Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting June 27, 2013 REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER JUNE 27, 2013 Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 5:00 p.m., June 27, 2013, the Hon. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Lockett, Guilfoyle, Mason, D. Smith, Williams, Fennoy, Johnson, Davis and G. Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Absent: Hon. Jackson, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited. Mr. Mayor: And I’ll go ahead and call to order the Commission meeting. Madam Clerk. The Clerk: Yes, sir. The first delegation --- Mr. Mayor: Excuse me, I was trying to, and I would like to call on Rev. Robert D. Fain, Pastor of the Good Shepherd, to issue our invocation. Please stand. Ms. Prather: You’re right, I don’t look like Robert Fain. I’m Lynn Prather. Can you hear me? (Invocation given by Ms. Prather) The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited. Mr. Mayor: Thank you for that wonderful invocation. And, Pastor, could you please come forward? I have a little something for you. Office of the Mayor. By these present be it known that Reverend Lynn Prather, Church of the Good Shepherd is Chaplain of the Day. And it’s my church too. For your civic and spiritual guidance demonstrated throughout the th community serves as an example for all of the faith community. Given under my hand this 27 of June 2013. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor. Thank you. (APPLAUSE) Mr. Mayor: Now, Madam Clerk, on to our delegation. The Clerk: DELEGATIONS A. Mr. A.K. Hasan regarding Turner Construction Company – Municipal Building bid process. Mr. Mayor: And if you could keep it to five minutes, please, sir. Mr. Hasan. I’m A.K. Hasan. My address is 5029D Atria Court, Hephzibah Georgia. Honorable Commissioners I’m here to ask the Commission to call for an immediate investigation into Turner Construction Company specifically the impact of Ms. Jennifer Henderson Project Manager for the Augusta Municipal Building Project activities involving me, Kelly Peal and our 1 respective companies, a.k. Human Resources and Supplies, Inc. and KMT Services Inc. Should the Commission call for an investigation we believe at a minimum it would be determined that Ms. Henderson initiated specific steps to undermine our efforts, disrupt our prequalification and discourage our bid in the project thereby denying us the right to complete our prequalification process and submit the bid for our project in an unmolested, fair and objective environment. Furthermore we believe an investigation will show that we were subjected to a level of scrutiny and hostile treatment that the other bidders of the project were not. Second, first it is important that you know I bid the Municipal Building, building project at the 60% level via my other company HH&L Electric, Inc. It was a joint venture bid with another majority firm. The process was straight forward. Second our later informants in this and I plan to bid the project but in the next round I would bid with a new partner KMT Services. She seemed unusually interested in knowing why I was discontinuing relations with my previous partner. I have a email for the record if an investigation is launched. Although my new partner and I had submitted only partial prequalification information to Turner online permits. In this instruction she asked if we could meet with her so we did. In the meeting I noticed Ms. Henderson was aggressively critical, interrupting and discouraging. In all of my dealings with her for the first time she expressed Turner has no requirements to include minorities and women in the project. My partner and I never inquired about that and never commented on it. As she pressed forward she essentially stated this project size, scope and complexity of scheduling is too much for your companies to handle to which my partner Kelly replied respectfully this is an easy job. Ms. Henderson was quite upset by the use of the word easy. She took it as an insult. Kelly was able to convey to her in fragments that he was not underestimating the project’s scope and complexities but rather stating that the project’s his company does in local and industrial plants up and down Columbia Nitrogen Drive and FEDEX’s across the United States where electrical construction is a clear and present danger to workman’s property and online production where he must work as quickly and safely and efficiently to solve the company’s electrical problems or they will lose tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars has sufficiently equipped him to manage without fear or failure a project like the Municipal Building. After the meeting Kelly and I surmised that Ms. Henderson scheduled that meeting in an attempt to discourage us and undermine our partnership in that she utilized the no minority or women requirements to do it. Meanwhile we received an invitation to attend a mandatory pre bid meeting at Turner’s local office. I received a call from Turner’s Atlanta office wanting to know if I received the bid package and if I planned to bid. I confirmed yes. While chairing the mandatory pre bid meeting without anyone asking the question Ms. Henderson again raised the issue that Turner has no requirements to include minorities and women in the project. I mentioned that fact in my email to the Commission and the media because after the pre bid meeting when my partner Kelly and his brother and I were discussing our take on the meeting they were outraged that Ms. Henderson had targeted and singled me out by race. I told them I am not certain because I had my head down and was writing notes in my tablet when she addressed the minority and women issue and since I already knew that I didn’t bother to look up. They both stated emphatically she was looking right at you when she said it. They remained convinced I was her intended target and that she was intent on driving us away from the table. Unfortunately her response to my emails the next morning confirmed our suspicion whereas Ms. Henderson stated while Kelly may think this is an easy project I can assure you it is not. She declared me incompetent, our company’s incapable our experiences are irrelevant. And then she stated I think if you are willing to expend the resources it probably wouldn’t hurt to put a bid together and submit. I will review it and 2 provide feedback but it would not be accepted based on the points above. In light of Ms. Henderson’s actions against us it was difficult to see how we could be successful in that environment therefore we opted not to bid. