HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting September 6, 2011
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
SEPTEMBER 6, 2011
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 5:00 p.m., September 6, 2011, the
Hon. 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.
Mayor Copenhaver called the meeting to order.
Mr. Mayor: I would like to call on my friend, Reverend Paul Sherwood, Pastor, Reid
Memorial Presbyterian Church for the invocation. Please stand.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited.
Mr. Mayor: And, Paul, if you could please come forward. Thank you for that wonderful
invocation. I hope we all took it to heart. And I have this for you. Office of the Mayor. By
these present be it known that Reverend Paul Sherwood, Pastor Reid Memorial Presbyterian
Church is Chaplain of the Day. For his civic and spiritual guidance demonstrated throughout the
th
community serves as an example for all of the faith community. Given under my hand this 6
Day of September 2011. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, if we could move on to the presentations.
PRESENTATION(S)
A. Presentations(s) to Ms. Linda Beazley in recognition of outstanding services rendered to
the Georgia Secretary of State, Elections Division and the Richmond Board of Elections.
The Clerk: Yes, sir. I call your attention to the presentation portion of the agenda. We
ask that the state representatives for the Richmond County Delegation please join the Mayor for
this presentation, as well as I understand Ms. Beazley’s unable to be with us today. However her
son Mr. Wayne Beazley is here to accept the recognitions on her behalf along with any present or
former members of the Board of Elections please join the Mayor the State Representatives for
this presentation.
Representative Howard: Good afternoon and good evening to everyone. We are here on
behalf of the legislative delegation to pay tribute and honor to a young lady that most of us, if
you’ve been around this town you’ve known her, you have gotten to know Linda Beazley for all
of her services and work that she’s done here in Richmond County and across the state. And we
the members of the Richmond, Augusta Richmond County delegation we the House has we
prepared a resolution that we wanted to present to Ms. Beazley. And her son is here to receive it
1
in her staid. But before I go further I just want to as, Mr. Mayor not, I hoping I’m not out of
order and as you know as we approach 9-11 with these firemen in the room I must say commend
and thank you. And say thank you for your services to this city and to this state and we 9-11
taught us what firemen, the importance of your roll in public safety as well as the Sheriff and all
of the others. That being said I would like to introduce first the members of the delegation. We
have Representative Fraser here. We have Representative Sims and Representative Murphy and
Representative Smith here with us. The two senators were unable to attend but they send their
regrets but they also support this measure to this great woman who serves this community as
well. And we will do this by reading a resolution.
th
This is House Resolution 73EX. Representative Howard 121 Ralston and the 7 Frazier
thnd
from the 123 Sims from the 199, Murphy from the 120 and Smith from the 122. And when I
say Ralston I must make note that’s the Speaker of the House, David Ralston who signed off on
this as well. And it’s a resolution honoring Linda Beazley and for other purposes. Whereas
Linda Beazley began working for Richmond County in 1957 in the Sheriff’s Department and
was soon transferred to the Probate Court. Whereas she first came into contact with Election
Administration whereas Linda worked in the Probate Court until her appointment as Executive
Director of the newly created Board of Elections Office in 1973. And whereas she served as
Executive Director of the Board of Elections from 1973 to 1993 when she was appointed as
County Administrator for Richmond County. Whereas she served as County Administrator until
1996 when she was appointed by the Secretary of State Lewis Massey as Georgia’s State
Elections Director. And whereas she served as State Elections Director from 1997 to 2005 and
was appointed as Chairperson of the Board of Elections in 2005 until her resignation. And
whereas Linda worked in the Elections Administration for 48 years and helped to administer
thirteen presidential elections and whereas she served as president of the Voter Registrars
Association of Georgia from 1983 to 1985 and in 1985 she was elected as the founder, founding
president of the Georgia Elections Francis Duncan Award for excellence in elections
administration. In 1988 she testified before the United States Congress regarding handicapped
accessibility at polling places. In 1992 she was appointed as a first ever woman to chair the
University Hospital’s Hospital Authority board. And in 2000 she was appointed by the Secretary
st
of State Kathy Cox to the 21 Century Vote Commission to assist with elections reform in
Georgia. Whereas it is only fitting and proper that Linda Beazley be honored for her outstanding
work as a public servant to insure that the elections process remains fair and assessable to all
citizens. Now therefore be it resolved by the House of Representatives that the members of this
body honor Linda Beazley for her outstanding career in Election Administration. Be it further
resolved that the Clerk of the House of Representatives is authorized and directed to transmit an
appropriate copy of this resolution to Ms. Linda Beazley in the House read and adopted on
rd
August 23 2011. Robby Rivers is the clerk and we want to present this to her son for her great
work.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Howard: I would like to at this time, one of our chair, co-chair for the delegation is
Barbara Sims who all of us laid the charge in making sure this happening. Lynn Bailey, who we,
when we offered to do this, made it real comfortable to make it happen. So we want to thank her
as well. But, Barbara, if you don’t mind, Mr. Mayor, we’ll share.
2
Ms. Sims: Thank you everyone that’s here. I find it such an honor to be standing with
Linda’s son and to be in front in all of you who probably all know her. It is an honor to have any
part in giving this recognition to someone who served this city this county and this state so
tremendously. Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, representatives of city and state. I just want to say about your
Mom, about Linda, please share with her that she for me defines what a public servant is.
Selfless service, civic mindedness. She’s just been a treasure to this community and with that I’d
just like to deliver this Certificate of Recognition. Certificate of Recognition presented to Ms.
Linda Beazley, Executive Director Board of Elections 1973 through 1993. State of Georgia
Elections Director 1997 through 2005. Chairperson Board of Elections 2005 to 2011. Whereas
Linda Beazley was appointed as Executive Director in the newly created Richmond County
Board of Elections Office in 1973 and served until 1993 and whereas Linda Beazley was
appointed by Secretary of State Louis Massey as Georgia’s State Elections Director in 1996 and
served until 2005. And whereas Linda Beazley was appointed by the Augusta Commission as
Chairperson of the Board of Elections in 2005 and served until her resignation this year. The
Augusta community has benefited greatly from the wisdom you share and the life you
exemplified by your hard work and devoted service. Thank you for your commitment to civic
th
excellence. Given under my hand this 6 Day of September 2011. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Beazley: Thank you very much. On behalf of the Beazley family I’d like to say
thank you very much and Mama wishes you all (unintelligible) she loves and keep her in your
prayers. Thank you very much.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, if we could move on to the next presentation B.
The Clerk:
PRESENTATIONS
B. Presentation from the Georgia Association of Water Professionals. RE: The N. Max
Hicks Water Treatment Plant receiving the Plant of the Year Award for surface water
treatment plants in their size category.
The Clerk: So he has, Mr. Wiedmeier, are you here along with your staff members?
Won’t you come on around. Mr. Mason, you want to come down and, and Mr. Smith as Chair
and Co-chair of the Engineering Services Committee? Come on, Mr. Hicks, Mr. Saxon.
Mr. Cannon: My name is Bill Cannon. I’m the president elect of the Georgia
Association of Water Professionals. GAWP is a 5,000 member organization here in the State of
3
Georgia charged with maintaining the quality of drinking water and treatment of waste water for
the municipal and industrial users here in the state. Along with that we recognize outstanding
performance. In the city of Augusta the Max Hicks Treatment Plant has been selected as the
treatment plant of the year for year 2010, 2011 and I’d like to recognize Max Hicks who the
name of the plant is named after. And he’ll assist me in the recognition of this award. It’s
important to understand that there’s a number of folks that contributed to this award that aren’t
able to be here today. So these are just a few of the folks that made this award possible. In
particular I’d like to point out that Javen McAster. Javen he’s in charge of the plant lab. Linda
Jones in charge of customer service. John Johnson, thank you, John. John was also selected as a
top op which means he also was previously awarded a certificate for top operator as an
individual award for the association as well. And then we also have Charlton Wade who I
believe was instrumental in the maintenance efforts here at the plant. And Alan Flanagan who’s
in charge of operations and then of course over all of it Debra Beazley who’s the one who makes
it all happen. We have a plaque that I’d to briefly read the critical parts of it. The Georgia
Association of Water Professionals hereby presents this award for outstanding operation of a
water treatment plant in the category of surface water 15-49 MGD to Augusta Utilities in the
Max Hicks Water Treatment Plant. Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: I’ll just keep my remarks brief because I know we’ve got a lot of other stuff
to get to. But this is just another example of our city’s striving for excellence at all levels. I just
want to say congratulations to everybody out there. This state wide award means so much to the
citizens, to me personally. So just thank y’all for the great job that you do on a daily basis.
Thank you so much.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Wiedmeier: I would just like to say that these folks worked really hard for this
award. They were preparing for the full year before the judging came around. I’m proud of
them and this reflects well on our entire department and on the whole city of Augusta. So thank
you very much.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: All righty, we get another chance to recognize here. There’s no “I” in team.
The Clerk:
RECOGNITIONS(S)
C. Recognition of the East Augusta Warriors Basketball Team for capturing the 16-U
Division 1 Title at the Youth Basketball of America National Championships in Kissimmee,
Fla. July 24-30, 2011. (Requested by Commissioner Matt Aitken)
The Clerk: We ask that Commissioner Matt Aitken along with the Mayor please join us
in recognition of the East Augusta Warriors Basketball team for capturing the 16-U Division 1
4
Title at the Youth Basketball of America National Championships in Kissimmee, Florida. And
Representative Ernest Smith has so graciously agreed to do the roll call for the team in receiving
their award.
Mr. Smith: Good evening. This is truly a proud day for Augusta, Georgia. Let me say
what’s most important is that these young men displayed dignified focus, discipline and tenacity.
And just know that they were well represented in the state of Florida. So now Augusta’s known
not only for the Masters but for some tenacious young men that probably in all likelihood will be
replacing all of us as time goes on because of the discipline that they displayed. But to give you
a bit of background. The East Augusta Warriors Basketball team was organized in March of
2006 under the East Augusta Youth Association Inc., a non-profit organization. This
organization gives young girls and boys a sense of community pride and builds character by
shaping minds and bodies through education and athletics. We are housed at May Park
Recreation Center. We also have a girls’ team. The teams place in different tournaments during
the summer. The teams play in what’s called the YBOA which is the Youth Basketball of
America League. The boy’s team has won three state championship titles. Georgia State
Championship in 2009 and back to back South Carolina State Championships in 2010 and 2011.
The Warriors have been to the national tournament in Florida six years in a row. They finished
in third place at 11 and 13 years old. They were runners up at 12, 14 and 15 years old. On July
th
30 2011 they won the national title at 16 and under. The team only lost two games in three
years. What a marvelous accomplishment. Their record this season is 37 and 0. During the
national tournament Darius Williams won the Hustle Award. Darius raise your hand. All right.
Ronald Jones and William Bentley won all tournament awards. Gentlemen please raise your
hand. Kyle Doyle won MVP. Jeffery Minipy has been the team captain all six years. All right
cap. They had a team of fine coaches, Head Coach Mr. Gregory Utley, Asst. Coaches Mr.
Charles Huggins and Mr. Sirlester Harrison. The teams Mom’s cause we’ve got to have some
motherly advise to go along with these young men Mrs. Gwen Utley. The team roster, roll call.
Jeffery Minipy #55 Guard. Darius William #3, Guard. Ronald Jones #52, Center Forward.
Kyle Doyle #23, Forward. Robert Askew #15, Center. Jerome Talbert #5, Guard. Austin Kyles
#30, Center. Michael Lewis #1, Guard. William Bentley #2, Guard. And Brandon Quarterman
#33, Forward Guard. Give these young men a round of applause, please.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Smith: As we said these young men displayed focus, tenacity but more importantly
discipline. And that reflects back on the coaches, which means if you’re coachable you can win.
And these young men showed their coaches that they can win. And not only are they excellent
athletes they’re going to be excellent students as well. Amen to that, young men? All right. So
we’re going to recognize the coaches at this time. Head Coach Mr. Gregory Utley. Asst. Coach
Mr. Charles Huggins. Mr. Sirlester Harrison and team Mom, thanks Mom. Ms. Gwen Utley.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Smith: Again thank you ever so much. We are so proud of the job that you young
men and this young lady has shown. And it gives me great pride to say that I’m a public servant
for them to call for anything at any time. Thank you so much and congratulations, young men.
5
Mr. Mayor: And just before we close just to read the Certificate of Recognition. And it’s
no secret I’m all about the team game. Y’all exemplify that in representing us on the state level
like that. We are so proud of you. Certificate of Recognition presented to the East Augusta
Warriors Basketball Team 2011 Youth Basketball of America National Champion for your
outstanding achievement and excellent sportsmanlike conduct displayed during the 2011 summer
basketball season the City of Augusta congratulates you for participating and clenching the 16
and under Division 1 Title and the 2011 Youth Basketball of America National Basketball
thth
Tournament in Kissimmee, Florida on July 30 2011. Given under my hand this 6 Day of
September 2011. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor. Congratulations again.
