Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting September 3, 2013 REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER SEPTEMBER 3, 2013 Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 5:00 p.m., September 3, 2013, the Hon. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Lockett, Guilfoyle, Mason, D. Smith, Williams, Fennoy, Jackson, Davis and G. Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Mr. Mayor: In the interest of time and due to the fact that we’ve got the gang all here I’ll go ahead and call the meeting to order. And call on Dr. George Robertson, Pastor of First Presbyterian Church, for our invocation. The invocation was given by Dr. George Robertson, Pastor, First Presbyterian Church. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited. Mr. Mayor: Pastor, thank you for that wonderful invocation. Great words to live by. And if you could come forward I have a little something for you. Mr. Mayor: Office of the Mayor. By these present be it known that Dr. George Roberson, Pastor, First Presbyterian Church is Chaplain of the Day. For his civic and spiritual guidance demonstrated throughout the community. Serves as an example for all of the faith rd community. Given under my hand this 3 Day of September 2013. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor. Madam Clerk, on to the delegations. The Clerk: DELEGATIONS A. Presentation from the Augusta Arts in the Heart regarding their upcoming 2013 Festival-Celebration of Community. Mr. Mayor: And if you could keep it to five minutes, please, ma’am. Ms. Durant: Thank you. Mayor, Commissioners, I’m Brenda Durant with the Greater Augusta Arts Council. I bring you greetings from the Arts Council and the good news that the rdnd 33 Annual Arts in the Heart of Augusta is September 20th through 22 of this year. We traditionally honor one of local ethnic or cultural organizations by naming them the featured cultural or country during the festival. We were so excited about some of the movements and celebrations that are going on in our community that we felt that we had to celebrate our community. So this year’s theme is a celebration of community. I think that we designed a beautiful poster this year. We in fact made up some art posters to sell. We felt that they were so beautiful and I had an extra one framed to give to you. The poster was designed by Rhian Swain with Red Wolf Advertising Agency and we’re really excited about this year. I also included in your packet two press releases. The most recent press release covers some of our awards for 33 years. The festival has not stayed still. We are moving forward. We have just won an addition 1 to Best Festival by the readers of Augusta Magazine. Top Twenty Event by the Southeastern Festival Association. Top 200 Event we never made it on this list before by Sunshine Artist Magazine. We debuted at number 73 which I think was pretty amazing. We also won at top USA Event by the publishers of Top Events USA and if you opened your Augusta Chronicle a week ago Monday and you pulled out American Profile Arts in the Heart of Augusta was the thnd happening for Georgia for the weekend the week of September 20 through 22. So we were really thrilled about that. I’ve also included a map. We made some changes to our map this year and the road closing schedule. But I just wanted to thank you and tell you how excited we were and thank you for all your support of Hearts in the Hearts of Augusta. Mr. Mayor: Brenda, thank you so much for all that you guys do. And this is one of my favorite events during the year each and every year. So thank you so much for all that ya’ll do. And before we get started I just want to share a little more good news that earlier today I was interviewed by the National Association of Counties. They’re doing a national report on local economic development initiatives and are doing a case study on Augusta, Georgia. So Washington is taking notice of the great things going on here in Augusta. Madam Clerk, on to the consent agenda. The Clerk: Yes, sir. Our consent agenda consists of items 1-10. Mr. Mayor: Do we have any additions to the consent agenda? Not many to add there. Do we have any items to be pulled for discussion? Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On agenda number three that is supposed to be heard at our Legal meeting on September 9. I don’t know if this is necessary what I’m doing but that’s not going to be heard today. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Lockett: I have a question on agenda number four, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do you want to pull that one for discussion? Mr. Lockett: No maybe, I don’t think so I’d just like to --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Lockett: --- Housing and Community Development was directed to come back in six months with a recommendation. If I could I would like to make a friendly amendment to say rather than come back in six months to come back within six months because they may finish in two months or three months and that’ll give us more time to work on it if that’s the will of the body. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Mason has requested that it be pulled so we can discuss it at that point. 2 Mr. Lockett: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Did Commissioner Lockett request that number three be pulled? The Clerk: No. Mr. Mayor: No. Okay. Go ahead. Mr. Fennoy: I’d like to make a friendly motion in reference to agenda item number three if I can do that. Mr. Mayor: Okay, would you want to pull it for discussion? Mr. Fennoy: Pull it for discussion. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: I’d like get some clarification on six and seven just to be so I know what six and seven is really. I missed you all last week. I wasn’t able to attend committee. I know ya’ll missed me a lot too but. Mr. Mayor: We did. Okay, so we’ll pull those. Any further items? Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, I would like to pull agenda item number ten. And if I may state that the reason why agenda item number three was for Legal is one reason is to deal with DBE and Ms. Gentry’s not here today. And that was the understanding when it came out of committee that it would be heard during Legal as opposed to now. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you, sir. Okay, hearing nothing further do we have a motion to approve the consent agenda? Mr. Guilfoyle: Motion to approve. Mr. D. Smith: Second. CONSENT AGENDA PLANNING 1. ZA-R-230 – 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 21-1(b)-Permitted Uses by adding Group Day Care Homes and Day Care Centers. (Approved by the Commission August 20, 2013 - second reading) PUBLIC SERVICES 3 2. Motion to approve of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Grant for the Airport th Master Plan Update. (This item was received by the Airport the morning the 26 of August th 2013 and must be returned to the FAA by the 12 of September 2013. Due to the time constraints the agenda item was not processed through regular channels. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 26, 2013) ENGINEERING SERVICES 5. Motion to approve the deeds of dedication, maintenance agreements and road resolutions submitted by the Engineering and Augusta Utilities Departments for Haynes Station, Phase 2A, including Pullman Circle and a portion of Rosland Circle in Phase 1. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 26, 2013) 8. Motion to approve a resolution creating street lighting districts. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 26, 2013) PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 9. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held August 20, 2013 and Special Called Legal Meeting held August 20, 2013. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 10-0. [Items 1, 2, 5, 8, 9] Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Madam Clerk. And let’s move on to the pulled agenda items. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 3. Motion to direct the Law Department and DBE Director to meet and come back with a finished product at the next legal meeting regarding Augusta, Georgia’s DBE Program for federally assisted contracts in order to comply with the Department of Transportation’s program and update of the DBE rules 49 CFR Part 23. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee August 26, 2013) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy, this was your pull. Mr. Fennoy: Yes, and my only concern is that maybe we need someone from the Procurement Department and someone else or maybe a Commissioner or another department head to be a part of that committee to come back with the finished product to be presented to the Department of Transportation. