HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting April 2, 2013
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
APRIL 2, 2013
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 5:00 p.m., April 2, 2013, the Hon.
Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Guilfoyle, Mason, D. Smith, Williams, Fennoy, Johnson, Jackson,
Davis, G. Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
ABSENT: Hon. Lockett, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
Mr. Mayor: I’ll go ahead and in the interest of time call the meeting to order. And I’d
like to call on Reverend Andrew Rees, Pastor, St. Andrew Presbyterian Church for our
invocation. Please stand.
The invocation was given by Reverend Andrew Rees, Pastor, St. Andrew Presbyterian
Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited.
Mr. Mayor: And, Reverend, if you could please come forward. I’ve something for you
and thank you for that wonderful and heartfelt invocation. Office of the Mayor. By these
present be it known that Reverend Rees, Pastor, St. Andrew Presbyterian Church is Chaplain of
the Day. For his civic and spiritual guidance demonstrated throughout the community. Serves
nd
as an example for all of the faith community. Given under my hand this 2 Day of April 2013.
Deke Copenhaver, Mayor. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, I believe we’ve got some additions to the agenda.
PUBLIC SERVICES
35. Discussion: A request by Thomas Jastrom for a Special Event License Liquor, Beer &
Wine to be used in connection with T Bonz Banquet Hall located at 2860 Washington Rd.
Masters Week 4/11/13 There will be Sunday Sales. District 7. Super District 10. (No
recommendation from Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
The Clerk: Yes, sir. On our addendum agenda it is not only an addendum agenda but we
have had a request from License and Inspections to delete item number 35 due to the fact that the
petitioner has decided to cancel the event.
ADDENDUM
39. Presentation by Raymond Lee Mann, III, Deer Chase Elementary, of “I have a dream”.
(Requested by Commissioner Mason)
And under the additions to the agenda our first item is a presentation by Raymond Lee Mann III
from Deer Chase Elementary of the “I have a dream”. And this was requested by Commissioner
Mason.
1
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have unanimous consent to add this presentation? Okay, all
righty, let’s go with that one.
Mr. Mason: Let me have a few words before you come up. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I
had the privilege of attending an event a couple of weeks ago. I believe it was Commissioner
Lockett and myself, Commissioner Johnson and Commissioner Fennoy and it was Andrena,
want to raise your hand back there? She’s a part of Fresh Start Best Start. And for those that are
here from Fresh Start Best Start could you stand please? They did a salute to the heroes and we
were some of the heroes that they saluted and they did a fantastic job in what they did. So I
applaud you for inviting us out and saluting us as your heroes here in Augusta Richmond
County. You guys did a fantastic job and I just wanted to tell you that in front of God and
country. So let’s give them a round of applause if you would. (APPLAUSE). Now our main
feature speaker, Mr. Mayor, I want everybody to listen to this young man. His name is Raymond
Lee Mann III. He’s from Deer Chase Elementary. He’s in the second grade I believe it is?
First? He’s in first grade and he’s going to give you a speech, I Have a Dream. And if you listen
very, very closely especially as far as the Commission is concerned I think we can learn a lot
from this young man. He was also a part of what went on in that program that night. And the
reason why I brought him here because I want people to see what happens in these programs that
we have out in our community. Very rarely do you see this on the news or TV, the positive
things that our young people are doing. And so I thought, Mr. Mayor, that this would be an
opportune time and Commissioners to see what our young folks are doing in these programs. No
he’s going to be right there. So at this point the mic is yours.
Master Mann: Hello. My name is Raymond Mann III.
(Speech given by Master Mann)
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mason: That was truly, truly awesome. Let’s give him another round of applause.
You deserve it. Not a single note, all by heart, all by memory. This is what goes on in the
community that many times we don’t get a chance to see. So I’m hoping the news media, the
press media, TV media I’m hoping that you’ve got an opportunity to really see the jewels that we
have out in our community. And I just want to offer him a little token. There’s several coupons
here, some gift certificates from Applebee’s. I also have a Regal Cinema gift certificate, Subway
and Wendy’s and several other coupons for you to have and for you to enjoy. Because that took
a great amount of courage to stand in front of this group. So my whole purpose for bringing him
here if he can get at 7-years old we need to be able to get it up here as well. Thank you so much,
Raymond. Raymond Lee III, Raymond Lee Mann III. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy and before I Commissioner Fennoy, Raymond’s got
his Mayor’s pin that he told me that I gave him when he was 4-years old at a dinner party. So
thank you for wearing that. I was going to say it’s a future Mayor but I think he’s a future
President. Commissioner Fennoy.
2
Mr. Fennoy: At this time I would like for the members of the A, B Honor Roll to stand
and the ones that almost made it. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Thank ya’ll so much for being here. Madam Clerk, on to the next addition
to the agenda.
ADDENDUM
40. Mr. Walter Sprouse, Executive Director, Augusta Economic Development Authority of
Richmond County RE: Item #26 (Requested by Commissioner Fennoy.
The Clerk: Yes, sir. The next addition is a delegation, Mr. Walter Sprouse, Executive
Director of the Augusta Economic Development Authority of Richmond County regarding item
26 on the agenda. And this was requested by Commissioner Fennoy.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have unanimous consent to add this delegation. Okay. Okay
Mr. Sprouse, please, sir.
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, Walter said he didn’t want follow ---
Mr. Mayor: Yeah, I sure wouldn’t either. Walter, if you could keep it to five minutes,
please, sir.
Mr. Sprouse: I’ll probably keep it to about three minutes. I would imagine because
that’s, that was impressive. That was extremely impressive. Commissioner Fennoy, thank you
so much for allowing me to be here. I know that at some point you will be discussing what
needs to be done about retail here and I wanted to give you a report from the Development
Authority that we too have also been doing some investigation on this. At our last board meeting
we had someone to bring us some information not only about community development entities
but also the new market tax credits and how that affects retail. What the Development Authority
may or may not be able to do with that we felt that our obligation to make sure that we do the
investigation on some of this so that we are ready to either help the Commission here with
whatever you are discussing with retail or anything that we can do to be of assistance to work in
that area. As you know there’s with the Development Authority law there is a great deal of
flexibility. Sometimes the Development Authority maybe will have say over the county as far as
leases and financing and things such as that and also especially recruitment. We are set up
primarily as you know for the recruitment of industry and that’s what we have done in the past.
But since there has been some changes in the Development Authority Law in the past few years
we believe that there may be some other doors may be opened there. So basically what I wanted
to mention to you is the fact that the Augusta Economic Authority has been investigating some
of the information here. We’re still gathering some information. If there’s anything we can do
to be of any kind of assistance as you make any deliberations concerning any kind of retail
recruitment in the future we’ll be more than happy to do our part and do whatever we are
requested to do by this body.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Walter.
3
Mr. Sprouse: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you. And that was a minute fifty-five. Madam Clerk, addition,
next item?
The Clerk:
ADDENDUM
42. Discussion on “Destination Projects” for Augusta Richmond County. (Requested by
Commissioner Mason)
Mr. Mayor: Do we have unanimous, this is your item, Commissioner Mason. Do we
have unanimous consent to add? Okay. Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Yes, Mr. Mayor, this is just a simple item. I just want to bring forward at
this point many of us up on the Commission have been talking about Augusta being a destination
place and trying to do all that we can to bring more revenue to the city and more excitement to
the city. I had proposed an item myself which was a multi-facility racetrack but I think it’s
probably in the best interest if we somehow got together perhaps put a subcommittee together to
bring up some ideas of destination places. I’ve heard people talk about water parks. I’ve heard
people talk about different things zoo, and aquarium and so forth. I think they’re all great ideas
and we should not necessarily be confined to one or another. But perhaps if we could get some
consensus on the commission to come together and develop some sort of subcommittee to talk
about these various things so that we can bring a destination attraction to Augusta other than the
one time a year, The Masters. So my whole focus for this was for us to start getting into the
thought process and the mind set of really instead of continually talking about it and
piecemealing it let’s get together and really bring some ideas to the table that we may be able to
have some discussion and dialogue upon and maybe agree upon because I brought up the multi-
race facility I think it’s a great thing to do. It may not be the only thing to do or may not be the
thing to do but we don’t know if we don’t have the discussion about it. So I would hope that you
know my commission colleagues would look favorable upon perhaps setting up some sort of
type of subcommittee to bring together events that could be considered destination places for
Augusta Richmond County.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Mr. Russell.
th
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, as you know on the 25 of April we have a retreat scheduled
from one to five. If you like we’re in the process of putting together the agenda for that. And if
it’s the will of the body what I’d like to do is maybe carve out 25/30 minutes to begin that
conversation there and talk about putting together the necessary subcommittee or whatever to
look at these ideas and move forward. If that would be appropriate.
Mr. Mayor: I think we’ve got unanimous support for that. Commissioner Smith.
Mr. D. Smith: Mr. Russell, can you see if we can have our new recreation director either
involved in that be it a conference call or maybe he can make a trip to come down here because I
4
think that whatever we go in this direction he should be involved as our recreation department
will be involved some way shape or fashion in operating something.
Mr. Russell: I’m not too sure about his schedule as far as being able to come down but if
we can’t get him here we’ll conference him in.
Mr. Smith: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m in support as well. My question though, Mr.
Russell, will we not be in Savannah for ACCG on the twenty something? I’m trying to make
sure that that’s not going to be a time when we ---
th
Mr. Russell: That’s the Thursday before we leave on the 26 if I remember correctly.
Mr. Williams: I hope we can move it a little bit earlier then. I would hate to be at a
meeting and then try and get back to get ready to leave. I don’t know what everybody’s schedule
th
is. I just thought it was mighty close when I heard the 26. And I understand we’ve got a work
session set up but maybe we can tweak that and get it to a time where we can all participate.
Mr. Russell: If it’s the will of the body would it be appropriate to move that earlier in the
day then?
Mr. Johnson: Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you. Well, I think what Commissioner Williams’ is saying
probably you’re talking about an earlier date right, Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: I was thinking maybe a day or so earlier than that because we were going
out of town I think either ---
Mr. Johnson: That Friday.