(APPLAUSE)
The Clerk: Congratulations. Would you like to say something Mr. Utley? No? Okay.
Any team member? Captain?
Mr. Speaker: Take the time to thank the Mayor and the Commissioners of Augusta for
recognizing these young men. They did an outstanding job for I guess it’s been six or seven
years I coached them. So of my coaches have been six years old. A real job to work with. We
also have just a few things about these young men for just a minute. If you’re familiar with
(inaudible) right here he’s one of the star running backs with Butler High School. He’ll also be
graduating this year along with Rob Esque and Craig Pittman. Thank you. (APPLAUSE).
Mr. Aitken: You know Ms. Utley called me about this recognition and I’m continued to
be amazed at what’s in this city with the talent that we’ve got. And when we can be a winner
when we’re all working together so my colleagues on the Commission y’all got to top this. Y’all
got a lot of work to do to catch up so y’all made me look good up here. But more so you made
yourselves look good and especially the District One. So just so thankful to be a part of this as
well.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Don’t you just feel so good right about now? Madam Clerk, on to the
delegations, please.
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS
D. Charles L. Masters RE: Augusta Professional Firefighters.
Mr. Mayor: And if you could keep it to five minutes, please, sir.
Mr. Masters: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners. Please understand that I’m going to take
five plus years of disaster and condense it down into a five minute speech. Soon after Chief
Willis took full control of our department we realized we were in trouble and started a downward
spiral. We started a dialog with Fred Russell to no avail. Let me state for the record that any fire
6
station built or any fire truck bought was because of the planning of Chief Few and Gillespie.
We are still working off their vision and foresight. This just didn’t start with our Truck 4
debacle that Chief Willis and his deputy chiefs orchestrated. This was the last of many poor
decisions that they have made. The department has been destroyed by these men. When Chief
Willis took control of our department we were in the midst of a wellness and fitness grant but
due Chief Willis’ mismanagement and the fact that the chief officers refused to participate in
physicals Chief Willis terminated the program and returned the leftover funds. Now six years
later you, the Commissioners have instructed our department to implement the same program but
now the taxpayers of Augusta has to foot the bill. For safety reasons a portable radio should be
provided for all firefighters during an emergency. We had four firefighters with near death
experiences and one that may very well return to work due to a lack of a communication device.
There has not been one safety review or investigation to why these incidences happened nor has
anyone asked what policy could be changed or implemented to insure our fire fighters safety to
date. Commissioners we’re talking about real people with families and we owe them this
protection. Commissioners you’ve asked several questions concerning promotions and they have
gone unanswered. Chief Willis implemented a new promotion policy that the policy has been
totally ignored. The reason why the new policy was written was to create a promotion list that is
updated every two years regardless whether the list had run out or not. The policy was written to
protect our community if we ever have an incident the magnitude of 9-11 or the Charleston SC
fire where many fire fighters lost their lives. He totally disregarded this policy which has led to
law suits and morale issues. Chief Willis has created major disparity within our ranks due to his
policy of changing promotion rates from 15 to 5 percent. He totally destroyed the ranks due to
this policy. As for the purchase of fire trucks millions of dollars are being spent with one
company and one company only. We have no committee no group or anybody on our
department making recommendations except Rogers where this is concerned. At the same time
he and a very slick few are being wined and dined by this company. They would say they
wanted to keep our trucks uniformed and have parts on hand by using the same company. This
is nothing but smoking mirrors by Chief Willis and his deputy chiefs. Chief Willis has refused to
nd
stop by stations to check on his men to find out what the issues are. Up until August 22 a staff
meeting had not been called in over two years. If they say anything different show me the
minutes of the meeting. The firefighters have lost total respect and confidence in Chief Willis,
Rogers and Scott. Under Chief Willis’ direction we as firefighters have been denied most or all
opportunities for advancing our education. Education under his administration is not a priority.
Chief Willis, Rogers and Scott don’t even hold an EMT Certification as required for all rookies
and have even fired many good firemen for not having this same certification. I will ask you this
question because until now there’s been no answer. There are thousands of dollars of brand new
wild land fire gear that was purchased for all fire fighters. That gear has set in boxes to ruin in a
fire station storage room. The Augusta Chronicle just did a story on how each fire fighter in
Augusta has this gear. Let it be known that we do not. We’re asking for a full investigation as to
whether the fire department’s funds were used to balance the budget or returned to the general
fund including but not limited to the old city’s portion allocated for fire protection. I could talk
for five hours and not even scratch the surface of the lack of leadership and competency from
Chief Willis and his two deputy chiefs. They have spent the last six years talking about
backstabbing and humiliating each other at expense of the fire fighters. This department has
been on auto pilot for six years. And for that we owe these men and women behind me more
than an apology. We owe them true leaders who will give us the best chance to get home to our
7
families. We’re asking Chief Willis to resign and Deputy Chief’s Scott and Rogers to take their
full pension and go home. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. If y’all could please hold it down. Thank you, sir. Okay.
Mr. Mason: Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Y’all if you please. Commissioner.
Mr. Mason: Mr. Masters, could you come back up to the microphone for a second? Mr.
Mayor, can we see how many individuals are here? Can we get a head count of the individuals
that are here for this agenda item?
Mr. Mayor: Presentation?
Mr. Mason: Presentation, yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Raise your hands.
(87 supporters noted)
Mr. Mason: All active fire fighters, men and women. Mr. Masters, first of all, wow, let
me say that I’m disturbed by some of things that I’m hearing. Do you think it’s important
because you talked about some qualifications and certifications and I’ve been talking about that
myself? Do you think it’s important for the Chief as well as the deputies to be EMT certified
and if so why would that be important?
Mr. Masters: I appreciate the question. Let me start off by saying that this is a sad day. I
won’t stand up here and speak for the men. This is, we’re talking about three fire fighters that
have given their whole life to protect this city. This is not a good day. But we owe it to the men
to protect them. Your question concerning the EMT certification. You’re not allowed to come
on our department without being an EMT. You cannot advance into any rank without being an
EMT. And we’re firing guys, good guys and women that didn’t get this certification. And our
top three don’t have the certification. Let me tell you why it’s important. We operate off of a
chain of command system just like the military, you’re familiar and it starts at the top. If we go
firing people for not having it then our leadership needs to lead by example and they need to
carry the same certification that we do.
Mr. Mason: I just have one other question, Mr. Mayor. Now I appreciate your candor.
You mentioned about Chief Willis and the deputies in terms of coming by or not coming by the
fire stations. When is the last time that you can recall or anyone can recall Chief or his deputies
coming by the fire stations even check on the moral or any issues or any good things for that
matter that may be going on with their employees?
Mr. Masters: Commissioner, I just didn’t throw that out there. I called around to a lot of
stations a lot of shifts. I speak for me personally. I hadn’t seen Chief Willis at my fire station on
8
any shift in five years. I called around this morning just to make sure I had my facts together and
be precise in what I say and you’ll find very few fire stations, there are a couple because they’ve
got some relatives working in them stations. But you’ll find very few stations that he’s been
around at all. And we have, Commissioner, we have people in the hospital, in the hospital he’s
not willing to see them. It’s um, it’s sad.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Guilfoyle and then Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Commissioner Lockett first.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Masters, I want to applaud you for your bravery and your expertise
when it comes to fire service. I’ve been told that many of your peers have been threatened and
have been told not to speak to the media. I can understand why now. You mentioned the fact,
you mentioned about wild land fire gear in the station storage room. What is that for and where
should it be?
Mr. Masters: Wild land fire gear is purchased for every firefighter. It’s where we have a
road mostly in the rural areas we have a lot of vegetation and woods. It’s a lighter gear, it’s not
as heavy not as cumbersome on the body. And it’s, we still get the protection off of it. This gear
has been sitting in a fire station storage room for over four years. I actually went by there and
took pictures of it. Some of it’s not usable because the rats have done got into the boxes. I asked
four years ago why hadn’t this gear been sent to the men. And I still hadn’t got an answer why
this gear hadn’t, its, we’re talking thousands of dollars’ worth of gear and protection for us. I
don’t, you know I’m searching for answers. I have no clue why.
Mr. Lockett: You know, Mr. Masters, I’ve conversed with quite a few firemen over the
last few months and I’ve been told that many of the firemen can’t even get the necessary
equipment to go out and do their job. Have you experienced that or have you been privy to that
information?
Mr. Masters: Well we, we’ve got so many issues, Commissioner, that’s just part of it. A
Commissioner called one of our deputy chiefs and said we had a light out on the back of the fire
truck the other day. They were on a fire call in the middle of the road. Immediately after he
called they pulled that machine down to the shop and got the lights replaced on it but only the
lights he complained about. The rest of the lights don’t work. I got the email this morning
where those lights have been reported three weeks ago. This is just one area we have problems
with. It’s a leadership issue that’s bled down through the department and it’s turned into a safety
issue for every man and woman that’s protecting us.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, if I may this is my last comment. You mentioned something
about near death experiences of some of your firemen. Could you elaborate on that just a little
bit, please?
9
Mr. Masters: Yeah I’m going to try and condense this. This is emotional for me. We’ve
had, we had one fire fighter just recently he got separated from his crew which is common. He
didn’t have a portable radio. There was ammunition going off in the house. When they finally
found him which was by accident by the way he was in a closet. He done went into shock. He
had his face piece off, he’s breathing everything. We’ve left, we’ve left, we left him because we
can’t give him a portable radio and I’m not judging anybody. When a Commissioner can get a
portable radio and the men can’t get one, we’ve got a problem. We’ve got a problem. This guy
will never return to work again, he will never. He’s done, his career is over with. We’ve turned
our back on him. This department has turned its back on him. He’s won. Martin Luther King
had a house fire, the same situation. The guy’s get separated from his crew. He has no portable
radio. The house flashes over, he dives out the window but not before being burnt. He spent a
year in skin grafts. This can be avoided through a radio communication. I’ve addressed this
issue four years ago, four years ago.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Masters, I know it took a lot for you to be standing there talking
before the Commission. But I understand your reason and rhyme. You had spoke and it fell on
deaf ears quite a bit. You’re leadership that you had spoken to has done nothing. I have went
around to the different fire departments. I didn’t care to know the fireman’s name but I wanted
to hear their stories. They’re brothers, sisters, fathers, daughters and dads and when it comes,
they’re concerned, their main concern is about the safety of their fellow firemen which is being
eroded at the core. And I realize that. And that’s the reason why you’ve have been seeing me
speak up and reaching out to my other Commissioners as well. Mr. Administrator, you see
what’s going on, it’s time to act. We need to do something sir. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Commissioner Bowles, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, excuse me.
Mr. Bowles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Charles, I appreciate you coming here today. Has
there been an official vote of the union of no confidence for the Chief?
Mr. Masters: I appreciate the question. What we’ve done, this is not a union issue. This
is an Augusta fire department issue so we stayed away from the union and we separated men out.
I’ve done a poll talking to each station and every man except administration and I’m 97.9%
support for what I’m doing today.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Charles, I’d just like to say to you and your
colleagues here you all have my 100% support and commitment to finding out whatever means
we need to find out to get to the bottom of this. It does sadden me and I concur with my
colleagues in hearing this information that we don’t even have something as simple as two way
radios. That is completely unacceptable. And I just spoke with the chairman here and we’re
going to do whatever we can to instruct the proper people as well as ourselves to do some
research and find out what we need to find out to get to the bottom on this. Because we want to
make sure this thing is being done fairly and equitably amongst all of you all. And again thank
10
you all for what you do. It’s not an easy job, it’s not an easy position to be in but without you all
we could not you know, we definitely could not do it and it means a lot to us. So again thank
you and thank you for coming forward with that because that’s I mean it’s a wealth of
information.
Mr. Masters: I appreciate all the help you can give us in getting our communication
device. Our issues are a lot bigger than that. It’s leadership.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, well, Charles, thank you for coming down and everybody here thank
you all for coming down and sharing this information and your concerns with us. Thank y’all.
(APPLAUSE) Madam Clerk, if we could move on to the consent agenda.
The Clerk: Our consent agenda consists of items 1-22, items 1-22. For the benefit of any
objectors to our alcohol petitions once those petitions ---
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, while we do have a lot of firemen I’m sure they’re interested in
the balance of the meeting. We do have some citizens, other citizens in addition to the firemen
in the back. I was wondering if you all really don’t want to hang around and watch. It might be
good if ---
Mr. Mayor: Yeah, thank y’all.
Mr. Russell: --- take a second and let some of the other people come in.
Mr. Mayor: Thank y’all so much.
Mr. Russell: I didn’t mean you had to leave. If you don’t want to stay we’ve got other
people that might ---
The Clerk: Our consent agenda consists of items 1-22. For the benefit of any objectors
to our alcohol petitions would you please signify your objection by raising your hand once the
petition is read. I call your attention to:
Item 3: Is a petition for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be
used in connection with the Downtown Barroom located at 877 Broad Street.