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. MacKenzie, correct me if I’m wrong but a Commissioner would be free to attend the meeting between you guys. Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, absolutely if anybody’s interested we could certainly arrange that. I also want to clarify too this is not going to be during the closed legal meeting. It’s just going to 4 be on the same agenda. So we’ll be on the Special Called Agenda at the same time as the legal meeting. It’s not going to be in a closed meeting it’ll just by on that agenda. Mr. Fennoy: And my well --- Mr. Mayor: Go ahead. Mr. Fennoy: --- do you feel that Procurement needs to be a part of that committee? Mr. MacKenzie: It could be helpful to have additional personnel involved. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess my question would be the Department of Transportation have already have a program and have already laid this out as to what we’re supposed to do. How can we come up with something to do or to change if they have a program and have directed us as to what we need to be what they’re going to accept or not going to accept? Now this is kind of a little bit different than the other stuff we’ve been talking about. So I need somebody to kind of help me out to help me understand what that is. Or is that true? Maybe I’m off point, I get off a lot up here so I’m trying to get them all. Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, just briefly. There’s already a program required to be in place. There were some comments that were made by FTA and the suggestions for improvement with respect to the program that was submitted in 2012 and for some updates to be made to that. And I think that’s kind of where we’re at. The stage that we’re at now is to implement those updates and to come back with a final product that includes the updates requested by them. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can follow up with that. And I’m wondering why I mean why hadn’t that been done? Can somebody tell me why we have not gotten to past this point especially with the Department of Transportation who laid it out already for us? Here we are now going to discuss and to come with or to make those clarifications or make those changes that we need to make then bring it back. That’s I’m kind of --- Mr. Mayor: And correct me if I’m wrong Mr. MacKenzie but sort of the holdup on this one has been with the Department of Transportation. Correct? th Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, we actually got a letter July 24, 2013 and they gave a 60-day review period and that provided all our comments. Up until that time we had not received any feedback from them on the program submitted. Mr. Williams: Now, Mr. Mayor, I don’t have my paperwork. I didn’t know to bring that today but this is not it hadn’t just been dropped on it. This is not one of those surprise attacks that we’ve been always getting. This is something that we have been dealing with for quite some time. And I’m not saying that it had not been held up on their end but they have gave us some 5 instructions and told us what we needed to have and we didn’t need to have. Now I think we submitted something and I don’t have my paperwork so I’m trying to speak without looking at my notes. But I guess the meeting we’re setting up is that going to get us off center to get moving? I mean we keep meeting to meet to meet to meet so I need to know is this going, this is the right group, this is the right process, this is what is needed? The Department of Transportation already instructed us and to get those grants we’ve got to do what they say I think not what we want to do because we’re getting the funds and, Mr. MacKenzie, you might be able to help me on that. Mr. Mayor: Do you want another two minutes? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, I need three but I’ll take two. Mr. MacKenzie, can you help me out? Can you tell me if not we’re asking them for grants that they got guidelines for us to go by and we should be going by them in order to get those grants. Is that right? Mr. MacKenzie: Yes absolutely and I agree with you. They had some suggestions for improvement to the program that was already submitted. And that’s what we’re working on, making those adjustments. Mr. Williams: Well, Mr. Mayor, my other minute, you gave me two thank you but we need to direct somebody to get this done. This don’t need to be another meeting of the minds then come back with another meeting of the minds. Somebody needs to get this done between the DBE person and the Attorney between whoever else is going to meet whether the Administrator who we need to get this done so we won’t lose those grants that we need. Mr. Mayor: Exactly and that’s I believe what the motion is instructing them to do. Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Yes, I’d like to make a motion that someone from the Procurement Department be added to the committee that’s going to work on --- with the addition of a representative Mr. Mayor: Okay, that’s a motion to approve from Procurement. Ms. Davis: Second. Mr. Mayor: Is that correct? Mr. Fennoy: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. If there is no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Lockett votes No. Motion Passes 9-1. 6 Mr. Mayor: Next pulled agenda item, Madam Clerk. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 4. Motion to approve Laney Walker/Bethlehem Revitalization Project – Bridge Loan request of $2,500,000.00 and return whatever amount is not used; task the Administrator, Finance Department and Mr. Wheeler to identify and additional funding stream to continue the LW/B Project and bring back recommendation in six months; and to determine whether it is more economical to bring the consulting task in-house rather than outsourcing it. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee August 26, 2013) Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mason, I believe this was your pull. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If I could have this put up on the screen here so my colleagues could see it I’d appreciate. Is Mr. Wheeler not here? Mr. Speaker: He’s not here, sir. Mr. Mason: Okay, unfortunately, Mr. Mayor, I missed the last meeting where we had some lengthy discussion. Some of the questions I have here I’m not going to ask him to answer them today but I do want to read them into the record. And the first one is how much in Laney Walker bond money have you put into this project? What will be the total amount of bonds issued during the life of this project, what are the estimated total fees in interest for those bond issues? How much in HUD Program Funds have you put into this project? What will be the total amount of HUD Program Funds to be used during the life of this project? Where’s the evidence of the 10-1 match of private investment dollars cited on the website. I would like names provided, amounts and letters of commitment from our private entities that we say that there’s a 10-1 match. If you are not at a 10-1 match what is your current match and what are your annual goals for increasing that performance. What percentage of project money is being spent on administration? I need to describe any city positions that are fully or partially funded from the bond proceeds. What are the current and projected annual obligations to outside contractors? Describe any performance measures that are included in those contracts. Are there any current or former city of Augusta employees or officials in principal or are employed by the company during work on this project? If so identify the person, company and extent of that relationship. Do any current or former city of Augusta employees or officials have a previous business relationship with a company doing work on this project? Is so, identify the person, company and extent of that relationship. And I have yet to see any type or Performa financial statements on any of the work that’s been done. So it’s kind of difficult for me Mr. Mayor at this point to go with an approval. I know there was a six month deal but I want to make sure that these questions that are here are answered appropriately and that would give me the opportunity - -- Mr. Mayor: Do you need another two minutes? Mr. Mason: Well, I’m just going to leave it there. And I just want to add that into the uh, add that into the record. 