HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting July 19, 2011
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
JULY 19, 2011
The Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 5:00 p.m., July 19, 2011, the
Honorable Deke Copenhaver, Mayor presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Lockett, Guilfoyle, Mason, Smith, Aitken, Johnson, Jackson, Bowles
and Brigham, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
ABSENT: Hon. Hatney, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
The invocation was given by the Reverend Willie James, Pastor, First Shiloh Baptist
Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir, for that wonderful invocation. Madam Clerk, on to the
delegations.
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS
A. Jill Peterson/Lillie Robinson. RE: Relocation of the baseball stadium.
Mr. Mayor: And if you could keep it to five minutes, please.
(Video Presentation)
Ms. Peterson: Any questions?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: I see you did quite a bit of research on the baseball stadium.
Ms. Peterson: Yes, sir.
Mr. Lockett: And your recommendation is what?
Ms. Peterson: Our recommendation is that we have a great stadium, highly rated by the
people who rate stadiums. Well loved by the city in a part of town where we think it can do a lot
of good if we’re going to do anything downtown. If we’re going to put any taxpayer dollars we
should vote and should also do something that’s not a duplicate.
Mr. Lockett: Now you’re speaking solely for yourself or do you have friends and
colleagues that feel the same as you do?
1
Ms. Peterson: I’m actually part of a group. We’re called ACAVE, Augusta Citizens
Against Virtually Everything as the Mayor named us in a quest column.
Mr. Lockett: And that is the feelings of the group.
Ms. Peterson: Yes, sir, very much against a new stadium.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you very much.
Ms. Peterson: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Commissioner Lockett. Okay, thank you, Ms. Peterson.
Madam Clerk, onto the next.
Mr. Russell: Can I get a copy of that for the record?
The Clerk: We’ve got the film.
Mr. Russell: Ms. Peterson, can we get a copy of that for our files?
The Clerk: Are you going to rule on B. Do you want me to call it? Okay.
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS
B. Messrs. Keven Mack/Mark Senn. RE: Bid Item 11-111 Real Estate Brokerage Services
for the City of Augusta. (agenda item no. 35).
Mr. Mayor: And, gentlemen, to be fair I think that we should take this when we address
the agenda item and just, we’ll have you speak when we address the agenda item. And I do want
to make sure that you know if we start treading into protesting the bid process, that’s another
situation all together. So I’ll look to the Attorney on that but if we could take this when we
address this agenda item.
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS
C. Richmond County Board of Health. RE: Comprehensive No Smoking Ordinance in
Richmond County.
Dr. Gonzalez: Good Afternoon.
Mr. Mayor: Good Afternoon and if you could keep it to five minutes, please, ma’am.
Dr. Gonzalez: I will do my best. As Health Director and Director of the Richmond
County Board of Health I share the responsibility with you of insuring the well being of
2
Richmond County Citizens. Richmond County Board of Health and Public Health is in charge
of insuring communities are healthy and safe by establishing supporting sound policies based on
research and scientific evidence. It is our goal in Public Health to support implementation of
policies, ordinances, regulations that prevent unnecessary pain, suffering and death and improve
the quality of life for our citizens and community. I’m here today to address adverse effects
associated with exposure to second hand smoking and the rationale behind the ordinance being
proposed. Tobacco is a major public health threat. Cigarettes cause 443,000 deaths a year
nationally basically one in five. The major causes of death include lung cancer, chronic
obstructive disease, ischemic heart disease. For every person that dies there are twenty
Americans that continue to suffer at least once (unintelligible) tobacco related illness. Every
year thousands of non-smokers die of heart disease, lung cancer and hundreds of children will
suffer respiratory infections because of exposure to second hand smoking. In fact it is estimated
that 49,000 of tobacco related deaths nationally are the result of second hand smoking. Those
particular at risk are children, individuals with low income and those in certain occupations
including construction workers, blue collar workers and service workers. County data suggests
that Richmond County residents experience an increased burden of respiratory illnesses resulting
in hospital visits, admissions and deaths. From 2006 to 2008 there were nine deaths related to
asthma among children in Richmond County. That number pushed Richmond County up on top
in the county in the nation on deaths related to asthma among children. During that same period
9% of deaths among old age groups were attributed to asthma and emphysema. Hospital
discharge data from 2007 to 2009, Richmond County had a higher rate of respiratory illnesses
that led to hospitalizations. In 2009 the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America ranked
Augusta among the top 20 capital, asthma capitals in the nation because the prevalence of
asthma, the accrued death rate due to asthma, pollen count, air quality and lack of 100% public
smoke free laws. The World Health Organization has declared that there’s no risk free level of
exposure to tobacco smoke and there’s no safe tobacco product. According to the National
Cancer Institute over 7,000 distinct chemical compounds can be found in tobacco smoke. Sixty-
nine of them we know that cause cancer. 250 we know are harmful. Among those chemicals we
find arsenic, benzene, platinum, plutonium 210 which is radio-active, ethylene oxide and nickel.
Exposure to second hand smoking is a public health issue. It’s a Richmond County issue. There
is irrefutable scientific evidence collected for over 50 years showing how tobacco products and
exposure to tobacco smoke damages the human body with deadly consequences. The last one in
nine reports on the matter established a long list of health consequences and diseases caused by
tobacco use and exposure to tobacco smoke. Tobacco visually affects every part of the body.
Among the consequences that that you can find on second hand smoking include middle ear
disease, respiratory disorders, asthma, impaired lung function, coronary heart disease, infants can
die before year one out of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. They can be born low birth rate and
have severe complications. They can die of asthma. Long term exposure to second hand
smoking increases the risk of developing breast cancer in young women. The 2006 Surgeon
General’s Report on the consequences of involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke concluded that
smoke exposure affects the epithelial cells and that even short exposures to second hand smoke
could affect the circulatory system in the same way of the magnitude of smoking one pack a day.
And 8-hour shift in a smoky work place can do as much harm to the non-smoker as smoking 1 ½
packs of cigarettes. Therefore it’s imperative that we consider the impact of second hand smoke
exposure on those individuals. Nobody should be forced to choose between livelihood or
3
exposure to a preventable cause of premature death or chronic disease resulting from second
hand smoking. All workers deserve equal protection. A recent telephone survey ---
Mr. Mayor: Dr. Gonzalez, I hate the ---
Dr. Gonzalez: I hope that you consider. Thank you for the opportunity.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am.
Dr. Gonzalez: I hope that you can endorse in passing this ordinance. We really need it in
Richmond County.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and if the Commission has any questions. I know Commissioner
Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: Yeah, I do. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I would like to ask you. What exactly
are you proposing because I know we have the ban in restaurants and stuff like that.
Dr. Gonzalez: We want a total ban in all public places.
Mr. Johnson: In all public places?
Dr. Gonzalez: Right, correct.
Mr. Johnson: Isn’t it, isn’t it where can they smoke now in public places. I don’t think it
was, where is it now that they smoke?
Mr. Mayor: In bars and ---
Dr. Gonzalez: In bars, they do in bars. And they care, I mean there are other places
where they can right now be smoking. And right now what we want is to have it a total ban. All
of the public places.
Mr. Johnson: Would that be something we can implement solely from the Commission
or would we have to send that to the state to see if they can?
Mr. MacKenzie: There are some state regulations with respect to no smoking. However
those regulations are not as restrictive as some governments have approved. I’ve actually met
with the Board. The proposed ordinances that they’re in support of is done by I guess a group
that designs these ordinances and it’s designed to be a products that you can modify to fit the
specific needs of Augusta, Georgia. It would allow you know smoking to occur in private
residences. There are a number of exceptions, not a ban you know inside your car or anything
like that. There are a lot of other areas that have those restrictions. The ordinance that’s being
proposed would, has been challenged in other jurisdictions and found to be enforceable. We
would have to look at the specific details with respect to what we want to adopt or not adopt. It’s
4
a model ordinance that you kind of look at. You look at your city and look at your needs and
you carve out exceptions to that to fit the needs of the government.