Item 4: is an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer 7 Wine license to be used in
connection with Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar located at 120 Robert C. Daniel parkway.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to those alcohol petitions?
Mr. Russell: None noted, Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: Okay. Our consent agenda consists of items 1-22.
Mr. Mayor: Gentlemen, do we have any additions to the consent agenda? Commissioner
Brigham.
11
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I would like to add items number 26, 27, 29, 31, 33 and delete
item number 32.
The Clerk: You want to delete 32?
Mr. Brigham: And delete item number 30.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, Commissioner. Do we have any further additions to the
consent agenda? Do we have any items to be pulled for discussion? Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Agenda item number one, I just wanted to be noted that I vote No because
it deals with the illegal and unauthorized reorganization. And I’d also like to pull number 31 for
the consent agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have, Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman, I’m just going to vote No on item number one there.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: I’d like to bring up number six for discussion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, if there are no further items to be added to or pulled from consent I’d
look for a motion to approve the consent agenda.
Mr. Mason: So moved.
Mr. Lockett: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Hang on. Commissioner Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: Item number ten. Commissioner Jackson, did you have?
Mr. Jackson: I was getting ready to pull it.
CONSENT AGENDA
PLANNING
1. A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to approve 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 August’s government to the current
departments and positions, and for other purposes. Deferred from July 7, 2011 and
returned by the Augusta Commission at the July 19, 2011 meeting. The ordinances in
question are as follows: Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Addressing Ordinance, Land
12
Subdivision Regulations, Site Plan Regulations, Stormwater Management Ordinance, Tree
Ordinance, Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, Grading Ordinance, Soil Erosion and
Sediment Control Ordinance, Groundwater Recharge Area Protection Ordinance, Water
Supply and Watershed Ordinance, Historic Preservation Ordinance. (Approved by
Commission August 19, 2011 – second reading)
PUBLIC SERVICES
2. Motion to approve acceptance of a Federal Grant for Airport Rescue & Fire Fighting
Apparatus. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 29, 2011)
3. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 11-35: request by Hardy Meyer for an on
premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with
Downtown Barroom located at 877 Broad St. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by
Public Services Committee August 29, 2011)
4. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 11-37: A request by Peter N. Tompkins for
an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with
Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar located at 120 Robert C. Daniel Parkway. There will be
Sunday sales. District 7. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee
August 29, 2011)
5. Motion to approve the Budget Amendment for Augusta Regional Airport as listed in the
attached document. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 29, 2011)
7. Motion to approve Change Order #1 – Fixed Base Operator (FBO) Project at Augusta
Regional Airport for the lease of trailers to be used as temporary operating facilities until
the completion of the project. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 29, 2011)
8. Motion to approve Memorandum of Understanding between Augusta, Georgia and
Augusta Canal Authority. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 29, 2011)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
9. Motion to approve participation in the Business Occupational tax Submittal System
with Georgia Department of Revenue. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee
August 29, 2011)
PUBLIC SAFETY
11. Motion to approve acceptance of two grants for the Fire Department from
GEMA/Homeland Security for Hazmat Maint. in the amount of $15,000 and for GSAR in
the amount of $20,000. (Approved by Public Safety Committee August 29, 2011)
12. Motion to approve moving forward with submittal of the RFP for the Promotional
Process for the Augusta Fire Department. (Approved by Public Safety Committee August
29, 2011)
ENGINEERING SERVICES
13. Motion to approve Change Order #1 to Khafra Engineering Consultants, Inc. in the
amount of $227,558 for additional water/sewer systems upgrades to Fort Gordon
Recreation Area at Thurmond Lake. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee
August 29, 2011)
13
14. Motion to approve Change Order #2 to Blair Construction, Inc. in the amount of
$396,641 for additional water/sewer systems to Butler Creek Interceptor upgrade East –
Phase II. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 29, 2011)
15. Motion to approve Purchase of Itron 100W Radio Read Transmitters and Electronic
Hand-Hel Meter Reading Devices by Utilities. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee August 29, 2011)
16. Motion to approve change order to Johnson, Laschober & Associates, and P.C. (JLA)
design contract in the amount of $92,500.00 for additional engineering services for Fort
Gordon Gate #4 Water Main connection to tanks. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee August 29, 2011)
17. Motion to authorize execution of Change Order #1 in the amount not to exceed
$7,208,935.00 to Tetra Tech Inc. for installation of a raw water irrigation system at Ft.
Gordon through the Ft. Gordon CM@Risk – Phase II contract, and the Design-Build
services at Chafee Ave. Lift Station and Ground Water Plant #1 with the stipulation that
there be a minimum of two bids for any project using Richmond County funds. (Approved
by Engineering Services Committee August 29, 2011)
18. Motion to authorize execution of Change Order #3 in an amount of $93,775.00 to ZEL
Engineering for additional Engineering Services on the MSA-001 Wastewater Connections
at Ft. Gordon. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 29, 2011)
19. Motion to approve a cost share agreement between Walker Hills, LLC and the Augusta
Utilities Department (AUD) for McCoys Creek Subdivision. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee August 29, 2011)
20. Motion to approve the purchase a replacement gearbox for the #4 raw water turbine
and pump at the Goodrich Street Raw Water Pumping Station. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee August 29, 2011)
21. Motion to approve purchase of 4 SOLO Robotic cameras from RedZone Robotics, Inc.
in the amount of $152,000. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 29,
2011)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
22. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held August
16, 2011.
FINANCE
26. Approve request from the Augusta Regional Airport and Augusta Aviation
Commission to purchase one (1) compliant Passenger Boarding Ramp.
27. Approve the replacement of 1 public safety type automobile using Sales Tax Funds as
approved in the Sales Tax Referendum for Phase VI.
29. Approve allowing the Augusta Convention and Visitors Bureau to apply for a Georgia
Department of Economic Development Product Development grant on behalf of the City.
30. Receive a report on the City’s present financial status including any current deficit and
its relationship to the budget. (Requested by Commissioner Corey Johnson)
32. Receive a report from the Administrator regarding the savings for this year in
personnel reductions. (Requested by Commissioner Jerry Brigham) (Referred from August
8 Finance Committee)
14
33. Consider a request for refund for property located at 2538 Commons Trace,
Map/Parcel #013-1-149-00-0 for tax years 2008 and 2009 in the amount of $285.95 for each
year, respectively. Property owner, Roland Witherspoon.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we had a motion and a second. Are y’all okay with including item
numb 10 on that? Okay, we have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioners will
now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Mason and Mr. Lockett vote No.
Motion carries 7-2. [Item 1]
Motion carries 9-0. [Items 2-5, 7-9, 11-22, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33]
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, let’s go to the pulled items first. Item #6.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
6. Motion to approve and authorize execution of a lease agreement with Georgia Power to
provide, install and maintain the walking track site lighting for Brookfield Park.
(Approved by Public Services Committee August 29, 2011)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Tom, I just wanted to reiterate on our discussion earlier this week in
regards, well last week in regards to making sure we could equalize the amount of usage on all
the lights. That way in my district we’ll lights around the walking track as well.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Mr. Beck.
Mr. Beck: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. What this was doing was replacing
the lights at Brookfield Park which was actually one of five different walking tracks around the
county that we left on with some budget cuts about three years ago. Subsequently with some of
those cuts that we made we’re also looking at reducing the time back from 11:00 o’clock to
10:00 o’clock which is going to allow us to possibly open maybe one or two more around the
county which I think we’ll probably be able to do.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Brigham: Move we approve.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Second.
15
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. If there is no further discussion
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
10. Motion to approve rescinding the 44 raises that were given by the Administrator based
on their non-compliance with the Personnel, Policy and Procedures Manual. (Approved by
Administrative Services Committee August 29, 2011)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think it’s only appropriate to really discuss this
item based on the raises that have already been approved and given to these individuals. First
and foremost I’d like to say that I do agree that I think we need to rescind these but I want the
people that who are the recipients of this raise to know that we’re going to look at this and we’re
going to evaluate it on a case by case basis. Because I don’t, me personally, I think I speak for
the will of the Commission that everybody probably shouldn’t have got a 15% increase.
Someone probably shouldn’t have got an increase at all but this needs to be evaluated and we
need to go back to the drawing board and look at this. And I want the people that have received
these increases to know that we’re not slighting their added responsibilities. We know that some
of them got a great deal of responsibilities and we want to look at that and be fair. But I think
it’s only appropriate that we let them know that. We owe it to them and want to be fair in this
process. But I do support rescinding it giving us an opportunity to reevaluate and assess it and
come back to the drawing board with the increases that we think is appropriate due to the
classification. So I just wanted to make that statement, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Commissioner Johnson. Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m going to have to disagree with my
esteemed colleague Mr. Johnson. The Personnel, Policy and Procedures Manual that was passed
on March 1, 2011 which as far as I’m concerned is a illegal document but it was used to make
these pay increases. Now there is legal documents that show that government employees cannot
receive retroactive payments. Now General Counsel prepared an opinion but he did not
authorize us to give this to the public or to the media. His opinion did not address retroactive
pay it talked about back pay. I think he was playing with words. So I definitely oppose this. I
think the entire thing should be rescinded. I understand according to the Personnel, Policy and
Procedures Manual that the Administrator did have the authority to do it but I do believe that
poor judgment was used. So I think that we should wipe the slate clean and start over anew.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Commissioner Guilfoyle.
16
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, it’s going to be a couple of questions. One is for the
Attorney. What is the repercussions if we do rescind this raise?
Mr. McKenzie: That’s a good question. That depends on the nature of the way that the
raises are handled. I think there’s some legal concerns that we would have with rescinding the
raises and making that rescission retroactive so that you would be trying to collect some from
employees who already received the increase. If your question’s related to what the possibilities
would be as far as moving forward not having an attempt to take back money for time that’s
already been spent with the increase but moving forward there is room within the realm of the
law to require employees to do additional duties without authorizing additional pay. That is
authorized however there is a current code revision in the Personnel, Policy and Procedures
Manual that would be amended before that could take place to make sure we’re not inconsistent
with the current language in the Policy and Procedures Manual. And I passed out an alternative
motion that would effectuate doing that as long as well as code a Personnel, Policy and
Procedures amendment that Commissioners have before them. If it’s the will of the Commission
to discontinue the raises and moving forward it can be effective on the effective date of the
amendments to the code to discontinue the raises. It would also have the effect of transferring
the authority to approve or disapprove raises associated with the promotional or reclassification
promotion which is what the category that we’re looking at is. It would put that back in the
hands of the Commission.
Mr. Guilfoyle: All right, second question is the law suit. If we rescind the raises, will we
be set up for a class action law suit?
Mr. McKenzie: A class action law suit from the 44 employees affected?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir.
Mr. McKenzie: I would say it would depend on how the rescission was done in
connection with the first answer that I gave. If this is done in accordance with applicable law
then it should minimize the risk of any viable class action law suit. As you know anybody can
file a law suit but we would anticipate doing it in a way that would minimize risk. And that’s
why I gave you the alternative motion that I think would have the effective of minimizing the
risk and moving forward. And that is if it is the will of the Commission to go down that road of
discontinuing the raises. At a future point in time after amending the code that would have the
effective of minimizing the impact of any adverse litigation.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Right, this paperwork that you gave me is, as far as the new paperwork on
this policy manual is probably a anybody who has any incentive to become, move up within the
ranks will have to go before the Commission before they get the authority to get their raise. Is
that correct?
Mr. McKenzie: Yes and no. This particular amendment relates primarily only to a
reclassifications promotion. This would be the promotions that were done as a result of
reclassifications. This would not, this particular amendment would not address the
Commissioner, I mean the Administrators authority to do other types of salary increases. It is
17
my understanding that amendments along those lines are on for next week’s committee cycle.
But this does not specifically address those. This was intended to be very narrow, basically a
rewording or the motion that you have on here but addressing some of the legal concerns. And
it’s very narrow to that issue.
Mr. Guilfoyle: All right. I would rather make a motion to rescind a percentage of the
raise what we could do legally without setting ourselves up for a law suit which is going to cost
more. And then I was one of the ones who voted for this policy manual. I don’t mind saying
that but I never thought that it would be taken out of context in this day and age. So I would
make a motion to rescind the percentage.
Mr. Mayor: Just for clarity what would be, Mr. McKenzie, the proper to achieve the goal
of Mr. Guilfoyle while keeping well within the law? What would be the appropriate motion to
make on that?