Mr. Williams: --- be out of town or going out of town those who are going. I mean if it’s
going to be an all inclusive thing maybe everybody won’t have a chance to be there.
th
Mr. Johnson: And actually just for the record I won’t be here on the 25. My son is
th
graduating so I’ll be there then so I won’t be here on the 25. So I mean, I don’t know, I’m not
saying everybody has to adjust their schedule around me but if you decide to do that I just want
to let ---
Mr. Russell: Let me work with the Clerk and see if I can find an earlier day. I’d rather
do earlier than later if at all possible. We’ll get back to you on that if that’s ---
5
Mr. Johnson: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Russell: Thank you, Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Mason: Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Mayor: Okay item, the next addition Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: Yes, sir. Item number two is an item that we inadvertently omitted from the
agenda when we were preparing it. It was on the Engineering Services Committee. It should
have been included on the regular portion of the agenda.
ADDENDUM
43. Request to hear from prime contractors for Solid Waste collection services regarding
their plans to meet their Local Small Business utilization goals. (Requested by
Commissioner Johnson)(Inadvertently omitted by Clerk’s Office)
Mr. Mayor: Do we have unanimous consent on that? Commissioner Jackson.
Mr. Jackson: No --- (inaudible).
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I don’t think we need unanimous consent. The Clerk said
they inadvertently left that off. It wasn’t something being added on. It should’ve been on the
agenda and I think that she explained that. I thought that we would just move it to the regular
agenda to when we get to it. But it wasn’t an addition, I don’t believe. Ya’ll can, the Attorney
can jump in and give me his legal opinion.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie:
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure it was my recollection that it should have been an item that was
already added on to the agenda was a request actually made in the meeting. But it should be on
the meeting already.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, well, the Chair based on the fact that the request was made in the
regular meeting and it didn’t make it on the agenda the Chair rules that we will take it under the
regular portion of the agenda.
6
Mr. Williams: That’s fine, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, on to the consent agenda.
The Clerk: Yes, sir. Our consent agenda consists of items 1-33. And under the Public
Services portion of the agenda I’ll read the alcohol applications and if there is anyone here who
has an objection would you please signify your objection by raising your hand.
Item 8: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection
with Dalpin, LLC DBA Lucky Spot located 1237 Gordon Highway.
Item 9: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection
with the First Stop located at 1901 Gordon Highway.
Item 10: Is a request for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be
used in connection with Déjà Vu located at 913 Broad Street.
Item 11: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection
with Pine Hill Food Store located at 1680 Brown Road.
Item 12: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection
with Need More Country Store located at 4212 Windsor Spring Road.
Item 13: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection
with Super Express #9 located at 3696 Peach Orchard Road.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of these alcohol petitions?
Mr. Russell: None noted, Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: So our consent agenda consists of items 1-33.
Mr. Mayor: All righty, lady and gentlemen, do we have any additions to, Mr. Russell
you had your hand up.
Mr. Russell: Go ahead, sir. I’ve got a deletion.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have any items to be added to the consent agenda. Do we have any
items to be pulled for discussion? Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like get some clarity on item 26 I think here
just to get an understanding of what we tasked the Administrator to do. I have no problem with
the agenda item but I did want to make sure that we’re clear about whether or not we’re hiring or
we’re going to bring somebody on or exactly what we’re doing with that.
Mr. Russell: If I can, I believe that Mr. Sprouse spoke to that. What my direction was,
was to bring you back a plan that would allow for an increased presence in our search for retail
industry or retail businesses in our community. What I was going to do is give you a couple
options one of which would be to work very closely with the Development Authority to
determine which way we’re going. So at this point what you’re authorizing me to do is to put
together that plan which you’d have a later vote on, sir.
7
Mr. Williams: Okay and what concerned me was in the agenda item it read we would
bring in additional employees. And I wanted to make sure we had okayed that already. I mean I
want to make sure that wasn’t, I mean I got no problem with the rest of it but that part stuck out
in my mind and I wanted to get clarification on it.
Mr. Russell: Once he gets a plan on what we think would recommend to move forward.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, if there’s no further discussion can I get a motion to approve the
consent agenda? Fred, are you?
Mr. Russell: Mr. Mayor, I need to pull item 21.
Mr. Mayor: With that item pulled do we, Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. Can the Administrator fill me in, fill us in on what we’re doing
if we pull item 21 which I thought was on a roll and would be coming back with something
pretty soon. I don’t want to, I’m trying to figure out why we’re going to be waiting and waiting
and waiting. I need to know what’s the next step if we do this. We’re not having a committee
meeting next week. We will be back for a Commission meeting I think because of the Masters
in town we won’t be meeting so what’s that going to do, Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: What I was going to suggest, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, is
after a conversation with the Attorney and with the Purchasing Department that to do what I
initially proposed would probably put us in some degree of angst with our Purchasing procedure.
The recommendation I was going to make was that you end the current purchasing process and
allow me to come back with a proposal on what would be the next best steps to go forward. Be
that an arrangement with Mr. Simon in the First Tee or to go back for and additional look at
other people or bids or some combination thereof to move forward. That would be what I would
suggest, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy.
Mr. Fennoy: In view of this, are we or the Recreation and Parks Department in a position
to do the necessary seeding of the greens and whatever is going to take to keep the golf course
from going down?
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir, we’ll still maintain the course in a manner that moves forward with
that. That’s part of the plan, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to make sure we’re on the same sheet of
music. I think that from a procurement prospective it would probably, if I’m hearing you
correctly be it best to at this point put a halt to those proposals that have been sent or that have
been returned. Is that what we’re saying here?
8
Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. Our concern was if we bring a third party into the two that we’re
currently dealing with we’d be dealing with apples and oranges. And to do so would put us in
some jeopardy if we select the third party above the other two that have actually presented at this
particular point in time. The idea would be to put a stop to that process and look at the other
alternatives that were available to us and invite those people to come back if they’re interested as
they have spoken about. But we’d do a search in a, for a professional service as opposed to
particularly Procurement at this point unless we were unable to come to some agreement on that
process.
Mr. Mason: Mr. Mayor, I think from a procurement prospective I think that would
probably be the most prudent method to go moving forward. But I just wanted to make sure that
we don’t get caught up. We’ve been dealing with this past thing for a while and I just want to
make sure this time next year we’re not still sitting here talking about you know what we’re
going to do with The Patch. But we do need to have some specifics moving forward from a
procurement perspective. I think that’s the most appropriate way. I really wouldn’t want to see
though two or three/four months down the road we’re still haggling around trying to work out
something with whomever at this point. So I mean short of that is there a motion already on the
table or something like that?
Mr. Mayor: No, and procedurally just for clarity, Mr. MacKenzie, the item has, the has
been pulled but the consent agenda has not been approved. So it would be appropriate
procedurally and, Marion, I’m just trying to get clear on this too, that we would approve the
consent agenda then make a motion on agenda item 21.
Mr. MacKenzie: That would be appropriate since it’s being pulled.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Guilfoyle, did you?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Fred, as far as this closing out these
people who has already applied to the RFP, can we go back out and look for our different
options? Because that RFP clearly states that the threshold for somebody to operate that facility
is a high threshold. That’s the reason why we didn’t have too much of a response. But we did
have a response that it unfortunately they had backed away. But chances are that we would get
another opportunity like that would probably be slim to none. But I’m willing to take my chance
on that one.
Mr. Russell: Its, after talking with the attorneys and purchasing what we would do would
be a quick turn around on the bid itself, allow Mr., the First Tee people to come forth with their
proposal and anybody else within that short period of time that would be interested to give you a
menu to chose from that would provide the service level. And I still anticipate doing that fairly
quickly because I do want to get this off the table.
Mr. Guilfoyle: So what you’re actually saying is what we’re going to wait on until what
Mr. Simon is actually is going to present to us and the other two that has showed interest?
9
Mr. Russell: What I’m saying is that I’d like to go ahead and work with Mr. Simon as
directed initially and then if there are other people that are interested in coming that they be
allowed to present fairly quickly so we can make a decision on what’s the best way to move
forward.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Would it be better to show all the cards at one time instead of just
piecemeal?
Mr. Russell: That’s what I hope to do at this point.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Administrator.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: I have two things, Mr. Mayor. I want to go back to the Patch because I
guess we’re either going to pull it off or whatever. But this was discussed earlier that we were
trying to get the perspective First Tee set up with us because they had so many different things to
offer from the school, children to be involved from the local participation from the First Tee next
door. All these things was totally different from what the outside people were even talking
about. And we stopped it and we put them together. Now I’m hearing that we need to separate
them again. I’m just hoping we’re doing the right thing now where we ain’t got to come back
and redo something else. So, Mr. Russell, can you clarify one more time just for me we’re going
to get the proposals that we started initially with to come in and give us what they can. Show us
and then it’s going to be brought back to the committee so we can look at it, talk about it, discuss
it, hit it with a golf club do whatever we’ve got to do and then decide whether or not it’s good for
the city or what we want to do. Is that what I’m hearing? And if that’s not then we go find
somebody else. Is that right?
Mr. Russell: That’s the part that seems to be causing the consternation at the moment.
What I had initially suggested was that we do exactly that. The ramifications of that seem to
have raised an ire of several commissioners that we look at all of the proposals at one time again.
I can do it either way if it’s the will of the body that I need to be able to here. My initial
recommendation was to do exactly what you said. If you want to look at a small group of people
again to determine what’s the best value I think we need to do that including The First Tee’s
proposal into that. And so you’d have a menu to choose from and that’s obviously what you all
have to decide. So it is backing up a little bit, sir, but I think it’s backing itself up to a point that
we’re more stable in the decision that we make.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Okay, here we go. I want to make sure that I’m clear here. The reason why
I stated what I stated was because from a procurement prospective when you opened up
solicitations and requested for proposals and in receipt of those if you begin perhaps negotiating
or trying to come up with a lower cost solution for management of the operation of the golf
course you potentially and maybe General Counsel can correct me if I’m wrong, you potentially
open up some liability issues or some questions in terms of this solicitation that was sent out
10
initially because that third individual was not a part of that initially. So I’m concerned about
how we’re doing business and to make sure that we’re doing it in the right manner. Now it
would appear to me if in fact that’s the case then you would decline previous proposals that have
been submitted to work on a lower cost solution if you will for management of the golf course.