Mr. Johnson: Okay, yeah, because I’m, I do concur with what you’re saying and I’m not,
I’m a non-smoker as well but I think it’s bigger than just that. We’re talking more just you said
you got people not just all kids in (unintelligible) mother smoking and they’re exposed but
nobody’s there to protect those kids. So it is an issue but it’s one of those things that is almost an
act of morality that you know you really can’t control that, you know whole heartedly and that’s
the problem. And that’s where the thin line is drawn and that’s what I think the problem lies
though. But I do support what you guys are doing and whatever we can do to help we’d be more
than happy to do so.
Dr. Gonzalez: You have to think about those workers in let’s restaurants or other places
where they have no choice just to work there and they’re exposed to smoking and they may be
uninsured, low income, they don’t have any choice to work anywhere else and they’re exposed
to that. And they may suffer the consequences. They will suffer the consequences possibly
down the line.
Mr. Johnson: Yes.
Dr. Gonzalez: That’s, it’s a matter of equity.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham:
Mr. Mayor I think what we’re really being asked to do is have the
Attorney to review the ordinance and see if there’s language that needs to be drafted to fit
thing I think we do need to do as a Commission is authorize the
Augusta. The other
Administrator to call for some public hearings on this ordinance, get some public input and
then bring it back and decide whether or not we want to implement this ordinance or not.
Mr. Mayor: Would you like to put that in the form of a motion?
Mr. Brigham: I would put that in the form of a motion.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second on that?
Mr. Mason: Can I be heard before?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Mr. Commissioner.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Maybe I missed your name. What’s your name?
Dr. Gonzalez: My name is Dr. Ketty Gonzalez.
Mr. Mason: Dr. Gonzalez, we appreciate you coming forth with this information. I’m
sort of in the same boat as Jerry but I don’t even believe today this is the appropriate forum to
5
even have this discussion. I mean if she was given some information I think she should probably
get on the appropriate committee and we discuss it then because we’re talking about ordinances.
I don’t even know what ordinance we’re talking about. I haven’t seen anything we’re talking
about telling people or tasking folks to do things. Can we get this on committee and we can
address it appropriately?
Mr. Mayor: I concur with you completely so you’re not limited on the time that you can
interact with the Commission. So can we move forward with putting that on Public Services?
Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Doctor, could you provide us with a condensed
summary of what it is you want to do?
Dr. Gonzalez: What we want to do is ---
Mr. Lockett: No, I mean not now I’m talking about ---
Mr. Mayor: When we go through Committee it’s ---
Mr. Lockett: Yes, sometime in the future.
Mr. Mayor: If you want to ---
Mr. Brigham: There was a packet in your package.
Mr. Lockett: That wasn’t condensed. I saw it. In fact I spent half the night reading it.
The last thing I’d like to say is I believe the General Counsel brought it up is the enforcement
mechanism. We can’t enforce code violations how are we going to enforce a smoking ban? I
know Ronnie Strength would love to be given that task or Mr. Patty. They would love to have
that task. Where is Mr. Patty? He disappeared on me. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and just for the benefit of everybody here and for the folks at home
watching on Saturday afternoon it usually if people want the Commission to take action the
process would be to go through Committee first so that it would come before the full
Commission on agenda. So I know but thank you for being here today. Thank you for all that
you do. You do amazing work. Thank you, ma’am. Madam Clerk, on to the regular agenda.
The Clerk: Our consent agenda consists of items 1-22, items 1-22. For the benefit of any
objectors to our Planning Petitions, once those petitions are read would you please signify your
objections by raising your hand. I call your attention to:
Item 3: Is to approve a petition for a Special Exception for a sales office at property
known as 2993 and 3031 Willis Foreman Road.
Item 4: Is a petition for a Special Exception for sales office on property known as 2201
Sunny Day Drive.
6
Item 5: Is for a Special Exception for a sales office on property known as 4802 Apple
Court.
Item 6: Is a request for a change of zoning from a Zone P-1 (Professional) to a Zone B-1
(Neighborhood Business) affecting property known as 2006 Lumpkin Road.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of those Planning Petitions?
Mr. Russell: None noted, Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: I call you attention to our Public Services portion of the agenda. If there are
any objectors to any of the alcohol petitions would you please signify your objections by raising
your hand. I call you attention to:
Item 10: It’s a request for a retail package Liquor license to be used in connection with H
& S Wines & Spirits located at 545 Sand Bar Ferry Road.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to that alcohol petition?
Mr. Russell: Yes, ma’am, there’s one in the audience.
The Clerk: Our consent agenda consists of items 1-22 with no objectors to our Planning
petitions and objector to Item 10 the alcohol petition.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, and I know we had two additions to the agenda, one
for the consent agenda and one for the regular agenda.
The Clerk: Yes, sir. Item one was an oversight. When the Commission approved this
th
agenda item on June 30 the caption did not read as an ordinance. So it was an oversight not
having it placed back on the agenda for a second reading. And the next item is a discussion
Commission appointments to the 2011 Redistricting Committee.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have unanimous consent to add those two agenda item?
Commissioner Lockett. We do not.
Mr. Lockett: Do not.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
The Clerk: On both?
Mr. Mayor: On both or?
Mr. Lockett: On one, okay, but on two, no.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay, we will add one to the consent agenda and moving ahead do
we have any additions to the consent agenda. Commissioner Jackson.
7
Mr. Jackson: Mr. Mayor, I’d like the possible consent of items 24, 27, 28 and 29.
The Clerk: Say that again, Mr. Jackson?
Mr. Jackson: Twenty-four, 27, 28 and 29.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have any further additions to the consent agenda? Commissioner
Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: You can add, as far as I’m concerned you can add items number 30, 31,
33, 34 and 36.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any ---
Mr. Mason: You’re adding thirty-six?
Mr. Brigham: No, I want to go on and deal with that but I want to do it as a regular
agenda item. I think we need to, what I want to do I want to go on the recommendation of the
tax assessor set it at the $25 dollar rate or the hearing process. And that’s what I want to do. I
want to go on the consideration, let her say, let her say if it’s acceptable or not.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have ---
Mr. Brigham: --- being in you know with, consistent with state law which sets the rate at
$25 dollars.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any further additions to? Do we have items to be pulled
for discussion? I’d like to, Commissioner Aitken would like to pull ten and send it back to
Committee for further review. Okay, do we have any other items to be pulled for discussion?
Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Madam Clerk, eleven or twelve, which one is the one that’s dropped
because they’re identical. I know you said you’re going to leave one of them.
The Clerk: No, sir, those items, while they have the same number they’re not identical
grants. The memo I sent you was relative to an item on the public safety agenda.
Mr. Lockett: Well, I want to pull 11, 12.
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. Lockett: You had all these other, I’ll give you time to ---
The Clerk: The one I sent you was relative to Item 27.
8
Mr. Lockett: And sixteen.
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. Lockett: Thirty-six.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, does that cover it?
Mr. Lockett: I’m getting pretty close, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: You’re running out of real estate there.
Mr. Lockett: That’s what happened in our committee meeting. I think that’s it.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Jackson: Sixteen?
Mr. Lockett: Hold on, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: He’s got sixteen, we’ve got it.
Mr. Lockett: No, I don’t want to pull sixteen. I was, that’s for district on sixteen please.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do we have any more additions or items to be pulled for discussion?
Hearing none I’d look for a motion to approve the consent agenda.
Mr. Jackson: So moved.
Mr. Mason: Second.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Did Mr. Lockett pull 34, I believe, or not?
Mr. Mayor: No, 36.
Mr. Brigham: I thought he pulled both?
Mr. Mayor: No, I think it was just 36 was it not Commissioner Lockett?
Mr. Lockett: I didn’t touch 34.
Mr. Brigham: Okay. I just thought it was both, I’m sorry.
9
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion ---
The Clerk: Who was the second?
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. And, Madam Clerk, just for clarity I think
we’ve got it all up there but I just wanted to make sure that we, if you could read back the
consent agenda items.
The Clerk: Okay. Our consent agenda consisted of items 1-22 with item 10 being
referred back to Committee. We added the item on our addendum agenda number one, 24, 27,
28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34.
Mr. Mason: I believe that covers it.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, if there’s no ---
The Clerk: Let me say pull for discussion let me just we make sure we got the right items
pulling for discussion. Number 10 is on the consent to be referred back to Committee. We’re
going to discuss item number 36 and eleven and twelve.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Lockett: Number 24, Mr. Chairman, that’s the one I was trying to catch up with.