Mr. McKenzie: Sure and that’s actually a good question. The Personnel, Policy and
Procedures Manual has some minimal increases that are appropriate if a person takes on
additional duties and they go up several classifications. And there’s actually a ranking scale of
the amount of increase that the policy provides as a minimum. And the Administrator was given
additional authority up to 15%. So what you have is if you followed the minimums in the policy
there would be one amount for some people and there’s an amount that the Administrator
approved a higher amount. So if you were going to approve a percentage increase today my
recommendation would hold that you would need to first amend the Policies and Procedures
Manual if the percentage would be less than what the employee’s would be otherwise entitled to
under the manual. In other words you wouldn’t want to take an action today that would be
inconsistent with your own policies and procedures. My recommendation would just be that you
amend the policies and procedures first if it’s the will of the Commission to reduce it less than
what the policy provides. And that can be done if it’s the intent of the Commission to reduce the
potential raises to an amount that is the minimum under the current policy. That could be done
without amending the policy if that was the will of the Commission. Does that answer your
question?
Mr. Mayor: I guess. Okay, we have a motion but at this point we don’t have a second.
Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, you’ve asked the internal auditor to take a look at this and have
yet to receive the report from them. There’s been reports floating around but we haven’t
received their presentation at this particular point in time which they were asked to speak to the
validity of the process which we feel to be valid based on the rules and regulations. And when
they were asked to look at the amount of dollars that were given that we feel to be appropriate
given the nature of the increases in compensation of the duties that they receive. It seems
premature to me to take any action until you receive a report from the individual that you asked
to look at this and determine whether or not we did it right or not. I reviewed it again we’ve
looked at it you know I still think it was done within the authority given to me within the spirit of
trying to get additional duties done by additional people. There are a lot of misconceptions about
that. Everybody didn’t get 15%. People got dollars based on their amount of compensation
18
based on the amount of additional that they got. You know until you actually hear the report
from the internal auditor on this I think it would be premature to do anything at this particular
point in time and I would suggest you wait until they make their report.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to ask the General Counsel if he
would provide a copy of this opinion that he did on August 29, 2011 to the public and to the
media.
Mr. McKenzie: I’d be happy to do that if that’s the will of the Commission. That is a
privileged document in my opinion and if it’s the will of the Commission I’d be happy to release
it.
Mr. Lockett: And if it’s the will of this body, Mr. Chairman, I think what we need to do
we need to get a legal opinion outside of the Augusta government on the legality of making this
retroactive pay increase. Because we’re saying that we may subject ourselves to litigation if we
take the money back. There have been many times when the government, the IRS in particular,
have overpaid you and they took it back. So they can take it back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First and foremost I don’t believe that, well, first
of all there was six Commissioners that approved this authority. So I don’t think anybody’s
arguing about your authority. But I do think the argument becomes whether it was done
correctly and whether you used good judgment in what you called a financial crisis. Whether
you was communicative to your superiors even though we don’t have to give you the authority
certainly we should be communicated to and with instead of hearing it from the media. And I
think it was mismanagement of government funds in a way of when we’re in a financial crisis.
Also there’s some specific submission procedures in the Human Resources department on their
Personnel, Policy and Procedures Manual that must be adhered to. And we talked about that in
terms of the PDQ and other job descriptions that weren’t available for every single one.
According to the 44 that I’m seeing here they’re listed as reclassifications and I seem to recall a
situation out of the Mayor’s office where a particular individual thought that they were doing
more work and they were required to do a PDQ in order to get it done. And it says as
appropriate. I don’t know what time would be more appropriate than a major reorganization in a
$9 million dollar deficit. And we’re laying off people we’re sending them home. We’re
demoting folks we’re taking 2% of their pay, we’re taking portions of their sick time. At what
point can somebody answer me, at what point would be more appropriate to do a PDQ than this
time when it is the most accurate and it’s the industry standard for doing job reclassifications in
the industry. At what point would it be more appropriate than now.
Mr. Mayor: Who is your question directed to?
Mr. Mason: Anybody who cares to answer it.
19
Mr. Russell: I think if you look at, if I may, Mr. Mayor, I think if you look at the process
that we developed you’re looking at the PDQ particularly when new positions are created. Some
of the questions there are how far can you bend over, how much weight can you lift and
whatever. I think we all knew that based on the positions that we had available to us. And I
found it a little bit awkward to ask some of the employees if they could pick up 20 pounds or not.
I didn’t need to know that when we made the decisions that we made based on the
reorganization. We made the decisions based on combining duties, looking at opportunities to
save money in the long run and do so in a way that was conducive with the instructions that you
gave me. The financial crisis that we’re talking about is a crisis in the mind of some and an
opportunity in the minds of others. That opportunity could possibly be a way to reduce the cost
of government by looking at the functions that we do and do that in a more cost effective and
efficient manner. To do that it’s not in my mind to become a political issue it becomes a
management issue. It looks like you’re trying to move back to the point where each
Commissioner has a vote on whether or not Johnny gets to pick up ten or twelve additional
duties, gets a raise or doesn’t get a raise. We did that for years and years and years, we did
nothing but stagnate under that policy. It was my understanding that we were attempting to
move forward with that by centralizing that authority as voted on in the personnel manual to go
ahead and make those decisions, management decisions and not political decisions. When we
tried to do reclassifications in the past we came in situations where individuals would come to
individual Commissioners and say you know he got ten dollars and I got twelve dollars and I
didn’t think that was good enough. And we ended up not doing anything. We stagnated by the
fact that it became politics and politics alone and not good management. We could no longer
afford to have politics rule the day in these particular situations. You developed a policy. That
policy said that the Administrator has the authority to do A, B, C and D. Six of you voted on
that. That’s all it takes. No matter what your opinion is according to our legal advice six of you
voted on that and that’s the policy that we have. And that’s the policy that I’m following based
on the legal advice that I was given. You know we can hide behind words or hide behind you
know specific points of PDQ’s or whatever. But the rationale approach to this is we’ve looked at
the people, we’ve looked at what they did, we looked at the additional duties, we were able to cut
some positions, we did not force anybody to go home in this particular opportunity. And we
were able to accomplish about 90% of what you were looking for gentlemen when you gave me
this charge. I don’t know how to do it any other different than the way you tell me to do it which
is what you did. You know if that was poor judgment I apologize for my poor judgment. If that
was not what you meant I apologize for not understanding what you said. But the vote said to
reorganize. The vote said to save money. The vote said take those positions and do it in the best
manner possible given the authority that you’ve got. Otherwise you know we’re going to, you
know I’m somewhat frustrated by the fact that I’m getting a lot of mixed signals here from
people that at one point in time told me what they wanted and told me the path to take and now
the path has become a little rocky which we all knew it would. We all knew this wasn’t going to
be easy. I’ve said over and over and over again you’ve got to make tough decisions. And some
of those tough decisions are allowing management to manage and the Commission to set policy.
You did that and I was proud of you. And now you want to renege on that and that’s a little
tough for me to deal with at this particular point in time.
Mr. Mason: Let me kind of finish my thought process here.
20
Mr. Mayor: Fifteen seconds on this one and I’ll give you another two if you need it.
Mr. Mason: Thank you much. You said a lot but you really didn’t say anything at the
end of the day.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, I really don’t ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Mason: What happened here is that the only thing I’m asking you to do is if you’re
going to pass a policy which I feel was illegal in the first place and I still feel that way and it
hasn’t been proven otherwise. But if you’re going to pass a policy the only thing I would ask
you to do is follow it. And what I see and what’s been requested was not done the way that this
Commissioner sees it. I’m not looking to micromanage anybody. I’m not looking to pick and
choose who gets raises and you don’t. And I’ve still yet to see the savings that you’re talking
about in reference to that. Now there’s been a number of folks that have taken on extra
positions. The jobs been vacant for years doing extra time and all that. They came out while
you were gone on vacation. And so this is not about whether or not a Commissioner wants to
dictate who gets a raise. Let’s not get off the focus of what’s really going on. So my motion is
the same as it’s been before. I believe that it was done against the Personnel Policies and
Procedures Manual and I’m going to make a motion that we rescind these 44 raises. We’ve got
2600 other folks that’s sitting around we’ve got big time morale issues. You just heard plenty of
that from the fire department. We can go down every department they’ll be about the same. I’m
going to make that motion we approve rescinding these 44 raises that was given by the City
Administrator based on their non-compliance.
Mr. Lockett: 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 of voting.
Mr. Bowles, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Brigham, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Smith vote No.
Motion fails 4-5.
Mr. Mayor: No action taken, Madam Clerk. Let’s go on to the regular agenda.
The Clerk: 25. Receive as information the results of the 2010 financial audit.
Mr. Mayor: Twenty-three and twenty-four.
The Clerk: Oh, okay, I’m sorry.
The Clerk: Discuss personnel concerns. I thought you were going into Legal with that
one?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mason.
21
Mr. Mason: Well, I’m not sure how it needs to be done. I asked for Legal to be put
behind it because generally when we talk about personnel they want to go into Legal. I mean I
don’t have any problem discussing it right here if it’s appropriate. I mean whichever way the
Chair decides.
Mr. Mayor: I would look for the Attorney to give you, we kind of need to know the
subject matter prior.
Mr. McKenzie: If it’s just a policy issue and you’re not talking about a specific
individual person then that would be appropriate to be out here. If it relates to a specific person
that would be appropriate in Legal.
Mr. Mason: It does relate to a specific individual.
Mr. McKenzie: Then that would be appropriate to take up in a closed Legal meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, are we, do we have a need for a Legal meeting at the end of this
meeting?
Mr. McKenzie: We don’t but we can.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, could we just, Mr. Mason, could we wait until the place holder for the
Legal meeting to discuss it? Okay just so as to I know that there are people here for other
purposes that we’re going to go ahead and take that agenda item in Legal at the end of this
meeting. Madam Clerk, on to the next agenda item.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
24. Approve the termination of the administrator effective immediately. (Requested by
Commissioner Alvin Mason)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thirty-seven Legal portion because I think it’s the same.
The Clerk: Thirty-seven in Legal as well?
Mr. Mason: Yes.
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Changing the structure of the times of the committees? Am I looking at the
same?
22
Mr. Guilfoyle: No, that’s 38. That’s other business under the Attorney.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, let’s combine the two and I’ll pull up my agenda on this because
they’re two separate agendas. But I’ll promise mine is plainly on display. It is not a hidden
agenda. I do not deal in those.
Mr. Mason: Either way I think they’re like the same thing.
Mr. Mayor: We’ll discuss those two items in companion in Legal.
The Clerk: Number 37 which is a motion to approve the consulting services in separation
agreement concerning Rod Powell. So that would be a companion item to #23. Right, sir?
Mr. Mason: Right, well, yeah, that’s what I’m ---
The Clerk: In Legal? Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Mason: Item 23 okay.
The Clerk: Yes, sir, 23 and 37. Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, so, Madam Clerk, next agenda item.
The Clerk: Where are we on 24?
Mr. Mayor: Twenty-four I believe.
The Clerk: It’s projected on the screen.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
24. Approve the termination of the Administrator effective immediately.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’ll be brief. The only thing I want to say in
reference to this is a couple weeks ago I simply asked for a few good men to step up to the plate
and do what I thought took some intestinal fortitude to do and was necessary to be done.
Obviously we didn’t receive that at that particular time. What I would like to say is this to the
six that did approve this manual. I’m not sure where we’re going in reference to everyone saying
yeah, we know that we approved it, we know that we approved it we know that something needs
to be done but there’s no plan. I would tell you that in my opinion that doesn’t make sense
th
because the reorganization plan that you guys adopted on March 30 had a succession plan. For
the first time in the history of this government we had two deputy administrators full time we’re
paying a quarter of a million dollars for. There’s your plan. Now if you didn’t like that plan you
23
probably shouldn’t have put it into place. But that’s the plan you put into place. I didn’t agree
with it then but the point is you’re not following your own plan. So there is a plan that we’ve
had a deputy administrator for seven years in the same position. Mr. Russell left for a week last
week. It’s first time in nine months that I was able to get some truthful information out on the
floor. And so if that’s any indication then he left the least experienced deputy in terms this city
government in charge and we didn’t fall apart. So when you say that there’s no plan and we’re
just going to stick to status quo just because I don’t believe that we’re listening to the will of the
people for whom I was not elected to represent Mr. Russell or anyone else on this government. I
was elected to represent the people and the people are dissatisfied. And I know I’m not the only
one getting these calls and so my motion is very simple. And that is to terminate Mr. Russell’s
employment with this government effective immediately.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Is there a second?
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, I second and I’d like to speak to that motion.