That way and from that point a decision could be made after the fact and you’ve kind of dealt
with the procurement issues that little slippery slope that you have floating around out there. I
prefer not to ride on that slippery slope. I prefer to do it appropriately and to me in my
professional experience the most appropriate thing to do would be to decline those proposals that
have already been received. I don’t know how the Commission will receive that action but if
Legal could speak to that I just believe that that’s the most appropriate way to go about it.
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: --- I’d be happy to address that. That’s actually exactly correct that we
have started a procurement process as a city and that process has produced several vendors
within the scope of the parameter of the original RFP. It’s my understanding that now that we’ve
heard the possibility of additional information for a lower cost alternative that can’t be done
within the current parameters of what we have out there in the street. So it would be my
recommendation to terminate that process. It doesn’t mean it couldn’t be looked at again later or
reopened as a new procurement if that’s necessary. It would be to terminate that process so we
won’t have any allegations from any vendor saying you went outside of the scope because you
know we bid on this. This vendor didn’t even bid on the process. So that would be my
recommendation to end the current process that you already started since it’s not the will of this
body to select any of the vendors who responded because the cost is so high. And you addressed
the Administrator or tasked him to go back out and look at the lower cost alternatives and choose
an appropriate procurement method to bring those before this body that would be within, closer
to the parameters of what we think the proposals may be that are lower cost.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Mason, I’m going to ask that we go ahead and
approve the consent agenda. And then ask for you to make the appropriate motion on agenda
item 21.
Mr. Mason: Roger.
Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to approve the consent agenda?
Mr. Williams: So moved.
Mr. Johnson: Second.
CONSENT AGENDA
PLANNING
1. SA-46 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve a petition to amend the Land Subdivision Regulations for Augusta, Georgia to
11
allow for electronic data submittal and amend the requirements for plan submittals.
(Approved by the Commission March 19, 2013 – second reading)
2. SA-47 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve a petition to amend Article 1, Section 104 of the Land Subdivision Regulations for
Augusta, Georgia to exempt certain plats and subdivision where no new streets or utilities a
required per O.C.G.A 15-6-67-3(d). (Approved by the Commission March 19, 2013 –
second reading)
3. SPA-09 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve a petition to amend the Site Plan Regulations for Augusta, Georgia to allow for
electronic data submittal and amend the requirements for plan submittals. (Approved by
the Commission March 19, 2013 – second reading)
4. ZA-R-221 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta, Georgia Planning Commission
to approve a petition to amend the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia
by amending Section 29-B-5(Prohibited Signs) and 28-B-13(Enforcement and Penalties).
(Approved by the Augusta Commission March 19, 2013 – second reading)
5. ZA-R-222 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission
to approve a petition to amend the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia
by deleting from Section 2 – Definitions – Travel Trailers and Travel Trailer Parks, Section
7 – Special Exception for recreational vehicle park and Section 22 – General Business –
Travel Trailer Park. (Approved by the Augusta Commission March 19, 2013 – second
reading.
6. ZA-R-223 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission
to approve a petition to amend the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia
by adding a Section 28-E – Recreational Vehicle Parks. (Approved by the Augusta
Commission March 19, 2013 – second reading.
7. ZA-R-224 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission
to approve a petition to amend the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia
by amending Section 35-8 – timeline for re-submittal of a defeated zoning petition.
(Approved by the Augusta Commission March 19, 2013 – second reading)
PUBLIC SERVICES
8. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 13-05: request by Samir Patel for
a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Dalpin, LLC DBA
Lucky Spot located at 1237 Gordon Hwy. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public
Services Committee March 25, 2013)
9. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 13-06: request by Hemaliben Patel for a retail
package Beer & Wine license to be used I connection with Jay Mahakali, Inc. DBA First
Stop located at 1901 Gordon Hwy. District 5. Super District 9. (Approved by Public
Services Committee March 25, 2013)
10. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 13-07: request by Princess
Hemingway for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in
connection with Déjà Vu located at 913 Broad St. There will be Dance. District 1. Super
District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
11. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 13-08: request by Young J.
Chang for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Pine Hill
12
Food Store located at 1680 Brown Rd. District 8. Super District 10. (Approved by the
Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
12. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 13-09: request by Suhashhai
Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Need More
Country Store located at 4212 Windsor Spring Rd. District 6. Super District 10. (Approved
by Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
13. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 13-10: request by Prakashbhai
Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Jay Vihir, Inc.
DBA Super Express #9 located at 3696 Peach Orchard Rd. District 6. Super District 10.
(Approved by Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
14. Motion to approve the Architectural and Engineering services of Wendel for the
Augusta Public Transit’s RFP-11-138 Architectural and Engineering Design for a Transit
Operation and Maintenance Facility for Augusta, Georgia. (Approved by Public Services
Committee March 25, 2013)
15. Motion to renew the Sec. 5311 Rural Transit grant application between the Georgia
Department of Transportation (GDOT) and Augusta, Georgia from July 1, 2013 to June
30, 2014. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
16. Motion to approve award of the contract for Roof Replacement on the Department of
Family and Children’s Services (DFCS) for the Base Bid and Alternate 1 to the low bidder,
Thomson Roofing and Metal Company of Thomson, GA, in the amount of $209,789.00.
(Approved by Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
17. Motion to approve AXTELL’S Construction, Inc. Closeout – Contract Modification #1
(Deductive Change) as approved by the Augusta Aviation Commission at their February
28, 2013 meeting. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
18. Motion to approve funding for MACH Academy in the amount of $25,000 from the
contingency fund for the next 6-months and monitor their expenditures during that period
and review the matter again at the end of 6-months for consideration of additional funding.
(Approved by Public Services Committee March 11, 2013) (Requested by Commissioner
Williams)
19. Motion to approve bid award purchase of computers and accessories for the HQ
Library from United Technology, the lowest most responsive bidder on bid #12-217.
(Approved by Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
20. Motion to approve bid award purchase of the telephone system for the HQ Library
from United Technology, the lowest most responsive bidder on bid #12-218. (Approved by
Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
22. Motion to approve a request by Jan Scholer for a Special Event License Beer & Wine to
be used in connection with Wild Winds Café located at 2035 Washington Rd. Masters
Week 4/8/13 thru 4/13/13 District 7. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services
Committee March 25, 2013)
23. Motion to approve an ordinance to amend Augusta-Richmond County Code Section 6-7
Vehicles for Hire – Taxicabs, so as to provide current standards for the operation of
taxicabs. (Approved by Public Services Committee March 25, 2013)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
24. Motion to approve 2013 Commission goals and objectives as presented. (Approved by
Administrative Services Committee March 25, 2013)
13
25. Motion to approve tasking the Administrator to bring back in 60 days the parameters
of a potential early retirement system with incentives for consideration after which an
actuarial study can be performed to determine the costs. (Approved by Administrative
Services Committee March 25, 2013)
26. Motion to approve tasking the Administrator to develop a plan to either bring an
additional employee on board or to come back with a way to potentially contract with a
consultant to recruit retail businesses for those areas of Augusta not served by the
Downtown Development Authority. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee
March 25, 2013)
27. Motion to approve Commission review of its commitment to the DBE Program and
determine what steps are necessary to move the goals forward for DBE/Small Business
Program. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee March 25, 2013)
28. Motion to approve tasking the Administrator and the DBE Coordinator in formulating
a plan to maximize the utilization of the Small Business Opportunity Program for Augusta
Procurements by ensuring that all data to support a future disparity study is being
collected and maintained. A strategic plan designed to accomplish this task needs to be
submitted to the Administrative Services Committee no later than June 30, 2013.
(Approved by Administrative Services Committee March 25, 2013)
PUBLIC SAFETY
29. Motion to approve Effingham County Extended Care Facility Shelter Agreement.
(Approved by Public Safety Committee March 25, 2013)
FINANCE
30. Motion to authorize the Finance and Utility departments to begin the process for
issuing approximately $20,000,000 in taxable bonds in order to meet the debt service
reserve requirements for the existing 2004 and 2007 Water and Sewerage Bonds, with such
bonds to be issued through a competitive bid process with Murray Barnes Finister LLP
serving as bond/disclosure counsel. (Approved by Finance Committee March 25, 2013)
ENGINEERING SERVICES
31. Motion to approve purchase of two 250kw emergency generators through bid item 12-
224 Diesel Generator Set for Emergency Standby (250kw). (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee March 25, 2013)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
32. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular & Special Called Meetings held March
19, 2013.
APPOINTMENT(S)
33. Motion to approve the appointment of Cleveland O’Steen to the ARC Citizens Small
Business Advisory Council representing District 3.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
14
Mr. Jackson and Ms. Davis vote No. Motion Passes 7-2. [Item 18]
Motion Passes 9-0. [Items 1-17, 19, 21-33]
Mr. Jackson: Madam Clerk, if you could note me as No on item number 18.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Ms. Davis: Me too, please.
The Clerk: Yes, ma’am.
PUBLIC SERVICES
21. Motion to approve tasking the Administrator to present to the committee proposals
from Paul Simon and the other two interested companies regarding the operation of the
Augusta Municipal Golf Course no later than May 12, 2013. (Approved by Public Services
Committee March 25, 2013.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Now returning to agenda item 21 that has been pulled.
Commissioner Mason, would you like to make a motion on that agenda item?
Mr. Mason: My motion would be to decline all proposals received on the previous
RFP.number 12-206
I don’t know the or something like that or whatever that number was for
then task the Administrator to solicit a lower cost
the Municipal Golf Course. And
alternative or solution for the managementof the operation of the golf course.
And I think
time limit
that will probably get us where we need to be. And what would be an appropriate
because we don’t want this sitting out here four or five months trying to negotiate with
somebody.
th
Mr. Russell: We’re still looking at the May 12 date that we originally set, sir.
th
No later than May 12.
Mr. Mason:
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioner
Fennoy.
Mr. Fennoy: Yes. Do we want to limit this to lower cost? Because if we combine with
the First Tee, First Tee is going to be able to maybe to provide some services such as the golf
classes for the disadvantaged youth that the other two people may not be able to provide. So,
Mr. Mason: How about I amend it Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Okay, go ahead, Commissioner Mason.
15
Mr. Mason: I could amend it to ---
Mr. Russell: Lower cost, best value?
Mr. Mason: --- lower cost best value or other, other solutions or management of the
Municipal Golf Course and that could include all what you’re talking about there, Bill, if I don’t
throw the lower end in there.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay, and the seconder of the motion is fine with that?
