Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting October 4, 2011 REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER OCTOBER 4, 2011 Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 5:00 p.m., October 4, 2011, the Hon. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Lockett, Guilfoyle, Mason, Smith, Hatney, Aitken, Johnson, Jackson, Bowles and Brigham, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. The invocation was given by the Reverend John Pinson, Pastor, Aldersgate United Methodist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited. Mr. Mayor: Reverend, thank you so much for that great invocation. Madam Clerk, on to the delegations, please. The Clerk: DELEGATIONS A. Mr. Daniel Walton/Terrence Cook, M.D. Re: Update of Project Access. Dr. Cook: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: And if y’all could keep it to five minutes, please, sir. Dr. Cook: Will do. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Dr. Cook: I’m Dr. Terry Cook and Dan Walton he’s our executive director. Just a brief overview of Project Access. As you probably already know we’re an outreach program with the Richmond County Medical Society and the Richmond County Board of Commissioners funded by an annual grant provide by the Commission which provides us with a grant of $344,250.00 a year, this past year. And our mission therefore is to provide comprehensive medical care for uninsured citizens of Richmond County who fall below 150% of the federal poverty index and who are between the ages of 18 and 64. Just a few figures from this past year. Total Richmond County patients served were 196,000 which is an increase of almost 50% over the previous year. We’ve seen over the past two or three years a considerable increase in the number of requests for care. Physician and hospital services in the hospitals we have participating across are University and Trinity and Doctors Hospitals and they participate in this program and provide hospital inpatient/outpatient services, free x-rays and lab work for patients in the program. So between physicians and hospital services there were donated $2,352,000.00 worth of care in the last fiscal year. We provide prescriptions totaling $136,000 and we prevailed upon pharmaceutical firms to donate and additional $127,000.00 in prescription medicines for patients in the program. So the total donated care and services rendered amounted to $2,615,912.00. This represents a $7.60 1 return on your investment for every dollar this Commission invested in the program. And for st that we are very grateful. We’ve in existence since July 1 of 2002 so were into our tenth year. We do have five feeder clinics that do most of the primary care, Harrisburg, Lamar, Druid Park, Bell Terrace and Christ Community. I thought you might be interested in just a little bit about who obtains these services, the type patients that we see. 70% of the recipients are women. The area zip code that is most represented would be 30906 with 30% of the patients. The age group is of interest. 65% of the patients fall between the ages of 40 and 59. 68% of the recipients are African-American, 28 Caucasian and 2% Hispanic. So we serve a broad and adverse group of people in this community who will find themselves at a time of great need. And many times it’s the service that we’re able to provide them through this program that restores their health, gets them back to work gets them a job where they hopefully can obtain health insurance through their employment. So it’s always a pleasure to appear before you once a year and thank you, thank you from my heart for all of the good services that you allowed us to render to citizens of this community who otherwise would not have access to care. I would hope that you continue to fund this program in the manner in which you have in the past. I realize that funds are difficult to obtain but your generosity for the program is so outstanding and we’re one of the few counties in the state that really step up to meet the needs of the people in this regard to the degree that you do. And I thank you for that and our patient’s thank you for that. I would be available for any questions if you have them. Fine. Mr. Mayor: Well, hearing none I just want to say thank you for the great job that you do in taking care of the people that need it the most in this community particularly during this economy. So thank y’all. Madam Clerk, on to the consent agenda. The Clerk: Our consent agenda consists of items 1-27, items 1-27. For the benefit of any objectors to our alcohol petitions would you please signify your objections by raising your hand once the petition is read. I call your attention to: Item 1: Is for an on premise consumption Liquor & Beer license to be used at a location 3008 Deans Bridge Rd. to 1719 Gordon Hwy. A transfer application. Item 2: Is for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with the location at 2110 Walton Way. Item 3: Is for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with the location at 930 Broad St, Suite 1002. 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 1-27 with no objectors to our alcohol petitions. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Gentlemen, do we have any additions to the consent agenda? Commissioner Brigham. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I think we could probably add items 31 and 32 to the consent. 2 Mr. Mayor: Do we have any further additions to the consent agenda? Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to add agenda item number 28 to the consent agenda. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Do we have any further items to be added to the consent agenda? Hearing none do we have any items to be pulled for discussion? Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don’t need to pull it but I do want to be recognized as voting no on items 14. Mr. Bowles: I’d like to have that one pulled. Mr. Mason: Oh, well, great. And items 31 and 32. Mr. Mayor: Okay, just voting no on those two items. Mr. Mason: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Okay. And Commissioner Bowles, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, you wanted 14 pulled? Mr. Bowles: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Johnson? Mr. Johnson: Item 6. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would also like to be recognized that I vote no on agenda items number 31 and 32. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Do we have any further items? Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, I think we need pull item --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham. Mr. Brigham: --- number 23 too. Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any further items to be pulled? Hearing none, can I get a motion to approve the consent agenda? 3 Mr. Bowles: So moved. Mr. Jackson: Second. CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC SERVICES 1. Motion to approve Transfer Application: A.T. 11-42: a request by Chong Hui Hutchinson to transfer the on premise consumption Liquor & Beer license to be used in connection with Arirang Korean Restaurant located at 3008 Deans Bridge Rd. to 1719 Gordon Hwy. There will be Sunday Sales. District 5. Super District 9. 2. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 11-43: request by Robert J. Cataldo for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Hostmark Hospitality Group, Inc. DBA Partridge Inn Located at 2110 Walton Way. There will be Dance. There will be Sunday Sales. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee September 26, 2011) 3. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 11-12: A request by Mike Raeisghasem for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Doris Building, LLC DBA Tantra Lounge located at 930 Broad St. Suite 1002. There will be Dance. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee September 26, 2011) 4. Motion to approve a request by Clarence e. Blanks Jr. for an extension of time to December 31, 2011 to purchase the Alcohol license to be used in connection with S4 Lounge located at 952 Broad St. There will be Dance. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee September 26, 2011) 5. Motion to approve amendments to Augusta-Richmond County Code Section 6-2, Alcoholic Beverages, so as to increase the application fee, Sunday Sales fee, alcohol catering fee, transfer fees, single-event alcohol fee, and to increase the alcohol license fees. (Approved by Public Services Committee September 26, 2011) 7. Motion to approve new permanent staff positions to operate the American Eagle Airline Station at Augusta Regional Airport. The Augusta Aviation Commission approved this item at their July 28, 2011 meeting. (Approved by Public Services committee September 20, 2011) ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 8. Motion to approve Year 2012 Action Plan for community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program, Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Program, Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Program. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee subject to the 30-day comment period August 29, 2011) PUBLIC SAFETY 9. Motion to approve an Application of Purchase of Services Grant for Juvenile Offenders (#JB-08ST-0002/CFDA# 16.523). (Approved by Public Safety Committee September 26, 2011) FINANCE 4 10. Motion to approve the replacement of one automobile for the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office – Civil/Fugitive Division using Sales Phase VI Sales Tax Funds. (Approved by Finance Committee September 26, 2011) 11. Motion to approve accepting the GDOT TE award of $200,000 for the Augusta Entryway Beautification Plan to be managed by the Augusta CVB and to provide the required 20% cash match, which (the $40K) need has been allotted for through SPLOST funding. (Approved by Finance Committee September 26, 2011) 12. Motion to approve accepting the pro-rated taxes for 2011 relative to a request from Gethsemane Baptist Church for an abatement of 2011 property taxes for a parking lot located near the church at 1479 Wrightsboro Road. (Approved by Finance Committee September 26, 2011) 13. Motion to approve accepting the pro-rated taxes only for the exempt property at 2952 Old Tobacco Road relative to a request from the House of Prayer Christian Church for an exemption from property taxes for the year 2010 on property located at 2938, 2942 and 2952 Old Tobacco Road. (Approved by Finance Committee September 26, 2011) 15. Motion to approve increasing the Urban Development Fund Budget by $40,000. (Approved by Finance Committee September 26, 2011) ENGINEERING SERVICES 16. Motion to approve resolution authorizing the condemnation of 1,970 square feet of right-of-way and 1,322 square feet of temporary construction easement to Richmond County, Georgia. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee September 26, 2011) 17. Motion to approve Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with ESG Operations, Inc. to establish the final budget amount for 2011 at $5,503,482.00 and authorize two special projects at a cost of $2,647,778.00. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee September 26, 2011) 18. Motion to approve design contract with S.L. King & Associates, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $100,000 for water line system upgrades to various areas of Augusta-Richmond County. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee September 26, 2011) 19. Motion to approve asking the Attorney to render an opinion at the next committee meeting regarding the attachment of the garbage fees to the property tax bills and to ask the Solid Waste Director to gather information concerning the number of customers who have full disability exemptions and pay only for garbage and street lights; and determine what can be done for those with that adjustment only in association with presentation by Ms. Georgia Johnson. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee September 26, 2011) 20. Motion to approve award of Construction Contract to mabus Brothers Construction, Inc., in the amount of $498,565.05 for the Paving Various Roads, Phase 9 – Contract 4 (Youngblood Dr. & Youngblood Land) Project CPB #324-04110-208824001, subject to receipt of signed contracts and proper bonds as requested by AED. Funding is available in the project account and Phase 4 Fund balance. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee September 26, 2011) 21. Motion to approve a resolution creating street lighting districts. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee September 26, 2011) 22. Motion to approve the deeds of dedication, maintenance agreements, and road resolutions submitted by the Engineering and Augusta Utilities Departments for Walton 5 Hills, Section 8, Phase 2. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee September 26, 2011) 24. Motion to approve the request from Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc. (JJG), Supplemental Agreement Request 10, on the Windsor Spring Road projects, 323-04- 299823766 and 323-04-2998786, for the novation of the contract to reflect the name change from Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc. to Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. in accordance with the merger that occurred on February 12, 2010 as requested by AED. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee September 26, 2011) PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 25. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held September 20, 2011 and Legal Meeting held September 26, 2011. SUBCOMMITTEE Pension and Audit Committee 26. Motion to approve 2011 audit schedule. (Approved by Pension and Audit Committee September 26, 2011) Pension and Audit Committee 27. Motion to approve adjusting the salaries of those people that were shorted by $12 a year to reflect the actual salary; and that the Commission approve the hourly rate for the part-time individual that increased their duties from cleaning a 3,000 foot building to a 10,000 foot building in the same amount of time to $10 per hour; and adjust down the salary of the employee who received 10% above the new pay grade, which was higher than 15% of the current salary. (Approved by the Pension and Audit Committee September 26, 2011) ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 28. Approve/discuss amending the 2009, 2010, 2011 Action Plans to re-program $377,250.21 and the revision to Scope of Work in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. (Received as information at the August 29, 2011 Administrative Services Committee) SUBCOMMITTEE Pension & Audit Committee 31. Motion to adopt GMEBS Defined Benefit Retirement Plan Adoption Agreement, General Addendum, and Service Credit Purchase Addendum for Augusta, Georgia (Augusta GMEBS Plan I)”. Pension and Audit Committee 32. Motion to approve the adoption of “GMEBS Defined Benefit Retirement Plan Adoption Agreement and General Addendum for Certain Former Employees of the Augusta- Richmond County planning Commission (Augusta GMEBS Plan II)”. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Mr. Hatney: Madam Clerk, I abstain on all alcohol. 6 Dr. Hatney abstains. Motion carries 9-0-1. [Items 1-3] Mr. Lockett and Mr. Mason vote No. Motion carries 8-2. [Items 31 and 32] Motion carries 10-0. [Items 4, 5, 7-13, 15-22, 24-27, 28] Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, and I do believe we have an addition to the agenda? The Clerk: Yes sir. Mr. Russell, do you want to take that one? Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, we’ve got a request to add from Utilities and approve a contract award to Mabus Brothers in the amount of $436,798. This is a contract we’ve been working on. The reason for the haste is we’ve got a development that’s currently being built in that area and we need to go ahead and get the water to that. And the timing is such that we need to get started fairly quickly. Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have unanimous consent to add this? Okay. Mr. Mason: Add and approve? Mr. Bowles: Motion to approve. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have unanimous consent to add and there’s been motion to approve. Mr. Jackson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, let’s go to the first pulled agenda item, please. The Clerk: PUBLIC SERVICES 6. Motion to approve a request by Patrick Walton for a Dance license to be used in connection with Magic City located at 3200 Mike Padgett Hwy. there will be Dance. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee September 26, 2011) Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. 7 Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Johnson. Mr. Johnson: Thank you. I understand we have a, someone who’s in opposition to this particular item and I want to give them an opportunity to express their concern. Yes, ma’am. Mr. Mayor: Okay, if you could first, okay. Please, ma’am and –-- Ms. Brown: Martha Brown. Mr. Mayor: --- keep it to five minutes, please. Ms. Brown: Yes, sir. My husband and I, Gerald owns the property at 3205 Mike Padgett Highway directly across the street from this proposed dance hall. We have some concerns and I’ll tell you about them in just a minute. But first of all our main concern we could not find we th couldn’t ascertain a time of the meeting on the 26. I have a picture here if anyone wants to see it I could pass it around. It clearly shows that the time of the meeting was not posted. We, if I had known that the agendas were on the website I would’ve just looked on there but I didn’t know that. Anyway we found out the meeting was already over about ten after one we met with Mr. Sherman that afternoon and he gave us some insight into you know how the Committee voted. I have some other pictures to show that the sign was very difficult to see. You can see here’s a picture from the south side of the property. Here’s another picture where it was partially obscured by shrubbery. Here’s another picture of it. Well you can see that it is just very difficult to see. The only reason why my husband saw it was because he just happened to be looking and he just happened to see it and he walked up there and tried to look at it. We were also told to leave that afternoon when I was up there trying to figure out what time the meeting was. There was two gentlemen there that told us to leave and we told them we were on business. We were trying to figure out what time the meeting was and of course I stayed there and took the pictures and then I left. We would like to see this item pulled and sent back to the committee since the sign was not properly posted by the applicant. And just a couple of notes. The main reason why we have concerns about this dance hall is for the safety of the residents that live in the Sherwood subdivision. I have an article here dated September 19, 2011 about the two teens who were shot at the National Guard Armory. One was shot in the head. Here’s an article from The Augusta Chronicle by Sylvia Cooper on October 26, 2010 about the shooting that happened Steadman Fryer on the dance hall that was operating on Tobacco Road. He was shot and murdered on the dance floor in 2007. 2010, October 4, 2010 the was a raid on there and they were operating as an illegal dance hall. Also Highway 56 is an extremely busy highway as I know because I was involved in an accident on that highway a few years ago. It is directly across the street from residential areas and there are presence of gangs in the Apple Valley subdivision and we are quite concerned about the effect this may have. We don’t see anything positive in our community business community there. I know this side, the east side of Mike Padgett is an industrial area but the west side of Mike Padgett is got a substantial size residential area. Thank you, gentlemen. Would anybody like to see this article? Anyone? Okay. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, ma’am. And, Rob, could we hear from you, please, sir? 8 Mr. Sherman: Yes, sir, at the Public Services Committee meeting we had, we as well as the Sheriff’s Department reviewed the application. The Sheriff’s Department did not have a recommendation. There were just neutral on their feelings on this. We felt that it met the requirements of the ordinance and we recommend that it be approved. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Gentlemen, do you? Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, I’m going to reach out to my colleagues about this one dance hall. The gentleman came to my house to speak with me as well as I had spoken to Mr. Gerald Brown about this issue the other day. There’s a lot of positive that’s he’s trying to do and there’s going to be no liquor involved in it. He’s going to have weddings and with Cross Creek High School Booster Club he’s actually going to have it for a Bingo where they can raise money for the high school. I spoke to Mr. Brown about it. If we have to put a six months’ probation I was willing to do that. I did reach out to the other people within your area where you work at. They were fine with it as far my reports came back from. I know that you worry about what goes on in the evening time but also on Highway 56 in the evening the traffic is not as bad as what it is. It’s actually heavier between Bobby Jones and Lumpkin Road. It’s not between Bobby Jones and Tobacco Road where the traffic is heavily. I’m not going to hold somebody back from starting a business. No different than somebody holding you back, Mr. Brown, from starting your business, sir. Mr. Mayor: Would you like to put that in the form of a motion? Mr. Guilfoyle: I’ll make a motion to approve. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Is there a second? Mr. Johnson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Sherman, do we have any clubs of this type that’s operating within the city county that’s still open? Mr. Sherman: We do. There’s one down on Ellis Street Sector 7-G. It’s been there for some time. They had a new owner come in probably within the past year or so and applied --- Mr. Lockett: And they have the same age limits as requested here? Mr. Sherman: It would be operated similarly to this. They didn’t mention Bingo, it’s more or a music hall but because they have music then we considered they probably will allow that. Mr. Lockett: Okay, and I’d like to ask you again. I know there’s been several times when the Sheriff did not make a recommendation. Why didn’t the Sheriff make a recommendation? 9 Mr. Sherman: I just can’t answer that because I don’t know. Mr. Sherman: You don’t go to him and say, “Look, Sheriff, I need to have an up and down on this.” Mr. Sherman: No, sir. Mr. Lockett: Thank you. Mr. Mason: Good answer. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Johnson. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This happens to be a part of my district and I will say I have spoken with Mr. Walton. I did get the message from y’all as well and that’s why I pulled it to give y’all an opportunity to speak. But I think what the gentlemen’s really trying to do is just really open a facility that will be able to a multiplex facility that they can do rentals and things of that magnitude. And I had a very in-depth conversation with them about it. I told them I do not support teen clubs only because you do have two or three percent of the people there that don’t have good intentions and they make it bad for the rest of them. So he understands my concerns but I did encourage him that if he was going to go in the route that it wouldn’t be a bad thing that not only that but to operate a facility like that you have to apply for a Dance Hall license and actually that’s something that we’ll even look towards moving across the board. So it just won’t be that particular entity but all of them are required to have Dance Hall licenses now. So I was willing to give them an opportunity. I think the Board is willing to give them an opportunity and we’ll see how things pan out. I promise you if we do have any issues we’ll address it we’ll deal with it and we’ll have it at that particular time. But hopefully we can expect positive things from him in this business and it can be an enhancement to that area as well. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith. Mr. Smith: It was said that there would be no alcohol. Is that correct, Mr. Walton? That’s what I understood, okay. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion and properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to the next pulled agenda item, please. The Clerk: FINANCE 10 14. Motion to approve the Reynolds Street Parking Deck Management Agreement and the Conference Center Parking Lease. (Approved by Finance Committee September 26, 2011) Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, I believe this was your pull? Mr. Bowles: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. Fred, I’ve got some, a lot of questions but one serious question off of that. I see here we’re going to enter into an agreement and apply for air rights on the land. Do we not own the land we built the parking deck on? Mr. Russell: No, sir, you own the air rights. Mr. Bowles: We did not enter into any previous engagement before this facility. We already have the air rights and we’re trying to get the air rights after we built the building. Mr. Russell: We already had the air rights. Mr. Bowles: Okay, if there any reason why we did not send this out for an RFP to proper management. Mr. Russell: We looked at that we sent it out a couple responses we got were not really reflective with what we were looking for as part of the initial negotiation. We were dealing with the current management firm and after looking at that determined that was the best route to go. As you well know some of the issues we’ve had in the past were the third party involvement of the private person dealing with that. It was our thought after looking at those opportunities at one central point to where there wasn’t a run around between the hotel getting complaints, calling us and us dealing with the other people. It has a common theme to move forward with that. At the service levels will be such that there’ll be one person responsible and one person along that can take care of problems that exist. And we hope to eliminate some of these problems that we’ve had in the past. Mr. Bowles: So we did go out for an official RFP for services and looked at the cost benefit for the taxpayers? Mr. Russell: We looked at that, yes, sir. Mr. Bowles: Is there any way we can get that information? Mr. Bowles: All right. I’d like to make a motion we forward this back to committee and postpone it so we can look at it that way. Mr. Guilfoyle: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Motion carries 10-0. 11 Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell. Mr. Russell: --- we are operating under a 30-day temporary agreement that puts us in that. I’d like to extend that if it would be appropriate it would be beneficial to have somebody make a motion to extend that agreement under the current levels of agreement until we review the parking and come back with a recommendation on that. Mr. Bowles: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Well, your motion’s already been disposed of. Okay, we have a motion from Commissioner Jackson. Mr. Hatney: I want to ask a question. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Hatney. Mr. Hatney: What are you asking again, Mr. Administrator, because --- Mr. Russell: Several weeks ago because we could open the parking lot early we entered into an agreement based on your approval on a 30-day agreement. This is going to take longer than those 30 days to get this rectified or get your consent on the operation that we’ve got. I’d like to continue that agreement as written until the final approval of the agenda item. So I don’t want to close the parking deck. I want to continue the operation as is. Mr. Hatney: The 30 days you’re talking about this body did approve already. Mr. Russell: You approved the 30 days already. What I’d like for you to do is continue that until the approval of the agenda item. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion to that effect and a second. Mr. Mason: I need a point of clarification, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Is this multiple motions here because we disposed of the other agenda item with a motion. So are we either going to relook this because it was already voted on and disposed by the time Mr. Russell came to speak. So we’ve got to do one of two things. I think you know what they are. Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. 12 Mr. MacKenzie: One way you can dispose of it you can go back and do a motion to reconsider Item 14 and vote on that. Reconsider the item or you can add and approve with unanimous consent the secondary motion which is the motion that was just made. The Clerk: If it wasn’t on the agenda you can add and approve it you’d like. Mr. Mason: Which is unanimous consent or what? The Clerk: It takes unanimous consent to add it on. Mr. Mayor: Okay. The Clerk: Or you can do the reconsideration. Mr. Hatney: You’re not going to get that. Mr. Mason: It doesn’t matter I just know we couldn’t do it the way we were doing it. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham. Mr. Brigham: Can I ask the Administrator a question --- Mr. Mayor: Please. Mr. Brigham: --- for some information? When does the 30-day extension run out? Mr. Russell: I do not know off the top of my head. That’s why I wanted it to be continued until we got the final approval done. Mr. Mayor: Two weeks? Mr. Brigham: If it’s two weeks we ought to have this back from Finance and back to y’all in fourteen days. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Russell: I was trying to count in my head and I was afraid --- Mr. Brigham: If you have a problem we can always add it on the agenda for Monday. Mr. Mayor: Yes, okay. We’re good. Mr. Russell: Thank you. 13 Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, on to the regular agenda I believe. Mr. Brigham: I think we’ve got twenty-three. Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Madam Clerk, would you show on Item #12 and #13 I vote no please. I don’t know if I could do that but I sure would love to have that done. Mr. MacKenzie: Those will require a motion for reconsideration as well since the vote has been published. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay, Madam Clerk, agenda item #23. The Clerk: ENGINEERING SERVICES 23. Motion to approve tasking the Attorney and Administrator to review for legal compliance and make any necessary changes for approval of the selection committee’s recommendation to select R.W. Allen, LLC as the Construction Manager at Risk for Webster Detention Center – Phase II. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee September 26, 2011) Mr. Mayor: Whose pull was this? Mr. Brigham: Mine. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Brigham. Mr. Brigham: Do we have a report from the Attorney and the Administrator on this? Mr. MacKenzie: Sure. Mr. Mayor: Gentlemen. Mr. MacKenzie: I have supplied to you two supplemental items that we drafted and requested the Committee to address the concerns that we discussed at the last Legal meeting. With those concerns we would think a substitute motion would be appropriate if it’s the will of the Commission to approve the item to include those items which have been provided to y’all as well as the Clerk. And that would be an addendum to the proposed contract and a verification form which you’ve all been provided. Mr. Mayor: Would we need a substitute motion or could we just have a motion to that effect for this agenda item? 14 Mr. MacKenzie: We could do that. Mr. Brigham: So moved. The motion to that affect. The motion is to approve the selection committee’s recommendation to select R.W. Allen, LLC as Construction manager at Risk for Webster Detention Phase II with the inclusion of contract addendum 1 and the verification form addressing the utilization of the sealed proposal procurement method for this project. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Is there a second? Mr. Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Mr. Bowles votes No. Mr. Hatney abstains. Motion carries 8-1-1. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Madam Clerk. Now let’s go on to the regular agenda. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 29. Update from the Administrator regarding the salary reduction of 1.88% taken February thru September 2011 pay periods. (No recommendation from Administrative Services Committee September 26, 2011) FINANCE 30. Motion to approve a temporary pay increase for employees of 6% for the final five pay periods of 2011. (No recommendation from Finance Committee September 26, 2011) Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell. Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, Item 29 and 30 can be taken as companion items. They’re the same item that we’re taking in different committees and were both referred without recommendations. If it would be possible I’d like to go ahead and do that together. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Russell: We were asked several weeks ago we came forth with our report on the last fiscal year and that last fiscal year had a surplus of approximately S1.6M. As you know we’ve got two outstanding furlough days at that particular point in time. It is the recommendation of staff to compensate those individuals for those two days and to allow them to have those as days off basically. That was passed by the Commission. During that period of time we were asked to put together a report on what it would take to allow us to take the balance of the furlough days 15 that were already taken and reimburse or pay people for that. It was the opinion of our Attorney that the Georgia Constitution would not allow us to do that due to the clause of due to the way the Constitution is written and the retroactive pay clause which would be a gratuity. But they did suggest and opportunity for us to be able to do that and that would be to increase those people who were impacted by the furlough, their last five pay periods a salary increase, a temporary salary increase of 6%. That would allow those people to basically come back whole at the end of the year and basically would be able to do that. There’s a dollar a two difference depending on your salary but I think the maximum of that is a couple dollars which would be inconsequential in the grand scheme of things based on the salary they actually receive. That would cost us approximately in the general fund approximately $600,000 which would have to be taken from the fund balance. That would be the mechanism to do that if it’s the will of the body. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Administrator, what’s the difference between you talked about a retroactive pay and a gratuity of giving these, this money back to make them whole and the retroactive pay that was given to the ones who received raises? Mr. Russell: I think what we’ve done is if you look at the retroactive pay and that’s probably the wrong term. What we did in the first benefit was to compensate those people for additional duties based on a start time. What we’re doing now is actually giving individuals an increase for the five periods a temporary increase to cover that. And the lawyer can probably explain that better than me but that’s what we’ve done. Mr. Mason: So you’re not using the term retroactive pay. Mr. Russell: That’s never a good term to use as I have learned over the years and it comes out occasionally, sir. Mr. Mason: I just need to know which way we’re going because I’m trying to figure out what’s the difference between the two. Ms. Smitherman: In the previous situation in which there was a back pay award to nd employees effective May 2 that was based on information that was provided that those employees took on additional responsibilities and there was an agreement at the time that they were going to get additional compensation for taking on those additional duties. Under the Georgia Constitution there has been some Attorney General opinions that say you look at what the agreement is at the time the duties were performed. In this case because for the first pay period of the year there was an agreement at that time that there was going to be a 1.88 salary decrease if you were to give, just give that money back. That would be considered a gratuity under the constitution because it would be paying them more for services already performed. Therefore we are suggesting you do a salary enhancement for the final five pay periods which has a similar affect but is not and it’s only for current employees who were affected by the previous salary decrease. Mr. Mason: So it’s a play on words basically. 16 Ms. Smitherman: No, we talked to the Attorney General’s matter office on this and there is a distinct difference between a retroactive salary increase and a back pay award. One is allowed by the constitution and one is not. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Lockett and then Commissioner Hatney. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A few months ago when we had a discussion about balancing the budget and a possible deficit I believe there was unanimous consent when this body do impose five furlough days to our employees that haven’t had a pay raise in so many years. This 6% that they Administrator has requested this is just their money that we’re trying to give back to them. They stepped up to the plate when we said we have a need, we thought there was a need but we realized later on that had a $1.6M dollars surplus. Let’s not rob Peter to pay Paul. Let’s not take the money from those people that’s not making much money and give three hundred and some thousand dollars pay increases to their directors. Don’t get me wrong I’m not saying the directors are not entitled to this but I think a leader, a good leader should set by example. I would not take a pay raise if my employees were not getting paid what they were and they haven’t had it even though I’m entitled to it. I feel the directors are entitled to it and I would hope that the Commissioners here would not vote no on this because Bill Lockett is the one that made the recommendation. I hope you will do a little soul searching and say I do believe with the economy the way it is and with the caliber of people that we have in that the least we can do is give them the money back and go and approve what the Administrator has recommended. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: So does that come with a motion to approve the two agenda item? Mr. Lockett: Yes, it does. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second? Mr. Johnson: I’ll second it. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Hatney, you had your --- Mr. Hatney: Yes, sir. Madam Attorney, where is she? You did mention I believe that these folks who got these increases in pay had increases in duties, all of them? Ms. Smitherman: The documentation that was provided with the RPA’s and in the Administrator’s Reorganization Plan. Mr. Hatney: Answer my question, please. Ms. Smitherman: That’s the documentation that was provided was the RPA’s and the Administrators Reorganization Plan. Mr. Hatney: So that’s a yes. Everybody got increased duties who got raises. 