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you, sir. Do we have any questions? Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Mr. Hasan, that’s a pretty strong statement there and it really got my attention to have her, someone reply to you like that. But have you got any I guess Jim Wall would say proof, legal or something that, I mean I heard your platform your statement there but have you got any document or documents that will back up what you just stated? Because it’s pretty serious. Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir --- Mr. Williams: Pretty thorough but pretty serious. th Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir, thank you. I have an email here that’s dated June 13 that Ms. Henderson responded with the comments that I alluded to. And in addition to that you will find that those responses came as a result of my asking for a copy of the attendees to the pre bid meeting which we had held the previous day and that we were looking toward that list because we thought that there was someone there that was involved in data that we might network with which shows that we were continuing to build our portfolio. I can provide a copy of this email th for the record. I sent it to the Commissioners at an earlier date on the 13 in fact. Mr. Williams: But I think, Mr. Mayor, is there something that’s in place from the attorneys or from some side to do to look at a pre bid protest? Andrew, how does that work? I mean is this the floor where he needs to be to bring that or is that something? Mr. MacKenzie: Well, there’s a bid protest process that could be implemented with respect to that. I mean obviously this is not a procurement that our Procurement office procured directly but there are rules that apply to any bidding process for which any disappointing bidder could avail themselves of. Mr. Williams: So I guess what you’re saying is he needs to go through that process before we come here? I mean I think he enlightened us but does he not have to go, I mean where do they go? Do they come to your office? Who handles this? Mr. MacKenzie: I would be my recommendation that he go through any bid process that is in place with respect to the projects that he’s speaking of. Now if he’s made any allegation that there’s been a breach of contract with respect to the Turner contract that’s the only agreement that this city has an agreement with is Turner. If there’s any breach of contract issues that’s something the city could look at. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’m still doubtful because I don’t know what to tell him. I don’t know which direction to point him in if any. But I heard what he said and it’s a pretty 3 strong statement. But I’m just trying to see dealing with Turner who does work for us is one thing. But is that a contract that we have let, Andrew? Is that? Mr. MacKenzie: The way that this particular project was structured is we only have a contract with the prime contractor which is Turner. Then Turner has an obligation to procure additional services which is my understanding what this is. We don’t a direct contractual relationship or did not participate directly in this procurement process. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is for the General Counsel. With the Turner contract with this government were there any stipulations or recommendations that they should have of minority participation that would, well let’s discuss because I know with our other contracts I know that there’s a law department, procurement and administrative offices involved. But in many instances I don’t see DBE or anybody of that nature or this nonexistent position that we talked about having. I don’t see any representation there. So if you get the pre bid if they’re not a part of the meeting and so forth how will anybody get in a position to talk to Turner or anybody else and say look, you know this is our expectation? We’re not directing you but this is what we would like you to do. Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, and my best answer to that would be the terms and conditions of the contract with Turner would govern what relationship Augusta has with Turner. Now there are general laws that would apply to any bid procurement process that would allow party if they’re agreed by that process. And if there’s any allegation that someone’s been discriminated against there are laws that protect against that. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Mason and then Commissioner Smith. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I empathize with Mr. Hasan’s position there but I’m going to caution us up here to be extremely careful moving forward at this point because again through an appropriate procurement it is not and it should not be our position to deal with subcontractors or subs of subcontractors or potential subcontractors because that is not the function of this government. Now if there is an issue with our prime contractor we cannot and did not mandate who they should hire or who they shouldn’t hire who they should subcontract with or not. So to me it seems as though from this Commission’s standpoint that dealing with a potential subcontractor that we’re out of bounds. It appears to me that at this point if there is a protest perceived or real that would be an appropriate time to seek legal guidance on the part of the subcontractor if in fact there is a feeling that there’s a some prejudice if you will or discrimination even in this particular case. And I would encourage one to do that if that were the case. But it would seem to me that that would not be appropriate for this Commission at this particular point. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: This question is for the General Counsel. Andrew, we are operating under the guidelines imposed by the federal court from the Thompson Wrecking suit. Is that correct? 4 Mr. MacKenzie: Yes. Mr. D. Smith: And so in that it told us that we should that we are enjoined from mandating participation. Is that correct? Mr. MacKenzie: The injunction prohibits Augusta from awarding any contract or requiring a prime contractor to award any contract on the basis of race or gender. Mr. D. Smith: So if we went to Turner and said you’ve got to hire this sub and this sub and this sub we’d be in violation of the court, the federal court order. Mr. MacKenzie: It would implicate the court order. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you. No further. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Yes, sir, Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Even though I think this Commissioner cannot do what Donnie says I think this Commissioner is looking for fairness for our, from our contractors to our subcontractors. And I think if the, if there’s any unfairness that’s going on with the contractor as it relates to subcontractors than I think it should be brought to this commission’s attention. And I appreciate you bringing that issue to our attention. I’m not exactly sure at this particular time what we need to do to proceed other than what our General Counsel said about the bid protest. But if there’s any unfairness in the process than I think it needs to be brought to our attention. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you, sir. Mr. Mason: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Mr. Mason. Mr. Mason: Let me just do a quick follow up here so that we’re clear. I am very appreciative of the information that’s brought forward. I don’t want anyone to assume that that’s not the case as far as this Commissioner’s concerned. But at the end of the day my responsibility is to insure that we’re operating in a manner or that I’m operating in a manner as appropriate for the position that I hold. I’m not in a position to deal with the subcontract issue. But what we are in a position to do as Commissioners is be more cognizant of who we subcontract with, who we contract with as a prime. And so once we get that straight then the rest of it will take care of itself. So I’m not trying to put the cart before the horse because that makes for a very bumpy ride. I only want to deal with what the situation that we can deal with and that’s that we be more cognizant if in fact this was an issue. And I’m not assuming that it is but the fact of the matter is whomever it is that we contract with six at minimum six Commissioner’s vote on that. And so we’ve got to be more cognizant of who it is that we put in as prime contractors. And I think that’s the focus of this Commission. And then the rest of it if we did that appropriately then the rest of it would take care of itself. So I’m putting a little even on my own back. If we do that 5 what we’re supposed to do than a lot of this would not follow in this situation if you find with Mr. Hasan. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you, sir. Commissioner Guilfoyle, did you have your hand up? Okay, thank you, Mr. Hasan. Madam Clerk, on to the consent agenda. The Clerk: Yes, sir. Our consent agenda consists of items 1-3. Mr. Mayor: Okay, lady and gentlemen, do we have any additions to the consent agenda? Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, let me consent items 8-14, Madam Clerk, if nobody has a problem. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Johnson: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Johnson. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Johnson: Thank you. Item six. Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any further, Ms. Davis. Ms. Davis: I need some discussion on item six please. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay, do we have any further agenda items to be added to consent? Yes, sir, Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Mr. Mayor, is there any reason why we can’t, I would like to add sixteen. I don’t see any reason why we shouldn’t be able to do that. I see the Administrator say that --- Mr. Mayor: Mr. Russell. Mr. Russell: I don’t have a problem adding sixteen if we change the word discretion to direction as a typo. Mr. Mason: That direction would be absolutely appropriate --- Mr. Mayor: Yes. Mr. Mason: --- because we want that money going out to Windsor Springs so we can get that handled and we’re directing you do so. Mr. Russell: That would be the only issue I would have with that item. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Commissioner Lockett. 6 Mr. Lockett: Yes, I have one question on number sixteen. Mr. Administrator, how much do you authorize to approve at the present time? Mr. Russell: Twenty-five for purchasing --- Mr. Lockett: Per right-of-way. Mr. Russell: --- right-of-way is at ten I believe. Mr. Lockett: So you’re up from ten to fifty? Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay. So we have any further items to be added to the consent? Any items to be pulled for discussion? Hearing none, I’d look for a motion to approve the consent agenda. Mr. Johnson: So moved. Mr. Lockett: Second. CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC SAFETY 1. Motion to approve ordinance to protect pets by prohibiting operators of motor vehicles from leaving the vehicle with an unattended dog, cat or other animal inside under circumstances that would endanger the animal’s health, safety, or welfare. (Approved by the Commission June 19, 2013 – second reading. 2. Motion to approve ordinance to protect the children of Augusta, Georgia by prohibiting operators and adult passengers of motor vehicles from leaving the vehicle with an unattended child inside. (Approved by the Commission June 18, 2013 – second reading. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 3. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held June 18, 2013 and Special Called Legal Meeting held June 18, 2013. FINANCE 8. Approve the replacement of two trucks from Code Enforcement. 9. Approve the replacement of 1-F-250, for Fleet Management. 10. Approve the purchase of 1-F-150 4X4 for the Georgia Forestry, Fire Control Officer. 11. Request the Augusta Commission approve the acquisition of 2 transport vans and one Cargo Van for the Recreation Department. 12. Approve the replacement of two motorcycles of the Sheriff’s Office, Traffic Division. 13. Request to replace two vehicles of the Tax Assessor’s Office. 14. Request approval for the replacement of 4 trucks for Traffic Engineering. ENINGEERING SERVICES 7 16. Motion to authorize the Administrator to approve and Mayor to execute, at the discretion of the Augusta Law Department, Right-of-Way Parcels closing whose Fair Market Value does not exceed $50,000 on Windsor Spring Road Improvement Project, Phase V. All Parcels which have a Fair Market Value of $50,001 or Higher will be submitted to the Augusta Commission for approval. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion carries 9-0. [Items 1-3, 8-14, 16] Mr. Mayor: And, Madam Clerk, I believe we did have two potential additions to the agenda. The Clerk: Yes, sir. You have a request for two additions to the agenda. The first one is a motion to approve the award of the RFP for Transit System Service and support services to McDonald Transit for a period of three years. And item two was to consider award of RFP for the Waste Water Collection System Asset Management Program to Red Zone Robotics, Inc. Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have unanimous consent to add these two agenda items? We do not. Okay. Mr. Guilfoyle: Can we make it one on one? Mr. Mayor: What’s that? Mr. Guilfoyle: Can we add item number two as consent gentlemen? Mr. Mayor: Do we have, okay. Do we have unanimous consent for one? For item number one. Mr. D. Smith: Mr. Mayor, if I’m the only one --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: --- against it then I just have one question that can clear both of them up if I’m the only one standing in the way of this. Mr. Mayor: Who else was not? Commissioner Lockett, did you? Mr. Lockett: I did not consent to number one. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Lockett: And do you want to know why? 8 Mr. Mayor: If you would like to tell us. Mr. Lockett: I’ll be brief. I’ve read everything that I’ve been presented on line and in hardcopy and I don’t have sufficient information to make a recommendation one way of the other. And I’m not going to vote blindly. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do we have unanimous consent for number two? Mr. Lockett: I have a question on number two. Mr. D. Smith: I do too. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: If you don’t have unanimous consent, Mr. Mayor, we to just --- Mr. Mayor: Okay, we don’t have unanimous consent on either of the additions to the agenda. So, Madam Clerk, let’s go to the regular agenda --- The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: --- and see if we can get unanimous consent there. The Clerk: That would be item number four. Rob? PUBLIC SERVICES 4. New Ownership Application: A.N. 13-15: A request by Manoj Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Dhruti Real Estate Investments, LLC DBA Augusta Mart located at 1713 Martin Luther King Blvd. District 2. Super District 9. Mr. Sherman: Number four is a Ownership Application. Is a request by Manoj Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Dhruti Real Estate Investments, LLC doing business as August Mart located at 1713 Martin Luther King Blvd. District 2. Super District 9. Please state your name and address for the record. Mr. Patel: Manoj Patel 3975 Stone Village Court Duluth Georgia. Mr. Sherman: Planning and Development and the Sheriff’s Department have reviewed the application and recommend you approve it. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Rob, where is this located at? What’s it close to? Give me a landmark. th Mr. Sherman: Okay, this is at the corner of 12 and MLK. It’s a convenience store. 9 Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Sherman: Sort of diagonally across from --- Mr. Williams: Right, okay. Mr. Sherman: --- (inaudible). Mr. Johnson: Move to approve. Mr. Guilfoyle: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Sherman: Okay, number five’s a new application --- Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item. The Clerk: Can I get the vote on that? Motion carries 9-0. PUBLIC SERVICES 5. New Application: A.N. 13-16: A request by Lucretia Hanes for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer and Wine license to be used in connection with Cheerz Conference Center located at 2059 Gordon Highway. District 5. Super District 9. The Clerk: Go ahead. Mr. Sherman: Now, number five is a New Application: A request by Lucretia Haynes for an on premised Liquor, Beer and Wine license to be used in connection with, and here’s the correction Cheerz Lounge located at 2059 Gordon Highway. District 5. Super District 9. Ms. Speaker: My name is Lucretia Haynes and my address 2426 Plantation Road Hephzibah Georgia 30815. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: I need a location, Rob, again. Mr. Sherman: Okay the Econo Lodge Hotel behind the Waffle House, Wylds Road which veers off of Gordon Highway going towards North Leg --- Mr. Williams: Okay. 10 Mr. Sherman: --- the hotel right there. They have a lounge there it’s an existing location. Just a new application. Mr. Williams: So moved. Mr. Johnson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have motion that’s been properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please. The Clerk: PUBLIC SERVICES 6. Motion to approve the By-Laws for the Transit Citizens Advisory Committee (TCAC). th (Referred from the Commission’s June 18 meeting). Mr. Mayor: Ms. Davis. Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It’s come to my attention that the previous Transit So I just wanted to make sure we Committee was never properly deactivated or abolished. don’t have two existing committees. So I wanted to make a substitute motion to abolish the Augusta Public Transit Involvement Committee that still exists on paper and create a new committee to be known as the Transit Citizens Advisory Committee and also to approve the by-laws that we were given for review for the new committee. Mr. Mason: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, wait but there’s been no primary motion made so you’d make that as a primary motion. Okay. We have a primary motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. I’m totally in favor of this. In fact I made a call today about appointing someone. And I think Commissioner Smith, Grady Smith that each commissioner will have an appointee I believe. Is that the way that the by-laws came out because we thought it was going to be different. Each person has, I’ve already got ahead of the game Mr. Mayor. I made my call already. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was wondering if I get a point of privilege. 11 Mr. Mayor: Well? Mr. Guilfoyle: I got it. What as a commission up here we all have appointments and I had received a call today from a former commissioner out there in my district that he’s on the Development Authority. The problem that they have on the Development Authority is that there’s not enough people to make a quorum at any given month. And we’ve seen this habitually throughout all the other appointments. I didn’t know if the Clerk could actually bring back not next week give it a month whatever so we could get a list who actually shows up so we as commissioners could either replace or keep the one in positions staying if they’re there month in month out. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, is that? The Clerk: We’ll look into that. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you so much. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Yes, sir. It seems that we have a hard time with these appointments because my friend from the newspaper over there she called me up and told, no not Sylvia, she called me up and said that I missed an appointment and truly I thought I had appointed everybody. And the problem is like I didn’t even know we had a Development Authority appointment so it’s difficult for us to make appointments and hold people accountable going to the meetings when we don’t know how many appointments we truly have. So if the Clerk can try to get us an updated list because I truly thought I did all mine at one time and it turned out I missed one and she called me and reminded me of that. So if we can get an updated list I’d appreciate it. Mr. Mayor: The Clerk would be happy to help with that. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, this, I think something similar to this came up before. And at that time the commission directed all of the authorities and so forth well I don’t want to say directed or not but asked all the authorities and so forth to submit copies of their minutes. And I don’t know if the minutes will show it should show who’s in attendance. And if you don’t get a hard copy of those minutes it should be on line. And another thing from time to time I do call to find out how my appointee is doing whether he or she is doing a satisfactory job or what. And that’s something else we could probably do. Mr. Mayor: Okay we have a motion that’s been properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 9-0. 12 Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 7. Motion to approve a “No Confidence Vote” relative to the performance or lack of performance of the Augusta-Richmond County General Counsel. (Requested by Commissioner Bill Lockett) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that agenda item number seven be pulled. Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second? Mr. Johnson: 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. Motion Passes 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, the next and final agenda item. The Clerk: ENGINEERING SERVICES 15. Discuss 2013 Solid Waste Contract/Contract Term. (Referred from the Commission’s th June 18 meeting) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This new contract is still creating some heartburn all over the CSRA and probably beyond. The trash still and I know it takes time but it still is not being picked up in a manner and I’d like to know what the terms are that we do not, what can we do if they’re not picked up in the time frame it supposed to be picked up. The other part of that is the contractor who named one of the local people to be a part of that after getting the contract wrote him out of the contract. I’ve got some issues with that, Mr. Mayor, and I don’t know where we are but I need somebody to tell me what are we going to do? I mean you were given two pickups a week for one price then you dropped one of those pickups and then charged the same price. To me that doesn’t make good sense. Now maybe it’s just me but people who are in the district that I serve question me all the time about how can we do that if we drop one pickup we ought to at least drop some of the price if not half of the price. What we’re doing we’re charging the same price and it’s still not being picked up in the manner that we thought it was going to be. And I know it takes a little time so I’m trying to give you that time. But they have 13 not got to that point yet. I guess I can name the other local small business person that Mr. Coleman was wrote into the contract and then he was sub sequentially he was wrote out. So I’m trying to figure out how do we do that how do we keep the present contract with the company --- Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two. Mr. Williams: --- thank you, Mr. Mayor. How do we keep a contract with the prime who wrote someone in and got the contract with that stipulation and then wrote them out? Somebody needs to answer that for me then, Mr. Mayor, I’ll take my other one and a half. Mr. Mayor: You’ve got 1:49 left on the clock. Mr. Johnson, would you? Mr. Lockett: Take that one minute and forty-nine seconds, Mr. Johnson. Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I’ll address the initial question which I think was about changing the services from one service to two services a week. Is that --- Mr. Williams: Wait one minute now. Is this a legal question? I need a, Mr. Johnson who I think should be the one to answer this now. Can he tell me --- Mr. MacKenzie: If I may then I’ll respond to the inquiry relating to the subcontractor. And it’s my understanding this was bid as a multi-part contract and that there, the service provider had identified Coleman as a subcontractor did not win the total bid amount. They only won two parts of the three part bid. And I believe their counsel’s indicated here before the committee that the reason they did not hire Coleman to do when it was listed on the subcontractor list was because they did not get the entire amount of the contract is my understanding of what they provided their reason for that. Mr. Williams: Okay, since I’m dealing on the Legal side, Mr. Mayor, as a legal attorney then for whatever reason he was named in the contract by whoever. And once they got that contract then he was not named anymore. So that in my mind that they violated their own contract. When you name a particular person or group or business to be in and because you didn’t get the whole thing who got what you got because you named him. And now that he’s been written out then in my mind that I mean we’ve got enough suits flying around here now Sylvia so this may just another one. So I don’t understand that. Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, if I could just briefly respond. You mentioned the word contract but in this instance there was an RFP which had the identification of potential subs to be used on the contract if they were awarded. And that was one of the subs listed in the RFP. It’s my understanding that if there was any contract then it would’ve been between the prime and the sub and that’s not something that Augusta is privy to that contract. Whether there’s a breach for that would be a remedy for the subcontractor to have a remedy in a court of law to go into it. Now whether or not Augusta can enforce a provision in the RFP that allows for bidders to identify 14 potential subcontractors is a different issue that is probably best discussed in a closed legal meeting because it relates to the court order and is legal advice. Mr. Williams: This did not specify, Mr. Mayor, if I can respond to the attorney. I’ve got a document that all of us received that the prime contractor sent to Mr. Coleman asking him to come in and sign this particular document so that, and I don’t know if everybody’s received that besides me but I’m sure it’s available. And I thought I had it right here with some of this other stuff but that in my mind says that that was a binding document for someone to write you or to give you something and telling you to call them. And I’ve got a copy of that. If I have to go out in my car to get it I still got it somewhere. Trust me. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Johnson. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think if I could share a little light on I think what Commissioner Williams is referencing of course is the Letter of Intent which again it would still be a binding contract between the sub and the prime if in essence it was the will for the prime to elect them to work on the initial contract that they received. They will need to take that up with legal counsel themselves to pursue a breach of contract. And that was on the things we pointed out when they came before the Commission some odd weeks ago. Also moving forward I think as we look at this contract we need to be cognizant as a body that we can only enforce what the primes are doing or not doing and focus primarily on the service that being provided or lack thereof. If it is an issue of that matter then we need to address the prime contractor with that. And I think that’s where we kind to kind of stay focused on because that’s who we have the contract with initially. The subs as a result have the contract against the agreement that was premade before the contract was entered into that they