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, if there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the
usual sign of voting.
Mr. Guilfoyle votes No.
Motion Passes 8-1.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to the regular agenda.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
34. Discuss the responsibility of the Finance and Procurement Departments in association
with the approved Sec. 5307 Augusta Public Transit grant repayment between the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) and Augusta, Georgia for Capital purchase of engines.
(Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We had an addition on our last commission
meeting and I asked the question was that, why was it so important to get it added to the agenda?
And I was told that we had got a call from one governing body two days before that was
demanding money from the government that we owed them. And I didn’t, I couldn’t understand
that but I allowed to get it added on anyway. In my discussion and in my investigation I found
out that this is something we’ve dealing with for probably about a year and a half. And it really
upset me for me to have to answer to the public every day to come and try to make every
meeting and try to do what I can as right and then people tell us anything. It really bothered me
so I need to know why was it not handled in a timely manner. We get federal dollars coming in
for different departments and especially for the federal bus transportation and stuff. Can
somebody tell me why this was not handled properly? I mean in a proper manner and time. And
I need somebody I guess from Procurement I guess whoever handles this, Mr. Russell. I see
your hand up but I’d like to know from those people who we pay. And I’ve been stressing this a
lot. People make good money more, a lot whole more than I make and the make serious
mistakes. And then we act like that nothing happened. And I think it’s time for us to stop that.
16
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell
Mr. Russell: Yeah, if I can, Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission. This is an item
that we had talked about on numerous occasions in the past year. Commissioner Williams is
correct in the fact that we’ve been dealing with this for almost a year and a half or so probably.
Some of you might remember we had a audit from the Federal Transportation people that came
down and spent 19 days with us. What we had done in this particular case is spent money for a
sole source purchase of engines for $60,000 for the buses. Purchasing was informed that this
was a sole source purchase by the department head. It was in fact a purchase that was made from
a preferred vendor. When that was brought up in the audit we began negotiations with the
Transportation auditors over a period of time in which they led us to believe on more than one
occasion that they would forgive that debt and allow us to make another purchase with that, to
cover that. That dialogue went over a year’s period of time or so. Upon the review at a higher
level they apparently decided that was not an appropriate decision that was basically given to us
previously and then the crucial nature of that was we did receive notification from them that they
were denying the request to make this right by making another purchase with those funds. And
we were required to pay them back within a couple days of notification of that. So you’re
absolutely right, Mr. Williams, in the fact that it is something that was on going. It’s something
that staff had dealt with on more than one occasion with the auditors from the Transportation
Department. It was something we were led to believe by them that we were okay with what we
were doing even though we initially made the mistake. That was at the direction of the head of
the Transit Department at that time who got a preferred dealer and basically misinformed the
Purchasing Department in reference to their preferred dealer versus sole source. So once we
dealt with that we hadn’t really thought that much about it until the end of the day when we
received that notification prior to the meeting that it had to be paid. We’ve looked at that, we’ve
looked at the process and I think we’re in a lot better shape dealing with those kinds of issues
than we have been in the past. But that’s the series of facts that brought it to having to be added
to the agenda as quickly as we did to get that payment done because that was the notification we
had.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams?
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You know we always talk about safeguards.
We’re always talking about doing what is right in putting things in place to protect those things.
th
I’ve got a letter here that was dated July the 20 2012 that the Mayor Pro Tem at that time signed
and sent to the federal government saying that we was in compliance. Now that’s a written lie.
Now and I’ve got a serious problem when Procurement has grant writers in their office to protect
us and watch out for this. And not just today but every time something comes in we’ve got
people in Procurement that’s supposed to be looking at this that we’re paying. And then we sit
here and then accept something and I allowed to go on my colleague will tell you on the left, I
wasn’t going to allow anything to go on but he needed something. And because I let that go on I
allowed his item to go on as well. But then when people who work for you tell you an untruth,
well, children tell untruths. These are lies and I’ve got a problem with that. When you’re
making good money, Mr. Mayor, somebody needs to be accountable. I spoke with Mr. Russell
about it as well. I shared with him my concerns how we sit here and act like we don’t see certain
things. So I need to know from somebody from Procurement who wrote this letter I guess the
17
first thing. The Mayor Pro Tem Joe Bowles signed it but I want to know did he write it. And I
want to know who the person is because whoever wrote this letter knew we was not in
compliance who sent the letter saying we was. So I want to know from Procurement or whoever
handled this I guess Procurement handled it, who’s responsible?
Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Fennoy and then Mr. Russell. I saw Commissioner
Fennoy first.
Mr. Fennoy: And my question is I guess to the Administrator is the error that was made,
was this a Procurement error?
Mr. Russell: No. Procurement was informed by the department head that this would be a
sole source. The difference was in that it shouldn’t have been a sole source. He was dealing
with a preferred vendor. Upon the audit they would determine there was a difference in that
characterization so we had basically bought from a preferred vendor as opposed to a sole source.
So that’s why we ended up having to pay the money back.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay, and based on the information that Procurement received did they do
anything?
Mr. Russell: They had no reason to, they had no reason to question the Procurement
documents received from the department because that’s should’ve been the expert in that
particular field.
Mr. Fennoy: And to prevent this from happening again is there any policies or
procedures that we could put in place?
Mr. Russell: Yes. What we asking now is that instead of a sole source in those particular
areas we would, we would first we would double check that to make sure that it is accurate at
this particular point in time.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Point of personal privilege. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, first of all I hadn’t heard my answer. I hadn’t heard from
Procurement or whoever wrote the letter. I need to hear, I mean this letter didn’t type itself. I
know we got emails that go out and they go through the air and all but I don’t think it put itself
on paper. I need to know where did the letter come from first of all. That’s my first question.
I’m not finished but I need to answer that from whomever is in charge.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have anybody who can speak to that issue?
Mr. Russell: That was ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell you?
18
Mr. Williams: No, no I’m talking about department heads, Mr. Mayor. We’ve got
several department heads that’s normally here that I don’t normally see anybody here now. And
I want to know why they’re not here. Last week we had the assistant director come here with an
issue that we couldn’t get an answer to because the director was out. They ain’t out of money
but they’re out of place. I see Ms. Williams. Maybe she can answer Mr. Russell. I see Ms.
Sams, Mr. Mayor, on the end. Maybe she can address this.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have anybody to speak to this issue? Okay. Ms. Sams.
Ms. Sams: Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners. Yes, sir, Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams: My question to Ms. Sams is that letter that was signed by the former
Mayor Pro Tem Joe Bowles that was sent to federal agencies telling us that we was in
compliance which we wasn’t in compliance we end up paying the money back. Did that come
from your office, your people?
Ms. Sams: No, sir, it did not.
Mr. Williams: Okay, well, can you tell me who I need to direct the question to?
Ms. Sams: You will be able to direct that question to Ms. Williams.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Ms. Williams, can you answer that for us please? Who wrote this
letter?
Ms. Williams: Yes, sir, as Mr. Russell already mentioned to you and I informed you all
last meeting when this item was approved that this was an ongoing discussion between us and
the FTA after the grant findings came out in the 2010 audit. We were attempting, staff and our
external auditors and FTA were attempting to resolve this by avoiding a repayment. We were
originally told that we would be able to make a qualifying purchase to substitute for the monies
that were spent on this purchase. There were numerous conversations with both FTA, our
external auditors Cherry, Bekaert and Holland. This letter is based on language from the result
of a meeting, a phone telephone conversation with the FTA. It’s my recollection I believe it was
the gentleman that’s on the email that I provided you a copy of after you requested it the last
meeting, a Chris White. Members from Cherry Bekaert and Holland, they essentially told us the
language that they would accept to come from us saying what we had done and the results where
we were at this particular point in time. You do notice as you said that this letter is dated 2012.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can follow up. Ms. Williams, Finance, the external
auditor and the Mayor Pro Tem at that time signed off on this letter saying that we was in
compliance. Now I know that the department head had left. And what bothers me is a year and
a half that we’ve been dealing with this that should have been resolved whether we paid the
money back earlier or whether we made another purchase with the money. Either way it didn’t
happen. But the external auditor who I guess worded it. I haven’t heard it yet. You do have a
grant writer. You’ve got somebody that ---
19
Ms. Williams: I do not.
Mr. Williams: Okay, you do have somebody to look over your grants ---
Ms. Williams: We do not a grant writer no, sir.
Mr. Williams: Okay do you have somebody to look over your grants?
Ms. Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Williams: Okay, a grant writer. I don’t know none of that. I’m just trying to find
out what, whoever supposed to be there supposed to have the safeguards. They’re supposed to
help us to not get in trouble. We’re always paying back money, Mr. Mayor. You asked me to
fly with you at one point to go back to take some money because we didn’t spend the money.
How can we get federal dollars in and we don’t spend them? And here we are now. This is just
one of the many. We had it with the airport. We had about $11,000 dollars and I asked a
question what happened to the money. My colleagues and I was agreeing on that. When the
money comes back in or the money’s there and we don’t know but we’re the ones that are going
to take the rap for it. You as the Mayor is going to take the rap for it. So something needs to be
done, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: I appreciate your concerns, Commissioner Williams. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, in lieu of not getting the answers to the questions I will motion
that we send this back to committee and I guess give them an opportunity to come back with the
proper documentation to find out exactly how we got in this quagmire or whatever information
that needs to be distributed to the Commission up here so we can a clear understanding of what
happened. I mean I understand what took place and why we got in this jam but I guess at some
point we need to make sure we have a safety net there to make sure it doesn’t happen again.
Mr. Mayor: Is there a second to that motion?
Mr. Williams: I’ll second it.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: You know I’m not too sure how long you want to beat this horse and that’s
pretty much where we are at this point. I can’t begin to tell you how many times that we just
said what you’re going to end up hearing. We made a mistake. That mistake was caught in the
audit. The audit said that we after a period of negotiation we would not have to pay that money
back. We went based on that philosophy until we were informed by the Feds that they changed
their mind. And we all know how the Feds are and that’s just the reality of what happened.