The Clerk: Number 24?
Mr. Lockett: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Lockett: We need to talk about it.
The Clerk: Oh, okay twenty-four, yes.
CONSENT AGENDA
PLANNING
1. A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to defer until the
August 1, 2011, a petition to amend the Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia. The nature of
these changes are not substantive nor regulatory, but rather editorial to bring various
sections of the Ordinances into conformance with the correct name of Augusta, Georgia, to
reassign responsibility and authority as a result of the reorganization of Augusta’s
government to the current departments and positions, and for other purposes. The
ordinances in question are as follow: Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Land Subdivision
Regulations, Site Plan Regulations, Stormwater Management Ordinance, Tree Ordinance,
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, Grading Ordinance, Soil Erosion and Sediment
10
Control Ordinance, Groundwater Recharge Area Protection Ordinance, Water Supply and
Watershed Ordinance Historic Preservation Ordinance.
2. FINAL PLAT – DUNNINGTON, SECTION 1-B-s-799-B – A petition by H&C
Surveying Inc., on behalf of Dunnington Development, requesting final plat approval for
Dunnington, Section 1-B. This residential townhome development is located off Boy Scot
Road and contains 28 lots.
3. Z-11-28 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to approve
a petition by Stan Perhonish, on behalf of Philippe Erramuzpe, requesting a Special
Exception for a sales office in a residential subdivision (Spring Creek Village) per Section
8-2(f) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property
containing approximately 28 acres and is currently known as 2993 and 3031 Willis
Foreman Rd. (Tax Map 150-0-12-08-0 & 151-0-021-04-0) DISTRICT 8.
4. Z-11-29 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to approve
a petition by Wilson Parker Homes requesting a Special Exception for a sales office in a
residential subdivision (The Orchards) per Section 8-2(f) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property containing .42 acres and is known as
2201 Sunny Day Drive. (Tax Map 196-1-023-00-0) DISTRICT 8
5. Z-11-30 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to approve
a petition by Wilson Parker Homes requesting a Special Exception for a sales office in a
residential subdivision (Elderberry Section 3) per Section 8-2(f) of the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property containing .46 acres is known
as 4802 Apple Court. (Tax Map 066-4-114-00-0) DISTRICT 3
6. Z-11-32 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to approve
a petition by Laura Green, on behalf of Yupac Mill, LLC, requesting a change of zoning
from Zone P-1 (Professional) to Zone B-1 (Neighborhood Business) affecting property
containing approximately .29 acres and is known as 2006 Lumpkin Road. (Tax Map 110-2-
075-00-0) DISTRICT 6
7. ZA-R-208 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to
approve a petition to amend Section 2 (Definitions) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia by adding a definition for alcohol drinking establishments
or nightclubs.
8. ZA-R-209 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to
approve a petition to amend Section 22 (General Business) of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia thereby conforming with changes that we made to Section
21 (Neighborhood Business) relative to permitting cafes, restaurants, taverns and drinking
establishment as permitted uses.
PUBLIC SERVICES
9. Motion to approve Airport Resolution 2011-02 naming the Executive Director and the
Finance Director as authorized agents for the Aviation Commission’s Morgan Stanley
Smith Barney Account. The Augusta Aviation Commission approved the ratification of
Resolution 2011-02. (Approved by Public Services Committee July 11, 2011)
10. Motion to approve New ownership Application: A.N. – 28: request by Urvesh Patel for
a retail package Liquor license to be used in connection with Nesha & Bansi, Inc. DBA
H&S Wine & Spirits located at 545 San Bar Ferry Rd. District 1. Super District 9.
(Approved by Public Services Committee July 11, 2011)
11
13. Motion to approve the Morris Communication Company, LLC Lease Amendment as
approved by the Augusta Aviation Commission during their June 30, 2011 meeting.
(Approved by Public Services Committee July 11, 2011)
14. Motion to approve the lease between Augusta Regional Airport and StandardAero
Business Aviation Services, LLC as approved by the Augusta Aviation Commission at their
June 30, 2011 meeting. (Approved by Public Services Committee July 11, 2011)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
15. Motion to approve the implementation of a policy requiring all ARC boards, authorities
and commissions submit an electronic version of meeting minutes to the Clerk of
Commission for dissemination to members of the commission excluding those members of
the commission that may choose to opt out and post minutes on the city’s website.
(Approved by Administrative Services Committee July 11, 2011)
16. Motion to schedule a work session to further discuss developing a report and
recommendation for an organizational structure and job descriptions for Equal
Employment Opportunity and Minority and Small Business Opportunity consistent with
the Charter. (Disapproved by the Administrative Services Committee July 11, 2011)
ENGINEERING SERVICES
17. Motion to authorize amendment to existing engineering contract with Zimmerman,
Evans and Leopold to provide engineering services for the Goodrich St. Raw Water
Pumping Station Rehabilitation of Turbine Unit #1 in the amount of $49,987.61. (Approved
by Engineering Services Committee July 11, 2011)
18. Motion to approve award of Construction Contract to Sitec, LLC in the amount of
$39,714.50 for the Goshen Lake Drive South Drainage Management Project, Capital
Project Budget 324-041110-201824041, subject to receipt of signed contracts and proper
bonds as requested by AED. Funding is available in the project account. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee July 11, 2011)
19. Motion to approve and authorize Augusta Engineering Department (AED) to proceed
with the process to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Briar Creek
Water Conservation District and the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission
(GSWCC) to review the erosion and sedimentation control plans by the AED. Also
authorize Augusta Georgia Mayor to sign and execute the MOA upon completion of the
process. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee July 11, 2011)
20. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of property for right of way for the
Youngblood Lane Paving Project (Paving Various Roads, PH IX)-Tax Map 252, Parcel
015; 2085 Youngblood Lane. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee July 11, 2011)
21. Motion to approve Capital Project Budget 324-041110-201824333 and Supplemental
Agreement Number Two for Cranston Engineering Group, PC, in the amount of
$40,925.00 to provide additional concept for the Wrightsboro Road Widening, Phase I
project. Funding is available in the project engineering account for the Engineering
Department. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee July 11, 2011)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
22. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held June 30,
2011 and Legal Meeting held July 11, 2011.
12
PUBLIC SAFETY
27. Approve Capacity Agreement for FY2012 for state inmates being housed in the
Richmond County Correction Institution.
28. Motion to approve Fiscal Year 2012 County Capacity Agreement with the Georgia
Department of Corrections relative to State inmates being housed in RCCI, and to
authorize the Mayor and Clerk of Commission to execute such documents as necessary to
consummate the transaction, all in form as approved by counsel for Augusta.
29. Motion to approve and Ordinance to Amend the Augusta, GA Code creating Title Two
Chapter Two Article Six Section 2-2-57 Relating to Imposing a 9-1-1 Charge on Prepaid
Wireless Service; To Repeal All Code Sections and Ordinances in Conflict Herewith; To
Provide an Effective Date and for Other Purposes.
FINANCE
30. Approve the replacement of 6 public safety automobiles using Sales Tax Funds as
approved in the Sales Tax Referendum for Phase VI.
31. Approve request from the Finance Department-Fleet Management Division to purchase
one garage vehicle lift for the Broad Street Service Center.
33. Motion to approve a Budget Resolution and a contract with the Georgia Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) for Phase 1 of the Summerville Historic District Survey.
34. Approve request for refund tax year 2007 for Robert J. Palagyi, 2103880, Personal
Property (boat) in the amount of $282.80.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, can I get, we have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now
vote by the usual sign of voting. Some days it’s like herding cats. Not y’all, the agenda items.
Motion carries 9-0. [Items 1-10, 13-22, 27, 31, 33-34]
Mr. Mayor: All righty, Madam Clerk, let’s go to the pulled items first.
The Clerk: Eleven and twelve, Mr. Lockett, could those be companion items?
Mr. Lockett: I don’t see why not.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
11. Motion to approve the Sec. 5307 Augusta Public Transit grant application between the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Augusta, Georgia. (Approved by Public
Services Committee July 11, 2011)
12. Motion to approve the Sec. 5307 Augusta Public Transit grant application between the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Augusta, Georgia. (Approved by Public
Services Committee July 11, 2011)
Mr. Brigham: Move we approve.
