Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting February 18, 2014 REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER FEBRUARY 18, 2014 Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., February 18, 2014, the Hon. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Lockett, Guilfoyle, Mason, D. Smith, Williams, Fennoy, Johnson, Jackson, Davis and G. Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Mr. Mayor: I’ll go ahead and call the meeting to order and call on Reverend Timothy Green, Jenkins Memorial CME Church for our invocation. Please stand. The invocation was given by the Reverend Timothy Green, Pastor, Jenkins Memorial CME Church. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited. Mr. Mayor: Reverend, thank you for that wonderful invocation. And before we begin I just, I want to say and I know that’s on behalf of the entire Commission to our city staff to Georgia Power to all involved and state, local and national agencies and most importantly two or our citizens as well. I just want to say thank you on behalf of the city. We couldn’t have come through this storm like we did without ya’ll. So thank you. And I like to get a round of applause. (APPLAUSE) And before we begin as well, Commissioners, I had sent out an email to the Clerk’s office requesting that that due to the fact that what our staff has been through and we’ve been through personally and the city has been through if we could possibly try to consent as much as possible and other items may be sent back to committee. So I just wanted to make that request respectfully. And with that, Madam Clerk, let’s move on to the delegations. The Clerk: DELEGATIONS A. Ms. Annie Blount regarding the “use of public funds”. Mr. Mayor: And if you could keep it to five minutes, please, ma’am. Ms. Blount: Hi, my name is Annie Blount and as most of you can see I am an African- American woman and what you may not be able to see is that I graduated from Augusta State University with two degrees, one degree in sociology and one degree in social work. I went on to complete a master’s degree in social work from the University of South Carolina. I did graduate magna cum laude. Right now I’m presently enrolled in a (inaudible) program and I am (inaudible) social justice. Later this evening I will be going to the (inaudible) and I will be relying on food stamps to purchase groceries for myself and my child and I’m here today because one year ago I was employed at Georgia Regents University as the only MSW social worker, full-time (inaudible) social worker. I was employed there in 2009 and I worked for three years consecutively. For two of those years I was supervised by Tracy, my first manager, and I was rated highly effective for two consecutive years. I brought with me today a flyer for 1 whoever is interested in seeing it and it’s a flyer concerning the (inaudible) and GRU, the work teams (inaudible) with all the other services, social work, dietician, all of these other services and on the back of this flyer it listed different teams. My name is listed on nine out of the eleven (inaudible). My part-time coworker is listed twice. I am listed as the MSW (inaudible) and so is she. When I (inaudible) about the fall of 2012 (inaudible) and so surely after she was elected my supervisor and so I went from two consecutive years of being highly effective by my evaluation I went to a 40% out of 100. On the scale of three I received a 1.76 from my supervisor. Now my supervisor within one month of my evaluation, my yearly evaluation, I received a 1.76. When I complained to the director that this was not fair, that Susan has only been my supervisor for one month, he said Susan had input. She had inputs from four workers whereas I worked with the entire cancer cancer, Georgia Radiation Therapy Center, all these centers (inaudible). Eventually I went to my supervisor, not my supervisor but the Director of the Cancer Center at that time and I went to him and said I felt like I was being psychologically (inaudible). He said to me in an email, “Annie, your complaint is disruptive. If you continue to complain, further disciplinary action will be warranted” and I knew what that meant. That was on December 26. December 27 I went ahead and called the EEOC and at that time gave a complaint. On December 31 I mailed the complaint and they received it. February 6 I was discharged for one, missing a meeting with that same supervisor. Number two, for (inaudible) onto a fax machine, a fax machine that had been previously in my office for three years. The fax machine had been there with (inaudible) for eleven months. All of a sudden now it’s reason for discharge. I’m here because I love the cancer center. I love my work with the patients at the cancer center. Of all people a social worker (inaudible). I want the cancer center to receive all the money they can because of the patients and the needs of the patients. I have watched patients who have come from far just to come here so they can have radiation five days a week. Many of these patients lost their jobs because of cancer. They come without insurance. They have no place to stay in the city. I worked with the community leaders so they can get to Georgia Radiation so they can get their treatment. Like I say I want the cancer center to get all the money they can but I do not approve of any organization that practice what is considered social (inaudible). Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Madam Clerk, next agenda item please, next delegation. DELEGATIONS B. Rev. Christopher Johnson, Director Augusta InterFaith Coalition. RE: Proposal regarding the downsizing of the Augusta Commission. The Clerk: We have a request from Reverend Johnson on delegation ‘B’ that he can’t make it at this time. He was not able to be here. The Clerk: DELEGATIONS C. Ms. Gena Kirkendohl RE: Sewage Damage, 1612 Wylds Road. Mr. Mayor: And if you could keep it to five minutes, please, ma’am. 2 Ms. Kirkendohl: Good afternoon. On December 15, 2013 city utility workers used high pressure to try and unclog a sewer stop in the middle of the street. This pumped raw sewage into our home along with three other homes on our street. And I do have pictures from that day. Raw sewage filled every room in our home except the kitchen, dining room and laundry room. th We’ve been living in a hotel since December 15. First we were in the Holiday Inn with one room and two beds. We were told we that we would get a $50.00 stipend for food but then when th we moved into the Homewood Suites on December 26 which is a very, very nice suite but the unit has one portable electric burner, a microwave oven and two gas grills and these two gas grills are for everybody to use. And we’re not the only ones that are there (unintelligible). And now because of that we’re told that we won’t get the $50.00 per day which we don’t, it’s just me and my husband. We do not eat $50 worth of food a day. We have two small grandchildren and because of this ordeal we missed our first Christmas with them in our home. All of our furniture was ruined. There were antiques that cannot be replaced. The piano that my father bought me when I was seven years old cannot be replaced and he’s not here anymore. Pictures and memories that we cannot get back. We have been married for 30 years and for 26 ½ years we’ve lived in that home. Now we have to completely start over. We were told last week that it was procedure for the city to offer us the cost for our contents minus 20% depreciation and the cost of restoring our home to what it was before minus 20% depreciation. To say the least it was very (inaudible). We have not gone to the news with this. As a matter the news contacted my husband the day after it happened and he told them no, he would not talk to them because the city told us they would take care of us. And we believed them. We were told from the beginning that everything would be replaced and put back just as it was. It’s been two months as of Saturday. We’re just ready for our lives to be put back together, put back to normal. All we want for our contents to be replaced and our home put back not at the depreciated rate. We did th not wake up December 15 and think we would like to sell our contents and take a loss for them or have our home pumped full of sewage just so we could get a new house and have to pay for part of the repair. We did not ask for this to happen to us but it has and we just want what we had before this happened restored back to us. We appreciate you giving us this time to voice our concerns in this matter. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: I was just going to reiterate as ya’ll know we had discussed this claim along with other similar claims in legal and I would suggest we continue the same practice with respect to this claim. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, while she’s here though and I hear her (unintelligible), I’d like to ask her a couple of questions. (inaudible) This is something we’ve got to deal with. Has your home been cleaned, tested and cleaned? Ms. Kirkendohl: It was cleaned and then we had Aces come in, environmental services and whenever they tested it they took eight swabs and out of those eight swabs seven were still contaminated with coliforms and ecoli. 3 Mr. Williams: How old are your grandkids? How old are those? Ms. Kirkendohl: The grandkids are four months and seventeen months. Mr. Williams: I’m really at a loss for words. I certainly understand. I’ve got three grands and three growns but the young ones are who I particularly worry about. I know that they will crawl and will get into every corner and crack in your home. We have discussed this, Mr. Mayor, but I think the attorney needs to get with the Administrator or somebody and try to get it resolved as soon as possible if not sooner. I’m really kind of disappointed and I understand what the rules are but rules are in a normal situation, it’s not something that happened by chance like she said to wake and decide to do that. With that much waste in my home I don’t think I’d want to go back in there at all with not just my kids but (unintelligible) I’m just sitting here and somebody else may have some thoughts about it. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Commissioner Williams. Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Kirkendohl? Ms. Kirkendohl: Yes. Mr. Mason: First and foremost certainly I’m sorry for the situation that you found yourself in through no fault of your own by the way. But I heard something come from you that quite frankly I didn’t hear in our previous discussion so I’m going to ask you when the statement that you were told that everything would be taken care of. Do you recall where that statement came from or who made it on behalf of the city? Ms. Kirkendohl: They talked to my husband. Mr. Kirkendohl: Yes, Mr. Lawrence, when I first talked to her and the guy from the Sanitation Department they came out (inaudible) and from the beginning that’s all I wanted, I didn’t want anything extra (inaudible). Mr. Mason: Well, if I could continue, Mr. Mayor. This is one Commissioner’s feeling. Anytime someone represents the city and makes a statement as such if in fact that’s true then certainly we will figure out if that’s the case. One, if they weren’t in a position to do so they should have never made that statement. But two, if they did make that statement that’s the only ones that you all saw so you would take their word as if in fact that they were going to do what they said they were going to do. So I personally wouldn’t have a problem first of all corroborating that story. And if in fact that’s true then I would think that we should make you as whole as possible that we possibly can. Mr. Mayor, I don’t know if the City Administrator or Interim Administrator perhaps will do some further investigation in terms of the two names in particular as far as, we want to make sure we’re doing the right thing here. If we can somehow task the City Administrator to have that type of conversation and determine the validity of that statement and then we can certainly decide as a body what we should do if anything moving forward. 4 Mr. Mayor: The Administrator is nodding her head, yes she will do that. Mr. Mason: Do I need to make a motion for that or is --- Mr. Mayor: Just to dot our I’s and cross our T’s. That would be great. Mr. Mason: Okay, that’s my motion. Mr. Lockett: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner Lockett then Commissioner Williams. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Kirkendohl, I’ve been mentioned and spoke with ya’ll on several occasions. I understand that the position that you and your husband are in and you have my sympathies. But often times we get up here and we try and convey to others that we’re going to do something to help them when realistically speaking we can’t do it. Now this is one of those cases. We have put in place a policy that includes the depreciation factor. I’m a firm believer that there should be a replacement value because you indicated prior to this you had no plan to do these things. I mean this wasn’t something you had budgeted for. So I don’t want to go into detail because the General Counsel has said this was done in Legal but I can tell you our General Counsel will sit down with you and your husband and see if something can be worked out. That much I can assure you. And I won’t say anything additional because it would have to be in Legal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Thank you and Commissioner Williams I actually had seen Commissioner Davis. You’re good? Okay. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Well, I just wanted to reiterate about the testing that’s been done. That really bothers me after it was supposed to be cleaned out when the company cleaned it but when it comes back seven out of eight of the testing. I mean how can we even talk about policy or procedure when things happen. I understand we put things in place and if it’s a normal situation this is unique, this is different. This don’t happen every day. I thank God it doesn’t. But when I heard the response about the testing I don’t know, excuse me --- Mr. Mayor: Ladies and gentlemen, it finally happened, he’s speechless. Mr. Williams: You better write that down. But I don’t know whether that home is ever going to be livable and I know other people deal with situations as well but we’ve got the human factor about this thing. It’s not about the 20% or about the policy it’s about a family whose life has been interrupted through no fault of their own. And out of the worst thing that could happened with the sewage so --- Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am, Commissioner Davis then Commissioner Fennoy. 5 Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We are sorry, we’ve been aware of the few houses on Wylds Road that’s gone through this. And I guess what I want to ask Mr. MacKenzie what is the typical protocol for this. We have heard the case and we get advice from Risk Management and our Legal Department. I don’t know if it’s best for you to sit down one-on-one or to revisit this in Legal with Risk Management? What’s that next step? Mr. MacKenzie: Sure and that’s a perfectly fair question. Normally we can negotiate a number of claims that you all are aware. Typically decisions regarding that are usually discussed in a closed meeting because of the possibility of potential litigation and I anticipate that we’ll have further discussion with the claimants as well as the Commission to hopefully reach a resolution of this that can be done. Ms. Davis: (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. MacKenzie (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor, can the Clerk read the motion? Mr. Mayor: Please. Madam Clerk? The motion was to have the Interim Administrator to further investigate The Clerk: the situation. Mr. Mayor: Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: And thank ya’ll for being here. Okay, Madam Clerk, on to the consent agenda. And as I mentioned, lady and gentlemen, let’s try to use this as best we can this week. The Clerk: Yes, sir. Our consent agenda consists of items 1-30. And under the Planning portion I’ll read the Planning Petitions and if there is anyone who has an objection would you please signify your objection by raising your hand. Item 2: Is a request to approve a petition for a change of zoning from Zone LI (Light Industry) to Zone B-2 (General Business) and a Special Exception to establish Bureau of Prisons Residential Re-entry Center on property located at 802 Seventh Street. Item 3: Is a request to deny a petition for a Special Exception to establish a Family Personal Care Home on property located at 3924 Grape Avenue. 6 Item 4: Is a request to approve a petition for a change of zoning from Zone LI (Light Industry) and Zone R-3B (Multiple-Family Residential) to Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property at Lot 5 of the Village at Riverwatch. Item 5: Is to approve a petition for a change of zoning from Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) to Zone R-1D (One-family Residential) affecting property located at 1902 ½ and 1904 McDowell Street. The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of these Planning petitions? None noted, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams? Mr. Williams: I think we’ve got someone on Item 2 is that right? Did you raise your hand though to object? The Clerk: Item 2 we have one objector. And under the Public Services portion of the agenda I’ll read those alcohol petitions and if anyone has an objection would you please signify your objection by raising your hand. Item 6: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Super Express #6 located at 2447 Wrightsboro Road. Item 7: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Wal-Mart Stores East LP D/B/A Walmart Super Center located at 3338 Wrigtsboro Road. Item 8: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Old Town BP located at 443 Broad Street. Item 10: Is a request for a One Day Special Event license to be used in connection with th Tipsy McStumbles located at 214 7 Street. The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of those alcohol petitions? Don’t see any, Mr. Mayor. So our consent agenda is 1-30. Mr. Mayor: Okay, lady and gentlemen, do we have any items to be added to the consent agenda? Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir, can I add number 39 and 42? Mr. Mayor: 39 and 42. Mr. Guilfoyle: Number 30, 37 --- Mr. Mayor: 30 is already on consent. Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Okay, so you’re 30, 39, and 42. 7 Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Yes, sir I’d like to put number 44 on consent unless somebody has an objection to that. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor, I have a --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: --- a question. I have a question on 44. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: I’d like to add 41 (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any further items to be added to the consent agenda? Are there any items that can be referred back to committee? Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, agenda item number 38, send it back to Administrative Services please. Mr. Mayor: Any further to go back to committee? Okay. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: 38 now is going back to where with it? Mr. Lockett: Administrative Services because that’s where it originated. Mr. Mayor: I will respect the Chair. Mr. Williams: I’m going to let that go back because I have some questions. It belongs to the body now but I got no problem with it going back (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any items to be pulled from the consent agenda for discussion? Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Number nine please, sir. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. 8 Mr. Williams: I’m going to pull number two. We have someone here to speak to that I think so I just want (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: --- pull number three as well? Ms. Allen: We had an objector. We had an objector to number three. Mr. Mayor: Okay, so three’s good too? Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, three should be pulled. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Let’s put three back up on the big board shall we. And if we have any further items to be pulled from the consent agenda? Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: How about number twelve for clarity (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Can we --- Mr. Williams: Item 24, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to approve the consent agenda? Mr. Mason: So moved. Mr. Jackson: Second. CONSENT AGENDA PLANNING 1. FINAL PLAT – HAYNES STATION PHASE 3 – S-839 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta, Georgia Planning Commission to approve a request by Cranston Engineering Group, on behalf of Coel Development Company, requesting final plat approval, under Performance Guarantee, for Haynes Station Phase 3. This residential subdivision is located on Haynes Drive, adjacent to Haynes Station Phase 1 and contains 22 lots. DISTRICT 3 4. Z-14-09 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta, Georgia Planning Commission to approve a petition by Cranston Engineering Group, on behalf of Augusta Village at Riverwatch LLC, requesting a change of zoning from Zone LI (Light Industry) and Zone R-3B (Multiple-Family Residential) to Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property containing approximately 50 acres and is known as Lot 5 of Village at Riverwatch plat and is part of Tax Map 008-0-010-10-0 DISTRICT 7 5. Z-14-10 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta, Georgia Planning Commission to approve a petition by Kroeg Mixson Investments LLC, on behalf of Kroeg Mixson 9 Investments LLC and Carl Purvis, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1C (One- family Residential) to Zone R-1D (One-family Residential) affecting property containing .36 acres and is known as 1902 ½ and 1904 McDowell Street. Tax Map 045-3-027-01-0 and 045-3-028-00-0 DISTRICT 1 PUBLIC SERVICES 6. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 14-08: A request by Kanubhai S. Patel for retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Super Express #6 located at 2447 Wrightsboro Rd. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 10, 2014) 7. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 14-09: A request by Kelly N. Hutto for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Wal-Mart Stores East LP D/B/A Walmart Super Center located at 3338 Wrightsboro Rd. District 5. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 10, 2014) 8. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 14-07: A request by Alpeshkumar M. Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Old Town BP located at 443 Broad St. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 10, 2014) 10. Motion to approve a request by Michael Anglin for a One Day Special Event license to th be used in connection with Tipsy McStumbles located at 214 7 St. (This is an outdoor event for St. Patrick’s Day) District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 10, 2014 11. Motion to approve a request by Victoria E. Payton for a Therapeutic Massage Operators license to be used in connection with Phoenix Massage LLC located at 3062 Damascus Rd. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 10, 2014) ENGINEERING SERVICES 13. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of property in fee simple and permanent construction and maintenance easement (Parcel 209-0-008-01-0) 4733 Windsor Spring Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 14. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of property for right-of- way, and temporary construction easement, (Parcel 041-1-155-00-0) 3001 Raes Wood Drive. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 15. Motion to approve bid recommendation for Instrumentation for Pressure, Flow & Level Transmitters (Bid Item #13-176). (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 16. Motion to approve change to purchase order P216042 in the amount of $250,000.00 to Avrett Plumbing Company for cleaning sanitary sewer systems. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 17. Motion to approve purchase order in the amount of $69,239.00 to P&H Supply Company for a portable pipeline inspection camera. Augusta-Richmond County bid item 13-223. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 18. Motion to award contract to manufacture and install a new turbine assembly for unit #9 and to recondition the existing turbine for unit #1 at the Goodrich Street Raw Water 10 Pump Station (RFQ 13-193). (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 19. Motion to approve funding for an extension of the Southeastern Natural Sciences Academy (SNSA) Savannah River at Risk study. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 20. Motion to approve Georgia Power Company License Agreement EV-41434. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 21. Motion to award the Design Consultant Services Agreement for the North Leg Road Improvements Project CPB#371-041110-T13-045129 to Wolverton and Associates and approve funding for the first three phases of the contract. The first three phases include: Concept Development in the amount of $128,000; Database Preparation in the amount of $60,000; and Environmental Documentation in the amount of $5,000 (193,000 total). Project is in Band 1 of the approved Richmond County Project List for the Transportation Investment Act of 2010 (aka, TIA, TSPLOST). (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 22. Motion to approve Supplemental Agreement Number Two, Change Number Two with Kimley-Horn and Associates for the Roundabout Evaluation and Design Services to include design services for the Druid Park Avenue Road Diet Project (RC07-001219). This project is on the approved Band 1 list of Richmond County’s Transportation Investment Act of 2010 (aka, TIA, TSPLOST) projects. This Supplemental Agreement Number Two will be for the initial phases of the project including data collection, traffic studies, renderings, and public involvement in the amount of $82,946 as requested by AED. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 23. Motion to approve the final phases of the Consultant Services Agreement, Supplemental Agreement Number Three, CPB#328-0411110-212828014 and Change Number Three to Kimley-Horn and Associates for the Roundabout Evaluation Design Services Project in the amount of $409,741 as requested by AED. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) 25. Motion to award Design Consultant Services Agreement to Kimley-Horne and Associates for the Walton Way Signal Modernization Phases II and III Projects (T13043144 & T13043145) in the amounts of $173,030 and $346,070, respectively ($519,100 total) as requested by AED/TE. This is a Band 1 Project; part of the 2010 Transportation Investment Act (aka, TIA, TSPLOST). (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 26. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held February 4, 2014 and Special Called Meetings held February 4 & 10, 2014. SUBCOMMITTEE Pension Committee 27. Motion to approve COLA increases for retires of the RC 1945 Plan, the City of Augusta 1949 Plan and the City of Augusta 1945 Plan in the amount of 1.7% to be effective March 1, 2014. The Bureau of Labor and Statistics published the amount as the increase in the Consumer Price Index for the South Region for 2013. (Approved by Pension Committee February 10, 2014) 11 Pension Committee 28. Motion to approve 2014 schedule of internal audits. (Approved by Pension Committee February 10, 2014) Pension Committee 29. Motion to proceed with the process to appoint a guardian for a surviving spouse receiving benefits under the 1949 Plan, (Approved by Pension Committee February 10, 2014) APPOINTMENTS 30. Motion to approve the appointment of Taylor Bryant to the Augusta Animal Control Board representing District 4. FINANCE 39. Approve the purchase of one (1) prisoner transport vehicle for the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office-Civil Division. 42. Motion to approve a refund for property located at 3629 San Sebastian Drive, owned by Doanphuong N. Nguyen, in the amount of $114.61 for prior tax year 2012 due to value change revision/correction. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: That’s okay. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Lockett: I have (inaudible) hearing (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Ringing in your ear. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 10-0. [Items 1, 4-8, 10, 11, 13-23, 25-30, 39, 42] Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, let’s go to the pulled agenda items first, number two was the first? The Clerk: PLANNING 2. Z-14-15 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta, Georgia Planning Commission to approve a petition by Western Alternative Corrections, Inc., on behalf of Magnolia LLC, requesting a change of zoning from Zone LI (Light Industry) to Zone B-2 (General Business) and a Special Exception to establish a Bureau of Prisons Residential Re-entry Center per Section 26-1-(p) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property containing .57 acres and is known as 802 Seventh Street. Tax Map 047- 3-267-00-0 DISTRICT 1 12 Mr. Mayor: Ms. Wilson. We’ll hear from staff first and then we can hear from the objector. Ms. Wilson: All right this is just a location map to show you the address or the location th of the petition that we’ve got which is 7 Street and Walton Way. The Planning Board heard this case. This case was also sent back for a market order to give the applicant an opportunity to talk and work with the community. The rezoning request as you know is from is to a B-2 so it is a rezoning that would allow a transition center. One of the things that we did as staff is talk with the applicant about making a change which is one of the reasons I wanted to come up and talk with you about it briefly and the applicant has agreed. We have a request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to approve this with the following conditions that we would prohibit uses. The first use that would be prohibited is a convenience store. The second would be a liquor store. The third would be a tavern or a nightclub. Again a petition for Western Alternative Corrections, Inc. on behalf of Magnolia LLC, is requesting a Special Exception to establish a Bureau of Prisons Residential Re-entry Center per Section 26-1 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta. It’s affecting .57 acres and is known as 802 Seventh Street. So we’ve spoken with the applicant and they have agreed to omit those uses as part of this rezoning request and we’d like to have that included as part of the recommendation for approval for this particular use. I do want to stress that the Planning Board had a lot of discussion on this issue and we looked at it from the standpoint of whether it was an appropriate land use because there were two decisions that were made and one, is it appropriately zoned which is why we are omitting uses and the second is is it an appropriate location for a special exception which what the reentry center will be. If this approved they will have six months from the date of approval to establish the use for that property. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Prior to going any further, I just do want to fully disclose that I will not be in the conversation on this. My wife has an ownership interest in this property so I recuse myself. And, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, would you conduct the rest of this agenda item please? Mr. Johnson: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Pro Tem. Ms. Nunnally is here and I think she has some items to address it. But before she comes I’m a little bit confused because I’m hearing what you’re saying and I was in support but again you’re saying that we’re going to have to limit anything like grocery, convenience stores, liquor stores or some other (unintelligible) area. I mean I’m just trying to get some clarity. Ms. Wilson: Okay, that’s fine. What we’ve done is they’re asking that the property be rezoned to a B-2. B-2 is one of our most generous business zoning districts and it allows for a liquor store and other uses, a convenience store. Those are allowed uses in a B-2. Mr. Williams: Okay. Ms. Wilson: The applicant and we’ve spoken with them they have agreed because we looked at what would be considered something that could be detrimental at least from the neighborhood’s perception and based on the surrounding uses. So therefore we talked with the 13 applicant we asked if they would agree to remove, so it’s eliminating uses not only allowing these uses and they agreed that they would not allow a liquor store, they would not allow a tavern or a nightclub. They would not allow a convenience store. So these are uses that were, that the applicant agreed to omit. Mr. Williams: The thought pattern I had was that if we eliminate those what happens when the other board or anybody else decides they want to put to get it rezoned around the same area because we already done made an exception to put one here and they sign off and they sign off without doing it. What would stop the next person and I’m asking the question. Ms. Wilson: What was done and we’ve talked to the other applicant in case you will have another case very similar to this coming up at next month’s meeting. But we’ve asked both applicants to omit these uses. If this particular project does not move forward then the person or Magnolia LLC can still develop the property they just won’t be able to put a liquor store on it or a nightclub. Again we looked at this as a two-phase project. One you have to decide whether the rezoning is appropriate for that area or not because you’re changing the land uses. The second is whether you support the Special Exception they’re asking for which is for the transitional facility, the re-entry transitional facility. So from the zoning standpoint we are saying that, you know, we felt that a nightclub looking at the land uses and what’s around it is not necessarily an appropriate use there. You as a Commission can say you think that’s it’s okay and you can allow it to stand in there but the owner did agree to remove those uses from their request. Mr. Johnson: Commissioner Jackson then Commissioner Mason. Mr. Jackson: Thank you, Commissioner Johnson. Melanie, isn’t there a currently a transition state transitional facility in that area? Ms. Wilson: Yes, let’s see, it’s right behind this building and it’s a state facility. This is a federal facility and so therefore it’s a bit different with regards to how they operate. Mr. Jackson: Thank you. Mr. Johnson: We don’t currently have a federal facility here, right? Ms. Wilson: No, not at that location but again this is one of the challenges of the way that the system is set up. The applicant for this as well as the other property they can’t move forward with their application until they have a package that allows the use. That’s why you’re going to get the same request for another piece of property in the same area. You know when the feds make their decision they’re only going to pick one use and that of probably of the two or the three, I don’t we haven’t gotten any other applications from anybody thus far for this use in the Augusta Richmond County. But they will make a decision for one of them and what’s going to happen is the Special Exception because their recommendation we’re going to be consistent we’re not being biased for either one. We’ll be the same for the next one that comes up. But once a decision is made in six months, that Special Exception goes away. So it’s not something that’s going to you know stay for perpetuity. It just goes away and that’s why this is an issue of 14 looking at the zoning first if this is an appropriate location for B-2 zoning. Right now it’s zoned Light Industrial. And then second is it an appropriate location for a bringing in a trade facility to allow a Special Exception. Mr. Johnson: All right. Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Ms. Wilson --- Ms. Wilson: Yes, sir. Mr. Mason: --- I’m just a little curious after hearing what you’re saying here I’m wondering how many of the same type of facilities do we need in one area. I’m hearing you say that there’s already one similar there and possibly one coming even after this and I’m trying to figure out are we trying to make that whole road just re-entry facilities? Ms. Wilson: No, the facility that is currently there is a state facility and they, it’s different in regards to the population that is there in that facility. In this case it being a federal facility they have different standards in regards to what their requirements are for work. Both groups have made some concessions with the neighborhood with regards to doing things to help make improvements within the community. We looked at it again from the standpoint of is this an appropriate place for a B-2 zoning and we’d say yes. The second question is is this an appropriate place based on the fact that do you have that state facility for a federal facility to be there, it’s possible. Mr. Mason: Okay, I’m getting all that but I’m a little concerned with when we’re talking about growing our city and putting a lot of money in this general area and vicinity trying to build it up. I’m just wondering for my purposes what would be an appropriate use there and I guess I might be a little bit more amenable to it but now I’m hearing you say there’s another one poking around a few months down the road. And when you start saying yes when are you going to start saying no. So I don’t know I’ve just got some problems with it but, Mr. Mayor, I don’t know, Mayor Pro Tem was there some objectors here or something like that because I haven’t heard anything. And if we could because my question is the neighborhood associations and all of that do you, you’ve had some discussions with them and what is their response to this. Ms. Wilson: Well, the people from the neighborhood associations in the area attended the Planning board meeting and we had a number of people speak in favor or at least of the request, we some that were wanting to see what would happen if this request moved forward. And then we had some people that were against the use. So they were against the Special Exception component of his request. Again only one of the uses will be developed not both if they come in. I was just full disclosure letting you know that you will be getting something that comes in next month that looks very much like this but only one of the two will be developed. Mr. Mason: Did you recall the number of objectors that was there at that meeting? Ms. Wilson: No, not right off hand. If you would like to find out I can call my office and get it from the minutes but there were just as many at the last meeting that were for it as well. 15 Mr. Mason: Okay, so Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, if we could hear from some objectors and then at some point I would hope that the district commissioner would chime in for District One so we can kind of understand what his feeling is in reference to this. Mr. Johnson: Yeah, if ya’ll don’t mind we can. I know Commissioner Fennoy had his hand up to speak next and then Commissioner Donnie Smith then Commissioner, Donnie okay we’ll go on and take it. Mr. D. Smith: I think that my question was just for Mr. Fennoy because this is his district and he has certainly would should have a better feel for what the community wants then one of us that doesn’t represent that district. And I’d just like to hear from Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Johnson: We’ll go ahead and take Commissioner Lockett. Okay, Commissioner Lockett, did you want to hear from the objector first or did you want to speak? Mr. Lockett: It doesn’t make any difference, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Johnson: Let’s hear from the objector. There’s only one here correct? I thought I saw somebody over there. Well, we can hear from her as well. Ms. Wilson: And while she’s coming I’m going to pass around the change just so you’ll have that. Mr. Johnson: Okay, can ya’ll please state your name and address. Ms. Nunnally: My name is Stella Nunnally. I live at 1030 Philips Street, Augusta Georgia. I’ve been there, I’ve been in this area since (unintelligible). And I’m here on behalf of the Laney Walker Community as well as the neighborhood. In August we voted in our neighborhood association to oppose this transition center. And since that time in the community we have been out there along with the community about this transition center what we could do what would happen and if it would be any use or if it would be any help to our community. Our community is in a bad shape. It has a lot that needs to be done. We have one transition center already and we’ve been having the people in that area. I live on Philips Street. The people who live down in that area have been having problems with the transition center that’s already there and I’m here to represent them. We have some signatures from the people who could not be here today and this is (unintelligible) and we the people in the community most of them that I talked to they feel like this is some more unsafe. We have children, we have seniors in this area and we want to feel like we’re living in a decent community and bringing more prisoners into this community is not helpful because it seems like it wouldn’t be anything to help our community. They’re not bringing anything to clean up our community, to help us feel safer and this is what the people, some of the people, I’m not saying all of them say it’s about having another transition center in the community. And there’s still a lot of unknown information about this transition center, the ones that want to come in and this is some feelings, some of your feelings, some of my feelings what would happen. 16 Mr. Johnson: Okay. If we can I think there was someone from the neighborhood association here. If you could come to the podium and speak and your name and address for the record please. Ms. Coleman: Good afternoon. My name is Neita Coleman. I reside at 1226 Pine Street. I’m the newly elected first vice president of the Laney Walker Neighborhood Association. And on behalf of the association and its current board I’d like to inform you that by a majority vote we were, we are not taking a position as a body for or against the transition center. That’s because according the Federal Bureau of Prisons it’s going to be located in Richmond County and not so much that this is an if scenario but when. It is of two of commissions to determine the land use and if it’s appropriate and by whatever vote taken we’ll accept that. There are some in our body who were for it, some against, some like I stated want to see what’s going to happen. However with that being said the association is prepared to work vigilantly and in cooperation with whichever vendor is awarded the contract if that be the case. We want to insure that mandated standards are being upheld, opportunities are made available to the residents in our community particularly small businesses and that are expectations are being met. In order to accomplish this the Laney Walker Neighborhood Association is interested in participating (unintelligible) community relations board for this transition center and the creation of this type of board was mentioned by each of the candidates who are bidding for this contract and we as an executive board had an opportunity to communicate with them in recent weeks. And we’d also like to request a written memorandum of understanding from whichever candidates are awarded the contract. We’re not oblivious to the fact that with the re-entry center there will be issues, there may be issues and some existing in our community. As a whole I’m sure we would prefer that we didn’t have a use for a transition re-entry center but that’s just not reality. And if the reality is that it’s going to be in our community we would like to as a body hold people, ourselves, our community, our boards our elected officials and this vendor accountable. We would like a seat at the table to voice our opinions, to take information to the body to the community and to simply be a part of the process. Yes, we would all prefer that it not be here and there’s a lot of information, misinformation that’s going around but we are going to deal simply with facts. And the fact is as a body we’re not going to take a position yea or nay as a whole but we do ask for a seat at the table and we will as a body, as a whole, hold the facility, this Commission and our community relations board accountable. Thank you. Mr. Johnson: All right, thank you for that. Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Fennoy: Yes, Ms. Coleman, you are the second vice-president for the Laney Walker Association? Ms. Coleman: First Vice-President. Mr. Fennoy: First vice-president --- Ms. Coleman: Yes, sir. 17 Mr. Fennoy: --- and you’ve been attending meetings on a regular basis. Mr. Coleman: Yes, I lived in the community for about two years. I’ve been attending the meetings, the regular meetings of the association since last summer. Mr. Fennoy: From you attendance (unintelligible) has the association ever taken a vote on whether to support or not support the transition center? Ms. Coleman: Well, I haven’t been there for all the meetings but not to my knowledge right off hand I haven’t seen or read the exact minutes for the other meetings because I was only elected to the board this past January. Mr. Fennoy: From your, how long have you lived in your present location? Ms. Coleman: Since February 2012. Mr. Fennoy: Have you experienced any difficulties as a result of the state transitional center? Ms. Coleman: Not personally no, sir. Mr. Fennoy: Do you know of anyone who has? Ms. Coleman: No --- Mr. Fennoy: Okay. Ms. Coleman: --- not right off hand, not personally. Mr. Fennoy: I’ve had the opportunity to talk to businesses, charities and both companies have agreed to work with the Laney Walker Neighborhood and try to improve that area. Both have agreed to set up a community service board where the neighborhood would have input on what goes on not just necessarily at the facility but to respond to any issues that we in the neighborhood would have as a result of them being there. One of the advantages and I know Commissioner Mason is talking about the existing space and whether we’re going to have too many in the neighborhood. I have not worked for the state transitional center but I worked at a state transitional center through my employment with the Health Department. And one of the advantages of a transitional center in that location is that the federal probation office is right down the street. In the past residents of Augusta would have to go to Savannah or have to go to Atlanta and then once they’re fully released they got to come back here and find a job. By having a federal probation, I mean transitional center in this area it will make it much easier on the families. They don’t have to travel all over the state to visit their relatives. Mr. Johnson: I’ll give you another two minutes. 18 Mr. Fennoy: Yeah, so I fully support that transitional center. 80% of the inmates that go through a transitional center do not reoffend whereas only 40% of those who do not go through a transitional reoffend. This is a wonderful opportunity for people who have been incarcerated to get back on their feet. So I fully support the transitional center, I support the great job that they’re doing. They teach GED, if they have drugs issues they will address those issues and they will be close to the people that will be working with them. So I think it’s a great idea, I support it 100% and I wish my colleagues would do the same. Thank you. Mr. Johnson: Okay, we’ve got Commissioner Lockett and then Commissioner Guilfoyle and then Commissioner Williams. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I think, I believe part of my question is for the Planning Director. Mr. Johnson: Ms. Wilson? Mr. Lockett: Ms. Wilson, is there any statistics about a research event conducted to show whether or not locations that have these facilities the crime rate is higher than without them? Ms. Wilson: Not to my knowledge at least that I’ve seen. It doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist it’s just that I haven’t had the opportunity to look at that. Mr. Lockett: How does this proposed facility fit in with our master plan for downtown Augusta? Ms. Wilson: Well um, that’s a great question. Mr. Lockett: Thank you so much. I appreciate that. I appreciate that. I stayed up all night trying to come up with that. Ms. Wilson: Okay. Well the, did I say it’s a great question because what is being proposed from the standpoint of the land use and that’s why for staff we looked at it from the standpoint of this is kind of an entry way into the city. There’s an opportunity to improve it. That is consistent with any planning that you would want to have coming into the downtown area. The uses that are allowed in the B-2 are a lot less intense than what is allowed in the Light Industrial and this is an opportunity to get some of the improvements that we don’t necessarily have the resources to make at that corner. So from that standpoint I would say that that as well as you know the proposed use would be --- Mr. Lockett: I believe, Ms. Coleman, you mentioned the fact that there’s a lot if misinformation out there. What are we doing or what are the prospective tenants doing in order to educate the people and make them aware of what they will be confronted with should this facility be approved then constructed there? Ms. Wilson: Well, I know that the applicant which the applicant is here one of the things that we did as a department was to make sure that the applicant and the neighborhood got an 19 opportunity to sit down and have a conversation. We suggested that both groups set up a community overview or advisory committee whatever each one of them want to call it that includes people in the neighborhood so they could be a part of what’s going on in the neighborhood. They would always have current information and both facilities have agreed to do that. Western Alternative is here, they can talk a little bit more about that but those are the things that we’ve done to make sure that this was coming in a little bit more holistic way that the community would be part of this. It’s also my understanding that as part of the way that the program is set up by the federal government that because they have to do go out and do work that part of this would be dealing with beautification and things of that nature that could be done in that area of the city so. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, if I may, could the young man that wants to put the facility here could he possibly come up? Mr. Johnson: Sure, I was going to request that if he would like to speak. Okay, sir, would you like to come up and brief us on the proposal? Please state your name and your address for the record. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, just a correction for the record. Can the young lady come up? Mr. Johnson: Yeah, we did --- Ms. Hultine: You never know. I’m Michelle Hultine with Western Alternative Corrections. I am the owner of Western Alternative Corrections, a residential re-entry center a long time ago unbeknownst to all of us in this room I’m sure was being considered by the federal government. They sneak into town they do their assessments, their research they analyze how many federal offenders are coming back to a certain area or location. And I find it interesting that Augusta has gone this long actually the size of town you are without a residential re-entry center. So residents that are transitioning out of a federal penitentiary back into your area have to transition through Augusta or Atlanta and then come here and start over again basically. So the feds decided that there’s going to be a facility in Augusta Georgia. So through the bidding process then an RFP was let. We responded to that. I feel that we’ve done our due diligence in working with the city and the community in terms of where that facility is going to be. I’ve heard a lot of great information here this morning about working with the community. That is very, very important and integral. We have a facility in the Nebraska and interestingly we are in the historic downtown area of our town and where we have residential area. We have rehabbed the building. We are really into taking a property and improving it and rehabbing it and beautifying basically an area of town that maybe needs some attention. I have a rendition of what our building would look like if you guys want to pass that around. And I have been in touch with the Laney Walker Neighborhood Association. Part of what the feds want you to do and actually mandate that you do is establish a Community Relations Board, a CRB and of course we want to include the Laney Walker Neighborhood Association as an integral part of that as we’re going to be living in that area of town. I did attend a neighborhood meeting a few weeks ago but we’ve also met with the Parks and Rec Department and the Pine Street Neighborhood Association. And we’ve also been in contact with the Augusta Neighborhood 20 Improvement Corporation in a preemptive effort to identify certain projects or ways that we can become more involved in a targeted sense in helping the community. And I can answer whatever questions you all may have hopefully. Mr. Johnson: Okay, thank you. Hold on one second. I know Commissioner Fennoy I’m sorry Guilfoyle had his hand up then Commissioner Williams then Commissioner Donnie Smith. Mr. Guilfoyle: I hope I got this correct, Ms. Holtine? Ms. Hultine: Hultine, yes. Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. Thank you for coming up and addressing this Commission. Do you have any other facilities that you operate? Ms. Hultine: We have a 50-bed facility in Hastings, Nebraska. Mr. Guilfoyle: All right. Tell me because while Ms. Wilson was speaking what is the difference between a state facility and a federal facility? Ms. Hultine: Right. Um, you know each state is different according to how they run their state residential re-entry programs and in fact they’re not always called residential re-entry. The federal government calls them Residential Re-entry. In regards to how we run our facility as mandated by the Guide of Bureau of Prisons, it’s all about accountability. Accountability is the bottom line. Everything the person does while at the facility must be accounted for. They must work. They must have a job within the first two weeks. If they’re at work our staff calls them twice a day on their supervisor’s phone to make sure that they’re there. The resident has to call in once a day to make sure they’re at work. Our staff does on site visits and ultimately the goal is to go home of course, to transition home. So that’s a step down process as well. You take a weekend trip home on a release and we monitor that. If that goes well then let’s go home and everybody goes home on an ankle bracelet so that we know that you’re doing what you are supposed to be doing and you’re not frequenting places that you shouldn’t be. The program is very, very intense. We have to be accountable as the business owner. Our staff has to be accountable, the residents have to be accountable, it’s all about accountability. Mr. Guilfoyle: Right. As far as the facility that you have and operate, tell me the positive impact it has been for that area and the negative as well. Ms. Hultine: Okay. The positives far outweigh the negatives and I am telling you, you can pick up the phone today and you call our Mayor, our City Attorney whomever you like in Hastings and ask them how we run a program and it will be positive. The positives probably the biggest benefit the city gets is, is we are right downtown so we are part of the downtown improvement district. And so actually all of the cleanup brooms and shovels and all of that stuff are kept at our facility and our residents go out there and are out and clean up after the parades and set up for festivals or whatever we have going on. We’re very crazy about the appearance of our buildings and we took an in need of rehab building in downtown Hastings and have turned into quite a complex to behold. And it’s our intent to do the same thing with the property at 802 21 th 7 Street. We’re very excited about that building. The negatives um, gosh I have to say we enjoy a very good relationship with our community. I would say the negatives are sometimes the perception of what our program is about for people that don’t fully understand it maybe and we deal with that. Mr. Guilfoyle: All right. The people that you’re going to have there for the halfway --- Ms. Coleman: Uh-Huh. Mr. Guilfoyle: --- for the transitional is it white collar crime? Ms. Hultine: It could be yes. Lately we’ve seen a lot of white collar crime on the federal level because of the economy. We have the trickle-down effect of the bad economy so we have had seen a lot of bankruptcy fraud. In Nebraska we deal with a lot of bankers that have given out bad loans because their buddy you know was kind of going south, that kind of thing. Counterfeiters we don’t get a lot of those because they don’t, that doesn’t seem to ever work out too well. Mr. Guilfoyle: Right and I do like the fact that you are actually going to be working with the neighborhood association. Ms. Hultine: Indeed. And I have met a lot of wonderful people that a lot of them are here in this room today through that process. I’m very happy about that regardless of what happened there’s some good people down in that area. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you for your time. Mr. Johnson: Commissioner Williams then Commissioner Donnie Smith. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Pro Tem. I heard the word that the Advisory Board that have not heard before today that will be put in place. I guess my question is if we don’t as an elected body put a board in place, how will the business in the community put a board in place if nobody’s going to hold them accountable? I’m asking a question I guess. I guess I need my lawyer hat on now to find out how can we would get that to be a part of the process versus just saying that. This young lady did an outstanding job and I think the negatives are a perception. I did get a few calls from the neighborhood. I did talk to Commissioner Fennoy. He’s not just the only commissioner; this is part of Super District 2. I want that known that you know there’s another vote that you have or may not have but it does exist. So the board I guess my first question is how can we put a board in place? Now we’ve got an Advisory Board for the Transit and we got a (unintelligible) and that brings another question. We got boards in place and we can’t keep up with ourselves so how can we enforce that? That’s my question how can we put something together that’s going to make sure that the T’s are crossed and the I’s are dotted as if everybody’s saying. I mean can somebody answer that? Anybody? Mr. Johnson: Ms. Wilson. 22 Ms. Wilson: I can basically I know that it’s been my past experience that when an applicant with a use of this nature that’s why I suggested it put an Advisory Board together. Normally the community if they are not doing what they need to do with what, you know, and that hasn’t necessarily happened. I don’t have any experiences where when someone has made a commitment that they would put together an Advisory Board that they weren’t active just because of some of the work and projects and things that normally take place they’re as well as the notification with regards to what is going on within the facility. At the Planning Board there was a lot of discussion that people were concerned about how will they know. You know I’m assuming they’re probably going to have some sort of website and I’m sure if we really want to keep tabs on them we could ask them to make sure that they at least put the activities and the meetings on their website so that we could periodically go in and check. But that’s an Advisory Board that they’re responsible for putting together not that we are responsible for putting together. That’s an agreement between them and the folks in the neighborhood. The second thing is as you heard someone from the Pine Tree Neighborhood Association, Pine Street Neighborhood Association the other thing that a lot of neighborhoods have started doing are Memorandum of Understandings. And what happens with that is that that gives them some teeth to hold the applicant accountable. That ends of being a contract of a sense between them and the uh --- Mr. Williams: And that’s what I’m getting at, Ms. Wilson, you know we kind of went around the wagon to get there but everybody that says they do don’t. And people say I do in a minute but they don’t always do that so that bothers me. Now if we can put some teeth like you said whether it be to do a board or a memorandum of understanding or whatever it takes. I’m not against the facility. I mean I think it’s needed I think it’s something that’s going to happen but you got people that live in that area need to make sure that the facility looks like it looks here that it’s going fit Commissioner Lockett asked about how it’s going to fit downtown. We can kind of mandate that. We can tell them it’s got to be at a certain standard you know and I think that standard’s good. I’m not arguing that but I’m just saying we can make that work but how do we make the community feel comfortable. The perception is, you know, when somebody’s getting out of jail whether it be a federal or state or just tied in the back yard I mean when somebody’s getting out will we look at the negatives instead of the positives. You know you don’t get a life sentence and when you get out you know you done paid your time to come back to society. And if you mess up then you go back again. Ms. Wilson: Well, one of the things that you could, that you possibly could do and we can get a brief from the attorney’s but again this a two faced process. One you’re determining whether the zoning is appropriate for that area. And second you’re looking at the Special Exception. One thing that you possibly could do and this is where the attorney needs to weigh in is you could grant the Special Exception with the understanding and have it tied to the rendering that has been submitted in tied to the fact that they’ve got to have a memorandum of understanding in place before they’re issued permits like building permits or whatever. At least that way that would be a way for us to check to insure that that has taken place. But I don’t know again that’s something that the attorney would have to make a decision on and it would only be on the Special Exception piece of it not on the zoning. 23 Ms. Hultine: Can I just say that your teeth with the board be insurance. Every year we are given a report card and a full monitoring by the Bureau of Prisons and that board is something that has to be in place. And I can stand up here and assure you that representatives from the Laney Walker Neighborhood Association will be on our Community Relations Board. And I don’t have a problem in the world with all of you adding that to our Special Exception or however this is done. I’m a little reluctant, Ms. Wilson, on the MOU’s later on. You know so say we get this Special Exception, say we get the contract and then all of a sudden and MOU comes in and somebody wants a $250,000 fence put around it. You know what I mean? Ms. Wilson: The MOU, the only thing that at least that I would be looking for the MOU is not, you know I don’t want to have this or I would not recommend that this be something where you are being squeezed for things that really are not appropriate. This basically would be an MOU that at least binds you to not only having members of the board but keep them abreast you know keeping a, having a website maybe having it current so that they know what’s going on looking at a list of projects that the board decides not one person. So it can be general enough to give you coverage but specific enough to give the neighborhood coverage and let them know that you’re serious about setting up this board. So you know I haven’t talked to the Pine Street group but I do know that that would at least give you some assurance and we can have that tied to the building permit. So if it’s not in place and you end up with the contract you won’t get a permit until that’s done so. Mr. Johnson: All right. Commissioner Donnie Smith, Commissioner Lockett. Mr. D. Smith: I just have a couple of questions. One, ma’am, I want to be clear that these are people that have been sentenced in the federal court and the majority of those people in federal court are tried not for violent offenses but for credit card fraud and politicians that have gone astray and um --- Ms. Hultine: And I would agree with you on that statement but I’m also not going to stand here and say that that doesn’t ever happen. And let me give you an example. The other day we had someone come to our facility and he was there on third degree assault. He just pulverized his brother with a two by four or something. And I said to our executive director how did this happen? Why is he at our facility because all day long that would probably be a state charge. And do you know what the answer was? He was on a Native American Indian reservation. Mr. D. Smith: A reservation. Ms. Hultine: Yeah and you know we don’t get a lot of murderers because again if you murder somebody on a federal level you’re probably not going to get out of prison any time soon. So it is money and drug crimes. We do get sex offenders occasionally and why do we get sex offenders all day long that would be a state charge. If you molest a child next door that’s a state charge. Well if you use the computer to look at elicit pornography or whatever that is a federal charge. That’s the FCC. 24 Mr. D. Smith: All right my last question for you is the document you gave to us shows 58 people, 46 males and 12 females who are proposed for this. Would there ever be a time when you would think that this would expand beyond that capability? Ms. Hultine: No. Mr. D. Smith: No? Ms. Hultine: No. Mr. D. Smith: So it will always be 58 people. Ms. Hultine: That’s correct. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you. Mr. Johnson: All right we’ve got a Commissioner Lockett then Commissioner Fennoy then we can go on and wrap this on up. Mr. Lockett: Yeah, I’m going to be real brief because we’ve been through this for some time. But the cost to residents what is the cost for them and how do they pay for it? Ms. Hultine: That’s a great question. So the residents are responsible per the federal law that they have to pay 25% of their gross income in what we call subsistence to stay there, okay? So our daily rate, the cost of what we deliver services for on a daily rate, daily basis that rate is offset by the subsistence. So let’s say your daily rate is $100 and the resident is paying 25% of their gross and so they’re paying maybe $50.00 dollars a day to stay there. Then the feds are only billed fifty. Does that make sense the balance? And there are occasions where residents are making enough money, and I just threw the $100.00 dollars out of there as a brief calculation but there are cases where the resident pays 100% of the daily rate because they’re making that much money. Mr. Lockett: Okay, you indicated they have two weeks to get a job. What happens if they don’t get a job in two weeks they go back to prison? Ms. Hultine: Not straight up. They, if it’s a reason whereby maybe the economy is horribly poor and or they don’t have the transferable skills necessary to go out and market themselves. We look at all of those things. Then if it’s because you’re gaming and you’re just hanging out and you don’t want to get a job that’s pretty transparent after a while. You get a write up and you go through the steps and we try to work with them. We have an employment program actually. They will go back to prison if it’s just something they’re not doing period. Mr. Lockett: And my last question is and it might be for you, Ms. Wilson. There’s another location I understand is being considered. Is that something we can talk about or you can mention now? 25 Ms. Wilson: I would prefer to --- Mr. Lockett: I withdraw the question, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I withdrew the question. Mr. Johnson: All right. Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: A quick question. What is the advantage of the local businesses to hire someone from the transition center? Ms. Hultine: That’s a great question too. Employers in our area love our residents because you know what they come to work every day and they come to work clean because they’re being drug tested constantly. And there’s a heavy consequence if you don’t come to work. Also our employers enjoy on an average of $2,500.00 dollar Work Opportunity Tax Credit for hiring a felon that has immediately come out of prison. And that’s dollar for dollar tax credit for an employer. I would say those are the three biggies. Mr. Fennoy: Okay. And my next question is when the residents are not working what are they doing? I mean what --- Ms. Hultine: When the residents are not working they’re probably programming. And understand our residents do not leave our facility unless they have permission to do so. If they want to go to Wal-Mart and get their sundries they have to put a pass in for that and they’re given from 1:45 to you know 2:30 to do that and our staff may call Wal-Mart and have them paged to see they’re actually there. They’re not wandering around in the streets. If that should happen that is grounds for going back to prison immediately. Mr. Fennoy: Okay and my last question is that you said you have random drug testing? Ms. Hultine: Correct. Mr. Fennoy: And what happens when --- Ms. Hultine: They get a dirty UA. They go back to prison. Mr. Fennoy: Thank you. Mr. Johnson: All right thank you, Ms. Hultine. We appreciate it. Do we have a motion? Mr. Jackson: Motion to approve. Mr. Grady Smith: Second. Mr. Johnson: We have a proper motion and second. And further discussion? Yes Commissioner Davis. 26 Ms. Davis: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, could we put that language in there, Ms. Wilson, if it already isn’t about the facility will stay at a maximum of 58 residents. Would that be, that’s what you say correct? And then I don’t know if it’s in there that then Western Alternative will work within an established Community Advisory Board. Is that, I don’t know if that’s in the (inaudible). Ms. Wilson: It’s not, it’s not a condition per se but it’s one that you probably could add. And I wanted to remind you also if you agree to include the language with regards to eliminating some of the uses that might have an adverse impact to the community like the nightclub and that sort. Ms. Davis: That would be the three things we add to the motion to approve. Would that be okay with the maker of the motion? Mr. Johnson: Maker of the motion? Okay. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, the motion has been modified drastically. Could the Clerk please read it back so we know what we’re voting on? Mr. Johnson: Okay, Madam Clerk, could you read the motion back the best you can please Ma’am? The Clerk: Yes, sir, I’ll do my best. It’s a motion to approve from the Planning Commission with the following conditions that the following uses shall be prohibited; the convenience store, liquor store, the tavern and/or nightclub, to approve the petition that the facility maintain a limit, I believe, of 58 people. And that they work with the Neighborhood Advisory Boards to stay in contact with them. Mr. Johnson: All right, let’s do it. All right vote by the usual sign of voting please. Mr. D. Smith: Mr. Pro Tem? Mr. Johnson: Yes. Mr. D. Smith: I think there’s a, the she wants to make there’s a, we need, there’s two different things we need to vote on here and we to take them in separate. The first one should be the zoning variance --- Ms. Wilson: Well it’s the, the first one is the zoning from Light Industrial to B-2 with the prohibited uses. Mr. Johnson: Okay, that’s what we’re voting on now. Ms. Wilson: That’s what you’re going to vote on right now. And then the second one would be whether you’re going to allow the Special Exception or not. 27 Mr. Williams: Mr. Pro Tem? Mr. Johnson: Okay, you said what we’re voting on we just took a vote on is for the rezoning. Ms. Wilson: Yes. Mr. Johnson: Okay and now the Special Exception is what we’re voting on next. Ms. Wilson: Next, that’s correct. Mr. Williams: You can’t have two motions now. The Clerk is sitting down there but somebody needs to say something --- Mr. Johnson: I agree with you. That’s what I’m saying we’ve got to have there’s got to be a whole other motion made. This is only for that one motion. Mr. MacKenzie? Mr. MacKenzie: If I can offer a friendly suggestion. The motion that the Clerk read into the record was actually relating to the special condition. It would be my suggestion to vote on that first then vote on the zoning piece second. That way that’s the motion that was already read into the record. Mr. Johnson: Right that’s what I thought. Mr. Williams: Clarification please. Mr. Johnson: Yeah, go ahead. Mr. Williams: I mean you’ve got this special exception and zoning all in one item. Is that right? Is that the way it’s put in the book here? Ms. Wilson: Right now you’ve got it in one item but when the Planning Board voted on it they voted on the zoning and then they voted on the Special Exception. Mr. Williams: But when it came to us, this is where the buck stops at. This is one unit right here now and if that’s not legal if it’s not right then we got to do something else. They got to be put in a different format. Somebody --- Mr. Johnson: Mr. Attorney, how, I mean it is item two, Z-14-05 but I know it’s two different you know requests here. So how would, is it appropriate to vote on it in a separate piece? How would --- Mr. MacKenzie: You’re right, it can be done two different ways. One way you can approve two different things in one item as long as the Commission approves it. It’s my understanding this vote does or you can separate the two out. You can do the zoning piece and then the Special Exception separately. Both of those are perfectly legal ways. 28 Mr. Williams: But, so there’s a rule? I mean there’s no guideline to go by? Mr. Johnson: Ms. Wilson, what would you --- Ms. Wilson: I was just going to say the reason that you got one motion was because when this application came in I guess almost a year ago, it’s been a while the application came in as one application asking for two things. That is what the agreement was when the application was taken in by the previous director. So therefore you’ve got a motion the zoning case itself has one zoning case number. That’s what you’re voting on. I’m just wanting to make sure for the record that you understand that you’re voting on a rezoning and a Special Exception and that you know they are two items. I just, because I don’t want you to come back later on and say well I didn’t realize that. Mr. Johnson: Well, based on the agenda item it’s one item. Ms. Wilson: That’s the way it came in. Mr. Johnson: So we’ve got to vote on it based on the item the way it’s presented, right? So we will vote on it in that manner. Mr. Mason and Mr. Williams vote No. Motion Passes 8-2. Mr. Johnson: Okay, Mr. Mayor, I’ll turn it back over to you. ADDENDUM 46. Approve the funding to pay the exempt employees that responded to the Ice Event from thth Tuesday, February 11 – Sunday, February 16 in accordance to the Administrative Rule th No. 11-1, Section 4.2. This will be processed for the pay date of March 7. (Requested by the Interim Administrator) Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. And to the Commission we did have a late addition that came through the Clerk’s office that we didn’t get prior to the meeting that we just got. I would like to and it addresses the recent storm. The Interim Administrator has requested a, and obviously we need unanimous consent to add this and approve it. But to approve the funding to pay the exempt employees that responded to the ice event from Tuesday, February th 11th through Sunday, February 16 in accordance to the Administrative Rule 11-1 Section 4.2. th This will be processed per pay date of March 7. Do we have unanimous consent to add that? Mr. D. Smith: I make a motion to approve that. Mr. Lockett: Second. Mr. Williams: No, no you ain’t --- 29 Mr. Mayor: Do we have unanimous consent to add? Mr. Williams: No, you ain’t got it from me. Mr. Mayor: So we do not have unanimous consent? Mr. Williams: Why didn’t this come through the normal process? Why are we always, Ms. Wilson (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams, it’s Tuesday and it was an emergency situation. So I apologize but I do think we need to get a --- Mr. Williams: This meeting has been going on for an hour and a half, Mr. Mayor, now and we’re just getting this now which is late. It should’ve been on the agenda but I understand there was a rush. Here we are now half way through the meeting and now we’re getting it. Mr. Mayor: I was waiting for the conversation to end. So, Commissioner Williams, I would respectfully request that we do get your consent that so that we can get our employees paid that went through this emergency situation. Mr. Williams: So their regular paycheck you’re saying is going to be stopped. They won’t get paid their regular paycheck but the emergency --- Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, you can -- Ms. Allen: No, Commissioner Williams, they still will get their regular pay check. This is what we got approved at the last increment weather situation we had. And it must have Commission approval in order for it to go in the place for us to do it at this increment weather. I apologize for the delay of course the event just happened and I got that information today to the Clerk’s office. Mr. Mayor: Do we have your consent to add? Mr. Williams: We pay too much money, Mr. Mayor, too much money and we aren’t talking about the people with increment weather. I’m talking about the people that handle this. I’m going to let it go this time. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay we have unanimous consent to add. Do we have a motion to approve? Mr. Mason: So moved. Mr. Lockett: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. 30 The Clerk: That motion carries 8-1-1 with Mr. Jackson voting no. Mr. Jackson: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Mr. Jackson says he pressed yes. The Clerk: Okay, Mr. Jackson, he’ll vote yes and Mr. Williams so that’ll be, okay 9-1 and Mr. Williams abstaining. Mr. Williams abstains. Motion Passes 9-0-1. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, on to the next pulled and then, thank you all for that. On to the next pulled agenda item which I believe is item number three. The Clerk: PLANNING 3. Z-14-07 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta, Georgia Planning Commission to deny a petition by Veronica Kinsey, on behalf of Clorinda Zawaki, requesting a Special Exception to establish a Family Personal Care Home per Section 26-1(h) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property containing .46 acres and is known as 3924 Grape Avenue. Tax Map 052-0-138-00 DISTRICT 3 Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Davis. Ms. Davis: Ms. Wilson, did you ask to pull this? I mean did you ask, Mr. Lockett? I know Mr. Lockett mentioned. Ms. Wilson: Based on the email that we received earlier we’ve discovered that the application when it was originally submitted was not submitted by the owner which we just found out. And we are asking that this be dismissed --- Ms. Davis: I make a motion to --- Ms. Wilson: --- from consideration. Mr. Mayor: Just, okay so the applicant --- Ms. Davis: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: --- yes, go ahead Commissioner Davis. 31 Ms. Davis: Also would it be more appropriate to deny it or dismiss it as far as it coming back? I know that this was definitely the board wanted made a request for us to deny it. So there are reasons for that. What would be --- Ms. Wilson: I’m going to let the attorney go into detail but I will just because I talked with Legal regarding this. But I will say we have made changes to our system to make sure that we insure that the owner’s signature is notarized on applications. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Mr. Attorney. Mr. Brown: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners we believe that it would appropriate to deny it because it will be disadvantaging the owner and the owner never took any actions in behalf. If you deny it then if the owner wanted to come in and take an action it would be blocked for a period of time. But since the owner has never asked you to do anything regarding this property and this is a person who was trying to acquire interest in the property we think that the petition is . So we ask that this request not be considered and to do that you not legally before you would just dismiss the request and the owner would be back in the same position that they were in before. Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to that affect? Ms. Davis: So moved. Mr. Grady Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Fennoy and then Commissioner Jackson. Mr. Fennoy: I think Attorney Brown answered my question. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Jackson. Mr. Jackson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Wayne, if this was done improper to begin with without the owners knowing to me I think they deserve a penalty because it was done without the owners knowing. To keep the owner from coming back and applying it was on the same address I think there needs to be a lesson learned here that using, not using the right person on that you see what I’m saying? Mr. Brown: Yes, but I think based on the information that the Planning Department received just today the owner did not sanction this person to apply. Mr. Jackson: But then the owner could turn around next month and apply if he wanted to. Mr. Brown: Yes. I think the analogy is someone went out and attempted to sell you car and you didn’t know about it, it probably would not be appropriate to punish you since you didn’t participate in any manner. 32 Mr. Mayor: Well, you’re saying how do we punish the applicant not the, okay. Commissioner Smith then Commissioner Mason. Mr. D. Smith: Mr. Brown, would it be appropriate for somebody in this government, a law enforcement group in this government to have that person arrested and charged with filing a false affidavit or a false filing with a state charge. Mr. Brown: I think what this person has pointed or has caused the county to learn is that this, the application process needed to be reviewed. I am not sure at this point if the application was sustained a criminal charge or an investigation. But we could look into that. But I don’t know that this application is an affidavit. Mr. D. Smith: Well, I’m pretty clear if you sign something that’s invalid it’s either a forgery or you have filed a false filing. And if it wasn’t your property and you were trying to file something to get an exemption to have a business in your house that you don’t own I think that is certainly a criminal offense. And I would appreciate it if somebody from the Law Enforcement Community through the Legal office would follow up with that. Thank you. Mr. Brown: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Yes, Donnie pretty much spoke to what I was going to say but let me add this. On a check and balance system that clearly is not appropriate at this particular time there’s still a fraudulent document in my mind no matter how you look at it. But I need to insure that moving forward if you say you don’t think it would stand the test of time under its current the way that it was presented then we need to make sure that we have the right verbiage and policies in place so that we can stand the test of time so there won’t be another person submitting a false application or fraudulent application on behalf of some other party. Now I personally believe that their signature could constitute a serious offense here and I don’t know that necessarily you should make that decision as you’re standing there right now. Mr. Brown: No decision is made. What we would do is I just didn’t want to give complete assurance that we could do that. But what we will do we’ll look at if the document can support a charge if it is the will of the Commission to take action then we would contact Law Enforcement to recommend an investigation on that matter. Mr. Mason: Have you had any discussion with the owner? The owner has told you that that is not that was not his will, it was not his intent. What has been said by the owner exactly? Mr. Brown: Ms. Wilson was contacted today by the representative of the owner. She spoke with him and then she forwarded it to me just prior to the meeting. Mr. Mason: So here again there’s a representative we haven’t really even spoke to the owner again. So do we know did we have validity that that representative was truly representing 33 the owner since we didn’t know that the person who submitted the application wasn’t representing the owner? Ms. Wilson: The, in this particular case the property is a HUD property and the person that contacted us is sanctioned to represent HUD who is the owner. Mr. Mason: Oh, Lord, have mercy. Ms. Wilson: But HUD, you know --- Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Uh, --- Mr. Mayor: To dismiss the request. Mr. Brown: We absolutely will look into the impropriety here. Mr. Fennoy: Is it possible that we could see the applicant on down the road maybe in the transitional federal transition center? Ms. Wilson: This probably would be considered white collar crime so it’s possible but no, I’m just kidding. No, I don’t know but we will follow up. And I will tell you that one of things that we have done is we’ve also added to our application process that if the applicant is not the owner they have the signature notarized so that we can insure that the owner is notified. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, is it possible that we could have someone from the Bel Air Neighborhood Association to make a brief statement about their concerns for a residential home in their house. I mean in that neighborhood? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Brown? Mr. Brown: If, Commissioner Fennoy, if the application is not properly before you, you would probably not want to take comments on an application that really is not properly before you. Mr. Fennoy: Okay, that’s fine. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign of voting. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next pulled agenda item which I believe is number nine. 34 The Clerk: PUBLIC SERVICES 9. Motion to approve the Customer Facility Charge (CFC) Ordinance as approved by the Augusta Aviation Commission at their December 19, 2013 meeting. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 10, 2014) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams, I believe this was your pull. Mr. Williams: Yeah, I --- Mr. D. Smith: I think it was mine. Mr. Mayor: Excuse me. Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Because of committee problems that day we didn’t have a good many of us were not here and that included myself and several others. Can you explain this ordinance to us, please, sir, to the entire body? Mr. LeTellier: Yes, sir, this is a Customer Facility Charge. Actually it’s associated with rental car transactions. It taxes for lack of a better word a transaction on a daily basis and pays it to the county. Whereas you approved it by ordinance heretofore it has been done by contract. We’ve been collecting this since 2007. So we’ve been at this with all the car rentals and we’re just, we’re just asking that you put it in an ordinance form so that it’s a proper tax. Mr. D. Smith: So in the past, I mean this is not a new tax to the consumer. It’s already been collected but just the car companies did it on a voluntary basis through a contract with the airport and then they had to renew it every year, two years, three years something in that nature? Okay. How much what is the fee? I’m just curious. Mr. LeTellier: Over a million I guess. Mr. D. Smith: That comes into your fund or the General Fund? Mr. LeTellier: No, to the airport’s fund. Mr. D. Smith: To the airport fund. Thank you. Mr. LeTellier: The fund right now has almost five million in it. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Williams. I heard the statement from the airport director but I guess my question is if it was working before and now we want to change it to an ordinance 35 which is changing, I don’t whether it’s changing the process or not but if it was working before why is the ordinance needed now because when you put an ordinance in place it’s law so to speak so. Mr. LeTellier: Well, contracts expire and that’s what happened here. And we were advised by our legal counsel that a contract probably wasn’t the right place to put this kind of fee that it really should be in some kind of a policy or ordinance. And so in our last negotiations with the car rentals we talked about this and they agreed to continue to pay the fee and we indicated that we would bring it our governing board for an ordinance and that’s what we doing. We’ve been working on this for quite some time. Mr. Williams: I mean before I can support this, I mean before your time we had some problems with the airport with some things that wasn’t, there was a day to day contract they renewed and this body didn’t know anything about it. But before I can vote on and ordinance I need to have our general counsel at least have a conversation with the counsel out there and bring me up to speed as to where what the ordinance is going to do. I mean I hear what you’re saying. Mr. LeTellier: I don’t’, I can’t really speak for general counsel but I think he has reviewed this or it wouldn’t be on your agenda. Mr. Williams: Well, he hadn’t no explanation come to me now. He may have it and he needs to convey. There’s been an issue too. I don’t know about the airport but here who drives the train the trains runs itself. I mean this is the body who votes on it and we ought to be abreast of whatever ordinance and whether it’s been changed. And it had to be important enough to bring it to this body. So --- Mr. Le Tellier: Sir, I think I’ll defer to the --- Mr. Williams: I think that would be good. That’s right. Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: Sure I’d be happy to speak on this item. I did review this as it came through the MuniAgenda system and it is consistent with the format that’s utilized by most other airports and has a consistent similar format to what Augusta has. And I concur with the opinion of the airport attorney which is the best way to do this is probably through an ordinance. It doesn’t mean that it was improper to do it the way it was done before it’s just kind of a bench practice this way to have an ordinance in place so that you don’t have to keep up with all the contracts and the renewal dates and all that. Mr. Williams: If I can respond, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: You’ve still got the floor. 36 Mr. Williams: Yes, sir. I understand what the attorney just said but the buck still stops with us. You may agree but you should have came to this body and related that and to share with us. We have to vote on those things that once it’s voted on once it’s done, it’s out of your hands and really out of our hands. So I’ve got some issues with that that no one came. We meet in Legal we stay there a long time people sit out here and wait on us and no one explained that. I’m not saying the process was wrong or shouldn’t have been done but before we vote on it it looks like somebody would say hey this is what we’re doing and this is why we’re doing it. Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two. Mr. Williams: No, I’m going to finish, Mr. Mayor. I don’t need to say (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Jackson. Mr. Jackson: Motion to approve. Mr. Johnson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Williams votes No. Motion Passes 9-1. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next pulled agenda item which I believe is twelve. The Clerk: PUBLIC SAFETY 12. Motion to accept proposal from Stage Front Presentation Systems regarding the presentation system for the new Commission Chambers. (Approved by Public Safety Committee February 10, 2014) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams, I believe this is you. Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, I need somebody to hopefully share with us before we vote on something that we don’t know what we’re voting on. There’s a lot of stuff (inaudible) so you can help me out by sharing what exactly what is it. Mr. Blanchard: This is or the intent of this agenda item is to provide for the audio/visual capability for the new Commission Chamber. In the chambers that we have right now we actually had to retrofit everything so that we had to drill lots of holes, we had to run cables. Everything had to be done after the fact and we still some cables that are on the floor and we have a camera in the corner of the chambers so that anybody watching on line is seeing Commissioner Lockett in profile which is not a bad thing. 37 Mr. Lockett: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: I like it because he blocks the view. Mr. Blanchard: Essentially what we’re intending to do here is that the new Commission Chamber which is on the second floor we’re going to reuse as much as the existing equipment that’s in this room as we can because some of it is still not obsolete, it’s in good condition. We want to do that. And then we also want to make some improvements to the video solution so that we have cameras mounted in front and in back. And then one of the unfortunate cost items that we’re looking is that where we have very short runs on the cabling because unfortunately our audio solution is up under the Mayor’s station here. On the third floor we have a control room so that we’ll have someone in there to manage the sound and video solution. So really this is going to give us the capability to make sure we give you a higher quality production if you will for the Commission Chamber. Mr. Williams: But that doesn’t change anything else. Everything else stays the same it’s just better equipment, better technology you’re saying keeping Commissioner Lockett from blocking Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Mayor: From blocking you. Mr. Blanchard: Yes, sir. Everything else will certainly be better. We’ll still have a lot of the same elements so it won’t be a completely alien configuration that you haven’t seen before and we will be replacing the projectors with large video screens. Mr. Williams: And all of this is still under the same price that we had nothing is changed nothing is different as far as the money is concerned? Mr. Blanchard: Well, actually this is a significant savings over what we had originally projected for the room. When we had to make a projection, this is a couple of years ago before the project started we were thinking about more cameras, more speakers and essentially what we were able to do is because we had a different space to work in we were able to shrink it down to two cameras. And again we’re using some of the existing equipment. It’s going to enable us to save about half of the project costs. We originally projected over $300,000 then what this is coming in for about $170. Mr. Williams: Okay, that helps me a lot especially knowing the part we’re saving. Hopefully that money will be put back so we can know where the other savings went to and what I make a motion to approve, Mr. we’re doing with it but I appreciate it. That helps a lot. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second? Mr. Johnson: Second. 38 Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Fennoy: Yes, will the, will the new video and audio equipment that you’re putting in if we decide on down the road to do live broadcasting would that audio video equipment allow us to do that? Mr. Blancard: The flexibility to do that is built into it. There’s a device called a Questron that’s the brand name for it it’s what we have at this station right here. That could be programmed in a number of different ways to accept input from multiple kinds of devices. And one of the things we’ll also be doing in these chambers is instead of the media having to cram back in corners there is a space to have cameras on either side back in the back. So there’s a much more media friendly facility. Mr. Fennoy: All right, thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Michael, originally you had said that you all figured $300,000 but you’re documentation’s showing you’re all really asking for $153,339.00 dollars. At the maximum expenditure which you’re requesting $170,000.00 which is $17,000 dollars more. Mr. Blanchard: Yes, sir. Mr. Guilfoyle: Please explain to us. Mr. Blanchard: The difference between the 153 and the 170. That’s there in case during the installation process we discover any problems. One thing I don’t want to do is having to come back to you and trouble you for a device that costs $1,000 dollars or two-thousand. And if we had any situation that would occur like that I wanted to make sure there was enough for us to take care of it. Mr. Guilfoyle: All right, this is probably a perfect example on not to exceed cost on our buildings because originally you figured $300,000 dollars and we do (unintelligible) would have more than half. And if you had done that during the IT process then it’s imaginable that everybody else had done so I can figure out pretty explanatory why we don’t exceed the maximum price. And the money’s that coming out is the G.L Account which account is that? Mr. Blanchard: Well, that’s the account that paying for the renovation of the building. That’s my extent of that. I mean it’s Finance (inaudible). Mr. Guilfoyle: All right, well, I appreciate you coming in under budget, Michael. I’ll second Mr. Williams’ motion. Mr. Johnson: I already seconded it. 39 Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: And, Madam Clerk, on to what I believe is our final pulled agenda item number 24. Am I correct? The Clerk: Twenty-four, yes sir. The Clerk: ENGINEERING SERVICES 24. Motion to award Phase 1 – Tasks A, B, and E of Consulting Services Agreement for Watershed Assessment & Analyses, and Inventory & Mapping Stormwater Facilities & Storm Conveyance System to W.R. Toole Engineers in the amount of $282,006.50 for Oats Creek, Phinizy Swamp, & Beaver Dam Ditch Watershed; Cranston Engineering in the stnd amount of $282,006.50 for Rae’s Creek & Augusta Canal (1 & 2 Level) Watershed; WK Dickson in the amount of $282,006.50 for Spirit Creek & Little Spirit Creek Watershed; Constantine Engineering in the amount of $282,006.50 for Butler Creek Watershed; and Michael Baker in the amount of $282,006.50 for Butler Creek Watershed. Also Authorize and approve Augusta Engineering Department (AED) to utilize Southeastern Natural Science Academy services under existing Memorandum of Understanding for assistance in establishing county wide Rain Guage Network and documenting Stream Outfalls at a cost not to exceed $193,760.00. This project will be funded through SPLOST PHASE VI as requested by AED. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 10, 2014) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess my first question is how did all of these bids come out to the exact same dollar amount is my first question. How did that happen? The third thing is, Abie, the stormwater facility, we know we’ve been talking about that but the money we’re putting in place now and we had passed the tax. The voters will have to decide whether or not we’re going, we don’t have a stormwater fee. The money we’re spending ahead of time I guess has got to spent in order to do that. But the fee first of all I guess how do the, everybody came up with the same? Mr. Ladson: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, to address the first question this was actually an RFQ so it was a negotiated price. So we went back and forth for about two to three months and negotiated a price that was satisfactory to us that we could actually do because the amount was actually higher per consultant. So we agreed on the amount per consultant, the same amount for each consultant. And some were like I said it was actually much higher but the budget that we actually had the RFQ allows us to negotiate so that’s how we actually came up with the price to each one. 40 Mr. Williams: So that can happen again and we can go back and renegotiate and get the price down and we hold to it. Is that what you’re saying? Mr. Ladson: We went back, we back for about two months went through it for about two months so the reason – Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Ladson: --- the way we got it. Mr. Williams: Since the voters got to vote on the stormwater fee and I know this something that’s got to be done --- Mr. Ladson: This --- Mr. Williams: Go ahead. Mr. Ladson: -- yeah, this is the answer I think the answer is to your second question this we had to do this regardless. And this is when we actually got the stormwater implementation project approved for SPLOST VI we actually included this in there as a cost because this had to be done. This is required through EPA and EPD so regardless whether we get a fee or not we still have to have inventory and there’s no way around that otherwise you could get a percent on it. Mr. Jackson: Motion to approve. Ms. Davis: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to the regular agenda, please. The Clerk: PUBLIC SERVICES 31. Motion to approve an agreement with Augusta, Georgia and the Sandridge Community Association (SCA) for Improvement Projects at Jamestown Community Park. (No recommendation by Public Services Committee February 10, 2014) Mr. Grady Smith: Move to approve. Mr. Fennoy: Second. 