Mr. Mayor: Let me, I’ll take your second, I’ll come back to you. Commissioner Smith
had his hand up. Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: I’d just like to say that you know looking at Mr. Russell’s past I think he’s
done a lot of good things and I represent Super District 10 which is across the county, about half
the county. I’ve had a lot of calls in the positive as for support for Mr. Russell. There’s some
decisions anybody’s playing quarterback as he is for our team. Yeah, they’re not going to like
every play. The thing about it is if you look at what’s been involved in the directions we’re
headed its positive. We just need to get together and make sure we get on the same focus and
team effort about it and not stand up here and have this out in the press and for everybody to air
out our linens. Get in our dugout and let’s discuss what we can do to move forward. I just, I
know the phone calls I’ve gotten and a lot of them and I’ve got some other calls too. The thing
about it is in my district there’s a lot of people that say stand behind the man and let’s get things
right. You know, who you going to put in charge that knows what Mr. Russell does and which
way this county can move. Now you know let’s think positive. All this negative stuff and
backstabbing and everything doesn’t get us anywhere. And in fact our neighbors are looking
over saying what’s going on? So y’all can do what you want but I tell you right now I think the
man is headed in the right direction. Sure he might have made a mistake and some people might
call it a mistake but I’ll tell you what walk a mile in his shoes and see how you feel. You family
and friends reading about it in and hearing about it in the press and the media I just say that you
know I think we need to think positive around here and then maybe we’d move in positive
directions and clean up some of this stuff. I’m just disappointed some times to see and hear but
I’m glad to say that a lot of folks around all areas I’ve talked to said you know let’s think
positive and move forward. It benefits everybody at all levels.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Commissioner Lockett and then Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I heard my name used in vain the other day
along with my colleague Commissioner Mason. The question was asked y’all must hate Mr.
Russell. I don’t hate Mr. Russell; I like Mr. Russell but I just don’t like some of things that Mr.
24
Russell has done as an Administrator. And one of things that I really dislike and Mr. Russell just
eluded to it a few minutes ago about six Commissioners. I got six Commissioners. When I first
got on this commission he and I sat down and talked about that. I said at least you need to talk to
all ten Commissioners. All ten are not going to vote the same way but at least they were part of
the conversation. And I questioned Mr. Russell’s judgment. We’re in a financial crisis, at least
that’s what we’ve been lead to believe that we’re nine point something million dollars in the
hole. I talked with the Administrator on several occasions that he has indicated more than once
that his team is the directors. But those other 2,000 plus employees are irrelevant. We’re talking
about leading by example. We have to lead by good example. And my forty plus years as a
leader I know that you take care of the people on the bottom before you even consider helping
those on the top. This is what you’re supposed to do. And as far as my colleagues are concerned
there is no cohesiveness at all on this body and there very easily could be if we communicated
with each other and not get in the media and say nasty things about each other and then come
into the meeting wanting to smile, grin and shake hands with each other. Folks we got to turn
this thing around. It’s not going to get any better if we keep on doing the same thing over and
over and expecting a different result. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: And I just want to make a quick comment here that at the end of the day to
me what it’s about locally is providing jobs and opportunity for everybody possible. And we do
not operate in a vacuum. I was speaking at an event in Calloway Gardens two weeks ago.
People around the state are following what’s going on in Augusta and it does not look good for
us. It does not help us to grow our local economy or to provide jobs for our citizens, which is the
key thing I think we need to be doing at this point. Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Wow, first I’d like to share into the words that my colleagues just said as
far as us getting along, talking negative to the media. And I was just reading last week where
one of my colleagues described me as well as five others as the white Commissioners. We need
to get away, we need to stop that. Everybody, if we’ve got to call somebody by the color,
describe somebody by the color we need to find a different way. I don’t call any of my
colleagues by their color. They have names that was their parents given to them. And that’s
what I use. As far as this statement as far as termination and Administrator the first time was a
statement. The second time’s an overstatement. What Fred did is not a, it didn’t put us in any
glorious positions whatsoever and I keep hearing I told you so which is fine. But we also know
that the policy manual could be amended at any given moment. And that’s the way I’ve been
practicing on. But what Fred has done that was, this was just happened. If we would’ve done
something else they would’ve pounced on him on another issue. So this is the first thing that
came up that Fred did that was subjective and now it’s being used as a tool to get rid of him. I
gave him the authority when I cast my vote. I’m going to have to support him keep him on until
something else changes. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I’ve stood idly by. I haven’t said a whole lot
about this but I think it’s due time that I do speak in regards to this. And I heard my colleague
mentioned name calling. I’ve been probably called more names in the last two weeks than the
man on the moon. And I’ve called those names for making a factual evaluation and I made my
25
assessment of the evaluation. The people in District 2 did elect me to lead with my emotions.
They elected me to be an intelligent decision maker up here. And I have to look at the facts and I
have to weight them. And that’s what I did. I was accused of switching votes with the Mayor
and covering the Mayor and switching votes with Mr. Aitken here. I don’t have to switch votes
with anybody. I’m going to vote my conviction. I shouldn’t be ridiculed for doing that. I still
have the best interest of my community my city and my district at hand and I wish people would
look at that and look at the overall projected of what I have done and what I want to continue to
do for my district. What Mr. Russell did, no I don’t agree with it. He knows that. We have
talked about that. But at the end of the day yeah, it’s six, that’s the policy six votes and pretty
much tell anybody what to do. I’ll sign a change to the Charter. That’s the way the policy’s set
up that’s the way it is. Do I like it? Maybe, maybe not but I can’t make that call. But I’ll have
to look at the facts and weigh my facts based on that. And at the end of the day because
somebody votes different or votes on the other side or what have you all of these sides it gets to
become redundant. We came on the commission over three years ago and we made a statement.
I know Commissioner Mason and I were the newest two commissioners up here. And we made
that change. I would love to continue to see that happen but we’ve got to get some transparency
going on not only in this panel up here but with our Administrator our Mayor our Legal Counsel
and all those people department heads. But we’re not going to solve it like this. We’ve got some
changes that need to be made and we’ve got to look at that. But we’ve got to be willing to do
that together. It can’t be the ‘I’ thing it’s got to be the we thing because one vote ain’t gonna
change anything up here. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Speaker: Call for the question.
Mr. Mayor: I recognized Commissioner Aitken and then the question has been called for.
So, Mr. Aitken, if you’d like to speak?
Mr. Aitken: I will. As I look at this whole process that we’ve been through there’s many
days that all of us on this commission will go home with our heads hung low because things
didn’t go the way we thought they would. But you as a leader we’ve got to come back and face
what the people elected us to do the next day. Yes, I voted to terminate the Administrator’s job.
The will of the commission is not there to do that today and I as a Commissioner represent my
constituents in District 1 I have to work within the framework that’s been given me. And until
we have a plan that’s the will of this body and that’s what I’ve got to go with is the will of this
body. It’s not six Commissioners. I remember George Eskola asked me a gang of six. I said no
a gang of ten. That’s what’s going to move our city forward. We’re not always going to agree
but we still have to work within the framework of our government has given us. So with that I
hope that we can do this and figure out the plans that we need to do. We all realize we’ve all got
a lot of problems that surfaced just recently in how we do business. And it’s going to take all of
us coming together to work it out. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. The motion has been made and properly seconded. The
question has been called for. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
26
Mr. Aitken, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Brigham, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Smith
vote No.
Motion fails 2-7.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Madam Clerk, next agenda item, please.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
25. Receive as information the results of the 2010 financial audit.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, Bonnie Cox, our audit partner, is here today to give you this
information. As some of you know we’ve made some preliminary releases in reference to the
savings that we were able to accomplish. In addition to that she has some issues with some of
the items we’ve looked at. As you look at an organization this big and the kinds of things we do
the audit’s a valuable asset as we continue to move forward. There are fine areas that we can
improve to help us do that over the years she’s brought forth many ideas that have helped us be a
better government. And while it’s sometimes hard to be criticized and sometimes hard to have
people look at what you do and criticize your actions as with the audit that’s a positive process if
you look at it that way. We’d like to thank Cherry, Bekaert and Holland for doing that. Bonnie.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Cox, thank you for being here and I’ll turn it over to you.
Ms. Cox: Okay, thank you very much. I am Bonnie Cox and I serve as the audit partner
st
of the Augusta Richmond County Financial Statement for the year ended December 31 2010.
I’ve a couple of, Bobby Smith is here with me. He was the audit manager on the engagement
and Denny Hopkins is also here with me who is in charge of the field work. We are going to, I
have a presentation that summarizes the highlights of the audit. Once I receive your approval
than we will be able to finalize our document. This document is a very lengthy document and so
will look forward to finalizing that. We’re prepared to issue an unqualified opinion. That’s a
clean opinion on the audit of the financial statements. That means it’s in accordance with the
generally accepted accounting principles. We did post some audit adjustments. Audit
professional standards require that I tell you about those adjustments. I’ll say that they were
consistent with the types of yearend adjustments that have been made in prior years. We’ll talk a
little bit more about those in just a minute. Professional standards require for me to tell you if we
got into any disagreements with management during the course of our audit and became unable
to obtain the evidence that we needed to complete the audit and we did not have any of those
disagreements. We were able to get what we needed to get done. We did not have any
significant difficulties in conducting our audit. We did have a delay in getting the actuary report
which has the pension, required disclosure, required supplementary information and the OPED
which is the other pension employment benefit calculations and disclosures. That’s about five or
six pages of information on financial statements that will translate into part of what we call
conversion entries and so we are unable to complete the audit without that information. So it
didn’t cause us a delay in getting that information. Professional standards again require that I tell
you if we got cooperation from management personnel. We did get the cooperation. The delay
was from the actuary vendor in getting the information to complete that. We get what we call is
27
a Representation Letter. It’s what management here signs and tells us that they told us what we
need to know during the course of the audit and the audit evidence that we received was truthful
and what we got to render our audit opinion. Professional standards also require that I tell you if
we are aware of any other consultations with other independent accountants. And what that
means is you’re independent you’re interauditor you’re not what’s called independent because
they work with you as a management function. But to our knowledge there are not other
consultations out there with independent accountants going on in relation to the financial
statement presentation. Professional standards also require that I tell you about audit results for
the year ended December 31, 2010. We did have three what we call compliance findings on the
financial statements which are all similar to (inaudible) the compliance section we actually
because of the length of the report we break it down and it’s starts with pages it’s prefaced with a
‘C’. So pages C-14 through 16 in this lengthy document here shows the financial findings. One
is because of this lengthy document is prepared by your auditor and not by internally by your
management. You’ve not devoted resources to have that capability here on staff therefore it is
considered a material weakness in the definitions of the accounting and audit standards. Item 2
in the financial statement findings was related to some purchase orders that were issued out
through invoice dates. What we do is we pick samples and we call them tester controls. We
picked 40 items related to purchasing and disbursements and two of those 40 items had PO dates
that were actually invoices and so because that is not according to policy it’s considered a
finding there. We also had two financial statement adjustments. We had to make adjustments to
the financial statements in the general ledger. There on two of the bank accounts that
reconciliations there incompletely done and the money was in the bank the way it was supposed
to be but the actual adjustments on the general ledger weren’t made in the proper time period
there. And so we had to make adjustments there to get the general ledger to reflect what the
appropriate balances were there from the reconciliations. You also received $14 million dollars
this past year, $14.1 million dollars in federal money. That is straight federal source money and
there’s a whole separate set of compliance guidelines that go along with those expenditures. We,
there are actually 14 compliance requirements that have to be tested in accordance with those
amounts. One item we noted as a finding here was on Grant’s Management. Because of the
volume of expenditures that the government is spending we did not feel like appropriate
resources were dedicated to that in order to properly monitor those 14 compliance requirements
for the volume of money that was put there. But there were a lot of little things that fell through
the cracks. And it’s not that the one person should be in charge of overseeing all the compliance
with those but one person should be looking out for that. And given the volume of the federal
funds that are going through this entity then we believe that Grant’s Management over site
should, it was insufficient at that point. Aging Cluster. This and I’ll put the dollars on here
because of the way the federal government requires the reporting. There was $358,000.00 spent
on the federal program for aging cluster and we had two items noted for that one which is just
related to the records maintained to track those expenditures for the Wellness and Recreation
Grant as well as the number of meals served there. We could see that meals were being served
but there was no documentation for who was receiving those meals. And because of the
eligibility requirements related to this federal money than one of those 14 requirements, one of
those 14 compliance requirements is that these items be referenced to support those items.
Another program Highway Planning Construction Cluster the total expenditures this year were a
million dollars, about a million seventy-seven and one of the requirements related to that
construction is what is referred to as the Davis Bacon Act and that is specific to federal funds
28
there. We tested two of the contracts there, they’re related to that. And one of those contracts
did not have proper monitoring of compliance with that Davis Bacon Act and that’s unique to the
federal contracts there. Airport Improvement Program there’s money that’s been spent at both
Bush Field Airport and at Daniel Field Airport. We had no problems spent over at Bush Field
but there was some lack of familiarity of those compliance requirements related to Daniel Field.
And the grant money that were, was spent there, the required reports that are required for the
compliance requirements were not followed accurately and timely on those funds. The Federal
Transit Cluster there was money used for the federal government to purchase some capital assets.
And there was some inconsistencies with compliance with the current policies there on one of
the transactions. This actually was the transaction spanned over two years and actually resulted
in findings in those years. But at that standpoint they gotten that squared away. Federal Transit
Cluster in Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program. The total expenditures for
that $864,000. And one of the reporting that was done there included some encumbrances that it
was not by definition required to be included. These compliance requirements are very
particular and very specific to the different programs and that is why it’s important that one
person is looking into these very specific and unique compliance requirements for each
individual program. That’s what’s insures knowing what obligations are required to be reported
on one particular grant that may be not be consistent with another grant there. Also there was,
there’s a specific provision in the RF funds that there’s a Buy American provision in the current
proposals and we did not see evidence of that being included in one of the expenditures there.
