don’t mind? Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Hassan: It’s not a legal opinion. I’d like to read it and let you do with what you want to with it. Now can I read that? It’s not a legal opinion. Let me read it. Mr. Mayor, would you please read it and let me elaborate on it? It’s to the Commission Council. 4 Mr. Mayor: The Commission Council shall have the authority from the affirmative votes of two-thirds of those elected to the Commission Council excluding the Chairperson Mayor to change the provisions of this act which conflicts with existing or future state or federal laws provided however that no provisions shall be made which amended or changes the principal of representation of citizens by district on the Commission Council or any other entity. Mr. Hassan: Okay, that you know that’s part of House Bill 805. You know that’s right. That’s Section 15. That’s Section 15. And what else it’s saying is an Attorney can listen you can look at it later you can discover what’s on it. Now what it’s saying here in my interpretation of it --- Mr. Mayor: But, Mr. Hassan, you’re not an attorney. Mr. Hassan: No, no, no you can do what you want to after. Mr. Mayor: But this is just your interpretation. Mr. Hassan: My interpretation. I think you will find it pretty much accurate. Mr. Mayor: But I have to go, I try to run --- Mr. Hassan: I want you to do that. Mr. Mayor: --- the city based on the letter of the law and there’s only one person that’s sitting in this. We’ve asked for a legal opinion on this and I’m just telling you my position. I’ve got to go by people you know have law degrees that interpret the law. So you’re welcome to your interpretation but --- Mr. Hassan: Can I do that --- Mr. Mayor: Yeah, sure. Mr. Hassan: --- that’s all. The Commission Council have the authority upon the affirmative votes of two thirds of those elected to the Commission Council excluding the Mayor Chairperson. When I read what I understand that you are part of the Commission Council, that’s eleven people. I mean you need eight votes to make it happen, to make this incident happen. This adds to, excluding the Mayor Chairperson that’s means that even though you’re the eleventh person you don’t have a vote in the issue. So eight of the Commissioners have to make, have to make the decision to the affirmative, the affirmative votes of two thirds of those elected to the Commission Council excluding the Mayor Chairperson to change the revision of this act which c conflicts, which conflicts with existing of future state or federal law. Now what this is saying what there, Mr. Mayor, in my interpretation in my --- Mr. Mayor: In your opinion. Mr. Hassan: -- in my opinion. 5 Mr. Mayor: In your opinion. Mr. Hassan: My opinion same thing. My opinion I see what you want me to do. Mr. Mayor: But we can’t base the law on opinion. Mr. Hassan: No, no, no my opinion. You’re taking my time up, Mr. Mayor. With my opinion what this is saying the only way that you have the authority to approach House Bill 805 that was changed in 1995 the only way that it has a conflict with a state or federal law. If it does not conflict with that you don’t have, you don’t have a right to change anything in that bill. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Hassan: Now it says --- Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hassan, your time is up. Mr. Hassan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I appreciate that. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, in light of Mr. Hassan’s reading of that bill I believe the Attorney erred in saying that it takes eight votes. I believe it only takes seven votes to change. Because if you’re talking about two-thirds of ten --- Mr. Hassan: Inaudible. Mr. Brigham: --- no magic number. And I know that the eight was figured on the --- Mr. Mayor: Eleven point five? That shows you how well written that document is to begin with I would say. Mr. Brigham: I would say two-thirds and two-thirds is --- Mr. Hatney: It’s eight votes now. We need to go on. Mr. Brigham: If we’re going to argue the law let’s argue the law. Mr. Mayor: Now and, and hang on, there’s a place --- Mr. Brigham: Inaudible. 6 Mr. Mayor: No, I’m, excuse me Commissioner Brigham. This was a presentation by Mr. Hassan regarding an agenda issue that we have yet to address. Let’s address it in full when we get to the agenda item. Mr. Brigham: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: That would be the proper thing unless anybody has any further questions for, and just keep it to the questions don’t, you know once again we’ll address this when we get to the agenda item. Commissioner Hatney. Mr. Hatney: I’ve got a concern, Mr. Mayor. I do believe we ought to give everybody who’s making a presentation the same respect. And I really don’t believe that we need to occupy his time just rubbing it in. He has a right to his opinion and he’s allowed to be on the agenda and he should be given the respect just like everybody else. That’s my concern. Mr. Mayor: And I fully and I would say Mr. Hassan would know he is a friend and I respect him but when he gave me this to read I just I had a comment, so Mr. Hassan thank you for your presentation and we will move on with the meeting. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Hassan, I want to thank you very much for your presentation. I agree with you totally on your assessment. I know we’re going to talk about this agenda item at some depth later but I do have a question I’d like to ask you about the DBE. You made reference that I believe DBE being under something other that what it’s under now. Could you explain that to me? Mr. Hassan: Well, what I was saying is that a couple of times I think you may have it on the agenda today I’ve noticed that as well as a part of your the policy procedure manual you’re currently looking at all in all the restructure in that the Administrator has presented to us what he, what he plans to do is possibly move the DBE up under Procurement and you have pretty much tried to move DBE in the month of November and the early part of December or either twice in November. And in both times you were only able to get seven votes both times. With that you have it back on the agenda today so you was recognizing that as a charter issue of House Bill 805 issue. You know you need eight votes to do it. So that was my point in making a reference to that. Mr. Lockett: So what you’re saying is you believe that eight votes is required no matter where you move it? Mr. Hassan: Well, eight, no what I’m saying at this point based on my interpretation of this, what I just read, my opinion --- 7 Mr. Lockett: Yes. Mr. Hassan: --- my opinion is that and that’s something I didn’t expect to come across that this Commission has no authority to do anything with the Charter. It is strictly a delegation issue. Mr. Lockett: And so moving the DBE would be a change? Mr. Hassan: A violation. Mr. Lockett: Thank you very much. I appreciate your comments. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank y’all and we will move on to the regular agenda. Mr. Hassan: Thank you, sir. The Clerk: Our consent agenda consists of items 1-29, items 1-29. For the benefit of any objectors to our alcohol petitions, when those petitions are read would you please signify your objection by raising your hand. I call your attention to: Item 2: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection th with a location at 307 8 Street subject to the License and Inspection Director meeting with the Sheriff to review the claims of panhandling and vagrants frequenting the area. Item 3: Is a request for an on premise consumption to be used in connection with a location at 3706B Mike Padgett Hwy. Item 4: Is a request for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with the location at 2864 Deans Bridge Road. The Clerk: Are there any objections to those alcohol petitions? Mr. Russell: None noted, Madam Clerk. The Clerk: Our consent agenda with items 1-29. Mr. Mayor: Okay, I know we have a correction to the agenda that should be before you and an addition to the agenda? The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, could you? The Clerk: Our correction should be on item #20, which was inadvertently placed on the consent agenda. That item should have been place under the regular agenda because of the No decision vote in the Finance Committee. And under our Petitions and Communications the th approval of the January 18 2011 meeting the Finance Department, the motion was to approve the reduction of pay in the amount of approximately 1.8% to be spread over the ten months 8 starting the first of February and that we discussed the appropriate days at the next Finance Committee. The Finance Director has requested that that motion be changed to reflect a pay deduction in the amount of 1.88% reduction is applied for twenty-four pay periods in 2011 starting in February and ending in December. Mr. Mayor: Okay, can I get a motion to add and approve the addition to the agenda? Mr. Brigham: So moved. Mr. Johnson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion Commissioner will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Johnson: This is just to add and approve that agenda item. The Clerk: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Yes, the addition to the agenda. And we can correct the first one with just removing it from the consent agenda. So I would have someone pull Item 20. Okay, obviously we need to pull Item 20 but are there any additions to the consent agenda? The Clerk: Wait, okay if we have a no to add so we have a dissenting vote. Mr. Mayor: That was a motion to add and approve. The Clerk: Well, adding it to the agenda. We need unanimous consent and Mr. Lockett is voting No. So we won’t be able to add those. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to make a motion that we correct the minutes, the on reduction of intent of in the Finance, the motion that was made in Finance in the Finance salary that basically the intent was to reduce it 1.88% and to apply it to the twenty-four periods in 2011 at that time was the intent of the motion. I believe when we talked about the motion we talked about ten months in 2011 and therefore I think it would be appropriately to correct the minutes to be more specific with and ending date of December since we did not talk about an ending date in the motion of the last meeting and I think it would be appropriate to correct it that way now. Mr. Mayor: And that’s in the form of a motion? Mr. Brigham: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second? Mr. Jackson: Second. 9 Mr. Mayor: We have a second. And further discussion? Mr. Lockett: Uh, a question, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Mr. Lockett. Mr. Lockett: My question is I know there’s some conversation about making the two snow days a part of the five days. I would like to ask my colleagues is this where that should be requested as part of that motion or what? Mr. Brigham: No, sir, I believe we separated those two events and I was going to recommend that since we didn’t have an agreement in Finance Committee to refer Item 20 back to Finance Committee to see if we can come up with an agreement there before we vote on that. But that’s another action entirely. I think what we’re doing is dealing with the reduction that we voted on unanimously two weeks ago in specifying that it would only put if for the year 2011. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Madam Clerk, if you could repeat the motion. th The Clerk: The motion was to correct the January 18 2011 minutes to reflect the reduction of pay so that the amount of 1.88% reduction is applied for twenty-four pay periods in 2011 starting in February and ending in December. Mr. Hatney: You’re talking about reducing the pay and having five furlough days? The Clerk: No, sir, the furlough days --- Mr. Brigham: We have not talked about furlough days at all. The Clerk: We haven’t, we haven’t identified the furlough days. This is actually approving the five days but it’s spread over a ten-month period. Mr. Hatney: So you won’t have to add no inaudible --- Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell, if you could add some clarification. Mr. Hatney: --- that’s what I’m asking. Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission what we’re doing is simply correcting the minutes to reflect the 1.88 reduction applied over twenty-four pay periods. That is in fact the five furlough days. What you separated out was the actual dates. So what you approved was you said approximately 1.8 and we’re uncomfortable with the word approximately. We wanted to specify it as a 1.88, which we had talked about. It’s still the five days there’s no addition to the number of days. The question on which days we take and whether or not we can include the snow days has yet to be answered. And that’s another question another agenda item at this point. 10 Mr. Hatney: I still didn’t understand. Are you saying to me that you want to reduce the work pay by 1.88 for ten months. Is that what I’m hearing? And my question was what has that, what does that produce or how does that fall out with the furlough days? Mr. Russell: That is --- Mr. Hatney: Is it two or one in the same? Mr. Russell: --- it’s one in the same. Mr. Hatney: (inaudible). Mr. Russell: It’s on in the same. Mr. Hatney: Well, that doesn’t make sense then. If you’re going to have a reduction in pay then you can’t have no furlough days. Mr. Russell: No, the reduction in pay for five furlough days equals the 1.88% and instead of doing that in those five pay periods we want to do it over a period beginning in February and ending in December to lessen the impact. Mr. Hatney: But there won’t be no furlough days. The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: The cost savings is coming from the furlough days. Mr. Russell: The furlough, the five furlough days would equal 1.88% of the pay. So and we’re spreading it out over --- Mr. Hatney: Spread it out over ten months and there are no furlough days. The Clerk: No, sir, we’ve got to take the days. Mr. Hatney: You can’t do both now. Come on now make sense. Mr. Russell: It’s --- Mr. Hatney: You’re either going to reduce the pay over a ten-month period 1.88 or don’t have no furlough days or have furlough days without the reduction. You can’t have both of them. Because I see, that’s double dipping then. Mr. Mayor: But the pay is reduced by the non-paid furlough days. They’re not getting paid on the days, furlough days that they’re off. 11 The Clerk: You have to take five days off. Mr. Hatney: So you get five days off and still get paid? The Clerk: No, sir. Mr. Mayor: No, you don’t paid. That’s where the cost savings comes from. Mr. Hatney: Oh, man, ya’ll --- Mr. Mayor: Does anybody want to know who’s on first? Mr. Hatney: This is high-tech language. That’s all this is. Mr. Mayor: All righty. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Hatney vote No. Motion carries 7-2. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, Madam Clerk. And we’re still at the point if anybody would like to add anything to the consent agenda you’re welcome to do it now. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I would like to add item #31 to the consent agenda and 34. The Clerk: And thirty-four, Mr. Brigham? Mr. Brigham: Yes, ma’am. Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any further additions? Do we have any items to be pulled for discussion? Mr. Lockett: Uh yeah Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Six, fourteen and twenty-two. The Clerk: Six, fourteen and twenty-two. Mr. Mayor: Six, fourteen and twenty-two? Mr. Lockett: Yeah and you might as well add thirty-one to that. I have a question on agenda item #27. Mr. Mayor: Okay, so that’s 6, 7, 14, 22 and 31? 12 Mr. Lockett: A question on seven but if you want to pull it, that’s fine. Mr. Mayor: Okay, if you’d like to go ahead and ask the question. Mr. Lockett: I’d just looked at the seven bills with the airport parking lot and I would like to know how many parking spaces will be in that lot and what it’s costing us per space. I mean four million and three hundred some odd thousand dollars that’s lots of parking. We can have parking all the way from here to the Judicial Center. Mr. Mayor: Let’s pull that one because I don’t think that’s a question we can answer immediately. Okay, if there’s no further items to be added --- Mr. Hatney: Do you have thirty-two and thirty-three? The Clerk: No, that’s on the regular agenda. Mr. Mayor: That’s on the regular agenda. Mr. Hatney: Well, that settles that then. Mr. Mayor: Okay. The Clerk: Item #34 to the consent agenda so that would be items 1-29, we’re pulling item 2, which should have been on the regular agenda. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have pulled item 20 as well? Okay, I would now look for a motion to approve the consent agenda. Mr. Jackson: So moved. Mr. Johnson: Second. CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC SERVICES 1. Motion to approve an Operational Agreement with South Augusta Community Development Corporation (SACDC) for operation of Barton Village Community Center. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) 2. Motion to approve New Application A.N. 11-05; request by Melissa Ruiz for an on premise consumption Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Burrito Rico & Wings, Inc. located at 3706 B Mike Padgett Hwy. There will be Sunday Sales. District 8. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) 3. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 11-06; a request by Chartara L. Newman for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Club 51/50 located at 2864 Deans Bridge Rd. There will be Dance. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) 13 4. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 11-01; request by William E. Williamson for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Aficionados, LLC located at 307 Eighth St. District 1. Super District 9. subject to the License & Inspections Director meeting with the Sheriff’s Office to review the claims of panhandlers and vagrants frequenting the area. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) 5. Motion to approve an ordinance to amend Augusta-Richmond County Code §6-6-45 License to Operate Arcades so as to define ‘Arcade’ to allow for the continued operation of amusement businesses. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) 7. Motion to award a contract to Reeves Construction in the amount of $4,310,823.10 for the construction of a vehicle parking lot associated with the Passenger Terminal Facility at the Augusta Regional Airport subject to the Attorney’s approval. (Approved by the Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) 8. Motion to approve a request by Joe L. Jones for a Dance License to be used in connection with J’s Lounge located at 3663 Deans Bridge Rd. There will be Dance. District 5. Super District (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) 9. Motion to approve a request by Chong S. Christenson for a Dance License to be used in connection with Chongs Lounge located at 3243 Deans Bridge Rd. There will be Dance. District 5. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) 10. Motion to approve Bid Item #10-197, improvements to The Boathouse Community Facility to RCN Contracting, Inc. in the amount of $251,039.00. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) 11. Motion to approve an ordinance to amend the Augusta, Georgia Code Title Six Section 6-2-76 relating to distance between location of package stores from 1 ½ mile to 500 yards. (Approved by the Commission January 18, 2011 – second reading. 12. Motion to approve the renewal of a lease with Augusta Housing Authority for Barton Village Community Center. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) 13. Motion to approve surveying, planning and engineering design services at Diamond Lakes Regional Park to Cranston Engineering Group in the amount of $55,940. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 15. Motion to approve submission of an NSP3 Substantial Amendment Abbreviated Plan by the Housing and Community Development Department for proposed activities outlined herein. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee January 24, 2011) PUBLIC SAFETY 16. Motion to approve revised maintenance agreement with Pictometry International to provide new 2011 oblique imagery and related software and product support to Augusta. (Approved by Public Safety Committee January 24, 2011) 17. Motion to approve a Professional Services Agreement between the Medical College of Georgia Physicians Practice Group Foundation and the Augusta Richmond County Fire Department. (Approved by Public Safety Committee January 24, 2011) 18. Motion to award Bid Item #10-193, Construction of Fire Station #10, to Continental Construction Inc. as low bid. (Approved by Public Safety Committee January 24, 2011) 14 19. Motion to approve payment to New World Systems, Inc. for Standard Software Maintenance for the period covering January 1, 2011 – December 31, 2011. (Approved by Public Safety Committee January 24, 2011) FINANCE 21. Motion to approve a request from Juvenile Court to carry over the remaining New Program funds they were granted in the 2010 budget. (Approved by Finance Committee January 24, 2011) 23. Motion to authorize submission of a grant application to the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to help finance Phase 1 of a historic properties survey of the Summerville National Register Historic District. (Approved by Finance Committee January 24, 2011) ENGINEERING SERVICES 24. Motion to approve Capital Project Budget Change Number Six and Construction Change Order One for additional site drainage improvement work in the amount of $244,407.11 to Blair Construction, Inc. for the Belair Hills Subdivision Road and Drainage Improvements project. Funding will be from SPLOST Phase IV Recapture as requested by AED. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee January 24, 2011) 25. Motion to approve Capital Project Budget Change Number Two (324-041110- 210824002) and Supplemental Agreement Number Two for the On-Call Construction Services Agreement with Moreland Altobelli Associates, Inc. in the amount of $56,400.00; to continue construction management services on the Walton Way Resurfacing Project as requested by AED. Funding is available in SPLOST Phase IV Fund Balance account. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee January 24, 2011) 26. Motion to approve the use of available federal funding for planning and preliminary engineering fro relocation of a section of CSX railroad line through Augusta. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee January 24, 2011) 27. Motion to approve the revised Tree Ordinance as requested by the Augusta Richmond County Tree Commission. (Approved by Commission January 18, 2011 – second reading) 28. Motion to approve an Underground Distribution Line Easement between Augusta, Georgia, as owner, and Georgia Power Company, in connection with the Marshal’s Substation located at 3050 Deans Bridge Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee January 24, 2011) PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 29. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held January 18, 2011 and Special Called Legal Meeting held January 24, 2011. ATTORNEY 34. Motion to approve Ordinances of restatement of the 1945 Richmond Employees Pension Fund and the City of Augusta 1949 General Retirement Fund and waive the second reading. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. 15 Mr. Hatney: Madam Clerk, I abstain on alcohol, please. Mr. Hatney abstains. Motion carries 8-1. [Items 2-4, 8, 9] Motion carries 9-0. [Items 1, 5, 7, 10-13, 15-19, 21, 23-29, 34] Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. And as we get into the regular agenda just because we have two new Commissioners up here, I just wanted to remind everybody that everybody on any given agenda item can be recognized a total of two times and speak for two minutes a time on the time they’ve been recognized. So, Madam Clerk, let’s go on to the pulled --- Mr. Bowles: Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles. Mr. Bowles: --- I believe Roberts rules in our rules state two minutes and then one minute. Mr. Mayor: I believe you might be, Mr. Attorney? Mr. MacKenzie: That sounds correct. I’d have to look at it to double check. Mr. Mayor: Okay, if you could double check. Mr. Hatney: That does what? Say again. Mr. Mayor: Everybody can speak for two minutes and then Joe Bowles was saying one minute after that being recognized two times on the agenda --- Mr. Hatney: (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: All righty, let’s go to the pulled items. The Clerk: PUBLIC SERVICES 6. Motion to approve rejecting the Bus and Shelter Advertisers bids for Augusta Public Transit and rebid the contract both separately and collectively for advertising on the buses themselves; and also on the bus shelters; and that the current services be maintained at the current rates until the matter is settled. (Approved by Public Services Committee January 24, 2011) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett, this was your pull? 16 Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is the Procurement Director present? Thank you, Ms. Sams. I pulled agenda item #6 because the way it was handled at the last meeting I vehemently disapproved of it. It’s my understanding that this particular item went out for bid on two occasions. Am I correct? Ms. Sams: Yes. Mr. Lockett: And on the second occasion did you or did you not accept the bid of one of these applicants? Ms. Sams: I accepted the bid, yes, sir. Mr. Lockett: And who was that? Ms. Sams: I had two submittals. One was for Billboard Guru and one was for Renaissance. Mr. Lockett: Okay and what was the bid for? Ms. Sams: It was for the professional transit advertising services for both the busses and the shelter. Mr. Lockett: For both the bus and the shelter. Okay on this second bid did anyone of those people that bid were they fully qualified for this? Ms. Sams: On the second bid both vendors were deemed compliant on the second round yes sir they were. Mr. Lockett: And what entered into the decision process of you selecting the particular company that you did? Ms. Sams: The companies were ranked by the Committee --- Mr. Lockett: And I see you show a total of 71 out of 100 and 89 out 100. Is that correct? Ms. Sams: Yes. Mr. Lockett: And who received the 89? Ms. Sams: Renaissance. Mr. Lockett: Okay, and so the person receiving 89 got the high score. So what does that mean to them? Ms. Sams: That means the, for the RFP that the city met that person met the scope of services by 89% out of 100. 17 Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, I pulled this item because this has been for bid two times. It’s obvious that one company scored much better. They were fully compliant and I cannot see us changing the rules after the game has been played and make us retroactively do something that I don’t think is kosher. I do believe and I would like to make a motion that this bid be provided to the person that received the higher score. I say because if we don’t I think we’re going to open ourselves up to litigation. Now in the future if we want to make changes fine but we cannot make them retroactively. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Ms. Sams. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Commissioner Bowles. Mr. Bowles: Mr. Mayor, considering this is professional services I’m going to make a substitute motion to approve the agenda item and rebid this item. When we are told we could revenues of $40,000 a year and to get $6,000 last year and $12,000 this past year that’s, in my So I’m going to make that motion to rebid. opinion, it’s time to look for a new quarterback. Mr. Mayor: That’s a substitute motion to rebid. Mr. Jackson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? If not, Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign of voting. Mr. Lockett and Mr. Hatney vote No. Mr. Johnson abstains. Motion carries 6-2-1. Mr. Johnson: Madam Clerk, I’d like the record to show I’m abstaining because of potential conflict of interest. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Madam Clerk, on to the next pulled item. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell, I take it you’re going to find somebody to address Mr. Lockett’s issue? Please, ma’am. Go ahead. Ms. Speaker: Okay um, this parking lot will add approximately 400 additional spaces. As you may have read already or have heard already we have broken the record in enplanements. We have the most enplanements in 2010 than the airport has had in its existence. As a result of that we have a problem. We have run out of parking. So what this will do is add about 400 additional spaces. And from the terminal also there would be an access road put in. It will include parking, utilities and conduit and all that stuff because it is a revenue generating resource for the airport. So it has to have all those mechanical things in place. Does that answer your question? 18 Mr. Mayor: I just want to say personally I’ve flown through there a good bit. To see that parking lot packed is a great thing because it wasn’t always that way. With your enplanements setting an all time record for the last year you know not a lot of other airports are seeing the growth that Augusta Regional is. So I just want to say to you and everybody else out there, great job. Commissioner Locket, did you? Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to you know when you see this much money, and see you just told me some things I didn’t know. That’s it going to be more than just parking spaces. I’m very supportive of it but I just wanted to know? Thank you very much. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney then Commissioner Smith. Mr. Hatney: I just wanted to ask the Administrator. What does the parking 450 units downtown. What is it costing? Mr. Russell: It’s about, because of the design of the facility --- Mr. Hatney: Just give me a figure. Mr. Russell: I’m trying to think of that price while I’m talking here. Mr. Hatney: It’s more than four million. Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. Mr. Hatney: Yes, sir, I understand how they can get 450 spaces for four million and we’ve got to pay the extra money. That’s my concern you know. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Smith, did you? Mr. Hatney: We need to consult with them next time. Mr. Smith: I just wanted to say I think they’ve done a great job out there. And this extra parking would definitely be a plus. I’m well pleased with what I see out that way. Mr. Mayor: You want to make a motion to approve? Mr. Smith: I do. I make a motion to approve. Mr. Jackson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there is no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. 19 The Clerk: It’s unanimous. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Madam Clerk, next pulled agenda item. The Clerk ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 14. Motion to approve personnel policy and procedures manual with work sessions to be scheduled if necessary to respond to any questions that commissioners may have. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee January 24, 2011) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, I’ll be crying in a little bit. As many of you may know on Friday and on yesterday I held an Administrative Services hearing on the content of the handbook. The two-day sessions we received, we had lots of valuable input. The Law Department, HR, the Administrator agreed with quite a few of the recommendations that my colleagues and I suggested. This handbook is not ready for the market. There are lots of changes they would have had to be made on yesterday and there are many more changes that are going to have to be made in the future. While this handbook was being prepared certain assumptions were being made. I’m not an attorney so I’m going to stay away from the legalese. But things that I know are not in agreement with the Charter. I would hope that my colleagues would realize their constitutional responsibilities and set a good example for our constituents and especially the young children that look up to us. I’m not at one time seeing that we don’t need a new manual, we do need a new manual but it’s worse to rush and put in effect a manual that doesn’t have all the factual information then to not to have a manual at all. So I would like to move that agenda item #14 be sent back to the Administrator for further concentration with the Administrator with his department heads with the EEO Office especially and let us take another look at this. And when we publish something we know that all our eyes looked at it and we agreed to it and we have a general consensus. That is my motion, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Johnson: I second the motion. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioner Brigham. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I have took time to read this personnel manual. While I’m not in agreement with everything in it I do think we need to move forward with some kind of document to provide to our employees. That we, this has been two years in the making, I think it’s something we need to move forward on. My biggest concern is the hiring and firing process of our senior executive core and I believe that I have a compromise that the Administrator can live with and we can live with and will not violate the House Bill 805 or the Consolidation Act . I believe that if we make the amendment in there to allow the passed by Legislature 20 Administrator to have the exclusive rightto nominate department heads very similar to a Board of Commissioners right a Superintendent of Schools has with school personnel but the still has the right to either accept orreject this nominee. I think we have a workable document that can be amended and I think that given the fact that we’ve gone this far with this I think that the rest of the technical changes can be brought forward and amended as needed. And I’m going to make a motion that we approve the document with that change. therefore Mr. Hatney: (Unintelligible) --- Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay, hang on a second because, okay. This is, this would address I’m just getting it clear and I always want to clarify things. Through that motion are we addressing agenda item 32 and 33? No. Mr. Lockett: We’re talking about agenda item fourteen. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay. We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Hatney. Mr. Hatney: My concern here is that one of our colleagues has agreed upon some stuff that we don’t know nothing about. And I just don’t believe we need to vote on anything that there is no clear instructions on. That’s the problem with that. We made some recommendations that they agreed to or make their adjustments but we have not seen those. And right now I’m not ready to vote on this. Can’t vote on it if I don’t see it. This ain’t gonna happen today. It ain’t that way. Mr. Mayor: You know, I just want to make an observation though too. A lot of this stuff we agreed to as a Commission unanimously. Every Commissioner that’s still here attended our th retreat last summer. On January 9 which we agreed to unanimously this government proceeding forward in this fashion. The only two Commissioners that weren’t at that meeting are no longer sitting up here. So at some point we’ve got to move forward. And once again we agreed unanimously. That’s, we’re getting on a year now consolidation was fifteen years ago. We can’t keep up as a city if we keep just dragging our feet. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I agree with you. At the retreat we did agree. We agreed that reorganization was necessary but we did not agree to violate the law. I’m not an attorney, I’m not going to get into the legalisms or whatever but we agreed that reorganization was necessary. Now I have directed the general counsel to get a reading from the Georgia Municipal Association and --- Mr. Mayor: But the Attorney cannot be directed by one individual commissioner. That would take the will of the body to do that. Mr. Lockett: Okay, that’s what well you think that the general counsel would’ve known when I directed them to do it. He would’ve said Commissioner Lockett you can’t do that. You need ‘x’ amount of your colleagues. But he didn’t do that. Mr. Mayor: Okay. 21 Mr. Lockett: One other thing I’d like to say. I know my time is running out. My colleague Commissioner Brigham was not in the 2 ½ hour session that we had yesterday when all parties involved agreed to make significant changes to this manual. Now that’s just like writing, if we vote on this thing to approve it today that’s just like giving whoever a blank check and hoping they spend it wisely and don’t spend too much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Johnson. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I do concur with my colleagues in this matter. We did have an extensive meeting a workshop yesterday and there was quite a few things in that manual that we had questions about. And I think general counsel and of course other members of general counsel did speak in relation to those things and changes that need to be made. I do agree I do think we have a policy in place now. I don’t think its dire straits that we move forward with this particular part. I do think we have time. I also believe truly that we’ve talked to actually Andrew about possibly getting this document looked through by GMA or ACCG. And I think Commissioner Lockett also mentioned the Attorney General. But I think we’ve got to be very, very careful about this particular document. We’re talking the next twenty, twenty- five years of Augusta’s life and we need to make sure that this document is correct and we have pretty much everything in there that we need to have in there without forsaking those things that people take for granted. So I think in lieu of that we need to make sure we’re careful with the document and I do support that we need to send it back to continue to have some more dialogue but let them do their due diligence to make sure we get the necessary changes in before we adopt it. I don’t think it’s that much needed for Herbert to get this document adopted at this particular time. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: And I just want to ask Mr. MacKenzie what was the initial date that the policy and procedures manual updates were brought before this Commission? Mr. MacKenzie: I believe it was November. Mr. Hatney: We didn’t get the document then. Mr. Mayor: Okay, but this is --- Mr. Hatney: We got the document a week ago. Mr. Mayor: No, but how long have we been discussing --- Mr. Hatney: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: No, I’m just taking about when did this first come before the Commission? Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor, let me just say this. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney. 22 Mr. Hatney: The thing that concerns me is that I’ve always had problems with folks trying to rush and cram things down my throat. I’ve got a problem with that because if I’ve got some concerns as a member of this group a citizen I mean and they agreed already to make some adjustments I need to see that before you ask me to vote on it. I think that’s just fair. There’s quite a few adjustments that they agreed to make. So let them make it and when they make it and give it to us so we can look at it then hey. But let’s don’t say how long we’ve got. I don’t make no difference. It’s just, we haven’t died yet being the fifteen years and I’d rather wait another thirty-days or whatever the time is and have a document that we all can agree with the language and we can see within that document the objectivity and the fairness in this. If I can’t see that I can’t support it. That’s all there is to it. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we –-- Mr. Speaker: Call the question. Mr. Mayor: --- the question’s been called for. We’ve had a motion and a second. For the point of clarity, Madam Clerk, could you please read back the motion? The Clerk: The substitute motion was to approve the personnel and policy procedure manual with the exception that the Administrator will be allowed exclusive rights to nominate a department director and the Commission will reserve the right to either accept or reject. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, I’d like to have a roll call vote, please. Mr. Mayor: I had already called for the vote Mr. Lockett and the vote had already been started to get underway. Mr. Lockett: All right, thank you. Mr. Johnson, Mr. Lockett and Mr. Hatney vote No. Motion carries 6-3. Mr. Hatney: Point of order, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney. Mr. Hatney: How can we say this vote carried when everything in here affects, mostly affects the charter? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Attorney, can you? Mr. Hatney: It takes eight votes for that. 23 Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney, we’ll hear the legal opinion of the Attorney. Mr. MacKenzie: Sir, if I can first address just to make sure the record reflects that there was a written document provided to the Commission that shows the changes that were made, a redline version since the last version that was actually in the agenda. I just want to make that note initially. And before the Commission meeting I actually passed out a legal opinion which addresses the authority of the Commission in regard to what can and can’t be done. The document that you have before you that’s been approved would not run afoul of the language that’s in the Charter. There are some additional changes that may be necessary as a result of the approval of the policies and procedures such as future code amendments. But that language is included within the document itself so that those changes can be made in the future. This, it does not conflict with the language of the Charter. It doesn’t require a Charter Amendment to take the action that was taken today. Mr. Hatney: The whole Policy and Procedure Manual on the workforce? Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, next agenda item. The Clerk: FINANCE 20. Motion to approve selected dates for building closure regarding the implementation of furlough reduction for 2011 and declare those dates “unpaid days of rest” in accordance with O.C.G.A. 36-1-12 and 15-6-93. (Approved by Finance Committee January 24, 2011) Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we send item twenty back to Finance Committee. Mr. Jackson: 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: Madam Clerk, next agenda item, please. The Clerk: FINANCE 22. Motion to approve placing recaptured funds from completed SPLOST Phase V projects into construction fund for Fire Station #10. (Approved by Finance Committee January 24, 2011) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett, I believe this was your pull. 24 Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question is how much money are we talking about and what other items could this money be used for other that what it’s designated for here? Mr. Speaker: Mr. Lockett, members of the Commission, Mr. Mayor, this money --- Mr. Speaker: Could you step up to the mike and identify yourself? Chief Rogers: Oh, I’m Second Chief Mike Rogers, Fire Department. I’m filling in for Chief Willis today. The monies that were anticipating using were monies put aside for the construction and renovation of the Training Center, the Fire Administration building and the construction of Station #10. We have finished all the other projects that were under Phase V. The cost of the property that we had to buy for this station on Alexander Drive it was pretty expensive that we had to buy two lots up there. We have looked high and low trying to find this location that would allow us to meet our response times and coverage area. So this is basically the only lot we could find, the area we could find. Purchasing this property and without the bid with Procurement through normal procedures basically it was a cost overrun with what we anticipated costing because the site work and underwater retention’s going to have to govern the construction of the site. I guess the answer to your question this money in Phase V was delegated. It’s specifically for the Training Center, for Fire Administration and for the Training Tower that we had built that we needed due to the ISO Inspection coming up. So the money that, the money that was allocated in Phase V for the Fire Department construction of the Fire Station and the Training Center. Mr. Lockett: Chief, thank you very much. You’re doing an outstanding job. I know what it’s all about now. I appreciate it. Chief Roger: Thank you, sir, thank you very much. Mr. Mayor: Would you like to move for approval with that? Mr. Lockett: So moved. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, next agenda item. The Clerk: ATTORNEY 25 31. Motion to approve 2011 Budget Resolution. (No action vote January 18, 2011 Commission meeting request by the Attorney) Mr. Brigham: So moved. Mr. Jackson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Mr. Lockett: I think that item was pulled. Mr. Mayor: It was and we just had a motion to approve and a second. We’re to that item and so we’ve just had a motion and a second to approve that item. Mr. Lockett: I had it pulled because I wanted some discussion on it and I --- Mr. Mayor: There’s still option for discussion. Mr. Lockett: All right, thank you. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Lockett, would you? Mr. Lockett: Yeah, I just wanted to ask the Administrator what does this entail? What are you expecting us to vote on here? What are we authorizing? Did he leave? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell? It got a little too quick on him. We’re to item thirty-one. Mr. Lockett: I just wanted to find out, Mr. Administrator. What are you asking us to approve here with this resolution? Mr. Mayor: The budget resolution. Mr. Russell: It’s the same budget resolution that you saw before in relationship to adopting the budget and the authority that I would have to implement the savings, the changes necessary to secure the savings that are budgeted in the budget. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Administrator, I’ve heard different reasons for this. I understand that first we were told to save $1.5 million dollars then 1.6 then I also heard that it wasn’t the money it was downgraded or whatever because of efficiency. So what is it now? Mr. Russell: It’s always been designed to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of our government. We anticipate some actual savings by doing that. And if you remember during the somewhat long and tedious conversation that I had with you a couple weeks ago it’s unfortunately very simple. We can either reduce, we can either raise our taxes or increase our revenue or we change the way we do business. And unfortunately changing the way we do business at this point given the nature of our government involves the reorganization in my mind 26 would reduce some positions or we could quit doing things and start closing facilities and those kinds of things. You’ve asked me for my recommendation on how the best to do that and that recommendation is what we talked about two weeks ago at some great length. And that’s where we’re still at. You know at some point we need to make a decision on if we’re going to increase the revenue we don’t have to worry about the other part. But if we’re not going to increase the revenue as I picked up on at least more than once there seems a great ground swell of support to raise taxes, which is our only real mechanism to increase the revenue at this point. We’ve got to look at the way we’re doing business. And what that does is, what that recommendation does is allow us to more effective and efficient in certain areas. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Russell, my last comment is I’d be remiss if I did not follow up on what my colleague Commissioner Mason asked. He asked for an itemized list in showing savings. Do we have that? Mr. Russell: We can provide that at some length down the line. But until we adopt the theory of what we’re going to do it seems to me that we’ve got, we’ve got the projected sheets of what you’re going to save. And in this case the salaries give us approximately 1.4ish, 5ish million dollars depending on when we do this. The later we wait the less savings you’re going to have. So you know obviously it’s a moving target at this point so I can’t give you a specific number or whatever. But I can tell you the longer we wait the smaller that number gets which means we’ll have to change, have to do things differently at the end of the day which might include looking at operations or whatever. Mr. Lockett: At one time Mr. Russell we talked about selling property. Are you saying now that the $1.6 million dollars are all going to be realized from salaries that we don’t have to pay? Mr. Russell: Yes, but I’m also saying there’s $2 million dollars programmed in for the sale of property so you’ll be shortly seeing a agenda item from me to go out and find a realtor to market and sell our property because that budget required a $2 million dollar input of cash from the sale of property. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Russell, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney. Mr. Hatney: Mr., thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Russell --- Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. Mr. Hatney: --- I’ve got a little heartburn here. You are saying to me that you have put this whole thing together without numbers --- Mr. Russell: No, sir, I’m --- Mr. Hatney: -- that you give us? 27 Mr. Russell: --- saying the numbers that you’ve got reflect gross numbers at this particular point in time on what we anticipate the savings to be. We have not shared with you the individual savings from particular positions because I, we thought that it would be more appropriate to look at a gross number instead of individual positions. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Johnson. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Also, Fred, we talked about the implementation of this plan and also you being able to carry it out with a I guess a with assistance with the directors of the departments. Do you have a projection or a panel which you will work with bringing it back the proposal in which you plan to of course you implemented a blueprint somewhat a couple weeks ago --- Mr. Russell: Right. Mr. Johnson: --- and you pitched it before the Commission. What I need to know is exactly how you plan to implement this and how will the procedure be carried out. Are you going to work with the department heads in doing this? And also, is some things, of course there was some questions about, of course, I know you talked about George Patty, I mean Rob Sherman being under George Patty where there’s some issues there are some questions and concerns. How much dialogue are we going to have with working through this procedure to see what’s going to be best for the city overall? Mr. Russell: I think you’ve captured it very well. I mean like most of the things we do this is obviously a continuing and flowing and living document that we’re going to have to have continued dialogue on. But what we’re asking you to do is adopt the concept and you’ve basically done that when you adopted the budget in the fact that you know we’ve said there’s a hole to fill and we’re going to do it in this way. What this is, is the next step in that and we’re making a decision that we’re going to have to look at the way we do business. And that way is unfortunately based on the structure that we have. And we’re trying through efficiencies gain from that structure. In this case we’re merging some of the areas that are currently under Public Services into Recreation, into Sanitation, which is the Landfill. So we’re trying to take advantage of upper level supervisory decisions moving downward and trying to clean up the chain of command basically. At this point we’ve got people that cut grass at the cemetery and they work for Public Services. We’ve got and have a command structure of them. We currently have people that work for the Recreation Department that cuts grass at the park. The simply philosophy behind this is cutting grass is cutting grass be it at the park or the cemetery and we don’t need a command structure, two different command structures to go tell somebody how to cut grass. Now what this is and I think you said it well, it’s the blueprint. And as you well know there’s a big difference between a blueprint and the drawings. And those drawings end up having to be a dialogue that we have. You know what I’m asking you to do is tell me how you want this government to be shaped. And if you’re not going to increase taxes then we need to look at making it more effective and efficient. And that’s the decisions that ya’ll will have to make. And I’ve made, what you’ve told me to do is I’ve made some initial recommendations. That’s all they are and those recommendations are ones that we need to get together and decide. 28 You know it’s not my plan it needs to be our plan. But you can’t start from ten different places you’ve got to start from one place to talk. And really that’s what you’re getting and I’m continuing to ask for that dialogue to go forward. Mr. Johnson: What kind of timeline do we need to implement here to carry this out? I know the budget is adopted in what, November, but we --- Mr. Russell: It started in January so we’re talking sometime between now and the end of the year we need to recognize ‘x’ number of dollars in savings. The longer we wait the tougher that’s going to be. There’s some federal requirements there that would require us to give 60-day notice to employees that lose that job in a RIFF. In addition to that I would suggest because what we said in the past was an additional 30 days. I mean we’re not trying to be cruel we just know that we need to make some tough decisions. And sometimes not only in Augusta but cities and counties across the country in private business and whatever that have to make those same tough decisions. You know in all honesty I was pretty happy to come back with only twenty-six when I initially thought we were going have to talking about a whole lot more than that to get where we’re going. And think that’s part of the continuing dialogue we need to have. Mr. Johnson: So about a year? Mr. Russell: Well, we need --- Mr. Johnson: Seven months? Mr. Russell: --- no, we need to decide what we’re going to do. And those people whose jobs are going to be eliminated we need to make sure that we make that decision quickly so we can either find them positions that are currently vacant that are funded or move those positions into other funding sources if we can. But you know until we get the nod from you that we’re going in the right direction I don’t a lot, that can’t take place. I can’t you’ve got to give me some focus and that’s what we’re asking for. If this is what you want to do tell me than and then we’ll come back with a level of specifics that I think will make you if not happy at least more comfortable. But until we decide what direction we’re going in then it’s hard for me to figure out how to get us there basically. That sounds a little vague I know but it’s the reality of it. You know, if what we decided so far is we’re going save $1.5 million dollars through reorganization. That’s been decided. What I’m trying to do is get you to move forward with that and either take my recommendation or not. I mean if I’m on the wrong track then that’s fine too, but I need to find out what track you want me on and that’s the collective decision of the body. Mr. Mayor: And I just want to make this point. And I’ve said this publicly so many times we cannot let the tail wag the dog in this community. And we cannot let small vocal groups of people hinder progress. We were elected to lead and to make the difficult decisions. And let me just say my phone line has not been lighting up with this one. And I have not been overwhelmed by emails. I’ve spoken to people throughout the community that understand this is something we’ve got to do. You know these are difficult times but they elected us to lead and to make those decisions. Now it’s time to make a decision. Commissioner Brigham. 