41 Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir, Sammy was here to speak in regards to this community center. I don’t know if he’s still here and Ron was actually --- Mr. Speaker: (inaudible). Mr. Guilfoyle: All right. Can I have Ron speak first in regards to clarify the meeting we had with the Sandridge Community about the SPLOST money being used last year? Mr. Mayor: Ron? Mr. Houck: Yes, sir. Actually we’ve entered into a mutual agreement in 2007 for SPLOST V projects at Jamestown with SCA the Sandridge Community Association managed in conjunction with us. And in 2012 with SPLOST VI dollars the first part of the SPLOST VI dollars that were available at Jamestown 2011 and the additional money for $150,000.00 dollars that’s available now is what we’re here to try to get authorization for SCA again to manage their SPLOST project out at Jamestown. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams and then Commissioner Smith. Mr. Williams: You go first. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Try to help me with this, Ron. We have a county owned facility at Sandridge Community Park. That building is owned by the county through the Recreation Department, is that right? Mr. Houck: It is owned by the department. We have a partnership with the Sandridge Community Association for operations. Mr. D. Smith: So who pays for the guy that mops the floor and the guy who cuts the grass and the program director out there? Who pays for that? Mr. Houck: That’s on Sandridge. Mr. D. Smith: And how do they raise their funds to get that done? Does that come through SPLOST or how is that done? Mr. Houck: No, sir, I’ll have to let Mr. Sias speak to the fund raising efforts. Mr. D. Smith: All right. Come on Mr. Sias. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Sias. 42 Mr. Sias: Yes, Mr. Mayor, thank you, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners. My name is Sammie Sias. I live at 3839 Crest Drive Hephzibah, Georgia. In reference to the Jamestown Community Center we’ve been in a partnership with the city to manage and operate that community center since the year July 1999. That was the initial contract we renewed it again in st January 1 2000 and we’ve been doing that since. As far as who pays for the cleanup and how can I say this we go buy plastic cups. We do the cleaning up, we clean the floors, we clean the toilets, we generally get a prison crew to come out and cut the grass the majority of the time. When that is a little behind schedule we do it. When the trash is a little bit late we take care of it as far as exiting the facilities. So in relation, in answering your questions, sir, we do that. The utilities are paid by the city of Augusta. And I want to say when we did the addition through conservative means the utilities we added 2800 square feet. With that addition the utilities cost did not increase by a large percentage because we exercised very conservative procedures in utilizing the use of that facility the cost of utilities, lights. Mr. D. Smith: I got my answer. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you. I’m in support of Sandridge there’s no doubt but I’ve got other community centers and I’m trying to figure out because people have been there and asking questions about why can’t we do that as well. And I hear Sam who’s you know explained how they do hands on and do a lot of work but when you use the taxpayers’ dollars and you have an agency or private entity using those monies to buy equipment and to do work how does that fit I guess the Administrator or can somebody tell me because I mean I’ve got calls, I’ve had questions about it. It’s like what child are you going to feed? I mean if you’re going to feed one you got to feed them all. So it’s the same thing with this. I mean I’m just trying to get a handle on what I can tell because, you know, it was the, what was it Dyess Park has been coming forever and a day to try and get the same facility. But I’m just trying to figure out how we can do that. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Sias. Mr. Williams: Sammie can’t tell now. I need somebody from the government. Sammie is just a share with what he does. So I need somebody to tell me how we how the government money can be spent that way. I’m not saying it’s wrong I just want to know how we’re doing it, Mr. Mayor, because I’ve got other people coming. Mr. Mayor: And I understand. Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. Mayor: And I’ll get Tameka but it’s a good example of a public private partnership that actually saves the city money. Ms. Allen? 43 Ms. Allen: Yes, sir, Commissioner Williams and I think this is actually something that was also brought up at the last meeting as it relates to the how this process works as it relates to the monies that are allocated. This was actually approved as part of the SPLOST project and I want to make sure that we are clear on what is being actually requested today. We actually have standards or a process in place for SPLOST projects as it relates to providing any funding to any outside agencies. Now this agenda item is actually asking for two projects of $75,000 dollars apiece as opposed to the 25% that is normally asked and processed through our Recreation Department. So I want to make sure we are clear on that as well, Commissioner Williams. But that kind of addresses the situation as it relates to how it was brought in. Like the Mayor said a private public partnership and this is actually approved in the last SPLOST. Mr. Williams: If I can follow up, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: And just for clarity though. But the SPLOST monies are going to fund infrastructure improvements to a building that the city actually owns. Ms. Allen: Yes, sir, it is. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Ms. Allen: However this process is a little different in regards to the buildings that we currently own. So if the, if it’s going to be to approve this I want to make sure that we are clear that this approval by the Commission will be two separate payments to the Sandridge Community as opposed to the normal 25% process that is part of our SPLOST process for all entities that receive SPLOST funding. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: And I had and I’m just going to go ahead and call a spade a spade. Dyess Park has been coming and calling and asking for a long time. And if the process is there I’ve got no problem waiting and doing the same thing. But I don’t want to pick children we’re going to feed and I was talking about feeding children a while ago. If we’re going to feed everybody and I’m support of Sandridge but we got to do the same thing across the board because now just like this one the others have been asking and saying something about the pool down there or whatever has been neglected and so much has been done I guess some has not been done especially in the inner city, especially with an area like Dyess Park. So I’m just looking for clarity so when folks come I want the same body to understand that what we’re doing today we’re doing the same thing we continue that same process. That’s all. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Fennoy: Yes and I guess this is information. The same type of agreement that the Sandridge Community has entered into with the city, a Mr. Dionne with the Laney Walker Neighborhood Association is proposing that same type of communication with Recreation and Parks to get that same type of agreement and programs like what they have at Sandridge going on at Dyess Park. And in the past the reason these programs have not been implemented at 44 Dyess Park is because the Laney Walker Neighborhood Association didn’t have the necessary personnel to put projects like this in place. We had a meeting last night and we are in negotiations with Recreation and Parks to get a program started at Dyess Park. Mr. Mayor: Thank you for that valuable information. Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Sammie, do we any of the county employees that works in that facility? Mr. Sias: No, sir. May I expand on something? Mr. Guilfoyle: Please you don’t take up to five minutes is that correct Mr. Sias: The project at Sandridge was not the very first one or was the first of a pilot program. Now there was several other programs and we have stood ready to assist other communities and neighborhood associations that want to do these things. However there was one at Hickman Park, there was one at Jamestown, there was a couple of more but there was a lack of understanding of the required commitment that it takes to keep those programs running. And we stand ready to assist anyone that wants to do a program. So wasn’t special we was part of a pilot program that we just happened to be successful with it over the last thirteen years. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Sammie. And if my colleagues would get Sammie’s number to reach out to him every time I rode by the community center the door’s always open, Sammie’s always in his office and plus he has extra staff within that building. That’s what it’s going to take is commitment from the people to operate one of these facilities and it’s just not a shallow commitment, it’s going to be a full time commitment and a long time commitment. Mr. Mayor: Would you like to move for approval with that statement? Mr. Guilfoyle: Motion to approve. Mr. Lockett: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Ms. Allen. Ms. Allen: Just for a point of clarification. Are you approving it to go as the regular SPLOST project at 25% which is part of this agreement or are you approving to split this project into two separate items of $75,000 dollars allocations for the $150,000 dollars that’s totally being requested? Mr. Mayor: Is that the maker of the motion’s intent? Mr. Guilfoyle: Let’s split it in two. Is that right, Rob --- Mr. Houck: Yes. 45 split it in two so the $5,000 payments and there’ll checks and Mr. Guilfoyle: --- balances through our REC Center to make that the money is spent wisely. Is that correct? Mr. Lockett: Second. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Mason out. Motion Passes 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 32. Discuss summary of conference call with Attorney Colette Holt. (Referred from the Administrative Services Committee January 27, 2014) No recommendation from Administrative Services Committee February 10, 2014) Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am, Ms. Gentry. Ms. Gentry: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission back in October you charged the DBE office along with General Counsel to meet with Colette Holt and arrive at some recommendations. And based on the city’s current status the following recommendation was made by Ms. Holt. The first thing she suggested is that the city should procure a new Disparity Study. If we can’t procure it right now it should be done within the next year or two. And her rationale for that is that the older the data the greater the risk that any program relying on the data will be held unenforceable. However the legal standard is that most recent available data which is of course right now our 2008 program. The second thing that she suggested is to purchase an off the shelf data management software program. By doing this it’s going to allow us to have real time in the collection of the data. In addition to that we should be able to provide reports on whomever is going to do the data, the Disparity Study which should result in a pulsating mechanism. The third thing that she suggested is that we develop a program narrowly tailored to address the areas of the greatest disparity. And basically what she was saying with that is that we should develop a program for minorities for women for projects over $200,000 dollars. And in doing that we will be implementing in which hasn’t been done so we’ll be implementing a new program. She also indicated that she gave us a city in which I’ve contacted my counterpart in that city. She suggested that we develop the program, allow her to review it. That will also be a cost savings to the city. You know, if she is having to put the entire program together herself it will basically cost more. The last thing that she suggested was, well, there was only four things she suggested. And based on our meeting General Counsel and I met afterwards and our recommendations are the following. Allow the DBE Department to work with IT to purchase software which will create real time data collection. The second thing is would be the 46 DBE go back again and draft an RFQ to receive proposals from potential companies following our procurement policy procedures and guidelines. The third thing is for the DBE to draft a minority program to address the disparity identified in the 2008 study of course working with our Law Department and in allowing Ms. Holt to have the final review of it before we implement such a program. The next thing is charge the Administrator to locate a funding source for the software as well as the study. Again all of these things can be done simultaneously, collecting the data, sending out the RFQ, that’s going to take time and also drafting a minority program. Working with Ms. Holt along with the city that she recommended I think would help us tremendously. That I would yield to General Counsel to add any additional information that I may have omitted. Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: Thank you. Ms. Gentry did a pretty good job of summarizing all that. I think we’ve you know had some discussion about these previously and I think one thing that we will be looking for is some direction. I know that there’s a lot of information that’s been shared and we don’t really have to focus on all of these necessarily at the same time. If we wanted to look at one thing and moving forward with that and doing without some of these items can be done independently as well. So I’ll also put out there for food for thought as well. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Was there any research done to ascertain the possible cost for this software that she referenced? Ms. Gentry: Yes, sir we have, Ms. Holt suggested $30 to 40, yeah $30 to $40,000.00 dollars. Mr. Lockett: For the software? Ms. Gentry: For the software and this is just an estimated cost. We’re looking for you to give us direction to actually contact the software company along with IT to meet and come up with a better cost of this software. Mr. Lockett: If we had to prioritize the steps to use to eventually fully implement this particular program what would you consider the first, the second, the third out of the four things you mentioned. I imagine probably the Disparity Study would be number four because I think it would be the cost of this. So what would be number one, two and three? Ms. Gentry: My number one would be actually purchasing the software and number two developing a minority program to address the disparity identified in the 2008 study. Again looking, at looking at actually implementing the Disparity Study going out for an RFQ. Mr. Lockett: Okay, well, at this juncture what are you and Mr. MacKenzie what kind of motion are you looking for and could we possibly direct the IT Director with you and the Law 47 Department to go out and do a little research to determine what the software would cost and what a funding source might be? Mr. Mayor: Would you, is there a motion in there some place? Mr. Lockett: Well, I was hoping you all had that. Mr. Mayor: Okay, I think the Mayor Pro Tem does. Commissioner Williams and then I’ll come back to the Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Gentry, the last motion at the last meeting that was here. Do you remember what that was because thought we had put something in place to get you started then. So do remember what it was? Ms. Gentry: You made that motion but it failed. Mr. Williams: Okay, okay and I think I remember now. Thank you for helping me out. We made the motion to go ahead and get started on this stuff and this body didn’t support it. Is that right? Ms. Gentry: Committee. Mr. Williams: Committee, it failed is where it starts at. Well we got enough here now to do it. Do you remember what that motion was? The motion was to go ahead and do all four of the areas simultaneously Ms. Gentry: to get started with looking at the software, identifying a funding source, working with the Administrator to identify a funding source. The second thing was to go ahead a draft a program to correct the disparity identified in the Disparity Study. The third thing would’ve been to send out to go ahead and put together the language to send out the RFQ so that we can get that out there on the city, on the streets and then have time to come back for them to do presentations and things to that nature. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor, I move to approve. Mr. Mayor: Okay and just for clarity that’s motion to approve the request of staff to proceed in the manner just outlined, correct? Mr. Johnson: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams you still have the floor. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We’ve been beating this dead horse forever and a day and it’s time to get up and get off of him and get on something else. So if we go ahead and do this when can we expect something back tangible that we can actually deal with that we can actually know what we’re doing? 48 Ms. Gentry: I will begin my communications with my counterpart from the city that she recommended that has an excellent program to go ahead and start putting that language together. In addition to that I’ll go ahead and schedule an appointment to meet with IT so that we can look at what our system because it has to be compatible and we need to get them involved. The third thing is putting the RFQ together and of course there’s a process that needs to be to go along with that. Mr. Williams: Okay, Mr. Mayor, I think we’ve got a motion and a second. Mr. Mayor: We do. Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Grady Smith. Mr. Fennoy: Just for clarity what is the motion? Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, could you please read back the motion? The Clerk: Yes, sir, it was to allow the DBE to work to purchase the software, work with IT to purchase the software, to draft the RFQ, to draft the minority program and to and for the Administrator to work towards identifying a funding source for all this. Mr. Fennoy: Okay. What about a recommendation that the city should consider and can erase a Gender Conscience Program Contract over twenty-five. Ms. Gentry: That was included, sir. Mr. Fennoy: That’s included? All right. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Grady Smith then Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. G. Smith: You know we’re constantly talking about being, having a shortfall and I was thinking especially what we’ve had happen in the last week, two weeks around this city and county we should I think look to prioritize where we need to spend our emergency fund to take care of some problems that came up unnecessarily. But I just I just think we need to take a long look at some of the expenses we’ve got coming up and you know just got to start prioritizing what’s pertinent to run this county. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. As far as the funding I see the financial impact of $50,000 dollars. What account is that coming out of? Ms. Gentry: We have not identified, one part of the motion is to solicit the Administrator to look for a funding source not only for the software but for the future Disparity Study also. Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay, and if she don’t find it where do we go from there? 49 Ms. Gentry: We’ll be back at the beginning. Mr. Guilfoyle: Well, I’ll make a substitute motion that we find the funding first and then bring it back before this body please. Mr. G. Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, that’s to task the Administrator with proceeding with finding a funding source for this initiative. Mr. Guilfoyle: Right. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think what Ms. Gentry was saying she was going to get with IT to identify the funding. We were just tasking them to go ahead and move forward with the items she mentioned. But she was out there to identify the funding before they can do anything anyway so that was already in the first motion. Mr. Mayor: And the funding source would I mean the expenditure would then still have to be approved. Ms. Gentry: That is correct. Mr. Johnson: Right. Ms. Gentry: In addition to that one of the items was to develop a minority program. It’s not going to cost us anything to develop that except meeting with the attorneys. And again with us developing it and allowing her just to review it to insure that it meets the strict scrutiny of the letter of the law we’re saving money by doing it with that process. Does that confuse you? I’m sorry. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Williams and then Commissioner Donnie Smith. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’m not surprised as to how this snowballed this started rolling this ice is starting to melt however you want to look at it. This is another way to deny and to delay. We did a study that we spent money on and it came back and said Augusta, Georgia was discriminating against women and minorities. It’s been on this for five years now. In fact going into the sixth year this year if I’m not mistaken since the study’s been back. And here we are we keep talking about how we want to move forward, how we want to move this city and how we want to take care of the community around us but we’re discriminating. And I got a serious issue with that. There’s something wrong when we sit here and act like we don’t see what the problem is. Now we just voted on a project for millions of dollars and nobody questioned none of that and that’s fine. And I know we got to have the money but the funding source can be found. And I’ve been on this body when we found a million dollars. I had no problem with the person who found it but I had a problem with the person who first lost the 50 million dollars. That’s where the problem comes in. And since we don’t know anything since we sit up here and just vote because we got the dias up here and we push the button but we need to know where the finances are. And there are monies there are monies there to be done. And I just want to figure out last week I remember after you reminded me we voted to do the same thing and it was turned down. I ain’t got no problem it’s going to be turned down today but it’s going to be back on this agenda every week from now on as long as we are still can breathe. This don’t make good sense for folks to act like we’re all together, everybody’s singing Kumbaya and everybody’s getting along fine. This is a serious issue, Mr. Mayor, and I’m ashamed to be a part of this government to sit up and --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner, I’ll give you one more minute. Mr. Williams: --- to prove that we’re discriminating against women and minority. And it’s time to do what is right. So I’m ready to vote, Mr. Mayor, and not just today but every day. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Donnie Smith then Commissioner Lockett then Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. D. Smith: I don’t have a statement I have a question. Okay the question is you laid these things that we should be doing and so we said that and I won’t, this is what I got tripped up on and I want you to tell me actually what it means. You said that you would work with the attorney in some other city that you didn’t identify to come up with a program. Now when you come up with this program that doesn’t mean that you’re going to impact that program you would have to bring that back to this body as a policy making board to enact that. And at that point if there were revisions that this body was uncomfortable with or if there were modifications that this body wanted to do that would be the time. All you’re asking is to go forward and work on this you’re not saying this is going to be our policy because a policy is driven by this board. Am I correct? Ms. Gentry: You’re absolutely correct. To give you somewhat of an idea Colette Holt, this body charged Colette Holt with implementing a similar program using the Sheriff’s as a temporary, as a pilot. That never happened. So basically our recommendations and the recommendations that she made we concur with it. The recommendation is just to put together a program so that we can come back to this body with the letter of the law. Mr. D. Smith: I have a follow up question. And you talked about a pilot program. Last night I got an email for my appointment to the Small Business Advisory Board. Is that the right terminology for that? Ms. Gentry: It’s not, but I, Citizens Small Business Advisory Board --- Mr. D. Smith: Which is supposed to give us input on these kinds of items correct? Ms. Gentry: That’s correct. 