would agree to provide 25% of the services to subcontractors. How they meet their goal or how they met the goal if you will is totally up to them. We did have them come before the Commission and explain to us how they plan to meet the goal prior to the contract starting June 1. They did that. However there have been some questions and concerned about the service and them being able to adequately handle the capacity because there’ve been people that have been overlooked and I think that’s one of the concerns that Commissioner Williams have. But at the end of the day as far as and I just want to put that out there that we got to be very careful because our contract is with the prime and not with the subs. If it is an issue with the sub and the prime then the sub needs to take that up with legal counsel, their legal counsel and have them get with the legal counsel of the prime to deal with that issue if it is in fact a breach or a issue there that they can be awarded. Mr. Mayor: Do you need another two? Mr. Johnson: I’m pretty much done, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to put that out there. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Now as opposed to the last case with Mr. Hasan this is a little different. Here’s where you kind of run into a little slippery slope with some of the verbiage that’s being used here. If in fact Company A whoever that company may be is used in 15 the solicitation or for the proposal process and there’s an evaluation that takes place and they’re a part of that evaluation as a whole now you got a whole other issue. That’s just not a subcontractor. You have utilized this entity to assist you in acquiring an acquisition. Mr. Williams: That’s right. Mr. Mason: That’s a whole other ballgame. I would be very, very careful if I were the prime or anyone else when you’re utilizing companies with the intent of acquiring an acquisition that in fact becomes a binding contract. And anything as opposed to that can be litigated if you will. Now fortunately in the federal government we have a Federal Acquisition Regulation that guides our procurement. Unfortunately we don’t have that here in the county government an acquisition guideline. But that is extremely important because you’re utilizing a company to say hey we’re going to partner with this one, this one and this one okay so give us the contract. And then all of a sudden they’re not there when the contract is let. First of all it’s just moral issue with me and that’s why I say this is where we as a commission can do a better job of determining who it is we’re going to do business with. And that’s not forcing your hand because we didn’t tell you to put them in there. Nobody forced you to do that. That’s what you did and there was an evaluation done and then subsequently there was an award. Mr. Mayor: Do you need another two? Mr. Mason: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Mason: Then there was another award that, then there was an award that was given as a result of that. From that standpoint all of sudden the company’s not there anymore. That’s deceitful at best for whatever reason. And so you know I’m a little disappointed and as a result of that now the results are clear. And Mark and I have had numerous conversations and the things that I brought to him he’s been able to correct in a timely fashion so I will give him credit for that. But that caused a lot of the issues that we have out in the community, trash being left, routes not being known because you didn’t go with the known entity that understands those routes you went with whomever. And they don’t know the routes. These are some of the excuses or reasons that have been given to us, don’t know the routes, new trucks big trucks can’t get into the small street so forth and so on. Well it wasn’t broke I’m not sure why we tried to fix it. And so now we find ourselves in a position that we’ve all been bombarded from our citizens with cause. So just to end that I’ll just say that you know I don’t know what’s going to happen as a result of this but I would frown upon anyone utilizing companies to gain a procurement and then cutting them out at the very end. That’s just wrong on so many levels. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. And, Commissioner Williams, I will recognize you for a third time for one minute. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I thank you, I appreciate that. I just want to know why, how can we do what we’re doing? Really it’s not just, it bothers me about the people that was wrote into the contract whether it be minority whether it be local owned or whatever you are and they 16 were exe’d out of it. But what concerns me is that we was charging our taxpayers for two pickups a week and then we dropped one of those pickups but we’re still charging the same thing. To me something is seriously wrong with that. Now if you’re going to drop the service you at least ought to drop the price somewhat. So it’s like Mr. Mason just stated. If it wasn’t broke I don’t know why they tried to fix it. And they didn’t fix it they made it worse. And trash is still all over the city. But thank you for the third minute. a motion to Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Okay, if there’s no further discussion can I get receive this as information? Mr. Lockett: So moved. Mr. Johnson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Williams votes No. Mr. Guilfoyle out. Motion Passes 7-1. Mr. Mayor: With no further business to come before the body, we stand adjourned. [MEETING ADJOURNED] Nancy Morawski Deputy Clerk of Commission CERTIFICATION: I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Augusta Richmond County Commission held on June 27, 2013. ___________________________________ Clerk of Commission 17