They changed their mind and they came back and said you’ve got to pay this money and we want
it on Tuesday. I can’t do much about that, that’s what they did. You know our safety checks,
our desires and our work was probably as good as anything that you can do. But I can’t fix the
federal government and that’s just the reality of it. And I don’t know how else to come back and
20
tell you what we did. That’s what happened, it happened that way through the process when I
tell you next week it’s the same thing that we did. And I don’t know what else I can do to
change that at the moment.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been um, Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to reach out to my Mayor Pro Tem. This
was discussed last year in our Legal Department. There was no hidden agenda on this
whatsoever. They presented it to the board or the council that was here at the time and now
we’re digging up bones. But if we owe the money, let’s pay it back and end the case.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, sir. And, Commissioner Williams, I’ve recognized you
three times and so I ---
Mr. Williams: Point of personal privilege. Mr. Mayor, can I have a point of personal
privilege?
Mr. Mayor: I’ve recognized you for two appropriate times and then I gave you a point of
personal privilege.
Mr. Williams: I need to add this on committee or put it back on the agenda. We can talk
about today or we can talk about it next week, it doesn’t matter because I’m not upset about
somebody bringing. I’m upset about the length of time it took to resolve something like this
when we had to come in here and add it to the agenda.
Mr. Mayor: I understand and the motion is to refer it back to committee. If there’s no
further, Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell: That’s all right.
Mr. Mayor: If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual
sign of voting.
Mr. Fennoy, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Mason, Mr. D. Smith and Mr. Williams vote Yes.
Ms. Davis, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Grady Smith vote No.
Motion Fails 5-4.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please.
Mr. Mason: Mr. Mayor, I’d like Madam Clerk to add it to the next agenda, commission
agenda add it back on.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Russell: Committee or Commission, sir.
21
Mr. Williams: We don’t have a committee. It’ll go straight to Commission.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
36. Discuss changing the ordinance that deals with conflict of interest and ethics violations.
(No recommendation from Administrative Services Committee March 25, 2013)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy.
Mr. Fennoy: Yes, I’d like to make a motion to take this off the agenda and put it on
th
the agenda for the April 16 meeting.
Mr. Mason: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. If there is no further
discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Ms. Davis and Mr. Grady Smith vote No.
Motion Passes 7-2.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
37. Approve rotating the scheduled time for all committee meetings. (No recommendation
from Administrative Services Committee March 25, 2013)
Mr. Jackson: Motion to deny.
Mr. D. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, I talked with Commissioner Lockett who feels like
everybody leaves and leaves him on the end of the committee meetings without support. And I
try to be here to support because I think every committee meeting is important. But I don’t see a
problem with rotating it or moving it around so he don’t always have to be the last one. Now we
used to do committee meetings differently from what we’re doing now. And I know things
change. We used to do Legal differently from the way we do it now. So I’ve got no problem.
I’m sure he’ll put it back on the agenda if we don’t have the votes to do it today he’ll put it back
on the agenda when he gets back.
22
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, sir. We have a motion that’s, Commissioner Fennoy.
Mr. Fennoy: Yes, I would like to ask our Administrator not to schedule any meetings
when we have committee meetings. I think at the last committee meeting that we had we had I
think four commissioners to leave the committee meeting and go to another meeting. So when
you schedule meetings outside of the Commission ---
Mr. Mayor: And I’m familiar with the meeting you were talking about but that was not
actually a meeting scheduled by the Administrator.
Mr. Fennoy: Well, whoever scheduled the meeting, not to schedule it when we have a
committee meeting or a commission meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Fennoy, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Mason, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Williams vote
Yes.
Ms. Davis, Mr. Donnie Smith and Mr. Grady Smith vote No.
Motion Passes 6-3.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, next agenda item please.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
38. Discuss the Downtown Development Authority’s CADI Program. (Requested by
Commissioner Bill Fennoy)
Mr. Jackson: Motion to deny.
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I got a ton of calls from my constituents that used to not be
my constituents but is my constituents now downtown. And I plan to represent them as much as
I represent anybody. And I wanted to hear from both sides while they’re here. They took time
out of their schedules to come down and speak on it. I’d like to hear the pros and the cons on
putting this back in place. And since they took their time out I think it’s just fair for us to listen
to them and giving them a chance to voice without just denying it like that.
Mr. Mayor: I completely agree with you. And I was going to do that before calling for a
vote. If we have representatives one from either side one from pro one from designated
representatives against I’ll give each side five minutes if there’s a representative that would like
to speak.
23
Mr. Williams: Is he against it, Mr. Mayor, or what?
Mr. Mayor: What’s that?
Mr. Williams: Is he speaking against it ---
Mr. Mayor: No, he’s pro.
Mr. Williams: Okay, if we’ve got somebody on the other side, okay.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Lloyd.
Mr. Lloyd: First, let me, well, my name is Sanford Lloyd. Do I need to state an address?
Mr. Mayor: Please.
Mr. Lloyd: My home address is 711 Wood Gate Court in Augusta Georgia. First I’d like
to thank you very much for allowing us to speak on behalf of the program. The things that I like
to do are quite simple. What I like to do is actually first lay out the law that allows us to do
creative business improvement districts and then state some of the facts about how it gets done.
And the reason I like to do this is because what I’ve noticed in most of the discussion about the
business improvement district very seldom is the law actually discussed. Very seldom is there
any comparing information to the law and the facts. And I think really that the law and the facts
of the things that should have got on the discussion about it because without that none of this
would actually be possible. That said I’d like to read what the requirements for creating a bid
are. First you have to have a BID petition signed by either 51% of the municipal tax payers of
the district or by 51% of the municipal tax payers owning at least 51% of the taxable value of the
property in the district. And the reason for that is to give all the people in the district the
opportunity to create a business improvement district. If you allow 51% of the property value
owners to do it you know that’s okay because they will pay the majority of the taxes in the
district. However, if you allow them to dictate what will happen in the district you crowd out the
voice of all of the small people in the district. 51% of the property taxpayers the reason for that
is you don’t pay the majority of the money of the tax in the district so it takes a lot more of you.
In this particular situation six or seven people can make up 51% of the value. It takes more than
100 people in terms of property owners to get their 51%. But that allows everybody in the
district to have a way of coming up and proposing something to do better in the district. The
second item is that such petition must be accompanied by a proposed budget or a formula of
assessment. And the third is the petition shall be presented to the governing authority of the
municipality. And the governing authority of the municipality which is our Commission may
approve it, they may approve it with modifications or they can disapprove it. When we first
presented the plan for renewal back in December the Commission expressed items of the things
that they had a problem with and they wanted changed they would have liked to have seen
different. Our request was and is now for the Commission to approve with those modifications.
One of them of course was there be one tax district instead of two. Another was that the way the
board of directors was elected should be changed and just opened to any and all property owners
24
with no particular set aside for any property value owner to have a spot on the board. And the
other was better communication with exactly what was happening with the program to the
Commission as well as anybody else who wanted to know. These are items that the Planning
Board had no objection to because they’re interested creating something that will improve not
just the business district that is represented in this plan but by doing that we actually improve
downtown, all of it and not just downtown all of it but because downtown is improved it actually
benefits all of Richmond County and the surrounding areas. The other item of the requirement is
that any plan thus adopted may be amended from time to time or rescinded completely ended
before its five year term has expired by again the governing authority which why we have heard
from numerous people that this must be a better way. And we’ve asked please present that better
way. If it is a better way we are excepting of a better way. What has failed to happen is that
anybody has presented a plan that proves to be both sustainable and enforceable. Nobody has
done that. So what we’re asking to do is to go ahead and approve with the recommendation ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Lloyd: --- modification that the committee wants, I mean the Commission wants and
they can change it at any time.
Mr. Mayor: I hate to cut you off but to be fair that’s five minutes. Do we have
somebody to speak for the opposition?
Mr. Speaker: --- I’m speaking for the opposition.
Mr. Mayor: No, I but I’m the Chair. I make the call on this and so I do it to be fair to
everybody. So if you want to speak for the opposition ---
Mr. Williams: Question before he sits down?
Mr. Mayor: --- yes, sir, before you sit down, Sanford, Commissioner Williams had a
question.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Lloyd, I heard you say about 51% of the district not the downtown
but the district 51%. Are you counting that 51% as being the people in the district or is that 51%
you’re talking about downtown because I don’t think we can set aside downtown. That’s in the
district from the rest of the people in the district because if we’re going to clean up and I’m
going hear both sides. I want to hear the other side too. If we’re going to clean we need to make
sure that downtown is clean. Not just Broad Street or the business sector of Broad Street but
when you leave Broad Street you not ought not to have to go through the jungle like I do when I
go home in the hood. You ought to be able to go straight through a clean area. So I’m saying
that are considering that 51% downtown or are you talking about the entire district? Because
these are the words you used and I just wanted to get that clear.
Mr. Lloyd: The 51% actually is the properties in the boundaries of the business
thth
improvement district. And in this case it’s from 13 Street back to a little past 8 Street and
25
from Reynolds to Greene Street. That’s the district that I’m talking about 51% of property
owners in the boundary, in those boundaries.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams, are you still on the floor?
Mr. Williams: Yeah, when I heard him say 51% of the district because I’m looking at
downtown. That’s District 1 and that’s what I was thinking when you said that’s why I want to
get it clear to know that you’re talking about 51% of the businesses in that District 1 downtown
area.
Mr. Lloyd: 51% of the property owners ---
Mr. Williams: Okay, well ---
Mr. Lloyd: --- in that area that was defined by the boundaries I gave 51% of the property
owners in that area.
Mr. Williams: --- okay and my last question, Mr. Mayor. Do we not have a code
enforcement who’s supposed to go business to business house to house enforcing something?
They may not be doing it but we’re supposed to have. I just got through talking a little while ago
and everybody thought I was crazy and that’s fine but we pay people to do work. And if they’re
supposed to be doing that then you’re going to tax yourselves again to do something that we
already got people that’s supposed to be on board to be doing, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Lloyd: May I respond?
Mr. Mayor: Please.
Mr. Lloyd: And that is that the program is not supposed to replace a particular service. It
is supposed to supplement the services that are being provided. In fact one of the things in the
program actually states that the government will maintain the level of services they provide even
before the implementation of this. It’s not to replace a service that is being provided by the
government it’s a supplement because the owners feel like more needs to be done then can be
done with the resources currently with the city. And they do decide they will tax themselves and
pay for those supplemental services themselves and it doesn’t cost the government anything at
all.