That is the, that’s the last of the audit results there. Professional standards require that I tell you
about if there are new accounting standards in the financial statements and there aren’t any
significant new disclosures. Next year coming up there’s a big change in the way that some
balances are reported and other fund definitions so you’ll see a big chuck of information here for
your 2011 audit. And then this year there’s no significant new audit standards that were in effect
that would have impacted the reporting here. The last items I have here on this spreadsheet is
due to some questions that have come up that I found it to be information and I just thought I
would point out because this document is so very large and difficult to hit highlights on. What
you have here is an excerpt from Page 32 of this financial statement. It is what’s called the
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Budget Natural. And this is
for the general fund. This fund includes a few different specific funds that are in your general
fund. But this is house reported in the financial statements. This presentation here showing the
original budget and final budget is by definition the way accounting centers require it. I just
wanted to point out a couple of things. If you look here in the third column over those are the
actual numbers for 2010 for the revenues for the general fund as defined by general accepted
accounting principles. You can see the total actual revenue that came in for the year was $120
million. And the final budget as amended throughout the year was $123 million. So there was a
revenue shortfall of $3.2 million dollars for the year ended 2010 compared to what the estimates
in the budget were. Now the two big pieces of that if you look there one here this use of money
and property. That’s your interest income and interest income is when you set the budget based
on estimates. And so the interest as we all know interest rates have been very low for a while
and so that did come under budget there and significantly under par here as well. The
Intergovernmental Revenue Line there that’s $2.3 million there under budget was largely, that’s
grant money. And so grant money is recognized as revenue when it is spent. And so sometimes
it’s very non-common at all for timing of different projects to happen not in the year you
budgeted because its project based instead of necessarily timing based. And so in general there
29
would be also a corresponding decrease in expenses that would really not have a net effect on the
bottom line there. This next slide is just the second half of that schedule which is on the
expenditures and on the other finances and uses which are transfers between other funds there.
And you can see there if you look at those same columns that we were just looking at the actual
amounts there for the expenditures the actual amount for the year ending 2010 is $124.6 million
where the actual budgeted expenses were $125.9 million. And so as you can see every function
there had positive (unintelligible) errant which means the expenses came in under budget by
$5.27 million dollars there from across the board there. Down here in the bottom part of this
schedule here you’ll see these are the transfers. These are the monies to and from other funds.
The budgeted transfers out of the general fund was right there at $4.2 million dollars right there
the transfers out to other funds. And actual transfers out were only $2.5 million. And so there
was a pick up there of about a million six that was unplanned that largely was related to a lower
than, a much lower than an anticipated transfer that had to go over to the Transit Department
because it’s some federal money that went in over there. So that is a pickup there. So between
the revenues being under budget by $3.2 million the expenses being under budget by $5.2
million and then the transfers being under budget by $2.3 million that’s where you ended up
right here. This is what the final budgeted deficit last year for 2010 $2.7 million dollars right
there. That was the final bottom line budgeted deficit and actually came in at a positive $1.6
million surplus in the general fund. So that’s just from my perspective looking at the year at a
snapshot.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any questions? Commissioner Bowles.
Mr. Bowles: I just want to make a motion to receive as information.
Mr. Johnson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Cox, I’m not an auditor by a long shot but I
noticed in some of the remarks you said that you identified certain deficiencies in internal control
over financial reporting that might be significant or material weaknesses. And therefore there
can be no assurance that all deficiencies significant or material weakness can be identified. What
do you mean by that?
Ms. Cox: Sir, that’s language out of the professional audit standard. And Professional
Audit Standards define significant deficiencies in internal control and material weaknesses as
just the way that a control is designed or the way that a control is functioning is to prevent or
detect a material misstatement in the financial statement. Meaning the records from the
internally prepared records what are the controls that are in place to make sure that there are not
errors that are either being prevented or detected in those errors. Those findings that I told you
about are the ones that were significant that did result in errors in the financial statement from
that standpoint. I’m not sure if I’ve answered your question.
Mr. Lockett: No, you did but you also indicated that significant adjustments were made
by this government during the audit process. I know teachers have gotten in trouble for coaching
30
students on a test but I know what you did is legal but I’m just trying to find out why would it be
necessary for so many adjustments to have to have been made during the auditing process by us?
Ms. Cox: I’ll be honest, I don’t think that was really what I was saying. There was
adjustments made to the end of the year financial statement. Those adjustments were similar to
adjustments that have been made every year to the financial statement. You guys are well aware
that you don’t receive a report like this on a monthly basis. Many professional, you know,
regular for profit companies they do. They have to make those decisions and so they have
internal staff that can actually put these together every month or every quarter or from that
standpoint. And so because the adjustment is on the yearend and aren’t done throughout the year
that doesn’t necessarily indicate something that is by definition a significant deficiency and a
material weakness. But it does not mean that it is something that indicates the transactions were
reported there and the yearend adjustments were needed.
Mr. Lockett: Okay. And my last question is and I’ll be truthful. You indicated that well,
number one, is I’d like to get a copy of the letter that’s prepared to management.
Ms. Cox: The management letter ---
Mr. Lockett: Yes, ma’am, if I could get a copy of that.
Ms. Cox: Okay.
Mr. Lockett: And I notice and I believe two consecutive years is on the audit we’ve been
faulted for approving pay raises but don’t have the proper documentation. And I’m pretty sure
you found it last year and I know you did find it again this time.
Ms. Cox: Well, that’s not true. We didn’t have any problem with pay rate changes this
year. We have had that problem in the past. But this year we didn’t have any problems with the
pay rate changes.
Mr. Lockett: Well, what you said here is approval for pay raises were not properly
documented.
Ms. Cox: What are you reading from?
Mr. Lockett: I’m reading from what I extracted from your document.
Ms. Cox: Okay, but is it a current year finding or a prior finding because they’re both
sets of finding in this.
Mr. Lockett: The 2010 audit, the one you just completed.
Ms. Cox: Yes, we did just complete the 2010 audit and if you look on these pages here
starting on page C-25 is a listing of all the prior year audit findings and it lists the current
statuses of those audit findings. And that to me, I don’t know exactly what you’re looking at but
31
that sounds like an item that was reported in the prior year but was not an item in the current
year. The 2010 audit includes findings from 2010 and an update on what we found in ’09 and
the current status of those.
Mr. Lockett: All right. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Bonnie, for the briefing here.
May I ask you something? You did a sample of information from our Finance Department and
others as it relates to this audit, just a sample of information. It was in no way comprehensive or
exact in nature.
Ms. Cox: We do use sampling in testing transactions. We do not test 100% transactions
---
Mr. Mason: Okay so –
Ms. Cox: --- in an audit.
Mr. Mason: --- part of your results that you gave us is just based on a small sample of
information that you tested to see if it ---
Ms. Cox: Correct.
Mr. Mason: --- met the test, very small. And so obviously there were even some errors
in the small sampling that you did. You are in no way validating that the information that was
given to you from this government is absolute and factual are you?
Ms. Cox: I’m not sure I ---
Mr. Mason: Are you validating that the information that was given to you to do the
sampling of these tasks is absolute and absolutely correct and factual. Are you validating that
with this audit?
Ms. Cox: What we are saying with the audit is that I told you about the adjustments that
we did make to the information that management gave us. And I will tell you that our audit is
based on sampling and it is not 100% of anything.
Mr. Mason: Right and it’s based on information that’s given to you though.
Ms. Cox: That’s correct.
Mr. Mason: And so if the information is given to you is correct hypothetically if it’s
incorrect than what you would report on would be incorrect.
32
Ms. Cox: I have designed my procedures to detect material misstatement in the financial
statement. I do it in accordance with AFCPA Professional Standards and with the government
standards. I stand behind that. I told you about the adjustments that post to what management
gave us.
Mr. Mason: Yes. You answered my question. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you. We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. If
there is no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you Bonnie. Appreciate it. Madam Clerk, next agenda item.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
28. Discuss the purported $9M deficit in association with the $1.3M surplus. (Requested by
Commissioners Alvin Mason and Bill Lockett)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Mason: Go ahead, Commissioner Lockett, you can start us off.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: I want to defer to the Administrator. I want him to explain it to me.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
st
Mr. Russell: Okay last year which ended December 31, after all the money was
collected and all the money was spent you just heard the auditor tell you we had a net gain of
$1.6M. Most of that was because of savings. We saved about a penny or so based on every
dollar we spent. And some of that was because of one time injections of dollars that were
available some of which came out of transit where we were able to recoup some federal dollars
there that went into this particular budget. So at the end of last year and it takes two months to
clear the books and they’ve been working on the audit since March or so we ended up with a
surplus that we could add to the rainy day fund of about $1.6M dollars in the general fund. You
know that’s based on several things. One of which is us tightening our belt the other which was
good luck in all honesty and the income from the federal money from Transit. As we prepared
this years’ budget which we looked at in October/November of last year and voted today to
establish a millage rate because of increased projected costs the cost of gas the cost of medical
care the cost of bread in the prisons and jails. The cost of electricity and other items that were
there in our unwillingness to pass that along to the taxpayer by increasing his taxes at that
particular point in time we looked at approximately $9 million dollars and we used the word
deficit between what we expected in our revenues and our expenditures. To fix that we used
33
some one time fixes that in my mind were appropriate to do. A portion of dollars out of the rainy
day fund like we budgeted for the past several years. No difference there. We decided not to
make capital improvements which in turn might be pennywise and tom foolish but given the
short term nature of what we were looking we thought that would be appropriate to fill that
particular gap. We looked at money from the reorg that we hoped would be able to fill that gap.
In addition to that we looked at dollars from the sale of property that we hoped would generate
about $2 million dollars. All those one time fixes got us to the point where in November of last
year assuming those one time fixes come true and nothing outside the norm happens i.e. the price
of gas doesn’t go up to $5.00 a gallon which might yet happen, that the power company doesn’t
raise our bill by 20% which might happen. Based on the best information we had at that time we
made a judgment call and determined that without raising taxes which I support, using these
onetime fixes we have a balanced budget. Now this year ends at the end of December we have
two months to clear off our plate as we, and that’s traditional to pay out the bills we will engage
an auditor to look at these dollars again and sometime around August or September we’ll be able
to tell you if we guessed good, if we planned good, if we hypothesized good or if we just got
lucky either bad or good and be able to give you an end result of those particular numbers at this
particular point in time. As you know our budget process is somewhat cumbersome because
we’re dealing with a large amount of money. The savings that we got was about 2% of our
entire budget for that. That 2% could have gone away very quickly with a drop in sales tax,
increase or decrease in franchise fees you know it’s somewhat of a calculated guess and
sometimes a gamble. I’m not uncomfortable with our spending to date. I think we once again
have done good and you notice in last year’s report we can control spending. We did a good job
with that. There are things that we can’t control and those are the things that keep me up at night
and should you. And that’s what it’s about and so last year we did good. Just like you told me to
do. We saved money, we were tight we spread the pain throughout our government as opposed
to putting in on the backs of our taxpayers and that’s the direction you gave me. You gave me
the same direction with this budget and that’s what we attempted to do. Only September of next
year we’ll be able to tell how good we did. But as of right now we seem to be on target for what
we expected.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Russell, will you tell me and you can be brief if you like when did you
determine that you expected us to have a guess $9.2 million deficit and what prompted you to
think that. If you can’t be brief I’ll be satisfied.
Mr. Russell: Well, you know, it’s hard to be brief when you’re talking about the issues
that are as complex as what they are. This gap that we decided to fill we started talking about
last September. And we started talking about it in October and November as we looked at things
that we thought were going to go up. The cost of gas the cost of bread the additional cost of
manning the new detention center. The additional cost of providing electricity and heat to the
new judicial center. Those as the kinds of things we had to take into consideration and those are
the kinds of things we thought about and we talked about at some length ad nauseum almost to
determine where we were going and what we were going to get done. There’s no secret in any of
this. It’s in the budget documents that we presented over again and that we began talking about
in September and October.
34
Mr. Lockett: Thank you.
Mr. Russell: Is that brief enough?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Russell, how much money did we get off
property sales or did we even sell any property?
Mr. Russell: We haven’t sold any to date so that’s an issue we’ve got outstanding.
We’ve got about $2 million dollars. We need to look at it.
Mr. Mason: Thank you. And how much actually have we saved with the reorganization?
Mr. Russell: It looks like we’re going to be able to discuss that at a later point. I don’t
have that number right in front of me, sir.
Mr. Mason: I’ve been asking for it for a long time.
Mr. Russell: Sorry.
Mr. Mason: You made back in November a five points statement in terms of what it
would take to get us out of this $9 million deficit. Do you recall that?