13
Mr. Jackson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, hang on. Hang on one second, let me get the clerk back up. Okay,
Madam Clerk, on eleven and twelve I believe we have a motion to approve.
The Clerk: Mr. Brigham and Mr. Jackson.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brigham and Mr. Jackson. Mr. Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To my dismay we privatized the Augusta
Public Transit. I do believe we did a disservice to the ridership and to this community. The Bus
Riders Association for months have complained about the lack of surveillance on the buses the
lack of signs the lack of schedules. They had many complaints but no money was provided.
Then I find that in 2005 we were granted over $2 million dollars for transit. We used all of it
except six hundred and some thousand dollars. We returned that to the federal government
during the fall of last year because we didn’t want to put 20% in matching funds. At our last
meeting I asked the question I know the fall of 2010 we were granted over $2 million dollars
from the FTA. And I asked last meeting what has been done with that two million and I didn’t
get a response. So I’m coming back again for an explanation as to what we have done with the
$2 million dollars. And this is for the Administrator.
Mr. Russell: The first statement you made is not exactly accurate, sir. That $600,000
dollars was based on a grant that we had with a 60 or 80/20 match to my understanding. We
received another grant that was 100% federal dollars. We made the decision it was all for the
same buses so we couldn’t buy the same buses with both grants so we took the grant that had the
complete federal dollars and no match. So I mean that’s those were the businesses issues that
were made opposed to using 80/20 money we used 100% in bought the same buses that we were
going to buy anyway. So that’s why that money actually went back. The $2 million dollars that
we got, if Heyward’s in the back he can speak to that.
Mr. Lockett: Okay, well then let me ask you this, Mr. Russell. You said that I was
inaccurate in my comment. I know I’m not inaccurate. I know I have the correct numbers. I
know in 2005 we were granted over $2 million dollars from the FTA. At that point it was 10%
match from the state, 10% match from the city. 2009 the state came back to us and said we’re
not going to give you the 10% match anymore. And at that time I do believe we had over
$600,000 dollars. So rather than us pick up the 10% that the state did not give us we chose to
send the money back when there was a desperate need. We could’ve invested $120,000 dollars -
--
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Lockett: --- there about and we could’ve received over four hundred some thousand
dollars from the government.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett, your two minutes’ up on that one. Would you like
to be recognized ---
14
Mr. Lockett: I would appreciate it.
Mr. Mayor: I’ll recognize you again.
Mr. Lockett: And now we have Mobility that we’ve signed a contract with and all of
sudden money’s coming out of the woodwork. And for the average person to see if they’re
going to think we’ll boy Augusta Public Transit was so bad but now we’ve got a private entity
that’s coming in and taking over. Boy, we’ve got a brand new bus washer, we’ve got security
(unintelligible) mechanism, we’ve got brand new buses, gee whiz, we should’ve had the private
company all along. But that’s not a true fact. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, is it okay if I ask Mr. Russell some questions?
Mr. Russell: Please if you’ll keep it to your two minute and then I’ll if we go over that
I’ll recognize you again.
Mr. Brigham: I appreciate it. Mr. Russell, do not we the citizens of Augusta still own the
buses in Richmond County?
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Brigham: If we don’t apply for this grant, is it going to inhibit our ability to get
newer buses for the citizens of Richmond County?
Mr. Russell: If we don’t use the federal money we ---
Mr. Brigham: If we don’t, if we don’t apply for this federal money to buy buses with,
will it cause us more hardship on the buses that we already own?
Mr. Russell: In my opinion it will, sir.
Mr. Brigham: It will? Okay. So therefore I think we ought to vote for this grant. We
still own these buses. These are the buses that are owned by the citizens and if we don’t apply
for this federal grant it’s going to go to somebody else is it not?
Mr. Russell: That’s true.
Mr. Brigham: So why should we not apply for this grant? I think it’s all about this grant.
Last time I checked the management contract would be, the bus company was to run the buses.
Not to own it not to go out and seek federal funds but to operate the buses as best that it could
operate. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Mason.
15
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Brigham made some good points and I’m not
in disagreement. I’m going to vote for this but not for the reasons that Mr. Brigham is
referencing. Because of the fact that they are our buses which is what I and certainly Mr.
Lockett had a problem with in the first place I felt that the contract should’ve been if they’re
going to be the private agency then they should either lease those buses or and bring some more
money into the government. After all we’re $9 million dollars in the hole instead of giving them
the buses free. Now, so now that we have though we do need to take care of the buses. So I’m
going to vote for it for that reason but from the very beginning I didn’t feel like we should have
taken over that responsibility as they not pay us any money for the use of the buses. After all
we’re on the bill for these employees and the whole deal as it is. So the problem that I have with
this Jerry is not that I’m not going to vote for it because I will but the point that you make that
they are our buses they are. And I would’ve rather them being leased instead of us giving them
to the private entity for free. So I think a motion and a second was made.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, a motion and a second has been made. Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Mr. Russell, the privatization of the bus system, are you not budgeting
about $400,000 dollars less for the Transit Department next year based on our contract then we
budgeted this year?
Mr. Russell: Obviously we haven’t begun the budget process. So as we go forward with
that that would be an option that would be available to you unless you want to expand the
services which some people want.
Mr. Bowles: We’ve got guaranteed payouts of $450,000 less in the next five years than
we have in the past year. That to me is savings and that is a lease in my opinion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Johnson, Guilfoyle. I looked at Cory and I turned
your way.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Guilfoyle: As far as who applied for this grant and has Mobility taken over yet?
Mr. Russell: They’re in the process and should be taking over, they’re doing training
now and should be starting sometime in the very near future.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay, who applied for this grant though?
Mr. Russell: The locality has to apply for the grant. They don’t, the feds will not deal
with a private company they deal with the locality itself.
16
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay, thank you, Mr. Russell.
Mr. Mason: I’ve got a final comment, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Yes, in reference to this lease that Mr. Bowles’ references, well, first of all
there’s supposed to be $450,000 guaranteed. To me nothing’s guaranteed until I see it and I
haven’t seen it yet. So if we get that than I’ll be happy with that guarantee. Secondly I’m not
debating the fact whether there’s going to be a savings. If there is then that’s great. My point is
there could’ve been a greater savings than the four-fifty. If we had to lease the building, if we
had to lease the buses, if we had to did a number of different things that would have brought in
some additional income because oh by the way, we keep throwing out this $9 million dollar in
the hole figure. So that’s all I’m saying. I’m not saying that we’re not going to see some sort of
savings or that is was a good deal or a bad deal. It’s irrelevant now it’s a deal that’s done. But
that’s what could’ve happened. We could’ve seen a greater income flux than what we currently
see. So let’s not get that twisted.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, I’m going to recognize Commissioner Brigham, but y’all this is a
dead horse that we’re going to make scream if we keep beating this hard. Mr. Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I believe to lease the buses we would have to own them. To
own them I believe it would cost us several hundred million dollars to buy them from the federal
government. Is that the case or not the case?
Mr. Russell: I’m not sure where you’re going on this.
Mr. Brigham: But to lease the buses to a private entity we would have to own them,
would we not? Since we don’t own them they were granted to us by the federal government.
And if we don’t pay for them we can’t turn around and sell them or we can’t repay, if we don’t
repay for them we can’t sell them and we can’t lease them.
Mr. Russell: I’m not familiar with that. But what you’re saying though is we’d have to
make up the 80% match that we’re, the reasoning for the federal dollars before you could lease
that to a private entity. I’m not familiar with that but ---
Mr. Mason: Nobody else is either.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Lockett votes No.
Motion carries 8-1.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to the regular agenda.
17
The Clerk: Item number 23.
Mr. Mayor: If there’s ever such a thing as a regular agenda.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
23. Z-11-31 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to deny a
petition by Dr. Ayudele Ayedun, M.D., on behalf of Earl Williams, requesting a Special
Exception to establish a Family Personal Care Home per Section 26-1 (H) of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property containing .35
acres and is known as 3316 Thames Place. (Tax Map 142-4-157-00-0) DISTRICT 4
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Patty.