Mr. Mayor: And I’m just going to say before I recognize Commissioner Mason. You
know my biggest concern here is that when the governmental body starts overriding the will of
the people that’s a very slippery slope. If you get elected to office and you win 51% of the vote
that means 49% of the people weren’t against you but you still get installed in office. So I just
think it sets a precedent to where the folks that are against this might be great this time but when
the governing body if it turns, you know resists the will of the people in the future that’s not a
good position to be in. Commissioner Mason, I’ll recognize you first.
26
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m going to respectfully disagree with you on your
assessment. You certainly have the right to that opinion. I do want some clarity though because
on your agenda item you’re saying discuss the Downtown Development Authority’s CADI
Program and CADI is a function of the DDA? So discuss the Downtown Development
Authority’s CADI Program.
Mr. Lloyd: No, that’s not our request. Our, this is CADI is a completely separate entity
from the downtown ---
Mr. Mason: I’m just saying what’s on the, what I see here.
Mr. Lloyd: --- I can’t address that.
Mr. Mason: Okay, because I mean that’s not what we’re even discussing here really. To
me you would be because the program doesn’t exist based on the action that was taken I want to
say in December. So the program doesn’t even exist. So I’m not sure why this is like. I’m not
blaming you for that I’m just saying so for the Chairman we’ve got to get something correct
here. What you’re probably discussing is the creation of a BID Tax District because you don’t
have one. And you’re trying to create one so that a program can run. Am I wrong in that
assessment or?
Mr. Lloyd: My understanding of it is we started the program to renew the previous
program which terminated ---
Mr. Mason: Right, it’s over.
Mr. Lloyd: --- December 31. However at our request of the Commission, the
Commission took no action to disapprove or approve. It took no action in terms of what would
happen with a business improvement district. So the request is actually for the Commission to
take an action on the request because six votes were not counted for any motion that was
presented.
Mr. Mason: Okay, since you made that point, Mr. Mayor, I’m going to need some clarity
here because the way that I see it now it doesn’t make it right but this is just the way that I see it.
st
If there was no action taken we know as of December 31 it’s over. It’s a done deal. I mean I
don’t know legally if that’s the case but that’s the thought process that I had in my mind because
there was no action taken. There’s two things that could’ve happened that day. The way it was
explained there could’ve been a vote either pro or con and if there was no vote to get you a
unanimous decision one way or the other it’s still ended because the effective date of the five
st
year deal ended on December 31. So I just want some clarity on what we’re talking about here.
Are we trying to create a new BID District because we don’t have one? I’d just like, well, if I
could get Legal or somebody ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie.
Mr. Mason: --- to speak to that.
27
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure I’d be happy to address that. That’s exactly correct. The program
that was in place the Business Improvement District in place initially had a five year expiration
date. That date came and expired and no action was taken by the Commission to either extend
the first BID or to create a new BID so it is not in place at this time.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Lloyd.
Mr. Lloyd: Yes, sir.
st
Mr. Guilfoyle: So when the company CADI was dissolved December 31 2012 the
petitions retired with them at that moment because if you’re going to start a new CADI Program
you would have to implement starting back over. Would that be correct to say?
Mr. Lloyd: I don’t think so and I don’t think so because first of all CADI wasn’t
dissolved. The Business Improvement District terminated. But also that Business Improvement
District terminated December 31 even if the body had approved a new or disapproved a new BID
because that one no matter what happened expired December 31. That was its term, it ended.
And so a new BID would take place. You can’t extend the old one I mean you want to renew it
but it’s a new BID. That’s the whole purpose.
Mr. Guilfoyle: All right so a 116 people that you solicited signed the petitions or was it
more?
Mr. Lloyd: It was not more.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay, and there’s 373 parcels of properties in the Downtown BID
District. Would that be correct to say?
Mr. Lloyd: That’s about right.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay, how do we come up with 51% based at 116 versus 373?
Mr. Lloyd: Well, the parcels of property are not the determining factor. It is the owners
of the properties, it’s owners. So you can have one owner who owns five or six pieces of
property ---
Mr. Guilfoyle: And that was accounted for.
Mr. Lloyd: --- and that’s one owner.
Mr. Guilfoyle: But that was accounted for in your solicitation of the petition. Would that
be correct?
28
Mr. Lloyd: That would be correct that we identified the number of property owners.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. Did you stop soliciting at 51% of the property owners?
Mr. Lloyd: We stopped soliciting when we had to come to this body to make our request.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay, before you came to this body today did you try to acquire more?
Mr. Lloyd: Today?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Today.
Mr. Lloyd: Not today. Today, I did not actually ---
Mr. Guilfoyle: From last week, the week before, week before last month, last four
months?
Mr. Lloyd: The communication about more support.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. All right, you had talked about supplement services what the
CADI does where Augusta Richmond County does not fulfill their total obligation. What is
wrong with add BID responsible business owners, vendors that lives downtown, resides
downtown not taking a responsibility on their own to clean up their own parcels? For example, I
have two commercial properties. I maintain them. I clean them. If I walk out of my truck and
see something on the ground I’m going to pick it up because that’s my pride and joy. What is
wrong with that?
Mr. Lloyd: There’s absolutely nothing wrong with people taking care of their property
and volunteering to do this. The problem though is you run into when you’re talking about the
whole, not just the mouth piece but the whole piece. That actually does not happen. And as far
as the avid approach to it ---
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir.
Mr. Lloyd: --- which is totally volunteer that’s the part that I talk about being sustainable
and enforceable. Volunteering is if I do it today, I can do it today. If I start tomorrow I’m not, I
don’t have too. If I want to pay I can. If I don’t, I don’t.
Mr. Guilfoyle: I understand your concern about the longevity of the add BID but with
the property owners down there, they’re going to take more action than most people would
because it’s their responsibility to take care of their own properties. Now we have different
organizations that maintains the center roads like Gordon Highway Association. That’s all
volunteer work. Guess what? It’s been a year now and they have done wonderful job because I
have to ride down Gordon Highway every day. Anyway I would just like to say we have given
CADI a chance for five years and if they had done their, not no disrespect to you Mr. Sanford, if
29
it was done right, correctly because one of the biggest supporters when you first initiated it
CADI is here in this room. Point of privilege?
Mr. Mayor: You want another, well, I was going to recognize you for your second two.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you. When CADI first started he was the one that was there that
had your backs that supplied the lawnmowers, weed eaters, shovels and everything else. And he
had paid his BID but nobody has stepped property on his property in five years. Wouldn’t that
be a considerable problem if you support them and if CADI had did their job correctly and
covered the entire BID area that people would actually be standing in line because they knew it
was a good investment because you got a return on it?
Mr. Lloyd: May I address that?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes sir.
Mr. Lloyd: First of all I would like to say that I’m not aware of any property owners who
bought all of the equipment that CADI has. And I would like to say that you know part of the
things that we encourage everybody to do because it’s part of what you should do. If something
is not working right you should speak up about that something to make it, to fix it not, not, not
do anything and just say see I told you it doesn’t work. The whole part is how we make things
better because we observe, we give suggestions how to make things run better. We try to make
things better. There is no perfect anything but if we don’t participate and try to make it better
when we see something wrong I don’t see that as being helpful. And yes if, you know I can’t
even say that if this property owners property had been cleaned completely that they would’ve
been in support of the program the second time around because a lot of people’s opposition to
the property, I mean to the business improvement district stems solely on how much taxes they
have to pay in the district. We don’t understand that. We understand that the ‘me’ is important.
But the ‘we’ is much more important to the whole and to the benefit of this community.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Uh, Mr. Sanford I truly believe communication is a success tool that we
all have that we need to implement and even on this floor we need to communicate more but
when a problem is addressed to the CADI and it’s not recognized or nothing’s been done that’s
the problem. It falls on deaf ears and sometimes when you keep talking about it, keep talking
about it and nothing gets done sometimes you’ve got to turn your cheek to it.
Mr. Lloyd: I assure you that didn’t happen.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Lloyd.
Mr. Mayor: I’m just hoping this doesn’t like leak out into the national media that we’re
outlawing CADIs in Augusta Georgia, Commissioner Smith a week before the Master’s.
Mr. D. Smith: Commissioner Jackson was first, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Jackson.
30
Mr. Jackson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. No disrespect, Sanford, but you had five years to
get it right with the majority of the participants downtown. And the last I’ve seen on your board
members you have a board member that’s two years behind in his property taxes. So I still stand
by my motion to deny and I call for the question.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We’ve had a motion that’s been properly seconded.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, we ain’t heard from the other side yet. Now we’ve been
listening to one side. I want to hear all of it.
Mr. Mayor: And the question has been called for but I will give the opposition their five
minutes ---
Mr. Williams: Yeah.
Mr. Mayor: --- and then we will vote on the issue. And if you, okay and if you could
state your name and address, please, sir and keep it to five minutes please.
nd
Mr. Walraven: Yes, sir. The name’s Mike Walraven, 302 2 Street, Augusta Georgia. I
own a business at 980 Broad Street, Augusta Georgia. Okay, thank ya’ll for allowing me to
speak with you. I rise in opposition to renewal of the Business Improvement District thus the
CADI Program. Last December there were not enough votes on the Commission to approve the
continuation of a BID. Since then the CADI components would have you believe they have
made changes to the program. They have not. The management plan is the same. There is still
no mention of supplemental services for security, advertising, promotion or business recruitment
and retention. They only mention a sidewalk cleaning service that would cost taxpayers close to
$4,000 dollars a year or $2 million dollars. There were concerns about the makeup of the board
of the CADI which is a nonprofit 501C Corporation. This is not a government entity yet they
want to spend $400,000 dollars of the taxpayer’s money each year as they see fit. One of the
concerns in December was the competition of the CADI board. You can see that the board is the
same today as it was in December. The pro-CADI people have said publicly that they will make
changes to the board before next December. The competition of the board should have been
changed before they came back before you to date, not nine months from now. The CADI Board
has stated they have cut ties with the Downtown Development Authority yet they have two
members of the CADI Board Gavin McCloud and Mr. Lloyd who are on the DDA and the CADI
Board. A current member of the board Mr. Paul King is a past member of the DDA so it’s all
still intertwined. CADI is basically a cleaning service so let’s see how they’re doing. This is the
2012 CADI Report. So they rode their little SEGWAYS and the bikes 3,283 yearly hours of
basically nine hours a day to accomplish the following: 59 yearly panhandle reports or about one
a week, 5,605 yearly merchant visits or 15 a day or two an hour. They gave assistance to the
stranded and lost people 767 times or two a day. They removed 1,939 handbills from public
property or five a day. And this is the one that gets me. They handled eleven police assistance
calls for the year, less than one a month. So much for security. They handled six Augusta Cares
calls or one every two months and they removed one ton of garbage per week from the BID area.