17 Ms. Smitherman: The Legal Department has not done an independent investigation and as to what exact duties each person took on or did not take on. Mr. Hatney: Don’t you think that’d be a good idea? Ms. Smitherman: If we’re tasked to do so, yes, sir. Mr. Hatney: My concern is that we we’re only instructed about four folks and then it ended up being 44 folks. Now you’re going to tell me all 44 of them folks took on exceptional duties. That means 44 folks went home then. If you take only, you understand what I’m asking. I know you do because you’re an attorney. Ms. Smitherman: Absolutely. Mr. Hatney: What I’m saying don’t you think that would warrant that the mess we’re in here? Please. Ms. Smitherman: If it would be the will of the Commission to task the Law Department into looking into and doing desk audits to see what the additional duties the individuals took on and whether or not they took those on we would be more than happy to do that. Mr. Hatney: I was under the impression that was already asked of somebody. I thought that was already asked for so I guess I’m wrong. I’m always a dollar short and a day late. The other thing I’m concerned about and I mean I could propose this question to the Administrator if I may, thank you so much. Mr. Administrator, I remember when the current pays last we was supposed to be I believe it was $9 million dollars in the red. And my concern is that you know like I said I’m a day late and a dollar short all the time. But where in the world did we come up with a million and something in the green or black when we collected $11 million dollars somewhere. Mr. Mayor: Okay Mr. Russell. Mr. Russell: It’s fairly simple. Mr. Hatney: No, it ain’t. Mr. Russell: Yeah, it is. Mr. Bowles: Yeah, it is. Mr. Hatney: No, it ain’t. Mr. Russell: What we’re talking about for the surplus was the last fiscal year. At the end of the last fiscal year we’ve asked our people to tighten the belt and they did so. We did not spend as much money as we anticipated spending. We saved some dollars and that dollar total 18 was approximately $1.6 million dollars. So at the end of the last fiscal year we were $1.6 million dollars ahead of where we thought we were going to be. Mr. Hatney: Okay. Mr. Russell: We suggest --- Mr. Hatney: What’s the difference then between the fiscal year and the operating year? What’s the difference in the two? Mr. Russell: None whatsoever. Mr. Hatney: Okay, so what are those dates, what date to what date, please? st Mr. Russell: January 1 to December 31. Mr. Hatney: Okay, now we got a, I thought it was an audit report at the beginning of the year saying you’re $9 million dollars in the red. Mr. Russell: No. Mr. Hatney: Nine million dollars in the hole. That’s what somebody said. It kept changing it but a bunch of million dollars. Then all of a sudden --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Russell: Let me --- Mr. Hatney: --- in the same fiscal year now you’re saying there’s no difference in it. I’m just asking a question sir. Mr. Mayor: I know but your two minutes are up. I’ll give you another two minutes. Mr. Hatney: Well, I appreciate that. Thank you because I don’t ask questions that regular, dollar short and a day late. I just need some clarity. How do we come from $9 million dollars and it’s the same towards my theory here --- Mr. Russell: No, sir, it’s not. Mr. Hatney: But it’s not even --- Mr. Russell: It’s not the same, sir. Mr. Hatney: What are you talking about if we go into the year $9 million dollars short? 19 Mr. Russell: We’re talking about 2010. We ended up doing better in 2010 than what we anticipated doing. Mr. Hatney: So you really weren’t $9 million dollars in the hole. Mr. Russell: No, that’s a different year altogether. This is 2011 that we had a problem that we have corrected with one time fixes for 2011. Mr. Hatney: Oh, Lord. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Bowles. Mr. Bowles: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And for the record the record reflected there was one Commissioner was not unanimous consent to furlough the employees and that was myself. And, Mr. Russell, how much is this going to cost the employees? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell? Mr. Hatney: Check the record there was two, brother. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell. Mr. Mason: There had to be three because one --- Mr. Russell: I don’t understand what do you mean how much is it going to cost? Mr. Bowles: What’s this going to cost the taxpayers? Mr. Russell: About 1.65 across the entire, 1.165 across all the funds. And there are some funds that did not benefit from the surplus of the general fund so that you had to take it out of the fund balance. Some of the smaller funds there. Mr. Bowles: And considering we projected basically a $2 million dollars shortfall last year we wound up with one million. So there’s a $3 million dollar difference there. We’re projecting $9 million dollar shortfall this year. At best you may have a $3 million dollar shortfall. This is going to add to that shortfall for this year correct? Mr. Russell: It will reduce the amount of money that we add to the general fund, fund balance for next year, the last year that we came up with. Mr. Bowles: I’ll make a substitute motion to deny. Mr. Brigham: Second. Mr. Mason: Mr. Mayor? 20 Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Thank you. Just so that we’re clear on this whole thing here. We’re not giving them anything. This was theirs to begin with from the jump street. Let’s understand that. They’re not getting any raises, they’re not getting any enhancements or any other terms you want to use. This is their money to begin with. The fact of the matter is we asked folks to bite the bullet and then we turned around and sporadically gave raises. And so now you want to continue to punish the ones who didn’t have a choice in the matter in the first place then talking about taking, putting the deficit to this government. It’s their money to begin with. If we had not have gone the way of doing raises to begin with everybody would have been okay for doing their part. But that did not happen and this commission has avoided any action on that. But we want to take more action and punish those who have already given. You’ve got to be kidding me. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Hatney. Mr. Hatney: Also in this 6% were the folks, the 44 folks also participating in that got those big raises. Mr. Russell: Yes. Mr. Hatney: Ah. Why? That’s my problem right there. The rest of it I can live with. Mr. Russell: Because --- Mr. Hatney: They shouldn’t. Mr. Russell: --- you’re talking two totally different things. Mr. Hatney: No, we’re not. Mr. Russell: Yes, we are. Mr. Hatney: No, we’re not we’re talking about the same dollars you took from those folks and these folks got great big old raises. And you said they got extra duties, that’s fine but that 44 with that extra duty thing they’re going to get more of an increase than these other folks. You add 6% to everybody they get a lot more money that the other folks. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Administrator, the last two days we are going to pay the employees for the furlough. Is that correct basically? Mr. Russell: We’ve already, you’ve already approved giving them the last two days, yes. Mr. Guilfoyle: As far as the employees that’s working 7 ½ hour days is that the majority excluding the police and fire department. 21 Mr. Russell: Basically yes. Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. So that’s actually a 7 ½ rate. The employees actually received a 6% raise because they’re getting paid, their salary wasn’t adjusted. They’re getting paid 2 ½ hours a week to go home. The only people that’s really suffering is the police and the fire department. Would that be correct because they was not --- Mr. Russell: No, that’s not --- Mr. Guilfoyle: No? They’re not set up on a 7 ½ hour day. Mr. Russell: No, but they’re set on a 28-day cycle so you’re talking apples and oranges again. Mr. Guilfoyle: But there is the last two furlough days and yes the employees did get a 6% kick when we dropped down to a 7 1/2 hour day. Is that correct? No? Mr. Russell: I don’t think so, I’m --- Mr. Guilfoyle: Then I was misled on that one. Mr. Russell: You’re talking about three or four different things at once all of which don’t really relate in the way that we’re trying to make them relate here basically. So that’s, that becomes the issue. What’s on the table today I think is whether or not it’s the will of this body to allow the individuals to basically do away with the furlough days that we’ve done based on how well we performed last year. And there are some funds that did not perform as well as the general funds so they’ll be some impact there. But the majority of what you’ve got is in the general fund. So what you’d end up doing if it’s the will of the body is to take the savings from last year, the last fiscal year which we would normally put into the fund balance and apply that to the furlough days so that basically our people are compensated for those furlough days. And that’s about as clear as I can get it I think. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Brigham. Mr. Brigham: Mr. Mayor, are we not, if we vote to do this are we not increasing our deficit? Mr. Russell: Yes, you are increasing your deficit. Mr. Brigham: We are increasing our deficit if we do this, approximately a million dollars. Mr. Russell: What we did last year was to add $1.6 million dollars to the fund balance. So technically by doing this you’re taking the money out of the fund balance so you’re increasing, you’re decreasing your fund balance. 22 Mr. Brigham: And technically what we’re doing if we do this we are increasing our deficit by approximately a million dollars which we’re going to take out of the fund balance, which means the taxpayers are going to be asked to pay another million dollars for our inability to balance our budget. Mr. Mason: I wish you had felt that way when you did those forty-four raises. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Brigham: I didn’t give forty-four raises. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles. Mr. Mason: You sure agreed to it. Mr. Bowles: I want the record to reflect that this is not the employee’s money. We are up here dealing with taxpayer’s money. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a, Commissioner Lockett. nd Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know I think I’m in my 22 month up here and I believe I’ve pretty much seen it all. I cannot understand how anyone can be so inconsiderate. I cannot see how you would vote three hundred fifty some thousand dollars for pay increases, no qualms little discussion after the fact but then everything was alright. But when we’ve got people that’s making less than $20,000 a year the cost of living has gone up, health care has gone up everything has gone up except their pay. I mean, folks, that’s just not fair. And I bet you we could have a poll of all the department directors and they would agree with me wholeheartedly. Let’s go on and give the people the money that, their money, give it back to them and let’s move on. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Hatney: Mr. Mayor, I have a question. Mr. Mayor: I’ve recognized you three times. I’ve recognized you three. Mr. Hatney: Last time of day. Mr. Jackson: I call for the question. Mr. Hatney: Last time of day. Mr. Mayor: The question’s been called for. Point of personal privilege? 23 Mr. Hatney: Point of personal privilege, yes, sir. Thank you. Help me out a dollar short and a day late. Mr. Mayor: And you’ll be, if you’ll be polite on this one. Mr. Hatney: I’m going to be real polite, real polite, sir. Look here, my concern is not whether or not we give the 6% to the employees back. That’s not what it is. I really believe it’s a disservice to these folks to give these folks who got these pay raises this 6%. That’s my problem. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Hatney: Because they’re going to be getting a lot more bang than these other folks are that got the big raise. They (inaudible) 6% work with me here. That’s my concern. Mr. Mayor: Okay the question’s been called for. We have a substitute motion that’s been property seconded. Madam Clerk, if you could read that back for clarity after that sometimes unclear discussion we just had. The Clerk: The substitute motion is to deny a temporary pay increase for employees of 6% for the final five pay periods of 2011. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign of voting. Mr. Johnson, Mr. Mason, Mr. Lockett, Mr. Hatney and Mr. Smith vote No. Motion ties 5-5. Mr. Mayor: Okay, I vote No. Wait a minute, I get to use this. You know I mean I just get to register it with this. I don’t get to use my remote control I’m like a --- The Clerk: The Mayor votes No. Mr. Mayor: If you were a kid and your parents never let you use the remote control you’d get excited too. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, we have a primary motion. You can read back the --- The Clerk: The primary motion is to approve a temporary pay increase for employees of 6% for the final five pay periods of 2011. Mr. Russell: Funding coming from fund balance. The Clerk: From fund balance. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. 24 Mr. Aitken, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Jackson and Mr. Guilfoyle vote No. Mr. Brigham abstains. Motion fails 5-4-1. Mr. Mayor: No action taken. Mr. Johnson: Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Johnson. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Let me get some clarity. Item #29, I understand that was regarding the, Fred, is this actually, this is not the furlough days, the last two furlough days correct? Mr. Russell: No, the last two furlough days have been approved by this body. This was two different expressions on how to look at the balance of the furlough days. Mr. Johnson: Okay, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item. The Clerk: SUBCOMMITTEE Pension and Audit Committee 33. Discuss recent audit report from Baird & Company regarding the audit of salary adjustments. (Requested by Commissioner Alvin Mason) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason and I’m going to make a request. You don’t have to honor the request but just in order so there can be a more lengthy and in depth discussion and we aren’t limited by the number of times to address this issue I just ask that you potentially consider running it back through committee. Mr. Mason: I don’t think it’s necessary, Mr. Mayor, I’m just going to make a statement. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Mason: It is what it is and we’ve done what we’ve done. At the end of the day, Mr. Mayor, obviously as this body avoids, tends to avoid taking appropriate actions for our citizens I just want to say that there’s been some folks in this body that have trivialized this report as if it was just a few dollars short here and there. But the fact of the matter is it contributed to a whirlwind of mess and low morale in this particular government. And in fact it mentioned several things that we had already brought out a couple of weeks ago. So we probably could’ve saved some money. But the fact of the matter is that I’m very, very concerned about some of them in reference to the paperwork that was done very excitedly, forms that had bad effective dates, requests that had changes, signatures of the Administrator missing, signatures and initials 25 of individuals missing. There’s just any number of things. And then when we went to the PDQ in 2009 there was a HR bulletin that went out and said the PDQ is to be used to record the duties, responsibilities, qualifications saw fiscal impact of classified and non-classified staff positions. This information is the basis for determining the title, salary rate and federal fair labor standards act exemption status for staff positions. It is essential that detailed and exact information pertaining to current duties, responsibilities, qualifications be accurately recorded on the PDQ. This new PDQ will add to our job analysis capability by providing a well-defined process that recognizes relevant skills and education in the way that helps HR compensate folks. In the manual it uses the word ‘when appropriate’ which is was a slippery slope there as well. The question’s never been answered when would it be more appropriate to use a PDQ then when we would go through that process. In fact --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Mason: --- that was, I’ll be recognized a second time if I could, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: I’ll recognize you a second time. Mr. Mason: In fact I think that was one of your recommendations as well that PDQ’s be used utilized in all jobs or remove the word appropriate. Is that not correct? Okay so I really don’t have any questions for you. The results are what they are. This is an internal audit. I think you’ve been with us what about thirteen years? Okay, GMA I think most people recognize GMA’s recommendation that you have an auditor for anywhere between three and five and we’ve exceeded that by three times that amount. So my point is if it’s an internal auditor would find these and they’re not small potatoes, if an internal auditor can find this what would an external auditor find, independent external auditor. So that was just my point, Mr. Mayor. It is what it is we’re here where we are and we can just move on. But the fact of the matter is, is that I am concerned about a lot of the things that did go wrong with the paperwork and everything. And we do need to hold people accountable. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Bowles. Mr. Bowles: Mr. Mayor, to clarify what GMA stands for when it comes to audits. External audits are to be bid out and changed every three to five years. Internal audits stay with you consistently and most governments have internal auditors on staff. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to receive this as information? Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor. Mr. Johnson: So moved. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion. Is there a second? Mr. Aitken: Second. 26 Mr. Mayor: I was waiting to see if we got a second. Commissioner Lockett? Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’d just like to ask the auditor a question. Y’all thst came out with a report on September the 6 about the audit. Then on September 21 you came out with almost an identical report. But this report contains the recommendation and it seems like the recommendation that’s on the last report is designed to minimize the discrepancies that you all picked up during the course of your audit. So my question to you is why did the th September 6 report that you all prepared not contain a recommendation but some fifteen days st later the September 21 does contain a recommendation? th Ms. Brenda Carroll: The September 6 report you’re referring to is a graphic report that was not given out by our office. That was not a completed report. It did not contain a recommendation. The final report was the one that was delivered at the Pension and Audit Committee meeting. Mr. Lockett: Well, how would one identify a report that’s been distributed that’s not complete as opposed to one that has been distributed that is complete? Ms. Carroll: It should not have been distributed. It wasn’t for public disposal. When we do our reports they have recommendations in them. Mr. Lockett: Okay, my last question is this. Why would you submit a report of any form if it’s not complete? Ms. Carroll: I would ask to do this by another (inaudible) and I would ask if that met the guidelines of what he asked for at that point in time or if he wanted any further details in it. At that point in time it did not contain a recommendation. It was not for public dissemination. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chair, if I may, one last thing. One of my colleagues requested that you all take this audit to another level. And that wasn’t done. Ms. Carroll: No, sir, it was not yet approved by the Pension and Audit Committee and if it’s approved for us to go further then we’ll be happy to take it further. Mr. Lockett: Thank you. 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 to receive it as information. Mr. Lockett votes No. Motion carries 9-1. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please. The Clerk: 27 APPOINTMENT(S) 34. Approve a request from the Richmond County Department of Family and Children Services to increase its size from 5-7 members and appoint Joanne Cooke and Dorothy Moore as authorized by O.C.G.A. 49-3-2 (a) to assist with the agency’s representation in the community. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hatney. Mr. Hatney: The Richmond County Department of Family and Children Services. Is that state funded? The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Hatney: And it’s state funded. If it’s state funded then the state or it’s under state oversight, right? The Clerk: Well, they have a local board that has oversight responsibility from Richmond County. The legislation is in your --- Mr. Hatney: The Legislators are doing this? The Clerk: No, sir, the legislation allow for local governing authorities to appoint a board to assist the DFAC’s in their counties to assist with their community representation. Mr. Hatney: Then they need to go from five to seven folk. The Clerk: Yes, sir, the director is requesting that two additional members which is allowed through the legislation to increase their board from five to a seven member board. Mr. Johnson: Move to improve. Mr. Hatney: That’s the ability of the person to make this recommendation to select the folks also? The Clerk: No, sir, they’re just making a recommendation. Mr. Hatney: Oh, okay. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? Mr. Guilfoyle: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Mr. Aitken and Mr. Jackson vote No. 28 Mr. Hatney abstains. Motion carries 7-2-1. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to the next agenda item. The Clerk: ATTORNEY 35. Motion to approve a resolution authorizing the settlement of all claims by Janet Delores Palmer and Keith I. Palmer in the aggregate amount of $16,000.00. Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, this was an item that was previously discussed in a Legal meeting that’s consistent with the authority provided by the Commission which is put on final approval. Mr. Lockett: Move to approve. Mr. Guilfoyle: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and second. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Motion carries 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, let’s move on to that final agenda item of the evening, shall we? The Clerk: OTHER BUSINESS 36. Receive a report on the project costs of delaying renovations on the Municipal Building. (Requested by Commissioner Matt Aitken) Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell, do you or Mr. MacKenzie? Mr. Russell: Mr. MacKenzie provided the report, sir. Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, what you have before you in the attachment of the item was actually information that was presented in a public hearing before the courts relating to projected costs associated with delaying renovations to the Municipal Building. Mr. Mayor: And that total would be? Mr. MacKenzie: $1,681,825.00. 29 Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, sir. Commissioner Aitken, did you want to? Mr. Aitken: Yes, sir. Without jeopardizing our law suit here I just think that for public record that as these law suits and I’ve been amazed by these law suits since I’ve been a Commissioner. And many have no merit but cost the taxpayers of this city a lot of money. And this is evident of what we see that goes on finagling the business in our community. And I hope that at these businesses do these things and look at how much it impacts the citizens of this city and this government from moving forward. So I thank you for these few comments, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, can I get? Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. MacKenzie, you gave the amount but you didn’t give the timeframe that is if this construction is delayed for one year. Is that correct? Mr. MacKenzie: That’s correct? Mr. Lockett: Okay. Mr. Russell, what’s the likelihood of this project being delayed for one year? I’m not asking you to read the tea leaves. What do you think? Mr. Mayor: That’s a loaded question. I’m not asking you to read the tea leaves. What do you think? Mr. Russell: Let me suggest that might be an answer best provided by the Attorney since he’s representing us in the case, sir. Mr. Hatney: Since he can read tea leaves then. Mr. Mayor: I’m not asking you to make a projection but what do you think about the Dogs vs. the balls this weekend, Mr. Russell. Mr. Hatney: Move to receive as information, please. Mr. Mason: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Mr. Bowles votes No. Motion carries 9-1. Mr. Mayor: And, Mr. MacKenzie, if there’s no need for a Legal meeting? Mr. MacKenzie: No need for a Legal meeting today. Mr. Mayor: If there is no further business to come before the body we stand adjourned. Thank you, gentlemen. 30 [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 October 4, 2011. ______________________________ Clerk of Commission 31