Mr. Patty: Yes, sir, this was a pretty typical request for a personal care home within a
subdivision. The owner, there was some discussion about whether or not he lived there which is
not necessarily applicable or relevant. But we felt that after listening to both sides the owners
presented, I mean the objectors presented a compelling argument. We’ve weighed the detriment
to the community versus the benefit to the applicant and felt that it shook out in favor of the
objectors. So we recommend that it be denied.
Mr. Mayor: Can we get a motion or would somebody like to speak?
Mr. Mason: So moved.
Mr. Jackson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Mr.
Russell.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, we need to hear from the applicant.
Mr. Mayor: The petitioner, yes, excuse me. Sorry about that, sir.
Mr. Speaker: No problem. All the individuals (unintelligible) homeowners association.
Mr. Russell: Wait a minute.
Mr. Mayor: Hang on.
Mr. Russell: Wait a minute. We need the applicant first. I’m sorry. Nice job taking
over though we appreciate that. Good job there.
18
Mr. Mayor: Can we hear from the applicant? Is the applicant in here? He cannot be
with us. Okay, sir, I don’t think you need to do this but ---
Mr. Speaker: I have to, Mr. Mayor, because there’s something bigger than this ---
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, let’s call for the order.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Russell: I would like to get a count on the ---
Mr. Mayor: Yes, please ---
Mr. Russell: -- objectors.
Mr. Mayor: --- if you could get a count on the objectors.
The Clerk: All the objectors please raise your hand.
Mr. Mayor: It’s easier to raise your hand so we can see everybody in the back.
Mr. Russell: Twenty-eight.
The Clerk: Twenty-eight objectors. Okay.
Mr. Speaker: I’m supposed to have another thirty-four on our petition including one that
didn’t (unintelligible).
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, sir. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will
now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mason: Mr. Mason, let me get a point of clarification just so I can ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: --- understand what’s going on. That is out in District 4 so I want to make
sure that where’d he go? Oh there he is back there. It’s to my understanding that there’s a house
established already. Obviously this has been denied today. What is the procedure in terms of
cease and desist operations that’s going on even as we speak?
19
Mr. Patty: We will send a letter to the applicant notifying him that’s it’s been denied
after which he’ll get a visit from our, we’ll have a discussion with him if necessary and we’ll
follow up with zoning enforcement.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you. And thank y’all for coming. Madam Clerk, next agenda
item. Okay, Madam Clerk, now we can go to the next agenda item, please.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
24. Motion to approve Choate Construction Company Contact and the Guaranteed
Maximum Price (GMP) to Construct Fixed Based Operation as approved by the Augusta
Aviation Commission at their June 30, 2011 meeting. (No recommendation from Public
Services Committee July 31, 2011)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Director.
Mr. LeTellier: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission this is a request to approve a
contract for a construction manager at risk for the construction of the fixed based operation
facilities and the Augusta Regional Airport. The contract is a guaranteed maximum price of
$5,045,461 dollars and is being recommended to you by the Augusta Aviation Commission.
Mr. Mason: Motion to approve.
Mr. Jackson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Lockett, I thought you
wanted to speak to this.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I completely agree with the agenda item but I
just want to do this to set the record straight. At the last meeting I was told that my comments
were incorrect dealing with Griffin and Choate. But I want to put in on the record that I was
indeed correct that we had, before this Commission we had talked about Griffin Construction.
They’re the ones that came out with the best bid and that is what came before this Commission.
That was phase one. However during phase two there were some problems and the second
person on the list was chosen. But that had not been brought before this body. So I just wanted
to get that straight. And at the same time, Mr. Russell, if there’s any kind of way when this body
votes like we did on Griffin for phase one and if there’s a change if that particular contractor
doesn’t get it, it would be nice if we were notified if it was highlighted. I know down in the
body of the text there was an explanation but if you are in a hurry or something and you don’t
read it quite thoroughly well then you wouldn’t see that. So if there’s some kind of way that if
Procurement makes that decision that it could be highlighted so this body will see it and it won’t
cause any confusion. So, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further
discussion Commissioner’s will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
20
Mr. Guilfoyle: Madam Clerk, I’ve got a conflict with this. That’s the reason why I’m
abstaining.
The Clerk: Okay, thank you, sir.
Mr. Guilfoyle abstains.
Motion carries 8-0-1.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, next agenda item please.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
25. Update of negotiations regarding options for future operation of Augusta Municipal
Golf Course. (No recommendation from Public Services Committee July 11, 2011)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Beck.
Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission at the Public Services Committee
request added to your packets this week is information regarding the RFP from The Patch of
Augusta, LLC regarding the RFP for the lease. You also have included as it was last committee
meeting the draft management agreement should you opt to go with that option for a
management company. Representatives are here from The Patch of Augusta, LLC representing
James Kendrick who is the Chairman of The Patch Committee is here to answer any questions as
well as Rick Allen who is the President of the First Tee of Augusta. If you have any questions
along the line of and those issues. So we’re here to answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Jackson.
Mr. Jackson: I was just going to make a motion to accept Option 2 which would be the
lease out to Augusta, The Patch, LLC.
Mr. Brigham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second?
Mr. Brigham: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Is there further discussion or questions for? Commissioner Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My colleagues say you want you made a motion
to lease it to who now?
The Clerk: The Patch, LLC.
21
Mr. Johnson: Now, Tom, when you guys met with, what’s the group, Affinity?
Mr. Mayor: Affinity.
Mr. Johnson: Affinity. Was it you met with them and met with the Patch Committee? Is
this two different committees we’re talking about?
Mr. Beck: The Patch Committee was the committee that you actually appointed that
James Kendrick chaired.
Mr. Johnson: Right.
Mr. Beck: That was made up of The First Tee, Paine College, Board of Education. That
was the Patch Committee and they recommended the management company.
Mr. Johnson: Affinity.
Mr. Beck: Correct or to go with the management company.
Mr. Johnson: Right, okay, so what you’re asking today is to allow them to negotiate with
them?
Mr. Beck: What, we just put out all the options to you. You’ve got all the options the
options are in your packet. The three options would be the first option for us to continue running
it, the second option would be to lease it based on the RFP to Patch of Augusta, LLC. The third
option would be to hire a management company.
Mr. Johnson: Okay, so basically you’re just asking to go with Option 2 in this agenda
item?
Mr. Mayor: That was Commissioner Jackson’s motion.
The Clerk: He just presented you with three options.
Mr. Johnson: Okay, and after that then they would you guys going to meet with them to
get the I guess the contract worked out or what. Because I wasn’t, this came before committee, I
wasn’t here at committee last week so exactly what are you trying to do to move forward with
this item. Are you going to take it to the next level of what?
Mr. Beck: I think we would await Commission action on the next move.
Mr. Johnson: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
22
Mr. Johnson: I just wanted to be clear on what we was doing with this item. Thank you,
Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: Fred, when I was reviewing the lease from the Patch, LLC I didn’t see
anything in there in regards to the golf carts. And I know we lease those from either Club Car or
E-Z-Go. Are we going to assign that lease to the Patch, LLC?
Mr. Russell: Tom’s got that, sir.
Mr. Beck: The only thing in the RFP with the golf carts is they have to have a minimum
of fifty. That was what was in the RFP. They’re open to go with whatever company they want
to go with.
Mr. Bowles: And then, Fred, when you negotiate a contract or if you negotiate a contract
with that group I didn’t see any kind of insurance bond in case of any deterioration or destruction
of the golf course in case they default and leave us with the golf course with dead greens.
Mr. Russell: That would be part of the final agreement once we get to that point. Then
you’d have a look at that. That agreement would come back to you for your approval.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Guilfoyle then Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Beck, as far as Option 3 the first five years that’s what I have to work
off of from Affinity is showing that the city will actually pay out $158,081.00 plus the upgrades
and the upkeep of the building.
Mr. Beck: You’re totaling?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir, I’m totaling. All right, the first five years with the Patch, LLC I
appreciate Mr. Bowles bringing up the other issues because that is a concern of ours. Is there
any we could discuss a seven year lease with them versus a ten?
Mr. Beck: I guess anything’s open. The RFP actually stated a ten year lease and that’s
what the Commission voted on. So I guess that would be a legal question whether or not we
could go back and renegotiate anything smaller.