All this for $350,000 dollars. All right, now where’s the trash? We have been without the
31
services for the CADI for the past 13 weeks. Using the CADI statistics I just showed you where
they removed a ton of trash a week there should be 13 tons of trash all over downtown. This
amount of trash should be very conspicuous. In order to find these mounds of debris this past
Sunday morning my wife Robin and I walked every sidewalk not only in the BID area but the
thth
entire central business district from Greene Street to Reynolds Street from 5 Street to 13 Street
and we picked up trash. This is an example of the trash that we picked up. And this is how
much the trash weighed notice, right at 28 pounds. And this is the one bag of trash we got, one
bag. Voluntarily I walked, I picked up the gutters, the sidewalks, the medians everywhere.
That’s all I could find which tells me our city is doing a great job. CADI is not needed. All right
here’s the district map, Mr. Williams. If you notice it doesn’t even cover all of downtown it only
covers a little gerrymander district. And there are (unintelligible) parcels of property. 100
petitions were presented but they were only signed by 80 people. Eight of those eighty, eight
came from private condominiums located in the White’s Building. On Page 13 of the 2003
CADI Management Plan it states single-family residential property that is used exclusively as a
residence will not be assessed. Of those 80 signers, petitioners, 10 were delinquent on paying
their taxes when they signed to raise my taxes. Four still have not paid. As was stated earlier a
current CADI board member as of today owes $6,819.00 in delinquent taxes.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, sir ---
Mr. Walraven: It looks as though they left no stone unturned to get their 52% majority.
I’ll answer any questions.
Mr. Mayor: Actually the question has been called for. So, the question has been called
for.
Mr. D. Smith: I just want some clarification, Mr. Chairman, because this, the question
what is the question? Will somebody please tell me what it is?
Mr. Mayor: There’s been a motion to deny and the question has been called for.
Mr. D. Smith: Motion to deny what? This says discuss the Downtown Development
Authority’s CADI Program. It doesn’t say create one, design one ---
Mr. Mayor: Good point. That’s a good clarification point.
Mr. D. Smith: --- so.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Jackson, would you like to clarify?
Mr. Jackson: I’d be happy to clarify. I’d like to make a motion to deny and future denial
of the CADI BID District protest in downtown Augusta.
Mr. Mayor: I don’t, Mr. MacKenzie, I don’t think that you can do that.
32
Mr. Jackson: Okay, I’ll take the future out. Deny the CADI Program for this year and
next year having to tax themselves to clean up their own property.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and let me just say the question’s been called for. I don’t see this
going anywhere. It’s actually been discussed.
Mr. Mason: But we do need some clarification, Mr. Mayor. I mean we’ve got to be
correct ---
Mr. Mayor: And the motion is? Go ahead.
Mr. Mason: --- even in this case because I don’t believe that we’re clear. Well, I’m not
clear. Now when you say motion to deny there has to be something to deny.
Mr. Mayor: There has to be a request.
Mr. Mason: Okay, the first thing is and this is what I tried to bring out and I think the
Legal spoke to this there is nothing to even talk about approving or denying because nothing
exists. That’s first and foremost. So what are you denying? You’re denying something that
don’t even exist already. I mean we’ve got to clear. We’ve got to do this thing right. I’m not ---
Mr. Mayor: I agree which is why I’m focusing on the rules of the procedure that we’re
governed by following the call for the question. So ---
Mr. Mason: But we’ve got to go ahead and get that clear for clarity. I’m not clear ---
Mr. Mayor: I’m not clear most of the time ---
Mr. Mason: --- on what we’re denying ---
Mr. Mayor: --- on what we’re doing these days.
Mr. Mason: --- because nothing exists, Mr. Mayor, I mean that’s why I asked Legal.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s just do this. Let’s go to Legal Counsel. And I agree you’ve made
good points. How can you deny something that’s not in place to begin with? Mr. MacKenzie,
what would be or is there even ---
Mr. Mason: That’s it.
Mr. Mayor: --- I mean I think if the motion would be a substitute motion to receive as
information ---
Mr. Mason: So moved.
Mr. Mayor: --- and move on.
33
Mr. D. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute motion to receive as information that’s been properly
seconded. I will tell you, gentlemen, the Chair rules that we’ve debated this enough. The
question has been called for. And ---
Mr. Fennoy: You mean there’s no discussion?
Mr. Mayor: The question has been called for so it’s been adequately ---
Mr. Fennoy: Wasn’t it on the original motion that was made?
Mr. Mayor: What’s that?
Mr. Fennoy: Whatever Commissioner Jackson’s motion was.
Mr. Mayor: Golly.
Mr. Fennoy: I’m just asking, I don’t know now.
Mr. Mayor: We, okay, can we do a class in parliamentary procedure? Mr. MacKenzie,
would it be appropriate to have discussion on the substitute motion?
Mr. MacKenzie: The substitute motion is a motion that’s incident to the main motion. If
it’s the belief of the Chair that the issue has been discussed and no further information would be
fruitful to discuss regarding the motion then it would be appropriate to call the question.
Mr. Mayor: That would be the ruling of the Chair.
Mr. Fennoy: (unintelligible) left up to the discretion of the Chair?
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Yes.
Mr. Williams: --- are you talking about the class. Now when you call for the question,
that’s a vote to see if there’s any more discussion. You don’t end it because you, the question’s
been called.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: If there’s some unreadiness, that means we vote to see if there’s enough
votes to keep talking.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Is the Commission ready to vote on this issue?
34
Mr. D. Smith: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion on the floor to receive this as
information. Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign of voting.
Mr. Fennoy and Mr. Jackson vote No.
Motion Passes 7-2.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, I think we have one final agenda item that was an addition to
the agenda.
The Clerk:
ADDENDUM
43. Request to hear from prime contractors for Solid Waste collection services regarding
their plans to meet their Local Small Business utilization goals. (Requested by
Commissioner Johnson) (Inadvertently omitted by Clerk’s Office)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, this was your addition?
Mr. Johnson: Actually it was, I guess it was on there from the committee cycle so it was
actually just kind of carried over from committee. We already heard from the prime contractors
so I think at this point it would just be upon us to move forward. I don’t know whether Mark had
anything he wanted to add to what was stated last week but my whole source was just to get the
primes up here to kind of get a synopsis of what they’re proposing to meet their goals for the
Local Small Business portion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Johnson who is the director I guess of Utilities
out there at the landfill. This bid was sent out and it was changed and we talked about this in our
previous meeting that were three service filling stations I guess you would call them for gas for
the landfill to be built. And it took out one of those and it not rebid it but that changed the scope
of the whole bid because it took that out. We got a contract and Mr. Johnson might need to step
up to the plate to tell us we got a contract with the clay mine out in south Augusta that we put the
line in place to provide fuel for them. If we use what we been talking about and I don’t think it’s
been done legally but if we use what we’ve been talking about taking the gas from the clay mines
and shut that mine down I guess if Mr. Johnson can address the issue that if we do that do we end
up spending that money to run the line for the clay plant out there.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: The contract with the mine goes to either 2015 or 2017.
35
Mr. Williams: No, no, Mr. Johnson. My question to you was did we lay the pipe. Not
when the contract started, when was it lasted. I just want to know did we agree to and put a line
in place to supply the gas for the landfill to that plant for whatever time. Did we do that?
Mr. Johnson: Augusta did not. Back in 1996 Augusta Richmond County contracted and
sold its gas rights to a company called Land Gas of Georgia. Land Gas of Georgia was a private
development company who then laid the pipe, entered the agreements with Uniman Kaolin at
that point in time who was the benefactor of the gas. They received the revenues and then in turn
they gave us environmental compliance. So in 2003 we identified that there were some
operational issues. In 2005 or ’06 we bought out that plant back from Land Gas of Georgia.
Mr. Williams: So we’re in business like I said with the clay company. I don’t care how
we got there from New York to Waynesboro we’re still in business with those and we want to
take that same gas that we providing for those now to get it into the trucks that we proposed to
use I guess when the contract comes to its full term. We had three stations in there, Mr. Mayor,
and we pulled out one. The Attorney said in this meeting that we went ahead and Procurement
asked them to rebid it and they didn’t rebid it and it went out. Took out, taken out one fueling
station which was a major change in the contract. And it should have been rebidded. Now the
Attorney said nobody has challenged us yet, yet meaning that they are coming. They may not be
here today but they’re on their way because we did not go through that process right. We hired -
--
Mr. Mayor: I’ll recognize you for another two.
Mr. Williams: -- yes, sir, we’re going to need two more after that, Mr. Mayor, but
anyway we elected to get one company 25% of the local participation. We had five professional
garbage haulers locally that been in the city for quite some time and did a real good job. And
now we have put four of those at least four maybe at least three maybe four out of business. My
point is we’ve done the bidding wrong, we have not considered the kaolin plant that we supposed
to be supplying the fuel for. He hadn’t even addressed the issues of the smell that those new
trucks that we’re talking about conveying. And if you never smelled one you think that
Continental Can was putting out an odor but can you imagine being on Broad Street when those
trucks go by, you’re sitting out at one of the local businesses trying to eat when those trucks
come by. We hadn’t considered any of that, Mr. Mayor. And I just think we need to go back
and look at what we’re doing, redo it, rebid it or whatever it takes to get this right. Because it
certainly started off wrong and it’s going to end up wrong because we did not do the proper
procurement issue that we should’ve done when we changed that.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Commissioner Williams. Commissioner Fennoy then
Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Fennoy: And my question is to the Attorney. If we go from three stations to two
stations, does that require that we go back out for rebidding?