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Mason: Okay. Part of that was the sale of property which as you said hasn’t
happened. Part of it was the reorganization which you’re saying you don’t have the numbers.
And we really don’t need to go through these other three because probably not going to get the
answers there. So um ---
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mason: --- I really don’t have anything else to say, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, the answers are in the book if you look at the numbers you’ve
got available to you. The capital numbers are there, the other numbers are there the savings that
we’ve got. It’s not my fault that people have a hard time understanding these complex issues. I
understand that it’s complex and that’s just one of the ways it goes at this particular point in
time. You know at the end of the day we had no idea we’d have a surplus last year.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor, point of privilege.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett.
35
Mr. Lockett: Ask Commissioners we’ve been rebuked many times for saying things that
wasn’t pleasant and I think the Administrator owes this body an apology.
Mr. Mayor: I will say I have not heard a lot of people you know in the course of
discussing different employees and everything, there have been a lot of statements made and I’ve
not heard anybody call for an issue and an apology. So I ---
Mr. Lockett: Don’t worry about it.
Mr. Mayor: --- would ask for a motion to receive this as information.
Mr. Jackson: So moved.
Mr. Johnson: 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.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item, please.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
31. Motion to approve a policy to require ARC employees to use direct deposit to receive
payroll payments and to approve a time schedule for implementation.
Mr. Brigham: So moved.
Mr. Jackson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there, Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor, I was present when I think Wells Fargo came in and made their
presentation. I was one of the proponents of having everybody to having their money going to a
bank and so forth but what Wells Fargo came up with is each person would be given a debit card.
And all the banks now are beginning to charge exorbitant fees for the use of debit cards. So what
you’re going to find is you’re going to find many of these people who don’t have transportation,
we know they get to the bank they’re going to draw out larger amounts than what they really
need to keep from going back and incurring additional charges. You can’t use a debit card in
church. I think that something should be done but this system that Wells Fargo has I don’t know
if that’s what you’re going to try and talk to us about today is not a very good system if we’re
going to be concerned about the workers. I think the best thing to do is to let all the employees
that are paid by paper check let them know that come 1 January of 2013 that’d be the end of the
paper check. Give them an opportunity to find a financial institution to do this. But I think if we
36
approve this today what we’re doing is just creating an undue burden for a group of people that’s
underpaid. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Ms. Williams?
Ms. Williams: Yes, sir, Commissioner Lockett. When Bank of America was to make
their presentation that presentation was only an option for the employees that could not obtain
their won bank account. Each employee will be just like they are now. They will be allowed to
choose their own bank account. We encourage them to do that. The last thing in the world I
want to have to happen is to transfer that money on to debit cards for employees. But we’re
trying to do with this is set a time table and ask that all new employees be notified through
orientation that they would expected to sign up for direct deposit. They give us their banking
information, where their checking account is. We send their paychecks directly to their bank. If
there are employees that cannot for some reason obtain their own bank account this will be the
option that will be available for them so that we can get them paid on time. Does that answer
your question?
Mr. Lockett: Well, not really. I understand ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: --- exactly what you’re saying and I’m in complete agreement with that.
But I would hope that, first of all have the employees been notified that this is something that
this body is considering?
Ms. Williams: No, sir, I’m waiting for your approval before I can know what mechanism
---
Mr. Lockett: Yeah.
Ms. Williams: --- to notify them. Currently we have 86% of our employees already on
direct deposit. We would like ---
Mr. Lockett: Well ---
Ms. Williams: I’m sorry.
Mr. Lockett: That’s all right. I apologize to you. It would be great if we knew how
many people were in the county compared to those people who could not get checking accounts.
That number might be insignificant in fact maybe all of our employees could get a checking
account as far as we know at this point.
Ms. Williams: We would hope so too.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, thank you very much.
37
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.
Motion passes 9-0.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
33. Consider a request for refund for property located at 2538 Commons Trace,
Map/Parcel #013-1-149-00-0 for tax years 2008 and 2009 in the amount of $285.95 for each
year, respectively. Property owner, Roland Witherspoon.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I thought we put this on the consent agenda.
Mr. Mayor: I believe that had been put on consent agenda.
The Clerk: He wanted ten years.
Mr. Brigham: We can’t do ten years.
Mr. Mayor: Sir, it’s actually already been approved so it’s already gone through. Sir?
Mr. Witherspoon: --- ten years it’s because if I can be real brief. Maybe we all can agree
on one thing.
Mr. Mayor: Sir, I really, because the agenda item’s been disposed of I apologize but
that’s the procedure’s we operate by. Thank you, sir. Madam Clerk, next agenda item.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
34. Approve across-the-board increases for all employees who did not receive raises under
the Administrator’s approved reorganization plan. (Requested by Commissioners Alvin
Mason and Bill Lockett)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason or Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I put this on simply to address what is
being or what will be done to address the other employees who have not received the cost of
living raise I think for two to three years. Also the way that the other raises were done. I do
want to make sure even if this was done that it would be done appropriately. When I brought
Mr. Powell up about three months ago and I asked him what was the most fairest of handling
raises for employees especially those that maybe hadn’t received raises or were actually
underpaid he said it would be to do them all at once. That would be the most fairest way. So I
guess my question today is there a plan in place to address the others employees who by enlarge
have called probably every commissioner out here and stated that they’ve done extra work for
38
any number of months and that sort of thing. Is there a plan in place to address any issues with
our employees which is our greatest asset.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell?
Mr. Russell: Yeah, I think as part of the budget process one of those tough decisions that
I keep telling you about are ones that we’re going to have to decide. If you want to do an across-
the-board cost of living raises we have talked about that on several occasions in the past. And I
firmly agree that it’s time to revisit that. The issue with that is the funding source that you have
available to you. And that funding source is limited based on our desire not to increase taxes or
our desire not to continue to cut deeper into what we’ve got. So that’s one of the tough decisions
you’ve got. And I think part of the budget process is there you know a percentage increase
across the board has not happened in a long time. And it’s tough on our employees not to get
raises but those raises are based on what would be a cost of living increase as opposed to
increase for additional duties. Even though each of our employees probably thinks that and
tighten their belt and help in addition to that. So you know I think we could argue that for a
while but I think what the bigger question is if you want to give an across the board raise what
would be the funding source for that? As I’ve said on numerous occasions the equations the
same revenue equals expenditures. So we would have to, if we increase our expenditures to do
that we’re going to have to think of some way to increase our revenue. And hopefully that
would be a conversation we would have to take it out of the fund balance in my mind is not
prudent at this particular point in time because you’re taking out what would be a reoccurring
cost out of a limited amount of dollars that are there. It’s not designed for reoccurring costs it’s
designed for one time either emergencies or onetime cost. So the discussion you might want to
have is if the law in Georgia would allow onetime influx of dollars you might take it out of that.
But even that in my mind would be something we’ve got to deal with. So I don’t envy you those
decisions as we move forward.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Russell, how about a 5-10% incentive plan? I have brought this up
on the floor before.
Mr. Russell: And I don’t disagree with the concept but the administration of that
becomes somewhat difficult. You know obviously we can’t agree on whether or not people are
properly compensated for additional duties. To begin in a government sector to talk about how
you actually measure performance and move forward with that becomes even more complex.
And that’s sort of tough to do. I mean if we were making chairs and I made five and you made
ten it would make sense to me that you get more than that. If we’re all making arrests or fighting
fires or doing whatever most of which we assume they’re doing at the best of their ability
because I’m not too sure you measure the incentive there. And I think I would be more while it’s
the easy way out if you want to give them more money I would be more inclined to do an across
the board cost of living thing simply because to measure the incentive you know you’ve got to
figure out what they’re supposed to do, how much they do better than that and that becomes even
more complex than the reorg in my mind.
39
Mr. Guilfoyle: Right but we got a 2010 actual out of our budget. Why can’t we use that
number each department is broken down and use that as a guide tool? If a department, and this is
actually goes down to the core of the any department which is the employees. If they save
anything over 5% it should be disbursed amongst that department and you could see the cost
savings from the 2010 actuals. And the same thing will coincide with the 10%. They could
actually make their own percentages or parse bonus’ even though the government don’t use that
word. But we got to start somewhere.
Mr. Russell: But and I don’t disagree but what you’re beginning to do is those small
departments like the ones we talked about today ---
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir.
Mr. Russell: --- in the budget hearings that only have budgets that consist of 95%
salaries and 3% of the balance in small funding issues there, you’re beginning to hamper them
right off the bat in the fact that they can’t save 5%. You heard me ask each of them for about
4.8% and you witnesses the eye rolls and whatever of My God how do I do that? So if you do it
that way you’re hampering the smaller departments. You’re also, the larger departments you
might be able to do that, is it fair for the larger departments to be able to do that and give their
people money where people like Lena who only has three people, a small budget and probably
80/95% of your budget’s salaries as opposed to anything else. You would basically rule them
out of that in that particular process. So you know in theory those things work well in practice
I’ve never seen them in the public sector work in the manner that while I know you want to do
something good I’ve never seen them turn out to be something good that they end up with more
people complaining then being helped. I mean we give somebody 5% somebody 2% across the
board over 2700 employees, wow.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, and a lot of this and, Commissioner Lockett, I’m going to recognize
you. But it sounds a lot of these issues that we’re discussing on this agenda item go to the
budget and the budgeting process. Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Russell, for clarification and before I
become emotional the 44 people that received pay increases. Was that a part of the budgetary
process?
Mr. Russell: That was part of the authorized reorganization process that was also
authorized in last year’s budget, yes, sir.
Mr. Lockett: It was included in last year’s budget.
Mr. Russell: The directions I got were there to do that, yes, sir.
Mr. Lockett: And what was that amount, Mr. Russell? Was it 350 even or was it more or
less?
40
Mr. Russell: We anticipated a savings of, I think, in the budget at 1.5 so that’s the dollar
amount we attempted to save by reorganization assigning additional duties to people that would
be compensated for those duties and eliminating positions as we were able to move forward.
Mr. Lockett: So how much did that give you to for the pay increases?
Mr. Russell: The net gain on the pay increases were there. The savings is what’s yet to
be determined.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, can I get a motion to receive this as information?
Mr. Jackson: So moved.
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Johnson.
The Clerk: You made the motion? And Mr. Smith seconded? Okay.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Fred, I do want to ask you this before we move
on. In moving forward doing a cost of living increase how feasible is that for us going into the
future versus certain percentages?
Mr. Russell: I think it all becomes a matter of political will at this particular point in
time. Do you want to ask us to do one of two things? You either have to increase taxes to get
the initial revenue or we have to cut other things sufficient enough to make up the difference.
It’s a long term commitment. It’s just not a onetime shot. So that becomes a political policy
discussion that you’ve got to have. You know I think our employees deserve more money, I’ve
said that year after year after year. Unfortunately with the unwillingness to burden the balance
of our community the 200,000 people who live here versus the 2700 that work here we’ve made
policy decisions that do not included raises for those people. And that’s a policy decision.
Mr. Johnson: Right. Could we get a number? Is it possible to probably get a number
what it would cost us to do that just for FYI?
Mr. Russell: Sure or I can give you 2, 3 or 5% over the year with no problem. Well, I
can do better than that. I can do it right now. The 5% COLA across the board for the entire
government is $5.137, $5,137,499.00 dollars which is about a mill.
Mr. Johnson: And that’s 5%?
Mr. Russell: That’s 5% across the board for cost of living. 3% total would be
$3,082,500.00 and 2% would be $2,055,000.00.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been properly seconded. If there’s no further
discussion Commissioner’s will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
41
The Clerk: That’s to receive this as information, correct? Okay.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATOR
35. Discuss/approve the solicitation of a RFP from professional human resources firms for
an independent audit and assessment/efficiency study of Augusta Richmond County
Government in accordance with the Commission’s action on August 2, 2011.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, if I can this is what we brought back to you in relationship to
your request and I wanted to make sure we had this that we were asking for what you asked us to
do. Because of the complex nature of it I’d like to go ahead and refer it back to Committee if
that’s okay, to the Administrative Services Committee to give us an opportunity to look at that
and talk about that. I do not want to put out and RFQ unless we’re totally sure that we’re doing
what you want. And Mr. Lockett, if you could take that into your committee I’d greatly
appreciate that.
Mr. Mayor: Can we get a motion to refer this to the next Administrative Services
Committee?
Mr. Smith: Motion made.
The Clerk: We need a second.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second?
Mr. Jackson: Second.
The Clerk: Mr. Jackson.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there is no further discussion
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion carries 9-0.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATOR
36. Recommendation from the Administrator regarding the November and December 2011
furlough days.
42
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, if I may. Based on the information you just heard from the
auditor and the $1.6M dollar surplus that we were able to ink out over the last year I think it
would be appropriate to revisit the fact that in part of this budget we said we were going to
accumulate ‘x’ number of dollars or a million dollars for furlough days. The difference in my
presentation here is this would be a onetime expense to go ahead and take care of this and refund
or, not refund that’s not the right word. But to go ahead and reestablish those days as pay days.