Mr. Guilfoyle: With a same five years with The Patch the Augusta will receive and not
have to pay approximately $890,000.00 in the first five years as well. So it’s a net gain for us as
far as for Richmond County. The $150,000 budget for the year, $80,000 for equipment then
$12,000 a month lease, a year, I’m sorry.
23
Mr. Beck: The lease does, should the lease go through its term would guarantee the city
$12,000 a year plus they would pay for the equipment.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay.
Mr. Beck: Then everything else would be their responsibility.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know for the last 19 months I’ve heard my
colleagues talk about doing everything we can in support of our local businesses and local
entities. One of the first responsibilities I had as a Commissioner was chairing a subcommittee
on The Patch. There are lots of Patch lawyers out there. Now we have comments from Scotland
and from Savannah. Their claim to fame is they’re going to make enough money during Masters
Week and I have a problem with that because it’s been known to rain the first week in April.
What happens then? We need to have local control of that golf course. Now money is
important, savings is important but sometimes we have to consider the importance of those
citizens that we represent. We have a responsibility. We have no problem at all providing funds
for them to go swim or go play basketball, play baseball but for some reason or another when it
comes to golf we don’t have any monies at all. I have said over and over and over that we
should have The Patch under the general fund, under the same as we do all of the other
recreational entities in Augusta. But for some reason I haven’t been able to get the support for
that. But our second best thing is with Affinity. They have done what Mr. Kendrick’s
committee suggested. They have involvement from ASU, from Paine College, from First TEE
and others, local entities.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner, I’m going to recognize you for a second.
Mr. Lockett: I appreciate that, Mr. Mayor. So really I think sometime we just have to
put the savings on the back burner and do something because it’s the right thing to do. And in
this case if we cannot keep the patch under the general fund then the next best thing would be
would be Option 3, Affinity. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: I’d just say I know what Affinity can do from ---
Mr. Mason: Before he goes ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Mason: --- it’s just a legal and just to make sure everybody’s on you know is on the
same sheet of music. With Mr. Smith serving on the board over at Forest Hills where Affinity is
24
running the golf course is there any conflict of interest in terms of him being a part of the
discussion, any voting what would you rule on that?
Mr. MacKenzie: I don’t see any potential conflict as long as he’s not a member of
Affinity or doesn’t, is not on the board of Affinity. It’s my understanding he’s just on the board
of different golf courses and they have hired Affinity as a management corporation. Is that
correct? I don’t see any conflict unless he has an ownership interest in Infinity. I don’t see a
conflict.
Mr. Mayor: Just for the record, Commissioner Smith, you do not have an ownership
interest in Affinity.
Mr. Smith: No, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Please, have at it.
Mr. Smith: My Cadillac will be arriving next week. Excuse me, I’m sorry, Sylvia. I just
want to say that I am on the board of up at Forest Hills. I’ve seen what this company can do and
you know if you want to maintain a certain amount of involvement in the golf course this is the
way to do it. And the option you have is to either do it with a company like this who has a
performance record and that’s how they earn their money by their performance. They don’t
perform they don’t get anything. But the thing about it is also the other side of private enterprise
when anything takes over he makes decisions because he’s got his money on the line. So those
are the choices you have because we definitely need to make some improvements up there and
just make it better for everybody. But I have seen what this company can do and if we want to
maintain a certain local involvement you know I would have to say that’s a very good option to
go with. This company is, I’m impressed with what I’ve seen, with what they’ve done with
Forest Hills. And we’ve just finished the local county golf tournament there this weekend and
had nothing but rave reviews from most of the players that played in our local city amateur. So
there again those are your options, two options that I see.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, it sounds like we’ve got a certain percentage for two and a certain
percentage for three. Maybe it’s headed for a substitute motion on three. But Commissioner
Mason.
Mr. Mason: We’ve heard from both sides now we’ll hear from somewhere in the middle.
I’m not really overly enthused with any of these that are sitting here the options right now
because they all lack something though but I know we’re going to have to make a choice here.
I’m not a fan of being on the dime for the employees, for Affinity. I’ve told you that on, at the
last committee meeting where the city is responsible for their salaries and their benefits and all of
that. But we have no control over them in terms of their not, they do not have to adhere to this
personnel policy that we just put into place and so forth. I think that’s kind of you know
backwards. I’m not sure why we would be on the dime for that. And that’s really the problem
that I have with that in that it’s just not leaving my mind. I can’t see us being on the dime for all
of that and then we have absolutely zero control. For this ten years is bothering me and I didn’t
25
really hear an answer from Legal as to whether or not at this point that that would be something
that we could go back and talk about. Do you have an answer at this point?
Mr. MacKenzie: I would have to review the RFP to see if that’s a term that can be
negotiated down to I guess I’m assuming a lower term?
Mr. Mason: It would make a difference to whether it passed or failed.
Mr. MacKenzie: I’d have to look at it.
Mr. Mayor: But correct me if I’m wrong the final contract would have to come back and
be approved by this Commission correct?
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes.
Mr. Mason: I’m not going there like that. Okay, but I understand but I won’t go there
like that. Mr. Beck, Mr. Beck, yes. Under the plan for the private there is no accommodations
made for First TEE at all. Is that correct?
Mr. Beck: They have indicated in a letter back to some inquiries that they would prefer
that not being a part of the lease, those conditions with First Tee not being a part of the lease.
They did not rule out anything done in a separate form.
Mr. Mason: But we have nothing binding that would in terms of the proposal that was
sent out, the solicitation that was sent out in that they proposed.
Mr. Beck: Not as far as (inaudible).
Mr. Mason: Okay, now from the standpoint of Augusta State University how much of
that from a private leasing standpoint how much of that acreage would be utilized by the private
company?
Mr. Beck: None. The only way that any of that property could be utilized would be if
they in fact would enter into an agreement with The First Tee to maintain some of those
properties. Just as if we end up weaving the city through the management company would end
up negotiating a contract with First Tee to maintain it.
Mr. Mason: So if they came on board they wouldn’t be knocking First Tee out of the
box.
Mr. Beck: No.
Mr. Mason: I just got to make sure. Yeah, that ten year deal is a little issue for me.
That’s all I have, Mr. Mayor. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, is there ---
26
Mr. Lockett: Can I have a one minute follow up?
Mr. Mayor: I’m trying to think if I’ve recognized you twice on that. No I actually I ---
Mr. Lockett: I thought I remembered one.
Mr. Mayor: --- I, no, sir, because you remember I gave you, I recognized you for the
second time so, nice try though, nice try. All righty if there’s no further discussion we have a
motion and a second. And Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, could she read the motion, please?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am, Madam Bonner.
The Clerk: The motion is to approve Option 2 to lease to The Patch, LLC.
Mr. Mason, Mr. Lockett and Mr. Smith vote No.
Motion carries 6-3.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, next agenda item.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
26. An Ordinance to amend the Augusta, GA. Code Title Eight Chapter One Article One
Sections 8-1-5 through 8-1-9 relating to the Creation and Duties of the Planning and
Development Department; to repeal all Code Sections and Ordinances and part of Code
Sections and Ordinances in conflict herewith; to provide an effective date and for other
purposes. (No recommendation from Administrative Services Committee July 11, 2011)
Mr. Brigham: So moved.
Mr. Jackson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to put a footnote that I oppose this
agenda item or any other agenda items that’s using the Personnel Policy and Procedures manual
as authority. And I have a question. I notice the authority they’re using on here is ARC
Commission approval the Administrative Reorganization Plan dated March 30 or eleven. I’d
like to direct this either to the Administrator or to the General Counsel. Could you explain to me
what that is?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie.
27
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure. This is to make additional code amendments to be consistent
with the reorganization action that was taken on the earlier date.
Mr. Mayor: Excuse me for cutting you off. No, I’m just trying to find out about the
authority you’re using here. Is that valid authority? You said, you have on here March 30, 2011
Administrative Reorganization Plan. I believe that’s what you’re using as authority for this.
Mr. MacKenzie: I wouldn’t look at that as necessarily look at this as authority. That was
just an action that was taken first. This is actually a standalone code amendment. The authority
would lie within powers of the Commission to amend the code. It’s just to, history to reference
that this is being done as a result of other action that we’re taking so that this action’s being
consistent with the action that was taken at the earlier date.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. MacKenzie, I have done research and I couldn’t find where we had a
March 30, 2011 meeting. Maybe I missed it but that’s what I’m trying to find out. Not what this
ordinance would do I’m just trying to find out did we indeed have a March 30, 2011 Commission
meeting where this was authorized?