Mr. MacKenzie: No, it doesn’t require that. This was procured, I think the initial date of
the procurement was in 2011 and there were a number of addendums. I actually have a stack of
36
them here that were done throughout this procurement process. As you know this was a very
complicated procurement. It had many facets to it. The C&G station was only one of those
facets and it is my opinion that the changes that we made with respect to the bidding were in
accordance with the Augusta Georgia code. The period of time for any vendors to file a bid
protest with respect to the procurement process is long over now as we’re into 2013. And the
date for the beginning implementation stages of the contract is scheduled to begin this year.
Mr. Fennoy: So what I’m hearing is that once we sent out a request, a bid request, we
could change make changes and do not have to rebid it?
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, you can make changes. I wouldn’t make a guess of the number of
changes, but there were numerous changes made to this one. And it’s very common because of
the RFP process is what you get back from proposers is a proposal. And sometimes when you
get that proposal back it’s necessary to go back to the drawing board and say, well, we didn’t get
what we hoped for. They’re asking and a lot of questions can be asked from proposers as well.
So it’s very common for there to be adjustments made once you receive the proposals back. In
this instance there were numerous questions and there were numerous addendums to the process.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Point of clarification from Mark Johnson if you
would. Mark, I understand that one of the colleagues is talking about UNIMAN using the excess
fuel or gases that the landfill produces. But these C&G stations, what type of gas is that?
Mr. Johnson: Natural gas. We’re pulling the gas right off of Atlanta Gas Light pipe line.
We will have options whenever that contract ends in 2015 or 2017. But as it stands today it’s
cheaper to buy the gas out of the pipe than it is to clean our gas up to natural gas standards.
Mr. Guilfoyle: So none of that C&G stations comes off of Augusta Richmond County
properties.
Mr. Johnson: No, it comes straight out of Atlanta Gas Light Pipe Line.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and I’ll recognize you Commissioner Williams for a point of personal
privilege.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, because it’s really confusing the way these
questions are being asked and answered. It’s not anything now but when we, we’re not having
those trucks now. We’re not using those trucks now we’re using regular gasoline trucks now.
When we convert if we convert the Attorney said that there was a lot of amendments to the
contract and there were. But when you change a large scope of the contract like that you have to
rebid it. The rules say that anything in the government over $5,000 dollars have to be bidded.
You can’t make a change because you just feel like making a change. And we talked about this
before in the same meeting about the changes that was made to take one fueling station out.
37
Now I’m not upset because the local participation’s not there I’m upset because we, Procurement
told them to go out for bid again and they chose not to. And I asked you gave that direction and
the Attorney gave that direction. And I asked how can he set the policy, say a parliamentarian
here to tell us to keep on the straight and narrow and he made that decision. Somebody needs to
look at this.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Johnson: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Johnson: Yeah, I think the Attorney has something. I’ll speak to him. Did you?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: Just a very brief clarification. This was a Commission decision. And I
know of you all weren’t and some of you were. The very issue of whether or not to go out to
rebid this at that point in time was a decision that was brought to the Commission’s attention and
the Commission voted to go with the Procurement would be addendum the way it was.
Mr. Williams: It doesn’t make it right, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: The Commission voted it, but that don’t make it right. The law says the
government says it should be bidded.
Mr. Mayor: All righty. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Johnson: Well, what I would just like to say at the end of the day, Mr. Mayor, you
know it’s unfortunate of course you know I’m one of the major supporters of our local and small
business especially those haulers who have been doing such a great job for us. Unfortunately we
didn’t, it wasn’t our choice to say who gets the contract or what subs get the contract. You know
they made a commitment that they would do 23/25% local participation. They came forth last
week and proposed or gave us their proposal how they are going to in turn meet their goal if you
will. And at this point you know it’s pretty much up to our primes to look at options and
avenues moving forward because I don’t understand how they’re going to be able really
complete the services that this contract is calling for with what they said they were going to do
last week. That ain’t my call to make. I’m not the one out there doing the garbage collections
and the yard waste collections both waste. But I just don’t understand how it’s going to work.
And I think before it’s all said and done them guys are going to be back at the table because I
don’t understand how you’ve got the largest contract ever let and now you’re telling me we’ve
got a furor you know local small haulers participating in this. I just don’t understand how it’s
going to work but know we have fought with this thing as much as we could from the
perspective that we do have. But I do think there’s going to be some opportunity for them. I just
38
don’t see how, you can’t bring those guys to the table because it’s just too much work. You
know and these guys are not going to be able handle the work load. I just understand how
they’re going to be able to do it. So I would like to say to those haulers who are out there that we
have looked at this thing through and throughout. Yes, a lot of things probably could have been
done in the initial beginning but it wasn’t done that way. My main focus was to make sure that
even in the event that the smaller guys got the contract that they would not have to convert their
trucks over right then. We wanted to give them a window to be able to do that. We did that. We
wanted to make sure that the participation efforts were there ---
Mr. Mayor: Another two?
Mr. Johnson: --- and yes please. And we did that.
Mr. Mayor: I’ll recognize you for another two.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you. And so at this point you know the primes did what they
thought they needed to do. I don’t agree with it; I’m making it known for the record and, you
know, we kind of got to let this thing play itself out at this point. So I just wanted to put that out
there, Mr. Mayor. And I understand right now it’s just kind of tough for us up here to really say
anything else about it.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess there’s no pun intended but something
doesn’t smell quite right here. There was some mention about I believe from Commissioner
Williams about the contract should have been rebidded and so forth. And so we do have
Procurement in here now and I just want if through the Chair Ms. Sams could come up to speak
to the issue of if things were not appropriately if in fact this could have or should have went back
out for rebid at any point during this process I think we have to get that on the record one way or
the other based on some things that have been said. So my question then would be what the
contract that was let or that is being executed during this process, was there any time where there
could have been or should have been perhaps a rebid of the contract?
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Sams?
Ms. Sams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, thank you, Mr. Mason, Commissioner Mason, during
any Procurement process there are times when you look and see what and how you are procuring
various products and commodities. In this particular case of course we’ve taken our time. We
looked at it we’ve gone into an analysis of what happened and the will of the Commission, the
then Commission, was to not rebid to proceed. If is that in the best practices? Perhaps so
because it was the will of the Commission they were within the laws of Augusta Richmond
County.
Mr. Mason: Uh, Mr. Mayor, of course ---
Mr. Williams: You didn’t answer the question, Ms. Sams.
39
Ms. Sams: The question was if you needed, the city needed to go back out to rebid if
there was any reason for the city to go back out to rebid. Legally there was no reason, no reason.
Mr. Mason: Legally there was no reason. Okay, so ---
Ms. Sams: But, yes, sir?
Mr. Mason: No, go ahead, please.
Ms. Sams: --- but would we have liked to have gone back out probably address some of
the issues of the day it would probably have been most suited to do it. However there was no
laws broken. There was proper protocol and we are where we are because at that particular time
given the analysis that was given to Commission, Commission decided not to rebid and to
proceed.
Mr. Mason: And, Mr. Mayor, the reason why I brought that up is because you know
during that time frame certainly I was a strong advocate against what we were about to do and
what we eventually did. I think what you’re hearing here is that certainly it could have and
maybe even should have been rebidded but the fact of the matter is during that time frame six
votes carried the day and it was moved forward. I don’t know legally at this point if there’s
something that could be done about that. But I do know that it was addressed quite vigorously
certainly by myself for one and several other Commissioners that this probably wasn’t the best --
-
Mr. Mayor: I take it you want to be recognized for another two?
Mr. Mason: Yeah, and I’ll probably only need about thirty seconds. But that it will, it
was probably not the best move at that particular time. I know I voiced that opinion and
unfortunately we find ourselves here today. Whether there’s been anything legally done, you’re
saying that legally everything is correct.
Ms. Sams: I don’t see where there has been any laws broken as it relates to Procurement
code.
Mr. Mason: So did the contract change at all from the original. There were several
modifications to the solicitation?
Ms. Sams: There were modifications to the specifications but in the best, according to
the best practices of the procurement process and procedures they were handled through what
legally you have to address him with an addendum. And that addendum took place. So
everybody was given an opportunity to bid in accordance to the changes that were made to the
specifications legally. So when you have a change in specifications and you address it by the
addendum everyone’s given the same information and are asked to report at the same time. And
the playing field as you would say it would be leveled to a degree then the process is legal. So
40
there is no reason to think that it was an illegal process. It was changed by way of an addendum
which is what the law requires.
Mr. Mason: My original statement stands. Something doesn’t smell quite right in this
whole process. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Can I get a motion to receive this as information?
Mr. Mayor:
Mr. Johnson: So moved.
Mr. Mayor: Can I get a primary motion?
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. If there’s no further discussion
Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion Passes 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: And, Mr. MacKenzie, you can make your plea but I don’t know that ---
Mr. MacKenzie: We do have one relatively short matter, pending and potential litigation
which does have an urgent timeline. I don’t think it will take very long but it is something I
would recommend that we address today.
Can I get a motion to go into Legal Session to address those issues?
Mr. Mayor:
Mr. D. Smith: I’ll make that motion.
Mr. Johnson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Commissioners will now vote by the usual
sign of voting.
Motion Passes 9-0.
[LEGAL MEETING]
Mr. Mayor: I’ll go ahead and call the meeting back to order. Mr. MacKenzie.
45. Motion to authorize execution by the Mayor of the affidavit of compliance with
Georgia’s Open Meeting Act.
Mr. MacKenzie: I would entertain a motion to execute the Closed Meeting Affidavit.
Mr. Mayor: Can we get a motion to that effect?
41
Mr. Fennoy: So moved.
Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioners will now
vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Williams out.
Motion Passes 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie.
ADDENDUM
44. Motion to extend the notice of termination of the Transit Management Agreement with
Mobility Transit Services, LLC to July 31, 2013, and to authorize the Mayor to execute
such documents as are necessary, all in form as approved by the General Counsel of
Augusta, Georgia.
Mr. MacKenzie: The next item would be a motion to, an addition to extend the Notice of
Termination date of the Transit Management Agreement with Mobility Transit Services, LLC to
July 31, 2013 and authorize the Mayor to execute such documents necessary.
Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to that effect?
Mr. Fennoy: So moved.
Mr. Johnson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioners will now
vote by the usual sign of voting.
Mr. Williams out.
Motion Passes 8-0.
Mr. Mayor: With no further business to come before the body we stand adjourned.
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Nancy Morawski
Deputy Clerk of Commission
42
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
April 2, 2013.
__________________________
Clerk of Commission
43