I don’t like that word either. What we need to do, what I would like for us to do as this particular
point in time is adjust the decrease in the pay by 2/5ths to give them back 2/5ths of the initial
adjustment that we did which would allow us, we took out 1.88%, we reduce that over the next
pay periods by 2/5ths that would show up in their salaries. So because they’ve actually gone the
extra mile to tighten their belt and done those things that were necessary to help us do this I think
it is appropriate that we do that. That would allow us to do that. In addition to that as part of
that because we’ve already given some of our employees those days off particularly the fire
service and the police department to keep that from being any more confusing than what it is at
this particular point in time. And in addition to that because those days are tied into long
weekends and holidays and we normally leave early those days anyway as recommended I’d like
to go ahead and establish those days as pay days off I believe would be the verbiage that I would
use. So we would still let them have, let the current employees that have not had that let them
have those days off and deal with that. The savings by keeping the building shut the extra day
and not paying gas, electric and whatever would be significant in this particular point in time. So
it would be my recommendation that you do that.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that has been properly seconded on that. Commissioner
Lockett and then Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, I’d like to make a substitute motion. I hope that it’s
something that’s going to be accepted by this body. My motion would be to reimburse all of the
employees for the three furlough days that they’ve already taken and pay said employees for the
nd
two furlough days scheduled for November 23 and December 22 of 2011. And I just spoke
with the Finance Director and she indicated that it would cost about $1M dollars and I think our
surplus was about a million dollars. If you want to boost their morale I think that would be a
good way to spend that surplus.
Mr. Mason: I second that motion, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: The substitute motion.
Mr. Mayor: Substitute motion.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell?
Mr. Russell: Wait a minute. I’m not opposed to doing that I’m trying to figure out how
at the moment.
43
The Clerk: Here comes Donna.
Mr. Russell: Let them figure it out right?
Mr. Mayor: We need lawyers, accountants.
Mr. Russell: If I can, Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: --- well, once again I’m not opposed to that idea at all. I think it’s a good
idea. There are some programming issues that require manual input for each of the employees.
If we could do that prior to the end of the year I believe we could do that with a salary
adjustment. I can’t make it happen overnight but because of the complexity of what it is it’s
going to take us a while to get that done. And I really, I think it’s a good idea and would support
that.
Mr. Lockett: Do I need to change my motion, Mr. Administrator? Is it clear enough as it
is?
Mr. Russell: I think what you told me was to reimburse them for the 1.88% based on that
and still allow them the two days off that they’ve taken, the next two days off is what I thought I
heard you say?
Mr. Lockett: Yes, that’s correct.
Mr. Russell: We do that. The only thing is that we would have to do that prior to the end
of the year as opposed to within the next pay period.
Mr. Lockett: I’ll make that a part of my motion.
Mr. Russell: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion that’s been properly seconded.
Commissioner Guilfoyle, did you?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yeah, as a matter of fact, it caught me very much off guard. Mr. Russell,
we have been working nonstop trying to figure efficiency for this government. Try to get out of
this so called deficit we are in and everything that we have done in the past I guess we’re going
to have to work harder on streamlining?
Mr. Russell: There’s no doubt in my mind about that sir but what you’ve got now is
opposed to an across the board increase that would be an ongoing expense you’ve got a onetime
fix based on our surplus from last year. I can probably argue both ways on whether or not that
would be physically prudent or not. But I think in my mind at this particular point in time
you’ve asked these people to tighten the belt. You’ve done that. My first recommendation was
44
the two days but if it’s the will of the body to do the balance of the three that’s a onetime
expense that’s already covered from the surplus from last year as opposed to an ongoing
expense. What that does mean though is that we look at this particular well not really because
we’ve already got that budgeted in. So that would come out of the bank as opposed to coming
out of the ongoing budget issues. So instead of adding $1.6M to our fund balance we’d only .6
million to the fund balance and you would reestablish those salaries. Is that anywhere close to
what you were asking?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yeah, can we, I don’t want to do a knee jerk vote like this. Can we send
it to Committee? Is that possible to do a substitute on a substitute?
Mr. Mayor: No.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham.
Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I believe what we’re doing is a budget adjustment and what
we’re doing is increasing our deficit from, wasn’t it 8.3, I believe it was Ms. Williams?
Ms. Williams: I’m sorry.
Mr. Brigham: The budget deficit was 8.3 that got rounded up to 9? And if we do this it
will be another million dollars and therefore we would be going from, using the round up from
eight to nine or we’ll be going from nine to ten?
Ms. Williams: You would have to specify the source of funding as fund balance for this
action that you’re talking about here.
Mr. Brigham: But ---
Ms. Williams: Yes, sir, the difference between revenues and expenditures in the budget
and the use of onetime expenditure reductions of which the furlough was a portion and revenue
enhancement was a total $8.3 million dollars in the 2011 budget.
Mr. Brigham: It was 2. ---
Ms. Williams: 8.3.
Mr. Brigham: 8.3.
Ms. Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Brigham: Then this would drive it up to 9.3 will it not?
Mr. Russell: No.
45
Mr. Brigham: Yes, it will.
Ms. Williams: Technically it will because you’ll add to this year’s fund balance.
Mr. Brigham: Last year’s budget does not have anything to do with this year’s budget.
Ms. Williams: No, sir, it doesn’t. You would specify if you took this action you would
specify the use of prior year fund balance.
Mr. Brigham: Right.
Ms. Williams: Now that was in general fund. Not all the funds had a surplus last year.
Mr. Brigham: Right.
Ms. Williams: And that is going to be ---
Mr. Brigham: I understand that so what we’re going to do ---
Ms. Williams: You need to look at that ---
Mr. Brigham: --- we’re going to drive even more funds some of the funds we could drive
even further into a deficit that we’re not going to be up.
Ms. Williams: That’s correct.
Mr. Russell: Those are minor compared to the general fund.
Ms. Williams: The general fund is the major concern.
Mr. Brigham: I do not believe it’s in the best interest of this government to bring a
million dollars in one fell swoop at this time.
Mr. Russell: Let me suggest if I may, Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell.
th
Mr. Russell: --- that we go ahead and look at the 2/5 of the 1.88 which I think we have
some consensus on and look at and then be able to bring back to you a plan for the balance and
let you take a look at that and see if that works.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, in order to do that we would have to first defeat the substitute motion
and pass the primary motion.
46
Mr. Russell: With the addition to the fact that you want us to bring back information
regarding the potential for doing the five days instead of two.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion on the floor and we’ll first vote on the
substitute motion by the substitute sign of voting and then should that motion not pass I would
request that the initial motion be amended to include those instructions. So let’s proceed.
Commissioners will now vote by the ---
Mr. Lockett: Madam Clerk, for clarity will you please read the motion.
The Clerk: As I understood the motion to read the substitute motion was to reimburse the
employees for the three furlough days already taken and to credit them for the two remaining
days the November and the December days.
Mr. Russell: Allowing them to keep those days.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign of voting.
Mr. Brigham, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Aitken, Mr. Smith and Mr. Guilfoyle
vote No.
Motion fails 2-7.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, the primary motion Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: Was the recommendation of the Administrator regarding the November and
December furlough days and to look at the other three remaining days with a report back to the
Commission.
Mr. Mayor: And the primary maker of the motion, will you add that to your motion? I
believe it was Commissioner Jackson? Okay.
The Clerk: Okay, what else needs to be in that motion?
Mr. Mayor: Just to look ---
Ms. Williams: Because the way the furlough was implemented it was a percent off of
each employee’s paycheck each pay period to spread it out. So if you want effectively cancel the
last two furlough days the way that you would do that is you would stop the 1.88% reduction on
the employee’s paycheck effective this upcoming paycheck. If you include that, that would
clarify the mechanism for it to be done.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Jackson, would you include that in your motion?
Mr. Jackson: I’d be happy to.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Guilfoyle.
47
Mr. Guilfoyle: Ms. Donna, as far as the firemen, because their schedule is so different
than everybody else’s for one day is actually 24 hours, have we come up with a solution on their
part as far as the furloughs?
Ms. Williams: What kind of solution?
Mr. Guilfoyle: For example. Let’s say if you worked eight hours and you’ve taken it as
a furlough the firemen’s having to take one day which is three days because they work a 24-hour
shift. Has that issue been addressed?
Ms. Williams: I just wanted to check. They were given an 8-hour day for furlough
purposes. That is defined in the resolution is that their furlough day equals 8 hours not a 24 hour
or 12 hour.
Mr. Guilfoyle: We got a fireman, can he give us an explanation because he would know
more that we would up here.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Speaker: Wasn’t every employee as far deductions based on 8 hours which is five
days 40 hours. Is that correct of the total base pay?
Ms. Williams: 1.88% is how it’s calculated of their base pay.
Mr. Speaker: Base pay.
Ms. Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Speaker: Okay, we don’t get deducted from our base pay. For instance, what
happens is if I work overtime that’s beyond my base pay correct?
Ms. Williams: Correct.
Mr. Speaker: They’re taking 1.88% of that also.
Ms. Williams: Correct, because the 1.88, yeah ---
Mr. Speaker: So every employee if they work overtime deducted 1.88%?
Ms. Williams: Yes, sir, because your base pay has been reduced.
Mr. Russell: (inaudible) base pay and we reduce that by 1.88%.
Mr. Speaker: Base pay is not based on, how do you do that if you don’t know if we’re
going to work overtime?
48
Mr. Russell: Overtime’s not in your ---
Ms. Williams: Base pay.
Mr. Russell: --- base pay.
Mr. Speaker: Right. Correct, that’s what I’m saying. Our base pay is 108 hours. All
right?
Ms. Williams: Base pay is defined ---
Mr. Speaker: As?
Ms. Williams: --- in the system by dollar amount not an hour amount.
Mr. Speaker: So if I make $43,000.00 a year, if I make $50,000.00 this year one
deduction from the $7,000 also?
Ms. Williams: Yes, sir, your base pay ---
Mr. Speaker: Is how much he’s paid.
Ms. Williams: Overtime is calculated as one and a half times percent of your base pay.
So if your base pay has been reduced by 1.88% consequently any overtime which is a calculation
off of that reduced rate is effectively reduced as well.
th
Mr. Russell: This will effectively reduce your base pay by 2/5 of 1.88% which would
also be reflected in your overtime.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Ms. Donna, can we look into that before –
Ms. Williams: Yes, sir, we have had some correspondence ---
Mr. Guilfoyle: --- our next meeting?
Ms. Williams: --- with our Legal Department.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thanks for coming up.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioners will now
vote by the usual sign of voting.
Motion passes 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to our final agenda item.
49
The Clerk:
OTHER BUSINESS
38. Approve the reorganization of committee meetings in the following order Public Safety,
Public Services, Finance, Engineering Services, Administrative Services. (Requested by
Mayor Pro Tem Joe Bowles)
Mr. Jackson: Move to approve.
Mr. Bowles: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, you can finish reading it.
The Clerk: Public Safety, Public Services, Finance, Engineering Services and
Administrative Services.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, I’ll be brief. I don’t know if this was put on the agenda for
retaliation or what but I’m going to assume that it was not. I would like to make a substitute
motion if I could. I will support the agenda item provided all of the Commissioners are present
at the Committee meetings the same as we are at Commission meetings. Because if this is
approved and the Commissioners attendance, if they’re not here I know what’s going to happen
because I’ve seen it happen over the past few months. The meeting is all of a sudden adjourned
or somebody walks out. Okay? So I don’t want to see it happen. But I think if all of us were
here for all of the committee meetings we could participate in them however we can’t vote. And
this is a very good learning process. I always make all of them and I wish my colleagues would
do the same. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, Commissioner Lockett. If there’s no further discussion we
have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of
voting.
Mr. Mason votes No.
Motion carries 8-1.
Mr. Mayor: And, Mr. Mason, is the personnel issue a brief?
Mr. Mason: (inaudible)
Mr. Mayor: Um, actually apparently the issue that was to be discussed in Personnel and
Legal has been resolved. So if there is no need for a Legal and there’s, Mr. McKenzie?
Mr. McKenzie: We would need to just read 37 and have it approved. That’s the item.
50
The Clerk:
ATTORNEY
37. Motion to approve Consulting Services and Separation Agreement concerning Rod
Powell. (Requested by Commissioner Wayne Guilfoyle)
Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to that effect?
Mr. Jackson: So moved.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, has anyone seen this?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. McKenzie?
Mr. McKenzie: It’s actually, it’s in the agenda. It’s the same one in the agenda.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Is there a second?
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. If there’s no further
discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Bowles votes No.
Motion carries 8-1.
Mr. Mayor: And if there’s no further business to come before the body, gentlemen, thank
you for the meeting, thank you for your commitment to Augusta. We’re 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
September 6, 2011.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
51
52