Mr. MacKenzie: I would have to check the record on that to be sure what ---
Mr. Lockett: Well, I need to know before I vote. Madam Clerk, can you help me out?
The Clerk: Well, I’d have to go back to my office to check my records but right off I
mean that was ---
Mr. Lockett: That was a Wednesday. I can’t recall a Wednesday meeting.
The Clerk: Yes, that was a Wednesday meeting. Not right off I don’t either, but I need
to confirm that through research.
Mr. Mayor: And that could’ve been a typo. If it ---
Mr. Lockett: It could’ve been no meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ve had the question called for and Commissioner Lockett you are
I think it would be good to find out if we actually did have the meeting on that day. But you’re
free to vote no on it. There’s been a motion properly seconded, the question’s been called for
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, can I ask a question before I vote?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: If we do vote on this and the date is not correct, is it relevant? Does it
stand?
28
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: This would be a standalone item. It’s an amendment to the code it’s not
related to whatever action heard on the other date. That’s just history to support if we need to
make this change.
Mr. Mayor: It’s just a reference.
Mr. Guilfoyle: So today has no ---
Mr. Mayor: No.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. Andrew, why would the date be on there before then?
The Clerk: And it very well may have been.
Mr. MacKenzie: The date is intended to be a reference to a previous action that was
taken to help explain why this action is linked to the previous action. It shows consistency
between the two actions. If the incorrect date it doesn’t have a positive effect on this item. It
still would have the effect of the amended code.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Johnson, Mr. Mason and Mr. Lockett vote No.
Motion carries 6-3.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item, please.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
32. Motion to approve 2011 Hearing Officer – Pay Set. (Requested by the Board of Tax
Assessors) (Referred from June 30 Commission meeting)
Mr. Mayor: Do we have somebody to speak to this agenda item?
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: I make a motion that we set the rate for the Hearing Officer at the
state rate of $25.00 per day.
29
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Do we have a second?
Mr. Jackson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion,
Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. At the Board of Assessors meeting they
conducted a survey to and they got reports back from several Hearing Officers. And if, they all
seemed to want $175.00 per hour. Now there are some things that we can do if we don’t want to
pay them that and maybe that’s what my colleague Commissioner Brigham has in mind. But
$25.00 is the minimum but they’re asking for $175.00 an hour plus $100.00 a day per diem if
they come from out of town.
Mr. Mayor: Are they taking applications? Okay, we have a motion and a second.
Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I understand that’s been the case throughout the state but I
don’t think any other commission has set a rate at this time higher than the $25.00. And
knowing this commission’s reluctance to be a leader and going up above state minimums I think
we ought to join the crowd right now and leave it at $25.00 minimum to see what happens with
that. We can adjust it later if we need to.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussions
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
35. Award the contract for the Bid Item 11-111, Real Estate Brokerage Services for the
City of Augusta to the Sherman and Hemstreet. (No recommendation from the
Engineering Services Committee July 11, 2011)
The Clerk: Along with Delegation B.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we, can we identify the players? Who all we have here and who’s
representing who?
Mr. Warlick: Mr. Mayor my name is Byrd Warlick. I’m here on behalf of Herman and
Hemstreet.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
30
Mr. Mack: Mr. Mayor and Commission my name is Keven Mack. I work for Blanchard
and Calhoun Commercial.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and as you were had requested a delegation first we’ll hear from you
first, Mr. Mack. But we will give each side five minutes and once again if it starts to delve into
the territory of being a bid protest there’s a totally different process that. And I would for our
Attorney to tell us immediately. Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, if I may set the stage for this. As you know the Commission as
part of the budget process asked us to go out for people that were realtors to sell surplus
property. We did so and went through that process and the committee has recommended that
Sherman and Hemstreet receive that bid. There was some discussion that week about that and
you know based on my feeling of the process itself my recommendation would merit the
committee recommendation of Sherman and Hemstreet as we’ve done in the past. Because of
the nature of hiring a realtor you know if my general comments last time and my
recommendation was that ya’ll listen to all of the presentations and determine what you want to
do. And that would meet the need of being fair and equitable. It would also give you the chance
to be to look at the realtors stuff yourself. That all being said if that’s not the process that you
want my recommendation then was to avoid all the bids and either rebid the contract or rebid the
RFQ or to look at it as a professional service which would be an option that would be available
to you. On the other hand as discussions have gone on during the week between myself and staff
another option that might present itself is we just develop a sales contract and whoever sells our
property would get a percentage and in that way instead of having one or two companies or three
we’d have everybody in the world trying to sell our property. You know the whole purpose of
this is to get rid of surplus property. The vested interest that we have in this process our
recommendation would still be Sherman and Hemstreet as they move forward. But if you know
it’s your, that’s all that is, is a recommendation and based on our process which I support fully.
But secondly if you want to look at that as a mechanism to gain money the more time we spend
talking about who we hire is the less time we have selling property. And the major focus of all
this is to get rid of property and not argue about who actually does it for us in my personal
opinion. But I just want to set the stage for that. We did receive a letter from Keven Mack
several weeks ago prior to the committee meeting in which he had some concerns about the
process. And that’s why we’re here today and we anticipate the Commission listening to that
and helping us move forward.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Mack and once again if we start getting to much into the process I
just want to say again that would be more along the lines of a bid protest. Mr. MacKenzie,
would you just ---
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure ---
Mr. Mayor: --- share a little bit?
Mr. MacKenzie: --- there is a bid protest process. The first step of the process would be
to notify the procurement director and to my knowledge that has not yet occurred. We request
that people going through the bidding process go through that process. Other stages in the
31
protest process would allow a vendor or protestor to come before the Commission but it would
be premature to allow them to skip some of the interim steps and come now. So to the extent if
this doesn’t have anything to do with the protest itself or any of the facts or allegations of the
protest then proceed.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Mack.
Mr. Mack: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, I want to thank y’all
for listening to us regarding this RFP. First of all from the outset we want you to know we’re not
here to be combative against Sherman and Hemstreet or no other realtor. We’re not here to be
combative with you all. We’ve had a good relationship and have a good relationship with these
realtors. What we are here to do is show our interpretation of the evaluation criteria as specified
in your RFP. If you look at your overhand there it says Evaluation Criteria and it has all these
items listed there, eight. Suitability of Proposal Plan, Demonstrative Ability, dah, dah, dah on
down the line. And you award points based on each one of those items. Now if you look at the
cumulative scoring sheet and it has the scoring for each firm that was interviewed. And if you
look down to the bottom you see that Blanchard and Calhoun’s score was 94.8, Prime
Commercial was ---
Mr. MacKenzie: I hate to interrupt you ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mack. Mr. MacKenzie?
Mr. MacKenzie: --- I hate to interrupt you this seems to right along the lines of an
allegation that the one who was recommended by staff was not the appropriate one and that
would probably be in the realm of a bid protest. I’m going to have to ask you to use the
appropriate bid protest process. This doesn’t mean you can’t go through the process you just
have to go through the proper chain before you can get to this point.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Saul.
Mr. Saul: Tommy Saul with Blanchard and Calhoun. I don’t know that it’s really a
protest as we’re looking for a clear understanding of the selection process and the scoring
process.
Mr. Mayor: But I still and I’m sorry you know I don’t have a law degree but I got to go
with the lawyer on this one. And if he says it’s delving into saying that it was you know the
committee made the wrong decision based on the criteria that sounds more legal. And based on
the opinion of the attorney like a bid, like your protesting the bid. Although correct me if I’m
wrong you’ve taken no action on it at this point. And would there not have to be to be in fact a
protest a bid or a some sort of agreement would have to be awarded. Is that not?