7 Mr. Mayor: Okay. Can we get a motion on this agenda item? Mr. Jackson: Motion to approve. Mr. Fennoy: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to approve that’s been properly seconded. Mr. Mason? Mr. Mason: Yeah, let me add something else here. As we, as we look at this situation I think it’s bigger than just, than just these buildings. Zip code 30901 I’m sure you’re familiar which includes Laney Walker and Bethlehem has lost over 25% of its population in the last ten years. When I was Chairman of the Redistricting Committee there was over five, 5500 folks that are no longer in 30901. And it’s now white flagged because all but 400 of them were African American. So that wasn’t the issue. Now we’ve identified 1100 buildings that are dilapidated or run down and another 300 or so that are in fair condition. We’ve got about 29 ½ million dollars left. Even at $100,000 dollars a house you’re looking at 295 houses. That certainly does not address the issue of the loss of personnel and properties if we keep with the same area that we’re at right now. So I think it’s critical that we infuse this with private sector funds and that’s why I talked about that 10-1 match. And I need to see if it’s actually a 10-1 match. So really I have issues right now, Mr. Mayor, approving this for six months without having this information available. So I’m going to make a substitute motion if I can and I’m going to make a substitute motion that we come back within whatever you think it’ll take you to answer these questions within two weeks to a month but I wouldn’t approve any monies right now at this point until we get some appropriate answers to those questions that are out there because those are legitimate questions that I feel need to be answered before I can well approve that. I want to say this just as a side note. I was very meticulous in attention to detail on the TEE Center bill and I’m the only one that didn’t vote for it that’s sitting up here right now that was here. There was only no vote and that was me. So I didn’t vote for this one nor did I vote for the TEE Center so I’m going to be fair with a critical eye on both the TEE Center and this deal because I didn’t like the financing mechanisms for either one at the time and I still haven’t seen the proof so far. So that’s my substitute motion, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Johnson: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioner Williams then Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I was hoping that Mr. Wheeler would be here as important as this is and we talked about the magnitude of the funds. I was hoping he would be here to answer some questions. Is he here or I mean do you know why he’s not here? Mr. Russell: Mr. Wheeler’s out of the country at the moment. Mr. Williams: Out of the country. 8 Mr. Russell: Yes, sir. Mr. Williams: Okay, well, I mean --- Mr. Russell: If you’d like to ask the questions, I’m sure Welcher can take care of that. Mr. Williams: Okay and I guess my concern was about the people that we had doing some of the, not the appraisal work but the, what do you call it? Mr. Russell: Marketing or the consulting. Mr. Mayor: Consulting? Mr. Williams: Consulting money. My issue was with them. I want to support the project I think we’ve got to continue to do what we’re doing but I had some issues or concerns about the consulting prices whether we can do it locally whether these people are local people that’s doing it now or who is doing it now I guess, the consulting part. Mr. Russell: If I can, Mr. Mayor, you know what we’ve done here is the project has been recognized nationally by lots of different groups. We’ve taken something that most people said we couldn’t do and began to put to together a Performa and a position that is received that kind of recognition. A lot of the work’s been up front. We’ve got a lot of property we’ve accumulated. We’ve taken down some houses we’ve actually built a few houses. We’re partnered with the Housing Authority and they’re building places as we speak there. The House of Prayer because of this project has created the house on Wrightsboro Road and in the near future are going to be breaking ground on another section of that that they got through this particular project. To establish that vision we did hire some consulting people. I think they’ve done a good job in beginning to market that. I thought the motion that was made was very appropriate to begin to look at how we can taper off the front end of the developing the vision and begin putting more of those dollars into actual bricks and mortar that would help there. So I thought that was an appropriate route to go. I think what we’ve done is established the vision but at this point I think we’re moving towards the bricks and mortar that need to be done to bring those people back to the community that Commissioner Mason was talking about. Hawthorne can give you the details on the consultant and the money that we’ve got there and I’ll let him do that. I just wanted to make sure that we looked at the big picture. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Russell. Now I’m trying to look at the big picture and the little one as well. And the big one in my mind is a consultant fee that’s really the hard one with me. It’s how much money we’re paying a consultant to do versus the property or the revitalization that we’re doing. So I’m not against the project I want to support it but I got to look at whether we can do it in house or whether it can be done in the cheaper. If we are spending what’s that price forty-five? How much is that, Mr. Welcher? The consultant fee is what? Mr. Welcher: It’s currently around $45/47,000 dollars a month. 9 Mr. Williams: $47,000 dollars a month. I want to know how far the money’s going to go. I want to support it but when you’re talking about consultant work and we’ve got four or five different pieces of property or four or five here we’re working here and what we’re paying the consultant over here we don’t have money to do the work that the bricks and mortar that you talked about. It’ll put us on the ground because we’ll be spending that money --- Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I’m finished. Save them two for me later on. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think that some of the questions that Commissioner Mason and Commissioner Williams’ are asking is stuff that we asked last week and answered during the Administrative Services Committee. I think the list of questions that Commissioner Mason came up with is an outstanding list and it is definitely something that we need to get answers to. However I don’t support his motion because we discussed last week if this bridge loan is not approved the impact, the immediate impact is going to have on this project. And early on I tried to make a friendly substitute motion that we required that this information be provided within six months and in that way if they get to it in two month or three months we know what direction to take. But I would hope that we wouldn’t do anything to jeopardize the continued progress that’s being made on that project. Mr. Mayor: And I’ll say that I concur with Commissioner Lockett. Okay, we have a substitute motion that’s been and properly seconded. Madam Clerk for --- Mr. Jackson: Can you read the motion please? Mr. Mayor: Yes, that’s what I was about to ask. The Clerk: Yes, sir, it was to bring the item back after the questions submitted by Mr. Mason has been answered. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign. Mr. Johnson, Ms. Davis, Mr. Mason, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Donnie Smith and Mr. Grady Smith vote Yes. Mr. Fennoy, Mr. Lockett, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Williams vote No. Motion Passes 6-4. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Next pulled agenda item. The Clerk: ENGINEERING SERVICES 10 6. Motion to determine that a portion of deans Bridge Road, as shown on the attached plat (Right-of-Way between 3343 Deans Bridge Road and 3341 Deans Bridge Road) has ceased to be used by the public to the extent that no substantial public purpose is served by it or that its removal from the county road system is otherwise in the best public interest, pursuant to O.C.G.A. §32-7-2, with the abandoned property to be quit-claimed to the appropriate party(ies), as provided by law and an easement to be retained over the entire abandoned portion for existing or future utilities as directed by Augusta Engineering Department and Augusta Utilities Department. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 26, 2013) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams --- Mr. Jackson: Motion to approve. Mr. Grady Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioner Williams, I believe you had a question? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, I did. I mean I don’t mind the motion (inaudible). I missed the previous meeting and I didn’t understand it looking at the back of it. I didn’t know what we was doing. I’m not opposed to the project. I just, I’m not going to sit here and vote, I’m not going to do something that I don’t normally do. I’m not going to inspect what I expect even thought people want you just to do that. I didn’t understand six or seven. Mr. Brown can you tell me and this is a piece of property we’re going to be quit-deeding to who. And can you explain it a little bit to me? Mr. Brown: Yes, sir. Good afternoon, Commissioners. All this motion would do is begun to investigate that process. It does not abandon the property today. The abandonment process which is set up by state law says that a Commission has to decide if they’re going to begin. A governing authority has to decide if they’re going to begin to look at possibly abandoning it. What will happen if the motion passes then this abandonment request will be published for a certain number of days and if the county orders it there will be a public hearing and then the results will be brought back to Engineering Services Committee. And then at that time the decision whether to abandon it, well a decision will be made on it. The only thing that has been done thus far is that this gentleman has requested the abandonment. That request has been circulated to Engineering, Planning, the Administrator, Fire Department, Utilities, Land Bank to see if they have any definite use for this property. They’ve all answered that they do not have any definite use for this property so it was candidate to be considered for abandonment for the abandonment process. Mr. Williams: Okay, is that the same going with number seven as well. I mean both of these are just processed to get to the point to bring back to this body? Mr. Brown: Yes, that’s correct. 11 Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’ve got no problem. I just wanted to get the clarification on it. Mr. Mayor: Fair enough. Good job investigating. We have a motion that’s been properly seconded on agenda item number six to approve. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Mayor: Do you want to make a motion to approve number seven? Motion Passes 10-0. Engineering Services 7. Motion to determine that Telfair Lane, as shown on the attached plat has ceased to be used by the public to the extent that no substantial public purpose is served by it or that its removal from the county road system is otherwise in the best public interest, pursuant to O.C.G.A. §32-7-2, with the abandoned property to be quit-claimed to the appropriate party(ies), as provided by law and an easement to be retained over the entire abandoned portion for existing or future utilities as directed by Augusta Engineering Department and Augusta Utilities Department. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 26, 2013) Mr. Williams: And I’ll make the same motion to approve number seven as well for the same reason, Mr. Mayor. Mr. D. Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded on agenda item number seven to approve. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next pulled agenda item. The Clerk: SUBCOMMITTEE Ethics Reform Study Subcommittee 10. Motion to approve an Ordinance to amend the Augusta, GA Code Article One, Chapter One, Sections 1-1-23, 1-1-26 and 1-1-27 relating to county employees or public officials participating directly or indirectly in procurement contracts and rules of conduct for employees and public officials of Augusta; to provide for hearing procedures for alleged ethical violations; to provide for additional penalties for ethical violations; to repeal all Code sections and Ordinances and parts of Code sections and Ordinances in conflict herewith; to provide an effective date and for other purposes. (Approved by the Commission August 20, 2013 – second reading) 12 Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett, I believe this was yours. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to applaud to Ethics Reform Study Subcommittee for putting this together but I have a couple of concerns that’s really been bothering me. But first of all under Exhibit B A-3, it says a public official accepts a gift from an agency or for the Mayor and Commission must file a report with the Clerk of Commission not later than February 1, 2001. Has that been corrected or is that what it’s supposed to be or what? Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: I think that’s when it was first initiated. It was in the year of 2001 then st after it says and not later than February 1 of each year thereafter. So it’s an annual requirement and that was actually a portion of the code that was not amended with this latest revision. So that language remained in force. But that date is correct. Mr. Lockett: Okay. Now my real concern is under page 8 subparagraph F-1 Complaint Initiation. If the Mayor or any Commissioner of Augusta Georgia Commission has reason to believe that a public official has violated the ethic requirements to this code he or she may request that the Commission authorize a formal investigation of such person. Now this is where I have the problem by placing such requests on the full Commission agenda. Now in the last few days there have been reports and rightfully so that some of our department heads have been treated less than respectful. But can you imagine if a Commissioner if six Commissioners think this Commission has done something wrong they put it on the agenda a discussion is going to happen and then it’s possible that they’re going to go out and hire someone to investigate. Mr. Mayor: I’ll recognize you for another two. Mr. Lockett: Thank you. The investigator comes in with a report and the report asks for facts and it asks for opinions. Now I was the lead investigator with the Federal Government for over ten years and no one ever asked me for my opinion. They always asked me for factual information. I think that we’re putting ourselves in a precarious position if this goes on as stated. And I hope that if this hasn’t been done that maybe the General Counsel or someone would get clearance from someone in the Legal Department to see if this can hold water or could possibly create a lawsuit for us. Because you know if an accusation has been made it’s put on the agenda and as debate and if this Commission is found not to be guilty forever and ever and ever that’s going to be in the back of people’s minds and they’re going to say yeah he was guilty I know. So I’m really worried about that. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Yes, I guess this question is addressed to the Attorney. If something happens like the scenario that Commissioner Lockett just mentioned would this be discussed on the Commission floor even though it’s on the agenda or would it be considered a personnel issue and be discussed in Legal? 13 Mr. MacKenzie: The way that this process is being drafted is it would be a public discussion. Now this is a place somewhere later in the investigative process if there was any recommendation for criminal prosecution or decision by the Commission to enter into litigation. That is something that could go through a closed meeting. But this was drafted similar to other places as part of what the committee looked at to see what do other people do with similar type allegations. And the process to request that the Commission do a formal investigation would be done in a public forum same as any other commission item. Mr. Fennoy: And I guess my next question would be to the author of this procedure. Was this to create transparency or what was the purpose behind the procedure being done this way? Mr. Mayor: I recognize the chairman of the committee, Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: The committee had three objectives one was to determine whether or not Commissioners should do work with the city. And overwhelmingly by that vote it was (inaudible) on the committee the decision was made that Commissioners should not engage in work with the city even at an arm’s length transaction to avoid appearance of conflict. The second part was if we did have a complaint against somebody and