29 Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, what I understand there was some question to whether or not we adopted a budget resolution. Mr. Russell has already presented some of the stuff that we are instructing him in this resolution to present. This is in no way an approval of anything that Mr. Russell has presented to us. These are just the marching orders to Mr. Russell to go back and do what he’s already done is to present to us options on how we’re to reduce the cost of this government to balance our budget. And with I’m going to make a motion, I’m also going to call for the question because I think we’ve debated this enough. Mr. Mayor: Okay, fairly the question has been called for but I agreed to recognize Commissioner Hatney after Commissioner Brigham so I will do so. Mr. Hatney: And I appreciate that, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Administrator --- Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. Mr. Hatney: --- what concerns me and I know we need to get going and I don’t have no problem with that. But when you agreed to that 1.5 savings thing the five furlough days was included. They were included. But not the 1.88. It was not in there. See that’s just what I’m talking about. When you approve something you push stuff in there that wasn’t in there originally. Mr. Russell: That’s not accurate, sir. The 1.88 is simply the equivalent of what the five furlough days is. Mr. Hatney: How are you going to get the 1.88 and the five furlough days? Mr. Russell: The 1.88 is the cost of the five furlough days. Mr. Mayor: Is the cost savings from not paying those employees on those employees on those --- Mr. Russell: Five days. Mr. Mayor: --- five furlough days. They don’t receive compensation for those days. Mr. Russell: It’s not a double hit it’s just, it’s just what it’s, the five furlough days equal the amount of dollars which is I don’t know what that number is, Donna, but it’s an amount of dollars. If you take it across the board, it’s 1.88 of the salary line item that we have to take. I mean that’s, it’s the same thing. Mr. Hatney: I could understand it if you say that 1.88 without the five furlough days and play out over a ten-month period. But how can you do both when you say you --- Mr. Russell: We’re not doing both. It’s the same thing. Mr. Hatney: But they got five days off and they don’t get paid nothing. 30 Mr. Russell: That’s right. For five days, for five days they don’t, we don’t get paid. And it’s we, me, you and everybody else doesn’t get paid for five days. And that equals 1.88 of the total salary to be taken over the ten-month period. Mr. Mayor: Okay, the question has been called for. Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: A quick clarification if I can. The way that this furlough plan has been structured is actually a reduction in salary of 1.88% across the board for all employees. And we designated as holidays certain days. But the number of days and the actual days chosen on the calendar are still a policy decision to be made on the, of the Administrator and the Commission. And so I just wanted to make that clarification that you’ve actually approved an across the board salary reduction to the extent any holiday/furlough days would be given to the employee as a benefit for that. That’s how this plan has been structured. Mr. Mayor: Okay, the question has been called for. Mr. Hatney: --- if you try to make those items separate and individual because it makes more sense if they’re separate and individual. Mr. Mayor: Okay, the question --- Mr. Hatney: You throw all that stuff together it don’t make sense. Mr. Mayor: The question’s has been called for. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Mr. Lockett and Mr. Hatney vote No. Motion carries 7-2. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, next agenda item please. The Clerk: I’m sorry I skipped #30 so we need to go back there. The Clerk: APPOINTMENTS 30. Consider the reappoint of Geneice McCoy and the following for appointment to the Georgia Department of Behavioral Health & Development Disabilities Region 2 Planning Board to three (3) vacant positions: LaTasha Walton, Frances Crawford, Willie Lee Jones, Bobby Hankerson and Jeff Padgett. The Clerk: So in essence you will be considering the reappointment of Ms. McCoy who has requested I think to Mr. Bowles and several other members that she be reappointed. She’s currently on the board serving in an unexpired, and expired term. And the other three positions are vacant. Augusta Richmond County received four positions on this board so technically we’re 31 needing to either consider reappointing Ms. McCoy and filling three vacant seats or just reappointing four. Mr. Mayor: Is this our usual situation where the first three are the three that were recommended by the board or? The Clerk: Well, the board recommended the first three, yes, sir. And Commissioner Brigham recommended the latter two. Mr. Mayor: Yes, Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think we discussed it a couple weeks ago. Would it be proper to nominate someone on this list? The Clerk: Yes, sir, you have to do that. Okay, you want to nominate Mr. Hankerson? Mr. Lockett: Yes, ma’am. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles. Mr. Bowles: I’d like to nominate LaTasha Walton and Frances Crawford. The Clerk: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Bowles: Does Ms. McCoy need to be nominated to be reappointed? The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Bowles: I’ll make that nomination as well. Mr. Lockett: Second. The Clerk: Sir, we don’t need a second. Okay, Mr. Bowles, you’re doing Ms. McCoy, Ms. LaTasha Walton and Ms. Frances Crawford, right? Okay. Mr. Brigham: Move the nominations be closed. Mr. Mayor: Okay, can I get a motion to approve the current, the reappointment and the three nominations to the vacant positions? Mr. Lockett: Move to approve. Mr. Johnson: Second. 32 Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. Mr. Mayor: I feel like jumping up and down. Mr. Lockett: --- too soon. Mr. Mayor: No, I still might feel like jumping up and down at that point too. The Clerk: Number 32 is an Ordinance to amend the code relating to procurement of goods and services, which is in the Local Small Business Opportunities Program. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles. Mr. Bowles: I’d like to hear from the Attorney first. Mr. MacKenzie: I’d would ask --- Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: --- to consider the next item, item 33 first since it could have an impact on what would be included in item 32. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, let’s go to 33 first. The Clerk: ATTORNEY 33. An Ordinance to present proposal to amend the Augusta, Georgia Charter and Laws of Local Application, Section 1-40 relating to Equal Opportunity; to separate the function of Equal Employment Opportunity from Minority and Small Business Opportunities; to provide policies and guidelines; to create a Local Small Business Advisory Board; to repeal all Charter, Code Sections and Ordinances and parts of Charter, Code Sections and Ordinances in conflict herewith; to provide an effective date and for other purposes. thst (Deferred from the January 18 Commission meeting until after the January 21 Work Session) Mr. Hatney: A question. Mr. Mayor: Hang on because Commissioner Bowles I recognized him first. But Commissioner Bowles, go ahead. Mr. Bowles: Mr. Russell, I’m going to need you for some explanation on this. Mr. Mayor based on trying to get the eight votes required to make this change there’s some hesitancy 33 and concerns about separation of duties with the DBE Office falling under Procurement. So I’d like to make the following motion, that is to alter the proposed charter amendment of Section 1- 40 and the proposed Procurement Code amendments to have the Local Small Business Program fall under a new office to be called Office of Economic Development and Contract Compliance and to have such person be the director of the Local Small Business Program with that person to report to the Administrator of his or her designee. And, Mr. Russell, you can explain that in layman’s terms. Mr. Mayor: But you’ll put that in the form of a motion? Mr. Bowles: Yes, sir, I thought I did. Mr. Jackson: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Mr. Russell, you want to? Mr. Russell: What that would do would be basically allow that position to be in the, as you’ve seen in the re-org we have a category, a special projects kind of things there. We talk about economic development in that area and that would allow the compliance function to come under that Special Projects area in addition to the several other things that ya’ll have to approve as we go forward. That hopefully eliminates some of the anxiousness some of you have about having it as a conflict with Purchasing. And Andrew and I had talked briefly about that this morning and I don’t think either one of us have any major problems with that. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney and then Commissioner Johnson. Mr. Hatney: I was under the impression, Mr. Mayor and Mr. Administrator, that the previous administrations down the road back when he had already separated these two and that they are both reported to actually the Commission. And so this separation here as been done already. You ain’t doing anything new here separating the EEO making that a single entity reporting to actually reporting to the Mayor. That’s who that person’s supposed to report to. And the DBE person’s supposed to also report to the Mayor. Mr. Russell: Upon research and practice we’ve done exactly that --- Mr. Hatney: Then why are we going to change it? What are we trying to do now? Mr. Russell: We’re trying to make it right. Mr. Hatney: What’d you mean, right --- Mr. Russell: Well --- Mr. Hatney: --- if we’re already doing it? 34 Mr. Russell: Well, apparently when we did it several years ago we did not make the changes to the Charter itself. We just sort of in practice did what we thought was the right thing to do which was separate those functions because of breadth and specificity of what they had to do. What we’re attempting to do today is rectify that by the Charter, which still says that should be one person. The Commission shall hire one person to be that and we’ve currently got four people functioning in that function: Mr. Hatney: One person to do what. Name those four things. Mr. Russell: To be the DBE/EEO person. Mr. Hatney: That’s been separated by a 9-1 vote four or five years ago, six years ago. Mr. Russell: I have not done the Charter recently. Mr. Hatney: I promise you it’s been done. It is a minute to that affect during the time Brother Mays was here. Mr. Russell: I know the conversation when Commissioner Mays was here and --- Mr. Hatney: I mean whatever he (unintelligible) it was done during that tenure. Mr. Russell: Right and I remember that. That’s why we’ve got it separated the way we do which in my mind it’s appropriate to have the DBE and the EEO separated. It’s too big of a function and too important to try to cram it into one person. Mr. Hatney: What I’m saying is has already been done. But there’s a minute to it. Mr. Russell: That would be a question for the Attorney at this point. Mr. Hatney: I ain’t talking about the Attorney. There’s a minute to that. It was a 9-1 vote on it. Mr. Mayor: Well, if it’s there let’s clean it up and do it the way, Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. Hatney: It ain’t unclean --- Mr. MacKenzie: I just wanted to --- Mr. Hatney: --- (inaudible) clear. Mr. MacKenzie: --- make sure. I have actually researched this issue and have not found any place where the Charter amendment was actually done. And I agree if it was done with a vote of 9-1 that’s good. But we need to make sure that the Charter reflects that change. And just to make sure that the record is crystal clear with regard to this item I’ve distributed to the Commission an updated version in accordance with Mayor Pro Tem Bowles. An amendment to 35 the motion, which you have before you, is an amendment of one function that, one person that had three functions. It was the Local Small Business Program, the DBE function and the EEO function was all one in the Charter. This splits those up. With regard the DBE function it creates a DBE liaison which in accordance with federal law and federal regulations. That person would report to the Mayor and Commission. Then you would have an EEO officer, which in employment function that person would report to the Mayor and the Commission as well. And you would have under Mayor Pro Tem Bowles a proposal the Local Small Business Program would fall under a new office, which would be deemed Office of Economic Development and Contract Compliance. The only thing you have before you on this item is to amend the Charter to reflect the changes I just mentioned. That would require for the next item that we put thirty- two on hold. There would need to some amendment to that item if it was approved. I just wanted to make sure that we’re all clear on what is being approved. Mr. Mayor: And I, Reverend Hatney, I think we’re all talking about the same thing but it seems to me when I look back and Andrew might echo this and you might as well that there was not in past commission’s a real good job of follow through. So this is, we’re kind of defining this so we’re all on the same page. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I requested not be given anything legal prior to the meeting and expecting me to vote on it. I think my colleague Commissioner Bowles has done a good job and I think his recommendation is great. But I’d like to sit down and analyze I would hope that my colleagues would agree to send this back to things before I vote. Committee and two weeks from now if it reads right, if it sounds right then you’ve got my vote. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Lockett: That’s the motion. Mr. Mayor: That’s a substitute motion? Mr. Lockett: Yes. Mr. Mayor: We already have a primary motion and a second. Commissioner Johnson. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Andrew, exactly the Local Small Business component. I understand you said that would be a separate entity. Who in that department will run that particular component? Will it, will they report to somebody we have in place now or do we got to create a position for that person, I mean for that component? Mr. MacKenzie: Well, currently with the proposal that Fred’s saying which has not yet approved either the Office of Economic Development Contract Compliance what he had on his Charter previously is special project. That department would include several functions, which would be SPLOST projects, I think some contract compliance functions which we desperately in need of. And it would also include the Local Small Business function. Now as far as you know what position you create for the person to run that department that would be a position that you’d have to create, create job duties that would include that. The way that I would anticipate this 36 would fit into the Procurement Code Amendment which is item 32 would be it already has language in there relating to Local Small Business director. Whoever is the director of that department would also be the Local Small Business Director, which would plug in nicely with the language in the procurement code. It would only require a number of minor changes. Where now it says procurement director it would say Local Small Business Director, Director of the Office of Economic Development and Contract Compliance. Does that answer your question? Mr. Johnson: Yes, it does. And who will they report to? Would it be the Administrator or would it be the Commission? Mr. MacKenzie: They would report to the Administrator under the proposal that was made by Mayor Pro Tem Bowles for the Office of Economic Development and Contract Compliance. Mr. Johnson: So just for clarity we got to create a position for this component. Mr. MacKenzie: You would need to --- Mr. Johnson: --- basically right or move somebody within it. That’s what I wanted --- Mr. MacKenzie: That office has not even been created. Mr. Johnson: Right, I mean I agree with the mechanism of what you’re saying. I’m just trying to figure out and be clear that this particular component would have to have a director or somebody to head that particular department. Mr. Hatney: Before we vote, Mr. Mayor, can I have a point of personal privilege, please? Mr. Mayor: Okay. Reverend Hatney. Mr. Hatney: My concern here is that the Local Small Business thing ain’t been, it ain’t four years old. It’s brand new. What you’re talking about redoing something that was done because of some action taken. It ain’t four years old. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. MacKenzie: If you’d let me address to that in the habit of doing that part of these include the recommendations that were made by the NERA organization after doing the disparity study. That would be to beef up the Local Small Business Program and that would be my recommendation to do for purposes of the litigation we have ongoing as well taking the advice of NERA. Mr. Hatney: And I appreciate that but what I’m saying is I would hope we wouldn’t talk as if though that Local Small Business option is that old. Because it’s less than four years old. 37 Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion and a second to refer this back to Committee. If there’s no further discussion, Commissioners will vote by the substitute sign of voting. Mr. Aitken, Mr. Jackson and Mr. Smith vote No. Motion carries 6-3. Mr. Mayor: And that substitute motion was just to refer agenda 33, correct? The Clerk: Yes, sir, back to committee. ATTORNEY 32. An Ordinance to amend the Augusta, Georgia Code, Article One, Chapter Ten, relating to the procurement of goods and services and the Local Small Business Opportunities Program so as to provide updates and to establish policies, procedures and guidelines regarding the procurement process and the Local Small Business Opportunities Program; to repeal all Ordinances and parts of Ordinances in conflict herewith; to provide th an effective date and for other purposes. (Deferred from the January 18 Commission st meeting until after the January 21 Work Session) Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor, my recommendation is the same thing for 32 --- The Clerk: Thirty-three. Mr. Hatney: --- because 32 is dependent on 33. Mr. Bowles: I make that motion to send thirty-two back to Committee. Mr. Hatney: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion, Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Jackson votes No. Motion carries 8-1. Mr. Mayor: And prior to adjourning the meeting I did want to say and, Commissioner Lockett, I appreciate your comments. And I would hope that within two weeks that there would be ample opportunity for everybody to go through them and get to a point where they can be approved. So, thank you, gentlemen. If there’s no further business to come before the body we stand adjourned. [MEETING ADJOURNED] 38 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 February 1, 2011. ______________________________ Clerk of Commission 39