Mr. MacKenzie: No, you can file a protest before the item is awarded.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. But gentlemen it’s just I think it’s important for us, for me I try to run
the city or my portion of what I’m able to do by the letter of the law. So I have to go with the
32
attorney’s opinion on this one. I just believe that’s the proper way to proceed. And I’d look for
any input from the Commission that you may have. Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: I understand Blanchard and Calhoun’s concerns as far as this
procurement process. It took me, I did my due diligence same for quite a many hours talking
with Ms. Sams and Andrew and it’s very, there’s a lot of things questionable and described it as
our Charter. You could put into it what you want to take out of it. In speaking with Mr. Saul
himself it is under their reading of it that they should receive it and no different than Sherman
and Hemstreet by reading thoroughly through it and get a better understanding. After talking
with Andrew that Sherman and Hemstreet. So it’s a conflict what we got going on. I know it’s
going to be hard to resolve at this point.
Mr. Mayor: But I think that’s part of what we’re trying to do with updating the
procurement code is to try to tighten that down and make it a better a tighter process.
Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think based on where we are today and based on
the non-action that’s been taken so far first of all I think we got to take some action. And I’m
going to make a motion that we go with the Sherman and Hemstreet, the one that was chosen by
the panel and by the, by the I forget what panel that is but procurement folks and the panel that
was chosen ---
Mr. Aitken: I second that motion.
Mr. Mason: --- and we’ll just kind of go from there.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing
none, excuse me, Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles:
Mr. Mayor, I’ve received phone calls and read this and I’ve got friends on
both sides with Sherman and Hemstreet and Blanchard and Calhoun. But when I read the RFP
nowhere in that RFP does it indicate that you will be called in for a presentation that will be
graded. And that’s exactly what happened here. And you would have to go to our local
ordinances to pick that up and that’s not the responsibility of somebody bidding on our projects
to go that far into our system to understand what they’re actually bidding on. It should have
I would like to throw out all bids and make
been specified in the bid document and it was not.
a substitute motion to throw out all bids and have it redone and have the Administrator in
charge of that.
Mr. Johnson: I’ll second that motion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, and I just want, prior to this I just want to disclose that I’m a past
agent with Blanchard and Calhoun Residential. I do want to throw that out on the table. Yes,
sir, Mr. Mason.
33
Mr. Mason: Yes and if Mr. Bowles is going to make those types of statements and I
think we said that we weren’t going to make judgments in terms of what may or may not have
happened. But since you’ve allowed that to come in I think it’s only fair that one, we either hear
from Ms. Sams and the Procurement Department in reference to that and or Sherman and
Hemstreet in terms of what their interpretation was of this since we’ve heard their interpretation
and we’re throwing out, you know, some verbiage.
Mr. Mayor: Well ---
Mr. Mason: At least we need to hear from Ms. Sams.
Mr. Mayor: No, and I think ---
Mr. Mason: Well, you let that in.
Mr. Mayor: --- I would like to hear from Ms. Sams but with all due deference I did not
know. I mean this is, just let me say I don’t think we can go through the bid process and then
have people continually come before the Commission and because I will be perfectly honest I’ve
got friends on both sides and both companies too. It does not put us in a good position to not
have a tight process that it does not arise to this level. So I’m just going to say that and I would
like to hear from Ms. Sams. It overly politicizes the process.
Ms. Sams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners. It is important that we recognize
not just sections of the solicitation but the, we visit all of the sections. And if we visit Section
One that clearly states on Page 11 of the RFP the highlighted areas does in fact say that the
owners will evaluate all proposals received firms with respect to evidence that the goals and the
objectives of this project are fully understood. The firms will be, will demonstrate technical
capacity, capability and other qualifications as described herein will be assessed. And right there
where it’s highlighted in green and I apologize for that, it says the owner will then make their
recommendation to the Augusta Richmond County Commissioners and a final approval will be
given to us. And if you flip on through the proposal in fact we’ll use Attachment 2 that was
provided in the correspondence one of the, from Blanchard and Calhoun. If you look at Section
5 it says that the first steps or in the first three paragraphs it says that the Procurement
Department will examine the proposal and we will make an assessment if all of the documents
are properly executed and everything’s in accordance to the proposal. Then you would be
deemed, you will go to the, you will be deemed if it wasn’t in the proposal you will be deemed
non-compliant. And then it goes on to say a Selection Committee will review all of the
submittals and based on the background information the committee will determine whether the
proposer is qualified or unqualified. Using the Statement of Qualification then three to five
companies will be requested to make a presentation to the Selection Committee. And it goes on
for that second step it says the Selection Committee will rank the firms by first, second and third
choices. And I believe as stated by the by one of the companies if you look at the evaluation
sheet the score of 94, 89, 92 that was the first phase where you go through and you read all of the
submittals, make sure everything is submitted to us according to the specifications. The second
phase is when the companies come in and do a presentation and when they do the presentation
they’re ranked again. And that’s where you see the one, two and three. Now keeping in mind
34
that the scores just let me give you a hypothetical example. If the city of Augusta is wanting to
hire employees for Accounting and Accounting gets 1500 applications they have to go in those
applications and decide who are qualified in accordance to our, to their letting of their records as
it relates to their experience and qualifications. This works the same way. These three
companies no one has said they’re not qualified because they are. We invited them back.
During their presentation the company that brought everything to the table in accordance to the
scope of services for Augusta Richmond County was the company that the committee
recommended to you. That’s where you got the presentation for one, two and three. The
committee went through everything. They spoke with each company. The company that
addressed Augusta Richmond County needs was Sherman and Hemstreet and I have
representatives from the Recreation Department that will be willing to talk to you. But if we go
as far as that then we would truly be addressing a bid protest. This process was fair, it was open
and the rules and regulations were stated in the solicitation.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, Ms. Sams. And I, you know, Mr. MacKenzie, I’m starting
to feel like we’re getting into some slippery slopes here.
Mr. MacKenzie: That’s for a good reason. We are appearing to receive information
relating to a protest but our codes specifically provides for a procedure to file a protest and to my
knowledge an official protest has not been filed.
Mr. Mayor: Okay ---
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I’ll call the question.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Commissioner Brigham. Okay, the question has been called for.
We first have a substitute motion that has been made and properly seconded. Madam Clerk, for
the point of clarity if you could read back that substitute motion.
The Clerk: The substitute motion was to reject bids and rebid allowing the Administrator
to be in charge of the process to award the contract for the real estate brokerage service for the
City of Augusta.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign of voting.
Mr. Aitken, Mr. Mason and Mr. Lockett vote No.
Motion carries 6-3.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, and next agenda item.
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
36. Approve attached Budget Calendar for FY2012.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett, I believe you had a question with this one?
35
Mr. Lockett: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Russell ---
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Lockett: --- I remember the budget process last time. I looked at the calendar and I
wish there were more opportunities for this body to engage in the budgetary process prior to the
time that it’s presented to us during mid November. And I think that if we could have maybe
even sit down with the departments when they meet with the financial director to give us an
opportunity to provide input and to listen and to fully comprehend what’s being presented to us
thth
on November the 15. Because once it’s presented to us on November the 15 the time clock
has just about run out. We’re having a major deficit we don’t have opportune time to correct
them.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. After the discussion at the retreat it’s our plan during that period
thth
between September the 6 and September 16 to set up budget hearings not only for the Finance
Department and myself but for the Commission as you suggested we, you recommended the
hearing to bring in the department heads, elected officials or whatever during that process. So it
would be our hope you would be able to participate during that time. And we know it might be
burdensome but we want to set those up so you can participate in do exactly what you just said,
sir.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to approve?
Mr. Lockett: Motion to approve.
Mr. Jackson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Mason out.
Motion carries 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: And if there’s no further business to come before the body, first off
gentlemen ---
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: --- yes, sir. Commissioner Brigham.
36
Mr. Brigham: Did we do the addendum? The addendum did add that to the agenda and
approve it?
Mr. Mayor: We didn’t have unanimous consent.
Mr. Brigham: I thought we had unanimous consent on item number one.
Mr. Mayor: We had unanimous consent on one but not two.
Mr. Brigham: Was it on the consent agenda or not?
Mr. Mayor: Number one was, yes.
Mr. Brigham: Okay, I’m sorry, I missed one.
Mr. Mayor: But I just to say just thank you to everybody that came to last week’s retreat.
I think we made some real progress. This is, we’ve had a lot of things on the agenda today but
we’ve gotten through it. So I just think we need to build on that progress, keep the lines of
communications open. And with that if there’s no further business to come before the body we
stand adjourned.
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Lena Bonner
Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy
of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Augusta Richmond County Commission held on
July 19, 2011.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
37
38