as those of you that attend our meetings on a regular basis know we kind of struggled through how to deal with that last time. We didn’t have a procedure in place so we said we would try to put a procedure in place that would allow for transparency in government for the facts to be the facts and for government itself to be not involved in the investigation. That we would get and independent group to make a recommendation to hire an independent investigator with certain amount of limit on time and money and then bring that report back to the Commission. And the Commission would then review that information and decide whether or not there was a violation. And then the third part that the subcommittee was tasked with was the punishment if indeed somebody had violated his ethics policy. And we reviewed eight other cities and municipalities in the state of Georgia similar to ours and we decided that censure and reprimand were applicable but the additional penalty phase to make it tougher was that we would disbar you from participating in the procurement process for five years. And that includes the time period from the time somebody was found guilty of violating this until the five years even after they left the Commission. So the objective Commissioner Fennoy was certainly to allow transparency within the government and to allow the public to have faith in the system which we did not have before and to hold us accountable. So I hope that is an answer that will, that answers your question, sir. Mr. Mayor: Does that answer your question Commissioner? Mr. Fennoy: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Okay. Thank you. Can we get a motion on this? Mr. Johnson: Move to approve. Ms. Davis: Second. 14 Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Yes, I just want to ask a quick question in regards to that as well where it talks about the complaint initiation. Now we’re still in F-1 the Complaint Initiation. From the General Counsel if I could Mr. Mayor it talks about the Mayor or the Commission of Augusta if they have reason to believe. Are those the only two ways that a complaint can be initiated is only by the Mayor or a Commissioner? Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: The answer to that is yes and I think part of the reason for that is because this would be the body that would initiate what I guess the penalty or punishment would also be held. So anybody, it doesn’t prevent anybody in the public who believes that there’s a basis for it for going to a Commissioner or to the Mayor to have that initiated but leaves the initiation portion within the hand of the body instead of it being subject to anybody in the public constantly coming up and making accusations against public officials. Mr. Mason: Okay, so I can do a follow up. So you’re saying that if there is someone other than the Mayor or a Commissioner that they would have to actually come talk to a Commissioner about a Commissioner and get it on the Commission agenda or talk to the Mayor about a Commissioner or the Mayor for that matter. Does this apply to you? Mr. Mayor: Yes. Mr. Mason: Oh, okay. I don’t want to assume. Mr. Mayor: I am not above the law. Mr. Mason: And so that’s how that works? Mr. MacKenzie: That’s correct. And it is done different places in the state of Georgia is done differently but that is a common way. There’s no other jurisdiction than what the committee chose to include. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Yeah, I kind of agree with that, Mr. Mayor, because if you’ve got Joe Q. Citizen coming up and making statements --- Mr. Mayor: You didn’t say Joe Q. Jackson? Mr. Williams: No, it was Joe Q. Citizen but if the shoe fits he can put it on. And I’m kind of in agreement because if you don’t have a gatekeeper or somebody to bring it to you if he brought it to a Commissioner and they had proof I’m hoping people just wouldn’t bring you something an allegation that you just act on. You’ve got to have some proof or if you’ve got to 15 know what you’re talking about. But if everybody could come in I think half of us would be under investigation every day because somebody’s going to say that you’re doing something that you’re not, you might not be doing. I think it’s good and I think the motion’s already out there to approve so. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. And if there is no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Fennoy, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Davis, Mr. Mason, Mr. Donnie Smith and Mr. Williams vote Yes. Mr. Lockett votes No. Mr. Jackson, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Grady abstain. Motion Passes 6-1-3. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Madam Clerk. I got accused of living in North Augusta during the campaign of 2006. Mr. D. Smith: Was that just in a hotel, Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Swimming back and forth across that river. Madam Clerk, on to the regular agenda. The Clerk: PUBLIC SERVICES 11. An Ordinance to Amend the Augusta, GA Code Title One Chapter Two Article One Section 1-2-2 Relating to the Time for Commission Meetings of the Augusta, Georgia Board of Commissioners; To Repeal All Code Sections and Ordinances and Parts of Code Sections and Ordinances in Conflict Herewith; To Provide an Effective Date and For Other Purposes. (No recommendation from Public Services Committee August 26, 2013) Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion on this? Ms. Davis: Move to approve. Mr. Grady Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Ms. Davis, Mr. Jackson, Mr. D. Smith, Mr. Guilfoyle, Mr. Williams and Mr. G. Smith vote Yes. Mr. Fennoy, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Mason and Mr. Lockett vote No. Motion Passes 6-4. Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. 16 Mr. MacKenzie: I just want to make a point of clarification that this would require two readings. So the effective date of it is not until after the second reading. So the very next meeting will still remain at the same time. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Madam Clerk, on to the next agenda item, please. The Clerk: PUBLIC SAFETY 12. Motion to approve an agreement between the State Court of Richmond County and Sentinel Probation Services for the year 2013-2014. (No recommendation from Public Safety Committee August 26, 2013) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I make a motion that this be moved back to the next committee cycle. I think we can get the answers to the questions that are outstanding and satisfy this matter. Mr. Guilfoyle: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: I don’t know I heard some questions and I’d like to know if we could just leave it here. There might be the answers to those questions to get some clarity on it. This is something I know we’re going to have to do and I want to do it, I want to get the best company and the best process in doing it. But is there anything that could be answered while Judge Slaby’s here versus having to come back. This is not his first trip here I know. I was not here last committee meeting but the meeting before that he was here so. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Judge Slaby, we are on a month to month contract right now right? th Judge Slaby: The contract is extended to October 15. Mr. D. Smith: So we’re not in a, we’re not crunched this could come back and try to get this resolved. And in the meantime trying to get these questions answered and give your staff an opportunity to get the answers back to us. Judge Slaby: I don’t know what questions you’re referring to. I know Judge Craig is going to be making a ruling soon. I’ve also been told that one of the parties is going to repeal that ruling. As far as the State Court judges are concerned we’re satisfied with the services that have been provided us. Again I will reiterate to you each of you if something is as a result of that has been improperly done, fraudulently done or if in good conscience the judges feel that we 17 can no longer do business with this company we will terminate the contract. You know that’s my homage to you concerning this county now in four different judicial positions over a number of years. And even though the law gives me the authority as Chief Judge to enter into a contract with a private probation provider I don’t operate that way and neither do the other judges. The first question I ask them are you satisfied with your provider, do you want to look for another provider or are there modifications to the contract which you want to make. We discuss those things, we come to an agreement amongst each other. We then meet with the officials at Sentinel we discuss those changes to the contract with them. Periodically they’ll ask for a contract modification themselves. If we think it’s fair to the public we agree to it. That’s the process we go through. We don’t, we take quite a bit of time going through it and I speak on behalf of all the judges requesting that it be extended for another year again with the provision that should something unforeseen come out of this litigation is basis for termination. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Judge Slaby, you know I did get some of my questions answered and this company don’t have a good record with some of my constituency. But I don’t think any company will have a good record with people who make them do what they need to do. I mean you know you don’t find that difficult but I did speak and I did find out that this contract is only for a year. You did say that the fines could not proceed I mean the fees to monitor these fines would not exceed what the courts have placed on the people. There was a limit I think you changed that they couldn’t go, if you’re going to that a little bit for me help me out. Judge Slaby: If an individual is on supervised probation with special conditions of probation such as a family violence requirement, community service some things the law requires them to do that is a $35.00 a month probation fee. The quicker they do those things the quicker their probation fee stops. They will in addition have a fine. If at the completion of the special conditions of probation whatever that fine balance that is owned at that time the probation fee is capped at one half of that figure. So that individual is paying no more than half of whatever they owe us at the particular time no matter how long it takes them to finish paying that. Once they do that generally we terminate the probation. If the individual is simply fined one half, the probation fee is capped at one half of that fine and the probation is terminated immediately upon payment. So if they can, it’s $25.00 a month if they can pay it off in one month they pay $25.00 dollars. A lot of times we convert community service. We do that a tremendous amount of time. I’ve signed a number of orders to date converting fines to community service. But you’re correct a probation company can do nothing more than what the court orders it to do in that sentence. And they are to supervise the individual to make sure they comply with the terms of that sentence. They can do nothing more nor should they do nothing less than that. So whatever the probation company does is by order of the courts. Mr. Williams: And my other question is, is there any company anybody would have to agree to the agreement that you and they set and not just what they come up with but for the courts for your office and the other judges have put something in place for them to be a guideline to go by. And it wouldn’t be any different if the Mayor had a, sorry, Mr. Mayor, but if you had a company that was doing it whoever did it would have to go by the guidelines you all set up. 18 Judge Slaby: That’s correct, it’s a contract negotiation just as any other. I don’t know every individual in the county but I can tell you I care for every individual in this county. What I think we have done with this contract is provide a service to the court where the court will be satisfied with its operation. And at the same time we’re all satisfied and spare the individuals who appear before us in so far as the fees are concerned and as so far as capping the fees are concerned. That’s all that we can do is try to be fair and I know there’s been a lot of allegations. We don’t base our decisions on allegations. Again should something arise out of the contract that’s proven we can no longer in good conscience do business with this company I will move to terminate them. And that’s my promise to you. And that’s the only promise I can make. Mr. Williams: And the courts, last question, Mr. Mayor. And the courts can decide and give 30 days or the company can give 30 days --- Judge Slaby: Whatever they want. The company can do that too, yes, sir. Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do you want to make a substitute motion? Mr. Williams: I make a substitute motion we approve. Mr. Fennoy: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a substitute motion that’s been properly seconded. Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you, Judge Slaby, for your remarks. This proposed contract on, is there is certain requirements that the state sets aside under 42-8-100 that requires certain things from a private probation office. Has, in one of those is a one million dollar liability policy. And in the previous contracts that were presented to us that was attached to the contract. And in this one it was not attached. Judge Slaby: It is in effect and I will get you that. Mr. D. Smith: All right because is the --- Judge Slaby: The company, excuse me, they’ll supply that at the time the contract’s approved. Now there is one in effect now even if you approve this October date. Mr. D. Smith: Well, I’m concerned about that, your honor, because in the US District Court in California Sentinel’s insurance carrier has filed suit against them saying there is no coverage against these ten federal law suits that are provided here in Augusta. And that was th done in a civil case and I’ve got the number in July or June the 11. And they’re seeking returns of certain legal expenses. So I’m just curious is Sentinel in compliance? Do we know for a fact because there’s, I don’t, this case I guess has me concerned that there is no coverage. 19 Judge Slaby: I can tell you there’s a policy in effect. I’ve got it at the office I’ll be glad to furnish the Commission --- Mr. D. Smith: That was the reason why I wanted to try to work these things out and send it back to committee. Judge Slaby: It’s in effect. Mr. D. Smith: If you would provide that to us, sir, I would appreciate it. Judge Slaby: I will do so. I’ll be there tomorrow. I’ll give it to Mr. Russell. Mr. D. Smith: That’ll be fine. On page 3 in paragraph 6 it provides for electronic and monitoring probation services at the discretion of the court. And it says in the contract on that same page that the fees will be negotiated upon the needs of the court. And the probations will pay for a flat rate that approved by the court. But we don’t know what the flat rate is in this contract. Can you tell us about the flat rate that supposed to be in effect? Judge Slaby: Electronic monitoring is cost, excuse me. My allergies are killing me, the cost is $69.00 dollars a day plus the initial hookup which is roughly $80.00 dollars. Mr. D. Smith: I’m sorry. Judge Slaby: Excuse me I’m sorry roughly $80.00 dollars and you have to have a phone service, land line type of service. And that’s something, that’s a sentencing privilege of a judge. Some use it some don’t. Mr. D. Smith: I’m sorry, so it was $60.00 dollars, sir, and --- Judge Slaby: Six to nine dollars. Mr. D. Smith: Six to nine dollars. Thank you that’s why I wanted a, because $69.00 dollars. Will that be put in your contract so that it’s here? Judge Slaby: I’ve got copies here of what they provide. I’ll be glad to give those to you now. The different services or the cost of those services we can put that in the record right now if you like. Mr. D. Smith: And my last I just have one or two more questions, Judge, and I’ll be finished. On page five of the contract they talk, in paragraph seven --- Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you, sir. It talks about the contract provides that the court and the governing authority which would be this Commission can select the type of audit to be 20 performed and the type of audit could be limited. Have we ever had an audit done in the fifteen years that Sentinel has been involved with us? Judge Slaby: Every year. Mr. D. Smith: Every year. Has that ever been made public to us at the Commission level? Judge Slaby: I’ll be glad to give it to you. You know they give it to me in my filing cabinet in the office every year. It’s full of quarterly reports, monthly reports and if you want those I’ll be glad to provide them to you. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you. One last thing, your honor. Sentinel owns their own electronic monitoring service. Is that correct? Judge Slaby: Yes. Mr. D. Smith: So every time that ya’ll put somebody on electronic monitoring in effect they’re that’s a payment that Sentinels getting in addition to their supervision fee. Judge Slaby: That’s right. That would be true whether it you know it’s a governmental function or a private function. Somebody’s going to be paying for that function. Mr. D. Smith: But I guess my concern is that in this particular case if company ‘x’ is doing it they have to contract with somebody else to do the monitoring. And in this particular case Sentinel owns their own so they have a concern about the number of people that go on electronic monitoring. And that just concerns me. It seems like there’s a little bit of a problem there. And then --- Judge Slaby: I can see where you’re coming from but again that would be the prerogative of the judge ordering that individual. That’s a sentencing technique. It’s something that some judge’s use something that are, I rarely use it myself unless it’s a stalking case or in some instances I’ll require GPS monitoring with exclusions on it if there’s a severe beating of an individual. It varies from judge to judge but that is something that’s utilized more frequently by some than others. You know I can’t prevent that each judge can do his own thing. Mr. D. Smith: Your honor, do you know how many cases within the last 18 months in State Court that have been referred to Sentinel for electronic monitoring? Judge Slaby: Not off hand I don’t. Mr. D. Smith: Is that something that you can provide to us? And then my last question -- - Judge Slaby: I’ll give that to Mr. Russell along with the (inaudible). 21 Mr. D. Smith: The last question I got is on Page 7 in Article 3 Paragraph 1 it says in which the judges agree in advance that each sentence shall provide for probation or monitoring fee payable directly to Sentinel. How do you, how do you agree in advance without knowing what the facts and the things are and the situation around each case. How do we do that? Judge Slaby: I’m sorry, you’re reading from what page? Mr. D. Smith: Page 7 Article 3 Paragraph 1. Because generally what --- Judge Slaby: In consideration of the probation the amount of services each sentence will provide probation monitoring. The individual comes before us they’re placed on probation for up to a 12-month period of time for any one misdemeanor account or confinement up to a 12- month period of time. Now the length of time that we place an individual on this is discretionary with the court. It can be a consecutive concurrence sentence it can be a consecutive sentence it depends on each incident and the nature of the violation. So sometimes we will put an individual on probation even though it was perhaps a speeding ticket for a 12-month period of time so it has a sufficient length of time in which to pay that. Of course the contract provides once it’s paid it’s terminated. And I sign I don’t know twelve or thirteen of those to date. But to answer your question when the matter comes before the court we hear from the state we hear from the defense and make a decision and then we place, in fact we in consideration of all these facts we develop a plan of probation for the individual be it straight probation or confinement and probation. We tailor the sentence to the facts of the case. Mr. D. Smith: But would that, that seems to be in conflict with what the statement says in that paragraph. It says that you will agree in advance and so to me that seems like that it’s not governed by the facts and the circumstances of the case. There’s already an agreement ahead of the time. Mr. Mayor: Okay and your second two minutes is up there. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason and then Commissioner Williams then Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Jackson. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Judge, for your time. I do have a couple of questions for you. First of all, do all four, well, I guess five if you count Judge Hamrick, do all of you agree that Sentinel is the vendor of choice? Judge Slaby: Well, Judge Hamrick was not involved in this. Mr. Mason: Okay. Judge Slaby: He lives in South Carolina and now he’s a Senior Judge Status, he’s not qualified to serve as senior judge in more than and, yes, all four of us (inaudible). 22 Mr. Mason: Okay, I’m going to have to rely on your expertise and your judgment in this. It’s what you deal with on a daily basis and so I’ve got two other questions. Can this contract go out for bid because there’s been some discussion about possibly sending it out for bid? Is that an option? Judge Slaby: The way that the law is set up I was Chief Judge. And the Chief Judge of any court in the state is the one who selects the provider with the consent of the Commission. Now the flip of that is we could ask the Commission simply to set up your own probation in house probation service. We go with a private company because that way there’s no cost to the county performing that function. They have 34 employees over there so you can imagine the cost of that department servicing 5800 people. Mr. Mason: My final question, Judge, and I’m going to ask this as respectfully as I can but I do need to ask it. There’s been some statements made that imply or maybe infer that either yourself or some of the other judges may have some personal financial interests in keeping Sentinel as the vendor of choice. So my question to you, Judge, is do any either yourself or any other of the state judges have any personal financial interests or gain by employing Sentinel as the for probation services for Augusta Richmond County? Judge Slaby: Absolutely none. I’ve heard those rumors. I’ve consulted with an attorney about those rumors. I find it very offensive that those rumors were even made. Very offensive. A moment of personal privilege please? Mr. Mayor: Sure. Judge Slaby: I’ve had the pleasure of practicing law in this county for 32 years. During that period of time I’ve served four courts. The city council appointed me as a judge of Recorders Court and I served in that position for six years. Superior Court appointed me to serve as Juvenile Court Judge, Judge of Sole Court Judge in this county. I served in that position for 17 years. I’ve served since ’97 as a State Court and this past year the duty fell upon me to operate Probate Court. The only consideration I have is serving this county and leaving the courts that I serve in a better position and in better condition than they were in when I leave than when I got there. For anybody to suggest that I have a pecuniary interest in this company is totally unfounded. For them to suggest any of the other judges have financial interest in this company is totally unfounded. I’m trying to control my temper, but I’m telling you right now I’m not going to stand for that kind of allegation. My only concern as yours has been to serve the people of this city this county in a fair manner. To treat them with dignity. When they come before the court you’re not going to find anybody that’s ever said that I’ve degraded somebody in public then come before me. I may be harsh in my sentencing but I do it fairly and I do it in a dignified manner. I dare anybody to find somebody who says something different. So those allegations, Mr. Mason, I take very seriously. Mr. Mason: Thank you, sir. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Williams then Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Jackson. 23 Mr. Williams: Judge, I just want to ask about the monitoring. I had someone to approach me. Will this contract be I guess exclusive as far as monitoring with Sentinel until a new contract at the end or will other companies will somebody else be able to come in and do monitoring. I think you said between six and nine dollars a day for the monitoring now plus their hookup. Will that be exclusive? Judge Slaby: Well, that’s a possibility. It could happen. I don’t know whether or not it’s six or nine dollars a day. I don’t know --- Mr. Williams: Okay I’m --- Judge Slaby: --- who came up with that figure but yeah I mean we could outsource monitoring I suppose with some other companies. Then you’ve got two probations two companies you’re dealing with versus one and you’ve got two sets of people reporting to the court. Mr. Williams: Well, we only have one. We’re only talking about one but that question came up to me and you know I had to do a lot of things but I haven’t had one of them yet, Judge. I know some folks want me in one but I’m trying, lots of folks want me in one but nevertheless that question came up and I didn’t have an answer. I didn’t know you was here it came out I wanted to know if this contract goes through will they be the sole provider for everything or could another company come in and say you know what we can monitor we can do this because people are coming to the government because I mean this is what we do. They’re running a business they want to try they want to be a part so I needed the answers. Judge Slaby: In theory, yes. Whether it’s practical to do that is another question. Mr. Williams: Okay, okay and that answered my question. Mr. Mayor: And, Judge, I just want to follow up on something you just said. And I appreciate your candor with regards to people spreading rumors and mistruths. It seems as though there’s some in this community that feel like if they say a lie enough times it’s going to be true. So I just want to say I appreciate your candor in that. Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Jackson. Mr. Fennoy: Yes, Judge, one of the, my concerns and I guess it would be the same thing regardless of who gets the contract is whether anybody that’s may get caught shoplifting that’s employed and have a fine that’s impossible for them to pay. Would they be incarcerated? Judge Slaby: No. Mr. Fennoy: Okay. Judge Slaby: Their fines are converted to community service. Now if they don’t do the community service they may leave us with no alternative. 24 Mr. Fennoy: I understand. Judge Slaby: But if they qualify for community service because of the fine conversion we do that an awful lot. Last year it was over close to 11,000 hours of community service. Mr. Fennoy: Okay and the second question is on page 7 under Service Fees. The service fees that are listed, would, if we had another company, would those numbers change any? Judge Slaby: No, those are pretty, I mean obviously they can change it’s a matter of contract. But those are figures that are pretty much in line with everybody except in our situation we cap them --- Mr. Fennoy: Okay. Judge Slaby: --- so as soon as somebody complies with the terms of probation the sooner they’re off probation. If we place somebody on probation for 12 months they don’t pay 12 months of probation fees if they do everything they’re supposed to do their probation is terminated immediately with these caps in place. And so if I fine somebody say $100 dollars and $50.00 is the max they had to pay they do it in one month all they have to pay is one month probation. Mr. Fennoy: Okay. Judge Slaby: And I get people on some fines if they’re able to pay a fine by 4:00 o’clock in the Clerk’s Office that same day I don’t place them on probation and I don’t require a probation fee. So we’re cognizant of the problems that people have. We try to enforce what you know the oath we took because we also try to be fair to everybody. And there’s a lot fines (inaudible). Mr. Fennoy: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Jackson. Mr. Jackson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Fred, what’s the average cost of housing an inmate per day. Do you know that? Mr. Russell: It’s close to $50.00 dollars a day now. Mr. Jackson: Okay, $50.00 dollars a day versus an ankle monitor by monitored by whomever I think it’s still cheaper in the long run to outsource that activity. Is that not leaving the burden on the, Judge, I guess this next part is to you. Is letting the defendant pay instead of taxpayers paying $50.00, $40.00 whatever it is a day, to be housed at the jail? Judge Slaby: That’s correct. Again the individual who places more people on electronic monitoring, that’s where he’s coming from. Rather than incarcerating somebody we’ll monitor 25 them electronically to make sure they comply. That way they’re carrying the burden rather than the taxpayers in a penal institution. Mr. Jackson: Thank you, Judge. Mr. Mayor: Okay and, Commissioner Smith, I’ll give you one more minute. Mr. D. Smith: Yes, sir. Let’s don’t lose what we’re looking at here. We’re not talking about what Judge Slaby’s sentencing people. Let’s talk about what Sentinel is doing. Mr. Jackson, you said $50.00 dollars a day. I was told by somebody in the county jail that Sentinel has between 50 and 100 people on an average in the county jail. So the problem here is not what you’re sentencing people to it’s when Sentinel goes back and violates these people and gets a warrant and puts them back in the jail. So the burden is then back on the taxpayer. So it’s not the original sentence. It’s what Sentinel does after the original sentence, Mr. Jackson. And as far as people being shoplifting and not put in jail Mr. Barrett has sued in federal court and Judge Craig ordered him released for stealing a $2.00 dollar beer. So he did go to the jail for shoplifting. So let’s don’t lose fact about what’s going on here. It’s not what judges are sentencing it’s what Sentinel is doing after the original sentence because they’re using the jail to collect their fines and they’re using the jail to collect their fees. And at 50-100 people a day that turns out to be about $900,000 dollars a year. Thank you. Judge Slaby: Mr. Mayor, can I clarify that? Mr. Mayor: Fifty-nine seconds. Yes, sir. Judge Slaby: Sentinel doesn’t do anything unless the court orders it to do. An individual violates the terms of probation, they bring it to us and an affidavit is sworn indicating what those violations are. We set up a (unintelligible) hearing and they appear. If they fail to appear at that hearing we issue a bench warrant. Eventually they’re put in jail. It’s not Sentinel doing anything other than making them comply with the terms of probation. And, Commissioner, no probations company can do anything more than what the court orders it to do. They don’t do anything without a court order. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion that’s been properly made and properly seconded. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ya’ll, when you talk about that particular situation in itself I agree with you. And I know we talked a little bit about this the other day and I found it hard to believe that any probation office, officer or company whoever it may be can issue a warrant without the judge signing off on it. And I think it has to be the judge that actually I guess that who presided over the case if you will to even make that decision one way or the other. So I’m glad you touched on that and I’m glad Commissioner Smith mentioned it because that was one thing that did come to the forefront in some conversation that I had. That was one of the situations that was occurring and I thought that was somewhat ironic because you can’t do that without the courts, without the judges of course signing off on it. So I’m glad you touched on that as well. And also the fees. And like I said before I know this was a very tedious 26 situation because we’ve all had people in our districts who have had some encounters if you will with Sentinel and they haven’t been very pleasurable in some sorts so I’m just trying to make sure nobody’s being treated unfairly. And we appreciate your diligence in this matter because I know --- Judge Slaby: If anybody ever has that come up, all they have to do is call one of us. Call me. We’ve done it in the past met with Commissioners had Sentinel come over and bring the individual’s file and gone through the whole thing with them. We’ve got nothing to hide. Nothing at all and I encourage you if you have that situation to bring those people. If there’s something going on, we want to know about it. Mr. Johnson: Right, right. Judge Slaby: Particularly that. Mr. Johnson: All right, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Madam Clerk, if you could read that substitute motion back for clarity. The Clerk: Yes, sir, that was to approve the agreement. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign of voting. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: I thought Commissioner Donnie Smith made a substitute motion to send it back to committee. Mr. Mayor: No, that’s the primary motion. Mr. Lockett: That’s the primary? Now what are we voting on now, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: To approve the contract. That was the substitute motion. Mr. Lockett: Thank you. Thank you. Mr. D. Smith, Mr. Guilfoyle and Ms. Davis vote No. Motion Passes 7-3. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Madam Clerk. Thank you, your honor. I believe that disposes of our agenda. With no further business to come before the body we stand adjourned. [MEETING ADJOURNED] 27 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 September 3, 2013. __________________________ Clerk of Commission 28