51 Mr. D. Smith: And my appointee was just absolutely incensed that he took time to go down there and participate in those meetings for the last five months the other appointees were not there to have a quorum to do our business on stuff just like we’re talking here about. Ms. Gentry: That is correct. The advisory board is there to support the department as well as the EEO Department and convey with you things of this nature any concerns, questions and things to that nature. Mr. D. Smith: But the people that have been appointed over a majority of the ten that have been appointed have not shown up for the last five months for you to have a quorum. Is that correct? Ms. Gentry: That’s correct, sir. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Lockett the Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My colleague mentioned the lack of participation by board members. I can understand why because what we’re talking about now we’ve been talking about for several years now and we get the same end results, we don’t have the money. But doggone it we better get the money because I’m not proud to sit up here and represent a city that’s been quoted as discriminating against others. We’re in 2014. Now the 60’s are long gone. We can up with money for everything else. Ms. Gentry, I like you, I love you but I’m getting so tired of you having to come up here and make the same presentation over and over and over and get the same end result. This is something that we need to do if no more than set the record straight that Augusta Richmond County is not discriminating in 2014. We have made improvements. We need to get this done. If we got to go out and sell aluminum cans to get the money we need to do it. And I want, Mr. Mayor, I want a roll call vote we vote on this so we can let the people that we represent know who’s impeding the progress. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Guilfoyle then Commissioner Grady Smith. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First I’d like to rescind my substitute motion first of all. Second my colleagues have got to have a clear understanding. The only reason I questioned the money issue is I’m fiscally responsible. I have to look out for the taxpayers of this community. You know I don’t represent one group or one factor I represent all the people regardless of color, age, sex, religion and as far as a minority business if my colleague had a true understanding what, where I come from my business is a minority owned business. And does this stuff help my business? No. We bid work with outside agencies other than Augusta Richmond County government and it doesn’t do any good. So I mean I think it’s --- Mr. Lockett: Is that why you don’t support it? Mr. Guilfoyle: --- no, I don’t have a problem supporting. My problem is --- 52 Mr. Lockett: (inaudible) look for your motion. Mr. Guilfoyle: --- unlike some of my colleagues they rather spend the money then try to figure out where it’s to come from. No different than this building. $26 million dollars we got to hope and drain that is passed on the next referendum. Hyde Park, another $14.2 million dollars where we’re actually spending money which we did not have. It’s only about responsibility nothing to do with race which some of my colleagues has a tendency in describing. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, may I? Mr. Mayor: Gentlemen, Commissioner Smith and I feel that now that Commissioner Guilfoyle and I can get you one more minute, but and Commissioner Williams I have recognized you twice, I’ll give you one minute. But I think there’s a general consensus now that the motion has been rescinded. To move forward is the will of the body it looks like to me. Commissioner Smith. Mr. Grady Smith: I just want to say you know and maybe the way I look at things because when I was growing up and passed on and had my own business and everything you know one of the first things you always ask and I mean I’d to be a brand new John Deere 410 Tractor but you know first of all you say where’s the money coming from. You know and if that’s a bad question we’re headed down the wrong road. And I’ll put anything, listen I’ve got a sister the reason why I didn’t play basketball she was so much better than I was it was embarrassing. So the thing about being a minority and this and that my colleague sitting right here she’s one of the most capable ladies out there and there’s several others I know. So don’t put that boogey woogey on me. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Gentlemen, it has been a long week and so I and lady, excuse me. But I will recognize Commissioner Lockett for a minute Commissioner Williams for a minute --- Mr. Lockett: All I need is 30 seconds, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Lockett: You know it’s kind of funny but you people that you’re so conservative but when it came to the TEE Center you had no problem. When it came to the parking deck you had no problem. When it came to the Convention Center you had no problem. End of statement. Mr. Guilfoyle: Who is you people? Mr. Mayor: Okay and let’s, come on now, everybody, let’s you know look at how our city just came through this past week and we’re sitting here going back and forth. Commissioner Williams, you get a minute. Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. Archie Bunker don’t say you people, he say yous people. But let me just clarify something. It’s really serious that people talk one thing and they 53 do something else. People watch this Commission they watch us vote. People know. I had a young that worked for the railroad told me the other day he can see the black and white all day long anytime we’re talking up here. But when we’re known to be discriminating we did a study that we already knew and instead of sitting on the shelf for five years before we even pulled it off to even talk about it we want to fix that. We want to stop that and because what you say don’t mean nothing to me. But what you do, your actions speak louder than any words you never say. But, Mr. Mayor, so I don’t expect this to pass. Mr. Lockett called for a roll call vote and I’m ready to vote but I’m going to vote on it every time. Mr. Mayor: Well, I’m going to make a prediction it’s going to pass today but, Madam Clerk, Commissioner will now vote by roll call. The Clerk: Yes, sir. Ms. Davis. Mr. Mason: Don’t tell me she’s gone. Mr. Williams: That’s a no, come on I mean --- The Clerk: Mr. Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Yes. The Clerk: Mr. Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, ma’am. The Clerk: Mr. Jackson. Mr. Jackson: Yes, ma’am. The Clerk: Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson: Yes. The Clerk: Mr. Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Yes. The Clerk: Mr. Mason. Mr. Mason: Yes. The Clerk: Mr. Donnie Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Yes. 54 The Clerk: Mr. Grady Smith. Mr. G. Smith: Yes. The Clerk: Mr. Williams. Mr. Williams: Yes. Ms. Davis out. Motion Passes 9-0. Ms. Gentry: Thank you very much. Mr. Mayor: And thank you, Commissioners. And now if we can just proceed forward with that spirit that would be a good thing. Mr. D. Smith: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, point of personal? I’ll recognize for a minute, Commissioner. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you. To my colleagues there are some people here that have been this with us and then there are items on the agenda that do not acquire attendance by the outside. And I would ask that if we have an agenda item on here and I know number 44 does and I think one Ms. Smith here. We had some people in attendance that have jobs they need to go back to if we take those up before we took up some of these other things I would appreciate it from my colleagues. Mr. Mayor: I will go ahead and call agenda item number 44 based on your request. ENGINEERING SERVICES 44. 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 bet public interest and to receive as information the results of the public hearing held regarding the issue of abandonment 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 and adopt the attached Resolution. (Requested by Augusta Law Department) Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor, may I? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. 55 Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Per request of Mr. Wiedmeier he has recommended that this go back to the law department and come back to us once again agenda item number 44. Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to that effect? Mr. Lockett: So moved. Mr. Fennoy: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there’s no further, Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: I mean 44 you’re talking about, Mr. Commissioner, but I’d like to get some explanation as to why we’re going back with this now. I mean when it gets on this body then it wants to go back it bothers me. Can you tell me why it needs to go back and go back through the whole thing? Mr. Mayor: Mr. Wiedemeier. Mr. Wiedemeier: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission I, this was handled my staff. I have not reviewed this and I would just like to make sure that we don’t have any utility conflicts in this right of way. I think it’s possible that we do. Mr. Williams: Okay, I got no problem going back then. I mean that’s --- Mr. Mayor: Legitimate. Motion made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam, what was the other agenda item Commissioner Smith that you? Mr. D. Smith: I think Mr. Smith is here. Is there anybody else here that has business with the Commission that wants to represent an item? I know Mr. Smith does and there’s somebody else. Mr. Mayor: What number, 41 and okay I’ll go ahead and do 41 and then 35 is it? The Clerk: FINANCE 41. Motion to consider the request from Mr. James K. Smith, Jr. regarding a refund of taxes related to his status as a 100% disabled veteran and have the Tax Commission report the actual dollar amount of the tax refund for which Mr. Smith qualifies to the committee. (Referred from February 4 Commission meeting. 56 Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Mr. Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Didn’t we hear this recently? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. Ross, did you? Mr. Ross: Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor and Commission. Yes we were tasked, charged with bringing it back to this body in addition to any clarification as to the exemption request. We would like to clarify that there was never any application on the record for consideration on this matter so you’re actions today is to consider retroactive consideration to adopt the application that was submitted for the purpose of being a refund. Specific to our charge should this board (unintelligible) per the Tax Commissioner records the dollar impact for 2013, $1,515.48, 2012, $1,478.29, 2011, $1,453.38. And, Commissioners, again the applicant purchased his property here in Augusta in 1995. There is no record that any regular homestead exemption or any other exemption was ever applied for. The current residence of the applicant is currently in an adjoining county in which his purchase was always 31 to 11 and he applied for a Veterans Exemption and was approved starting with tax year 2012 which of course was also for 2013 as well. I’ll clarify anything else the Commission may have. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Alveno, thank you for being here. So he’s never applied for exemption or a refund. Mr. Ross: There’s no record that any exemption application, regular homestead or otherwise was ever applied for in Richmond County. Mr. Guilfoyle: And he’s asking for what years? Mr. Ross: My understanding the petitioner is requesting a refund back to 2010. Statutory limitations of three years with the purpose of a limitation of 13, 12 and 11. Mr. Guilfoyle: So Mr. Smith just verbally asked for consideration. Mr. Ross: Mr. Commissioner, I’ll yield but I believe the petitioner took a position that he actually applied with the Tax Commissioner’s office and was denied. But I was not in a position to speak to that issue but I believe we do have representatives from the TCO with us that. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you. My motion is to deny. Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second? Is there a second on that motion? Mr. D. Smith: I’m going to wait to hear what he says. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Let’s hear from the petitioner as well. 57 Mr. Smith: Yes, sir --- Mr. Mayor: If you could keep it to five minutes please sir. Mr. Smith: --- yes, sir. It’ll be less than that. The property was purchased in ’95, lived in the house for about a year, PCS’d, that’s a move down to Fort Stewart. I’ve had that house since then just to add up almost 18 years. I’ve never applied, that’s correct, for an exemption. I’ve just recently found out about the exemption for the home. I’ve been paying Richmond County taxes since ’95 okay? I have not been benefited from Richmond County taxes or anything in any way. I haven’t had a kid here going to school or any of these things in quite a while okay? We moved back from Maryland, that’s upon retirement. Now I’m back in the tax system. I’ve benefited from it from 90, from 2009 when we moved back in the home. We paid those taxes. Now I’m benefitting because I’m living in the house. What I’m saying is I’ve been paying taxes in Richmond County for many, many years. Due to maybe my ignorance I didn’t know about the homestead exemption but I do know now okay? I feel like I would be doing, be done an injustice for lack of consideration to have at least what I’m eligible for paid back to me as a veteran. I mean that’s all I’m asking for. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Williams. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Smith --- Mr. Smith: Yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: --- when did you receive the 100% disability approved by the VA? Mr. Smith: I’ve got a letter here actually from the VA. It’s dated, it’s dated 2009. It’s th actually December the 7 2010. And my wife is not here today she’s also 100% disabled veteran again joint military. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: I’ll ask for a legal opinion again to find out what is legal. Is that what the law requires as to this veteran in legal to get the exemption whether he applied for it or not? Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: Well certainly if he applied for it you’re entitled to the exemption in accordance to the law. There is statute of limitations which allows for a refund within a three year period so you are within that period I would also caution you with respect to the latter two years it’s my understanding that you received the exemption in a different county so those two years can’t get, be made whole in two different counties. You can only have an exemption in one county so I would caution you on that. I would also caution you that this could open up a large number of other persons who may be similarly situated if not for the veteran’s exemption or other exemptions that we not applied for. I think the applicant has acknowledged that he was 58 not aware of it and he didn’t apply for. I would caution you in that respect as well maybe open the flood gates with others to not apply for other exemptions including the regular homestead exemption. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Smith then Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. D. Smith: Mr. Smith --- Mr. Smith: Yes, sir. Mr. D. Smith: --- that letter says that your wife Ms. Smith is, has been certified as being disabled in serving in the war. But you’re telling us that is was you --- Mr. Smith: What it is, I’m a 100%, I’m 100% as well. Only one can get it you can’t, both of us can’t get it. She can’t an exemption we’re joined, we’re married. So she filed for the exemption we both get it. We both can’t file for the exemption on the property okay? Mr. D. Smith: Let me ask you a follow up question. Mr. Smith: Yes, sir. Mr. D. Smith: Did you get an exemption in another county for these last two or three years on a separate piece of property? Mr. Smith: Yes, sir, McDuffie County and I explained that to the tax office now they say they can check it. They checked the tax records they have access to all of the county’s tax records. That’s why they know that I got it in 2012. There’s no secret about this tax thing. And what I would like to say is the statute states that if you paid them whether you paid them knowingly or unknowingly you can request, okay? I understand that and that’s all I’m asking for is to consideration of the Commission. That’s all I’m asking for what’s within my rights to ask for no more no less. Mr. D. Smith: Okay, will you give me a follow up. Who owns the house? Do ya’ll own the house together or does she own it? Mr. Smith: We both own the home, sir. I wouldn’t matter if it was just in her name, we could still get the exemption. The latitude what it explains is you have to live in the home. Well we lived in the home in Augusta, we moved to the home in McDuffie County okay? We did come into the tax office here okay? We were sent away. They pulled up the paperwork, ya’ll don’t qualify. Now I’ve been assured that we weren’t sent away but believe me I’m a soldier you don’t just send me away and I don’t, okay, you don’t just send me away. I don’t come there that’s why I’m back today with bullets instead of BB’s okay? It’s just that simple. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. 59 Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Smith, I too am a retired disabled veteran but one thing we were taught in the military that you’ve got to have proper documentation. And just by the fact that you were unaware that you entitled to that that’s not a viable excuse by reason. And I think the General Counsel alluded to it somewhat. We’re not talking about a loss of money here but if we approve making this retroactive for you you’re going to be out there talking to your buddies or somebody’s going to be here talking to their friends that were not aware of the fact they can get this tax break and here they come in formation coming in and we can’t very well say well, you know Mr. Smith, we gave it to him but we can’t give it to you. So we can’t afford to open Pandora’s Box. And really I sympathize but you admitted that you didn’t apply for it and that’s one of the prerequisites of getting it, you must apply for it and you didn’t do it. Mr. Smith: I understand that, sir, and maybe I misinterpreted what it said okay since knowingly or unknowingly. That means if I didn’t to me that means if I didn’t apply for it I can apply for it within the guidelines okay? And what you said is opening the door. If I owe any one of these people one in here money that I owe them they don’t know when they find out I should be held liable to pay them their money that they’re owed. You wouldn’t be opening a Pandora’s Box, sir, you will be giving the money that they are owed. You would not be doing that. Mr. Lockett: Well, let me ask you this. Mr. Smith: It may be lost revenue to the taxpayers but I’ve been paying taxes (inaudible). Mr. Lockett: How did you earn this --- Mr. Smith: How did I earn this? Mr. Lockett: --- by not knowing? Mr. Smith: Explain to me I don’t understand what you’re saying. Mr. Lockett: The money that you’ve earned. How --- Mr. Smith: What it is is money that I spent out of my pocket --- Mr. Lockett: And this was --- Mr. Smith: --- and how did I earn this? Mr. Lockett: --- because this is because evidently when you out processed you didn’t read the documentation you were provided. Mr. Mayor, we’ve got somebody from the Tax Commissioners office --- Mr. Mayor: I’ll call them momentarily Commissioner Lockett. 60 Mr. Smith: And how many times have we misread, misunderstood things that we should’ve known. I will tell you that we’ve all done that okay? Maybe you haven’t, sir, and but I have many, many times and probably will many more times. Mr. Lockett: I do it every day. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. To the General Counsel, you verified according to state law that they could request what within three years and he’s within that period. Is that what you said? Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, sir, state law has a statute of limitations that allows a refund for a three year period. Mr. Mason: Okay. Mr. Smith, have you applied for a refund yet --- Mr. Smith: Well I’ve been here --- Mr. Mason: --- filled out any paperwork. Mr. Smith: --- five times. I’ve never seen any paperwork from the tax office. I’ve even spoken to the Tax Commissioner. Nobody’s ever gave me a piece of paper saying okay. I guess they were waiting on the outcome of the Commission. Mr. Mason: So that’s a no, there’s been no application. Mr. Smith: No, there hasn’t. Mr. Mason: Okay so it appears to me, Mr. Mayor, before we do anything first and foremost is to send this based on the General Counsel’s statement that he can apply the first thing he needs to do is apply in my mind and then we will address it at that point because at this point there hasn’t been an application submitted for a refund. And then to me that’s putting the cart before the horse it makes for a bumpy ride. In fact you can’t even ride that way. I would say that his next step would be to go and apply before we try to make a decision on something that he hasn’t even applied for yet. Mr. Mayor: But too just so I’m straight on this but you have applied in McDuffie County and received these --- Mr. Smith: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: --- in McDuffie County and you’re not eligible to apply in two counties correct? 61 Mr. Smith: Yes, sir, not for that tax. I can’t apply for the house in McDuffie and the house in Augusta. It’s one county is your primary residence. And again like I said I’ve just recently gotten let’s say smart on the issue and again I would be doing my fellow veterans an injustice not to share the knowledge that I have. I don’t understand this because like how can we keep them in the dark? I mean how can we keep them in the dark? My wife and I did 46 years between the two of us in the military. How can I keep them in the dark another 40 years? Mr. Mayor: And I’ll just say thank you to you and your wife for your service but it’s, you understand when you say how can we keep them in the dark? It’s not like we’re not trying to get information out there that are in this situation so let’s say it’s you know --- Mr. Smith: I’m just kind of basing it on the comment that Mr. Lockett made. That’s kind of like you know maybe I misinterpreted it but that’s the way I feel okay. And I’m going to tell you --- Mr. Mason: If I can finish because I want to kind of stay on the relevance of what we’re trying to do here. You’ve applied for a, you’ve applied in McDuffie County as of what year? Mr. Smith: It was 2012. Mr. Mason: 2012 --- Mr. Smith: Yes, sir. Mr. Mason: --- so you are not asking for 2012 from Richmond County --- Mr. Smith: No, sir. Mr. Mason: --- you’re asking for 2011, ten we can only go --- Mr. Smith: Three, yeah the three --- Mr. Mason: --- yeah within that three year period so it couldn’t be twelve. Mr. Smith: Yes, sir. Mr. Mason: So I just wanted to just to say that that it’s not simultaneous that he’s asking for. And from that point that’s why I said the first thing he needs to do is apply because right now there’s not an application. Mr. Mayor: Effectively what you’re asking for is 2011. Mr. Smith: Yeah the three, 2011 is the only year and that’s because the time keeps it keeps clicking off. If I wait any longer it won’t even, it won’t even exist. 62 Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Ross, you had your hand. Mr. Ross: Just for a point of clarification. The Board of Assessors does not address the refund statute that is read only to the governing authority. What the board’s limitation is the board has no constitutional right to extend deadlines or plan extensions. So the issue of an application for consideration is a moot issue for the assessors. That won’t slide. The only thing that is available is whether or not the refund consideration which as I understand the process there is no application, Commissioner. Technically any person can just go before the Clerk of the Commission request a refund consideration to be placed on the agenda. That’s the process. Again if we read it on the agenda we show up to give you the statutory position. Mr. Mayor: And what is the total amount for 2011? Mr. Ross: $1,453.38. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: In time Mr. Mayor I’m want to make a motion to approve and get this out of the way. Mr. Mason: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay and that’s a motion to approve a refund for the 2011 taxes? Okay we have a motion --- Mr. G. Smith: How much money are we talking about? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner $1,400 dollars. We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Ms. Davis, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. G. Smith vote No. Motion Passes 6-4. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, let’s do agenda item 35 and then we’ll go back to the regular lineup. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 35. Consider a request from Paul Simon regarding an appeal of the non-compliance status of RFP No. 13-218, proposed merger of Augusta First Tee with the Augusta Municipal Golf Course. “The Patch”. (No recommendation by Administrative Services Committee February 10, 2014). Mr. Mayor: Is there anybody here to speak? Mr. Spears. 63 Mr. Spears: And if you could keep it to five minutes please sir. Mr. Spears: I sure will. Jeff Spears, lives at 2535 Walton Way, Augusta. I’m working with Paul. I’m the past Chair of the First Tee and on the executive committee of that board. Paul cannot be here today due to some business reasons but just ask for the Commission’s consideration of the proposal that he and I and others on the First Tee board have made. He also states that if the RFP’s once reviewed are a better offer than what we are proposing he recommends you take that and run with those recommendations. But if those recommendations are not for the benefit of the Municipal Golf Course and the county of Augusta he would ask ya’ll’s consideration of his proposal because it has not been turned down by the Commission. It’s been denied by a 5-4 vote and not turned down by a full six of the denial. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Yes, was Mr. Simon aware of the RFP that was submitted for The Patch? Mr. Spears: Yes, he is aware and he submitted a response to that RFP but it got denied. Mr. Fennoy: Okay, but what I’m saying is that did he follow the process. Did he go through the same process that the other applicant’s did? Mr. Spears: No, he didn’t. Mr. Fennoy: Okay, Mr. Mayor, can I see Ms. Sams for a minute please if she’s here? Mr. Mayor: If Ms. Sams is here. Mr. Fennoy: Or somebody from Procurement? Mr. Spears: Let me just say he did send a letter admitting to the process but he was (unintelligible). He did have a Letter of Explanation. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Sams. Mr. Fennoy: Ms. Sams, why was Mr. Simon’s response deemed non-compliant? Ms. Sams: Mr. Simon’s submittal was deemed non-compliant because he did not follow the guidelines of the RFP. Mr. Fennoy: Okay and when someone does not follow the guidelines you deny it. Ms. Sams: Yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: In all cases? Ms. Sams: In all cases. 64 Mr. Fennoy: And who can make an exception to that case? Ms. Sams: Well, the Commission can review it but in this case it’s just not a submittal process outside of the RFP. You’re asking to consider two separate procurements on one particular project. And that’s not something that this Commission should do. Once the Commission directs the Procurement Department to go out for an RFP then there should not be any consideration outside of the RFP. Mr. Fennoy: All right, thank you. Mr. Spears: I think how Paul would respond to that is we want the RFP process to go forward and if ya’ll find a good solution from the I think the two RFP’s that have been submitted then he’s all in favor of ya’ll moving forward with either one of those proposals. But if you don’t see these proposals as viable for Augusta then he would like his recommendation proposal to be considered because it has not been fully turned down by this body. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: --- if neither one of the two proposals are approved by the Commission, Ms. Sams, wouldn’t it be good business practice to send out another RFP or rather than accept the one that Mr. Simon submitted? Ms. Sams: Mr. Commissioner, in this case on the golf course it would be good business sense perhaps to go back out for an RFP. But let’s look at the history of the golf course and where Augusta is. We’ve gone out now four times to reach some resolution as to how the city of Augusta was going to operate the golf course. And we are at a process now when we look at competition. Vendors are beginning to be very leery of submitting proposals to Augusta on the golf course because it gives that word that I don’t like to use the appearance that we have premade a decision to give it to one entity or another. So I just don’t think if we have to go back out for an RFP that we would get the competition needed to make a decision. And I need to give you some history in that we had gone out before and had a contract and the Commission said no to another process as it relates that particular contract. I need to go further back to say you had another entity that was very interested in moving forward with the golf course and that entity did the exact thing that Mr. Simon did and we threw that proposal out. So I would recommend another RFP and as Procurement Director if I were you as Commissioners I would move forward to see what happens. And perhaps if that did not work for the city of Augusta I’ll come back to you with a recommendation. And that recommendation would be that we get Mr. Simon, Mr. Kendrick and other interested local persons in the city, the city establish what we call a Management Contract, let these people bring their ideas to Augusta and let’s just go to do it. Paine College also was interested and submitted their proposal but I’m saying to you do not mix apples and oranges in this process. So I think we need to be very clear, we need to be business person and we need to be business savvy as it relates to the process, the integrity of the process. 65 Mr. Mayor: Amen. Commissioner Donnie Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Ms. Davis had her hand up. Okay. Just a clarification from Ms. Sams. We sent out an RFP seeking apples, Mr. Simon gave us a proposal for oranges and if we were just drop the two apples that they gave us and take the oranges are we opening ourselves to a law suit by the two apples? Ms. Sams: Well, I would recommend that you go through this process, through the process. Let it go through the process and see what happens. I’m hoping that we will find a contract agreement that will be applicable to Augusta’s needs. From what I have viewed in the two submittals they are doing some of the same things that are listed in the proposal given by Mr. Simon but they are not at liberty to go into detail with all of that because it’s still under evaluation. And I think to be fair to the two submittals that we just go through the process. Mr. D. Smith: When do you think that process will be over with, Ms. Sams? Ms. Sams: Well because of the bad weather we had to change the date. We have a date for Friday --- Mr. D. Smith: This Friday. Ms. Sams: --- that we will be looking at it again. Mr. D. Smith: Do you think that we will get something in front of us by the next committee or the next Commission meeting? Ms. Sams: Well, that will be at the discretion of the Recreation Director. He will be the person that will be making the recommendation to you. Hopefully he will have something back to you if not at this committee the following committee because ya’ll like to have stuff in advance. Mr. D. Smith: Mr. Williams is certainly on that. Thank you, Ms. Sams. Mr. Mayor: Okay I think --- Mr. D. Smith: I make a motion that we accept this as information. Mr. G. Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: And thank you for coming in, Jim. Madam Clerk, on to the next regular agenda item which I think if we’re going back in order would be 33 if I’m not mistaken. 66 The Clerk: Yes, sir, I believe that’s right. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 33. Discuss/approve departmental audits. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We know what has happened previously with the last Administrator. I suggested that we do an audit of all the departments. We discussed talking about monies and what we don’t have and what we do have. We need to since we’re out looking for a new Administrator we as an elected body need to know exactly what’s there and what’s not there. And I had this put on the agenda hopefully that we can go ahead and get an audit of every department that’s in this governing body. We talk about how much money we don’t have how money it’s going to cost or how much money we need but we don’t have that information. So this is a motion I’m making that we task the Interim Administrator to put the procedures in place to start an audit on all of the departments that we’ve got here. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Ms. Allen. Ms. Allen: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, the audit process that we currently have in place entails going for the Pension and Audit Committee and they actually th approved a list of departments that are to be audited. We had that meeting on February the 10 and our Finance Department will be passing that out of the departments that are scheduled to be audited in 2014. I know, Commissioner Williams, you mentioned that the actual cost as well we only have a limited amount of money we currently budgeted for internal audits to take place and we probably need to clarify as well whether or not we’re doing a financial audit or a process audit or what audit are we actually looking at. This audit is basically of the cash handling and internal controls process that we’re asking our internal auditors to conduct however I’m not sure as to what form of audit that we would like to have done as it relates to the various departments. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I appreciate this it’s a little late and like always we get it when they decide they want to give it to her but our Finance Department do a great job. But we’re looking for an Administrator whose hard drive was completely wiped off. We don’t know anything in this government and we sit here and talk about I don’t care what the cost is. I mean we need to find those monies to do what we got to do. We can’t do it all at one time I understand that but we need to start this process so when the new Administrator gets here not only will he know or she know but we’ll know as well. But right now nobody knows anything. I mean everything is just left to chance. I’ve got some documents here that’s got nothing on them that was supposed to be ten years’ worth of equipment that’s supposed to have. It’s about 20 pages here maybe 30 but if we don’t do any audit and if don’t know how can we run the government officially. I hear my colleagues talking about we got to do it right but let’s 67 do it officially. I mean but we’re not doing the things to make it run right. I mean you don’t run your household like that. I know the business people, I don’t have a business I mean but the business people up here they don’t run their business like that because they wouldn’t be in business long. And we’re not going to be in business long if we don’t do what we need to do and that is that we ought to go ahead and do an official audit on every department in this government so we will know. And we won’t be upset and up here guessing when somebody tells us something we got to take whatever they say. And then when it comes back to bite us they say oh, I should’ve checked on that. So that’s motion I think I got a second, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: And Ms. Allen and then we might hear from Ms. Williams but we do get audited every year. Ms. Allen: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: We do have an audit report --- Ms. Allen: That’s right. Mr. Mayor: --- that comes back every year. Ms. Allen: That’s what I was going to add yes, sir. We do have a financial audit that is conducted each year, Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: I understand that but I’m talking about every department. Mr. Mayor, I’ve been here when we did an audit. We had an auditor come in and I don’t think he’s in business no more. Donnie, help me out over here on Telfair Street I think he’s out of business now. Who was that? Not Cherry Bekaert they --- Ms. Speaker: Baird and Company? Mr. Williams: Baird and Company did some audits for us and we had some --- Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you one more minute. Mr. Williams: --- stuff that was being misused and mistreated and then find out it wasn’t nothing. So we need to do an audit to make sure that we got all our ducks in one room and we ain’t just letting them fly all over the pond. That’s all I’m asking. Mr. Mayor. Okay. Commissioner Guilfoyle did you? Mr. Guilfoyle: I’m trying to figure out how to respond because we are audited every year. We are held accountable but each department any money that goes out of Finance to any department they control the numbers. Am I correct? Ms. Williams: Yes, sir. All elected officials are part of the annual financial audit, all departments, all elected officials, all financial transactions are encompassed in that audit. 68 Mr. Guilfoyle: And it’s transparent to the general public. Ms. Williams: Yes, sir, it’s published on our website. We’re currently in a process of th starting the 2013 audit and it will be completed by June the 30 which is the state required deadline. Mr. Guilfoyle: How detailed does that audit go? Ms. Williams: It is done to the specifications that are required by the auditing standards and we are in full compliance with that and any auditing standards that apply to any area but it encompasses the federal standards for the airport, housing and neighborhood development. The SPLOST section is a part of that audit as well as all of our regular operations. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Ms. Donna. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Davis then Commissioner Donnie Smith. Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Williams, what does an audit typically cost? Ms. Williams: Probably in the neighborhood of approximately $200,000 dollars. Ms. Davis: Okay, thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Ms. Williams we, I’m going to be, I’m trying to find a middle ground here. We are in the middle of an audit. Is that correct? Ms. Williams: We are at the beginning --- Mr. D. Smith: At the beginning. Ms. Williams: --- of our audit, yes, sir. It will probably be 60 days before we start because we have to close part of the (inaudible). Mr. D. Smith: You’ve got to close the bills out from January and February or January st and February close it out before the year that ended December 31 2013. Ms. Williams: Yes, sir. Mr. D. Smith: It takes some time to get your checkbook in order and that kind of business. And so now we are starting an audit that will run through, take six months or four months roughly to get done. And there’s state deadline to finish that right and its $200,000 dollars. Mr. Williams, would that be satisfactory to you for the audit? Is that the kind of audit that you’re looking for or is there something different that you’re looking for? 69 Mr. Williams: Well --- Mr. Mayor: And let me --- Mr. D. Smith: I’m sorry, Mr. Chairman, I should’ve went through the Chair. I apologize for that. Mr. Williams: I need to respond because --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: --- thank you, sir. Ms. Williams, let me, I’ve been up here too long. Let me tell you what I know. I heard somebody say $200,000 dollars, ooh that’s a lot of money but I rather spend $200,000 dollars then lose $2 million. And I’m not saying we’re doing that but I’d rather spend the $200,000 dollars. While you was in your position in Recreation there was an incident where we was taken hand written checks going to Sam’s and paying a bill. For the Rec Department we had five charge cards and somebody ended up getting four or five more additional charge cards and the bill was being sent to a post office box when it was supposed to come to Procurement. So anything can happen. This is a big operation. I’m not saying anybody’s doing anything wrong but we need to know those things, Mr. Mayor. We need to make sure that those things are not taking place now because it’s too big to assume. Mr. Mayor: And just for clarity, Ms. Williams, we’re spending $200,000 dollars now and that’s how much our audit costs correct? Okay, so we’re spending that $200,000. Ms. Williams: That is for your annual, I’m sorry, that is for your annual financial audit. The schedule that you have in front of you is for additional internal audits which would be more in the line of what Commissioner Williams was alluding to. Those typically go to a lower level of control and are geared towards procedures in cash handling. That comes down to a lower level of detail and that’s what you see on the sheet that all departments that handle cash and financial transactions are listed on here and they will be reviewed by our current staff of internal auditors which are an external firm. It is Cherry Bekaert Holland. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Williams, this is in reference to the agenda item that was sent back to committee. I don’t question that we have audits and I don’t question anyone’s integrity. I believe you all are doing the right thing. But there is no commissioner that is sitting up here that can tell me or anybody else what the exact status of our SPLOST funds are. You have certain information. Some of the department directors have certain information but no one has all the information. I’ve talked with some of the people that deal with SPLOST. I said is there any possibility that you have SPLOST funds that were designated for one project that because of GDOT or something else you’re just sitting on the money and it’s going into is there a possibility that this money could be switched to another shovel-ready project. Now if we’re 70 going to have to make the decisions for this government those are the kinds of things we need to know. You don’t have all the answers, the department directors don’t have all the answers, but collectively you all do have the answers. And this is why I wanted a work session so that not only myself but my colleagues we could sit down and we could see a certain item, we could ask you and if it wasn’t your purview we could direct it to a department director or whomever. And you know I don’t see why there’s always a push back because this doesn’t have to be a costly endeavor because you already indicated that we have the audits all the documentation and so forth is attached. But I, you know, this is the sort of thing, I’ve learned a lot over the last month about SPLOST that I didn’t know because of the inquiries that were sent back and forth and et cetera. And I don’t --- Mr. Mayor: I recognize you for another two. Mr. Lockett: --- thank you, that doesn’t fully understand what goes on and what’s going on. I just feel like I have an obligation I should give it my all to know as much as I possibly can. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Mr. Guilfoyle: What is the motion? Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, for clarity. The Clerk: Yes sir. The motion was to task the Interim Administrator to begin the procedures, putting the procedures in place to begin the audits of the departments. Mr. Mayor: If there’s no further discussion. Ms. Davis. Ms. Davis: Ms. Williams, so if we approve this motion is this an addition to what the schedule you just handed out to us? Ms. Williams: The schedule that I’ve handed out to you has already been approved. You approved that in an earlier item today when you, on item number 28 when you ratified the motion the actions taken by the Pension and Audit Committee. So this schedule is already approved. Ms. Davis: I’m satisfied with that schedule. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Yes sir, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think we probably need to get some clarity in exactly what. I mean I know it’s the actual item says for us to actually look at doing and audit on these departments but I think all in all I think that the Administrator may need some more clarity in exactly what is it she’s trying to put together to bring back because we probably wouldn’t know even if we try to put something together what is it she proposing to us before we do anything else to move forward with the audit. So that’s question here right now we need to be a 71 little more clear on what is it you know what we want her to bring back to us and then we can move forward on it. Mr. Mayor: And, Commissioner Williams, I’ve recognized you. Mr. Williams: I’m the maker of the motion, Mr. Mayor, I’m trying to help out but I mean --- Mr. Mayor: I see. If you want to clarify what your motion was. Mr. Williams: Here we are now and we’re talking about two minutes and give me another minute we’re trying to handle some business here and --- Mr. Mayor: Exactly but the rules of procedures apply to everybody --- Mr. Williams: The rules (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: --- the time limit’s fair. Mr. Williams: Okay, Mr. Mayor, but if we do an audit of each department and I think that’s what the motion was to find out Mr. Lockett brought a point out that you know we don’t know anything. No one department knows it all but everybody knows something. We’ve got money sitting around in banks that hasn’t been touched in I don’t know when --- Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Williams, you’re moving away from clarifying your motion. Mr. Williams: Well, I can’t clarify it. Mr. Mayor: Okay I would just say that you know we’re paying $200,000 dollars for an audit. We have internal auditors we have these controls in place internally but yes, ma’am, Ms. Williams. Ms. Williams: If there are areas outside of those that are already covered under the annual financial audit and outside of the proposed the schedule that’s been approved in front of you if the body would identify those then we can redirect some of the internal audit resources. We’re a little bit limited this year because of budget reductions but we would redirect that one to specific areas rather than just a scattered approach. We’re not sure what the intent of the body that we’re supposed to be looking at. It would be very helpful to the staff. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Ms. Williams. Ms. Williams: Yes, sir. 72 Mr. Fennoy: Didn’t the Carl, I think it was the Carl Vinson Institute do an audit or make an audit recommendation for Richmond County? Ms. Williams: Not that I’m aware of, sir. Mr. Fennoy: Okay. Okay and on the audit events that you have on here all of the departments are not on here? Ms. Williams: No, sir, for the cash handling and internal controls most of the departments that handle cash and I’ve missed one or two, they’re very small like, you know, someone may have a hundred dollars petty cash. That would not go to the level of an internal audit because that is reviewed internally through the procurement procedures and through the accounting procedures that are in here. But the people that take in revenue they’re License and Inspection, your Tax Commissioner, the revenues that come into this city that we use to operate off of that would, those are all encompassed in this schedule here. Mr. Fennoy: Then I guess my last question would be are there any particular areas that Commissioner other than cash handling that he’s concerned about? I mean I don’t know. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. D. Smith: What’s the motion? Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, if you could read back the motion for him one more time. The Clerk: Yes sir. It was to task the Interim Administrator to begin putting the procedures in place to begin an audit of the departments. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Allen. Ms. Allen: And can the Interim Administrator ask for clarification because I really don’t know outside of what --- Mr. Mayor: What we’re already doing with. Mr. Speaker: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: No, I don’t disagree. Mr. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, and that’s why I was saying that earlier it’s not clear. I think we really need to revisit this and I think we need to get an understanding up here. Mr. Mayor: Well, I think internally if it, if somebody wants to put it back on a committee and get more specific there’s that option available. 73 Mr. Johnson: I’ll offer a substitute motion, Mr. Mayor, that we --- Mr. Mayor: I’ve actually already called for the vote. Mr. Fennoy, Mr. Lockett and Mr. Williams vote Yes. Mr. Johnson, Ms. Davis, Mr. Jackson, Mr. D. Smith, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. G. Smith vote No. Mr. Mason abstains. Motion Fails 3-6-1. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 34. Discuss the authorities of the General Counsel versus the Augusta Commission. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Again, Mr. Mayor, this was a repeat. We’ve been battling this thing for a while. The Attorney gives us a ruling when the sun is shining, when it’s bright outside I guess then this body, this governing body ought to be the one to make the decisions. The Attorney is to advise us when we need that advice whether we take it or not. But everything that we have done, everything we’re doing has to go through the attorney. Going back to this document again in my hand that he said he wanted to make sure there was no attorney/client privileges being violated when I am the client of that hard drive deal that we’re talking about. But I’m really a little leery about everything from job descriptions to every facet of this government has to go through the attorney before it comes to this body. And I’ve got some issues with that and I want to know why is it that way. Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie, do you? Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I’ll respond as best I can. First of all I’m not aware that everything the government does comes through the Law Department or we wouldn’t the staff to review not even the small portion that it does. However if there is anything specific that I can address with respect to any concerns that are raised, I’d be happy to do that. Mr. Mayor: And with regards too I think some clarity here, Commissioner Williams, with regards to calling Legal meetings, I call those meetings so that’s on me. I do it at the request of the attorney when there’s a need specific for action by the body on legal issues. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, the legal meeting has always been held after the regular meeting taken place we go in there and we changed that we started going in early. I’ve got no problem with either one of those whether we do it before and after. But not only did that when you’re talking about job descriptions or even our previous contracts with the animal services, I’ll go back to that. When the two attorneys were negotiating on some issues that we didn’t even 74 address and Commissioner Donnie Smith and myself met with the attorneys and asked them why was that happening why was that being done? I mean it wasn’t just me, Commissioner Donnie Smith was there as well and this is why I thought I mean they didn’t come back and find out from us. It’s out of the hands of this government, Mr. Mayor, it’s in the hands of the attorney and I don’t think that’s truly wrong, I don’t think it should be that way. We need to look at how this operation’s being operated and how we can do better with what we’re doing. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, sir. Can we get a motion? Is there any more input? Can we get a motion to receive as information? Mr. Guilfoyle: Motion to receive as information. Mr. Jackson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Mason and Mr. Lockett out. Motion carries 8-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 36. Update from the Interim Administrator regarding the Augusta Public Transit Citizens Advisory Board. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams) Mr. Mayor: Madam Administrator. Ms. Allen: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, the Transit Advisory th Committee Bylaws was actually signed off by the Mayor on June 27 2013. The Mayor is not going to have Ms. Dottery here as well. There has not been I guess enough people appointed by the Commission to actually hold any meetings. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Dottery, do you want to add anything to that? Ms. Dottery: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, the only thing I can say is the bylaws are done and it’s supposed to be in place but I do not appointments of anyone. Commissioner Williams said that he appointed someone. That is the only one I’ve heard of so I cannot hold any type of meetings. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don’t remember this conversation. Mr. Russell was sitting right there and we talked about the, he asked you specifically about that board and the 75 answer I remember that Mr. Russell came up with it’s not time to get to that yet because none of us have been asked to appoint anybody. I’ve never been, and I remember Mr. Russell sitting right there saying we’re not at that point just yet. We need to hold on there’s some other things to work out. And I remember you sitting right there and I remember Mr. Russell sitting there. So I’ve never been asked to appoint anybody to this board and I don’t think anybody else up here has been asked to appoint somebody or there’s been a directive from the Clerk’s office or anybody for us to do that so I don’t know where we stand with that. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you. The body came in here. The board came in here and all of them sit in those seats out there and said they were willing to go to work and get started. So this conversation has been going around. Do you remember when that body came in --- Ms. Dottery: Yes, sir and --- Mr. Williams: --- and those appointed? Ms. Dottery: --- but those are citizens that have not been appointed by you all. They appointed themselves. Mr. Williams: No, no, my appointment was and I met with him. We came back here, Grady help me out now or they called us down here to a meeting in the committee room to meet to talk about what they were going to do, who was going to serve, why they wanted to serve and all this that goes along with it. Is that right, Grady? Mr. G. Smith: I do remember that. Mr. Williams: Okay we met and I appointed someone from District 9 to serve and she was here that day when we talked about this. So there has been some dialogue. There has been some conversation about it. So now I guess, Mr. Mayor, what do we need to do now. Do we need to reappoint? Mr. Mayor: And well that’s what I was going to say. I think this is a pretty simple case. Would it be that each Commissioner gets an appointment to that board? Ms. Dottery: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay. I think everybody just needs to submit their appointments to the board. Ms. Allen. Ms. Allen: According to the actual bylaws that were approved the Commissioners get to appoint members to the board. In addition two members shall be recommended by the Augusta Richmond County Delegation and the General Assembly of Georgia appointed by the Augusta Georgia Commission as well. That was the bylaws that were that I’m reading from. 76 Mr. Mayor: Okay. So, well, but the next step in the process the best thing to do would be the Commission to --- Ms. Allen: Yes sir. And those appointees need to be provided to Clerk’s office. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, who put up the bylaws that she just read because I never heard anything about the state legislature making an appointment. Who, who? Mr. Mayor: We the Commission approved them. Mr. Williams: There it goes again. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m going to be real brief. The Advisory Board, what clout will they have with the current contract that’s running our Transit? What can they do? Ms. Allen: Well, the board would actually meet and have discussions about things that can happen at Transit. They will look at you know what’s going on, things they want to see happen and that would come back before you all to make decisions on that. And the contractor that we have there can be a part of that conversation. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Okay, so get your nominees to or your appointments to the Clerk of Commission’s office. Ms. Davis: Mr. Mayor I make a motion --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. Ms. Davis. Ms. Davis: I’d like to make a motion that we submit our nominee for the Augusta Public Transit Citizens Advisory Board by the next Commission meeting. Mr. Mason: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, if I may. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. Lockett: You know, it’s not really that simple. The media’s going to go out and say I want to appoint to the board. You know I thought everybody would be standing in line wanting 77 to serve on these boards but it’s not really that way. I’ll do my best but I can make no guarantees. Ms. Davis: That’s all we can ask. Mr. Mayor: Okay we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please. The Clerk: FINANCE 40. Consider the issuance of a Tax Anticipation Note as funding mechanism for GRU Cancer Center Request in SPLOST VII. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Schroer. Mr. Schroer: Good afternoon, everyone. What I’m handing out is just a, another copy of information you’ve already received regarding the Tax Anticipation Notes and also an updated schedule. The request has been made from Georgia Regents University for $8 million dollars for a funding match for the Cancer Center. To do this under SPLOST VII we’re recommending that if you want to do this, that’s the first question that has to be decided if there’s a project that you want to include. If it is a project then the best path forward would be to issue a Tax Anticipation Notice and that way the project that would be funded would be repayment of General Obligation Debt. To do this we would issue go forward with the note $8 million dollars. It would be issued thth before March 10 so that would be incurred before March 10. Interest rates we talked to our financial advisor Dianne McNabb. Interest rates would range from .1% to a full percent. We’re thinking it would be closer to .1 0.25%. It would be a short term note, six months. A question has been raised what happens if SPLOST does not pass. The way the Intergovernmental Agreement we worked on with Georgia Regents University if SPLOST does not pass those funds would not be given to the university but it would be used to repay the note. If SPLOST does pass the funds would be distributed to GRU in accordance with the Intergovernmental Agreement. We would then issue a SPLOST bond and use the bond proceeds to repay the debt. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you. You actually had answered a couple of my questions. First is what happens if the referendum does not pass? Has GRU requested this money? Mr. Schroer: We have a SPLOST. Yes, we have a request we have received from GRU. Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay, GRU has asked for $8 million dollars. 78 Mr. Schroer: I believe the final paperwork was eight and a half million. The $8 million was a place holder we had been in discussions with so it’s $8 million dollars. Mr. Guilfoyle: What is GRU putting in with this? Mr. Schroer: It’s my understanding that there’s a $42 million dollars in bonds that are being issued by the Board of Regents. Mr. Mayor: Forty-five. Mr. Schroer: Forty-five, thank you, sir. $45 million dollars of bonds that will be issued. They have requested a match of $12 and a half million --- Mr. Mayor: Twelve and a half million, yes. Mr. Schroer: $4 million dollars is coming from --- Mr. Mayor: Yeah let, can I, I’ll just jump in for a minute. So this morning it was announced that through the Community Foundation the Augusta National and the Masters Golf Tournament are, have come up with a charitable contribution of $6 million dollars. $1.5 million of that will go to Camp Rainbow and then other $4.5 will go toward the Cancer Center. So the state is requiring that we raise $12.5 million dollars locally to access that $45 million dollars in bond funds. So that’s what the GRU or the Board of Regents is putting into it. So now we have if we’re able to do this on the city side we have the charitable donation of 4.5 in place and that would get us to the twelve and a half to access the forty-five from the state. Mr. Guilfoyle: So actually the only thing that they request to provide us with $8 million dollars since they already have four and a half million. Mr. Mayor: Yes. Mr. Guilfoyle: You already answered my other question (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason, Commissioner Williams then Commissioner Davis. Mr. Mason: Okay, so just so I’m clear. You said if the sales tax fails what happens? Mr. Schroer: If the sales tax does not pass we would repay, basically turn the $8 million dollars back to bank. There would be some interest costs that we would have to absorb. Based on the numbers that we’re talking with Dianne it would be $10 to $25,000 dollars in interest so it would be over a six month period. But we just, so giving the money to GRU we used that money to loan out proceeds to pay off the loan. Mr. Mason: Okay, so I know Mr. Lockett had previously talked about the various SPLOSTS over time. Do we know if we have $8 million dollars of SPLOST money available 79 out of our previous SPLOSTS and one that we’re in currently now that could possibly be reprogrammed for this? Mr. Schroer: I do not believe you could, sir, because those funds were not that project was not on the approved SPLOST list. Mr. Mason: Well, I mean we have programmed other monies for projects that have not been on the SPLOST list, Tim. Mr. Schroer: We’re trying to maintain them within the categories. Mr. Mason: I understand so that’s more of my question would this be in a category where we could utilize because we certainly have reprogrammed monies. Mr. Schroer: I don’t believe there was, sir. Mr. Mason: Okay I’m looking for a way, Mr. Mayor, that we can work this through. How about the Cancer Center location does anybody know whether we’re in blight? The reason why I’m asking is because possibly some funds out of HUD because if this thing doesn’t pass I’m trying to figure out ways we can still get it done. I don’t know if that’s, okay so it doesn’t okay that’s my question. My last question is if this doesn’t pass and what is the city’s, because I hear you say what we’ll lose out a few thousand dollars here or there, ten, twenty-five thousand dollars. That’s all good and well but then GRU still doesn’t have the money to do what they’re trying to do. So what I’m trying to do here I’m trying to assist, not take away from. So has there been any thought given or perhaps I know we’ve got over twenty some odd million in reserve. We borrow from ourselves the $8 million the minimal interest that we’re losing over that we can gain back in restructuring or structuring a payment plan on that. And in that way that’s guaranteed money versus money that we don’t know whether it’s going to happen or not. Mr. Schroer: To do, I don’t believe you could do that, sir, because it has to be General Obligation Debt. And you can’t, we can’t borrow the money from ourselves and create General Obligation Debt. Mr. Mason: How about the Pension Fund, like securitize, hey, I’m asking the question. Mr. Johnson: You got to try and figure it all out. Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Williams then Commissioner Davis, the Commissioner Donnie Smith. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I need some clarification. You said that the state required and I heard that before then I heard that the state don’t require so I need to know first of all is there a requirement that we got to do something, we have to do something that’s good to do. I guess I need to know that first. 80 Mr. Mayor: And I’ll tell you it’s not a written rule but it’s the way the past two governors have operated. And I will share with you, Commissioner Williams, that we’re very fortunate to see this type of investment available. In Athens they’re building a new campus for the Terry College of Business so the state is putting up $70 million dollars but they’re requiring the university and the local community to raise $70 million. It’s a $140 million dollars project so they’re requiring a one to one match in this situation. In our situation they’re not requiring that big of a match but they still are requiring a match. Mr. Williams: I didn’t even get clarification. Let me clear something up. I’m in support of the Cancer Center, there’s no doubt about that. But there’s some things I need to know from GRU as to what they’re doing. I hadn’t seen anything on their paperwork as to what they’re bringing to the table or what they’re income has been, how they’re generating. I don’t know nothing about their numbers. We gave MCG or GRU or whatever is that what you want to use $10 million before, Tim, for the facility they got down there now. I heard that we’ve been paid back. I heard that I ain’t seen nothing but I’m trusting that we have. But my point is that it came out in the newspaper and I don’t know if Sylvia Cooper wrote it or who but it came out in the newspaper that we wasn’t required because I got it, I was always, we were required in order for them to get their $44 million --- Mr. Mayor: Forty-five. Mr. Williams: --- $45 million that we had to do $10 million. Now I hear it’s down to $8 million. I’m not against it but I need to know, I need to see some of their records. I need to see what they have been generating how much money they’ve got coming through their facility. I’ve got, I need to see what they’ve done in the last five, ten years. I want to know is it, I mean they may have the money sitting in the bank with our money. You know money talks. I mean they ain’t taking to me but they’re talking to somebody, Tim, so I just need to know is our money talking to their money in the bank. I don’t see none of that. I need to know something from them. We don’t need walk in there tying to a tree or something so we can’t move. We need to be able to look at all of their efforts and --- Mr. Mayor: Do you need another two? Mr. Williams: --- yes, sir, and make that decision so I’m not opposed to it but simply if it’s not required if it’s good to do you know we’ve been up here talking about monies, Mr. Mayor, what we don’t have and what it’s going to cost but if nobody questions this everybody seems to be in support. Everybody’s thinking this ought to be a win, win. Mr. Mayor: No and I’ll tell you, you know it was clarified by an article the next day that we do have to have these local funds committed but that from a business perspective, Commissioner Williams, you know you put up twelve and a half from the local community to get forty-five from the state is a very good return on investment. Commissioner Davis. Ms. Davis: Thank you. Mr. Mason asked a couple of my questions but so basically, Tim, you think this is the best way as far as insuring that these funds will be available if SPLOST passes. 81 Mr. Schroer: Yes, ma’am. It does, it is basically a very low risk choice for us because if SPLOST passes we issue bonds and we repay the loan. If SPLOST doesn’t pass we just repay the loan with (unintelligible) proceeds. The key on this is we have to have the loan in place prior to the vote on the SPLOST so we have General Obligation Debt in place which can be paid for by the SPLOST funds. In answering one of Commissioner Williams’ points there are some work sessions that have been scheduled for the next two weeks and GRU has been invited to two of them so they may be able to shed some light on this. Ms. Davis: So in issuing bonds is just part of the typical schedule that you (unintelligible). Mr. Schroer: Yes, ma’am as part of the, and we discussed it at the last work session to do a dollar specific SPLOST issuance you have to have a couple of criteria. One is our consolidated government it’s a consolidated government which we are. We have an intergovernmental agreement with Hephzibah and Blythe which we will probably have and then we issue debt. And it’s worked very well for us in SPLOST V and VI. Interest rates are raised a little bit but it’s very inexpensive money right now. We would look at an addition to the $8 million dollars or the (unintelligible) request. If there are any other projects that you feel would benefit from getting a jump start we could use those in that issuance also. Ms. Davis: All right. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith. Mr. D. Smith: Tim, let me try to, I’m going to try and recap this through my mind out th loud okay so we can get to, so I can get to a point. We need the money by March 7. Mr. Schroer: Yes, sir. Mr. D. Smith: Okay. So because of the, we have to have the money for the SPLOST --- Mr. Schroer: The loan, the General Obligation Debt needs to be in place before the referendum is approved by the Commission. Mr. D. Smith: Okay. Why? Mr. Schroer: Sir? Mr. D. Smith: Because it’s my understanding, then that becomes the stream that pays the General Obligation Bond back, am I right? Mr. Schroer: If we have, if we issued the debt before the referendum is called by the Commission it is existing General Obligation Debt which can be paid for by SPLOST. 82 Mr. D. Smith: That’s what I was trying to get to. That’s the stream and that’s what we’re going to talk to. Okay, so the second part of that we got that part set aside, the second part is this $8 million dollars. If we borrow the money under this TAN --- Mr. Schroer: Yes, sir. Mr. D. Smith: --- and the vote fails we’ve given them $8 million dollars back with somewhere between $10 and $20 thousand dollars interest. Somewhere based in there we lose that little bit of money. Mr. Schroer: Yes. Mr. D. Smith: But if we, if we, if this passes --- Mr. Schroer: Yes, sir. Mr. D. Smith: --- we, if we pass that then we are getting the $45 million dollars which then, Mr. Mayor, you can enlighten me. I think there’s somewhere around $300 million dollars’ worth of contracts on the table for the Cancer Center that will be coming to our community. Is that right? Mr. Mayor: Research dollars. Mr. D. Smith: For research dollars. So for $8 million dollars we’re going to eventually get $345 million dollars back to our community. Is that a correct analogy, Mr. Mayor? Thank you, Tim. Mr. Mayor: Do you want to move for approval after you made the case? Mr. D. Smith: I will make, I make a motion that we approve it. Mr. Grady Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Mason then Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Mason: Yeah, I just have a brief question. Thanks, Donnie, for getting me a little bit more clarity there. I’m still concerned I think we all should be concerned to some level as to th whether or not this will pass on May 20 and what is the plan thereafter. So my question to you is what is the plan to assist GRU or is there one since you’re saying there is these deadlines of thth March 7 or 10 or what have you. So if it does not pass it’s over with or what. What happens at that point? Mr. Schroer: With the SPLOST or --- Mr. Mayor: Or with the, you’re saying the Cancer Center. 83 Mr. Mason: I’m talking about the Cancer Center but the fact of the matter is what if on th May 20 the vote for the SPLOST package fails which has the monies for the Cancer Center there. Correct? What happens in that case? Mr. Mayor: What other route do we go --- Mr. Mason: That’s what I was looking to hear because our bottom line we want this to happen and I’m trying to figure out we’ve got all of our eggs in one basket. Is there another basket out there to put an egg in? Do we get a General Obligation Bond for the eight mill? Mr. Schroer: Well, that we be on a, you could do that but that would have to go before the voters in November. Mr. Mason: Well, I’m just trying to figure out you know and we don’t, we don’t know what the results are going to be but I would like to be prepared. Better to have and not need than to need and not have. So let’s look at the Enterprise Fund like our water department or somewhere else could you pull from that? Mr. Schroer: With this question, no, sir. Mr. Mason: Okay, all right I’m trying to figure out how we can help them out if it doesn’t work. Mr. Mayor: I think, you know, a General Obligation Bond we’d have to wait on the vote. That would be another option. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I go along with everybody else I’m definitely in support of the Cancer Center but to what extent? We constantly talk about the lack of revenue but it seems when certain projects come up we can always find the money. We couldn’t give our employees a pay increase. All of our departments were cut by 2.4% because of lack of money. We have I don’t know how many houses that have gone through the court system that can be demolished in the property can be cleaned up but we don’t have the money. You go out and look at the county city right-of-ways and it looks like a war zone. You know my constituents I’m quite sure I haven’t told them are all in favor of the Cancer Center but there are other things that they are in favor of also. I’ve been up here for five years and I’ve been trying to fight for some things that we constantly say we don’t have the money. Since I’ve been here we found the money for a convention center, we found the money for a parking deck. We just about found the money to remodel this building here but where is the fairness or has there ever been an intent for fairness? And I’m mighty afraid that the next Mayor that comes in and the new five Commissioners are going to find themselves in a position where they’re not going to be able to make any choices because the revenue is not going to be there. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there is no further discussion Commissioners, oh excuse me. Commissioner Fennoy. 84 Mr. Fennoy: Tim, you mentioned that if we wanted to we could add other projects as a TAD. Mr. Schroer: No, sir, you would add them to the SPLOST bonds to, if we do this, if you do the TAN the TAN will be creating $9 million dollars for the Cancer Center. Once SPLOST passes we go forward and we, we’re going to bond $8 million dollars. What we would probably do with the advice of the council is to look at is there any other projects you want to get done relatively quickly. I would not recommend going over $20 or $25 million on a total bond package but the incremental cost to go from an $8 million dollar bond to a $20 million dollar bond in issuance costs is relatively small. If we can’t do this $8 million dollar bond and make it go away but if there are other projects that the Commission would like to see get done more quickly that would be the opportunity to do that. Mr. Fennoy: At the last committee meeting Planning and Zoning talked about $35,000 dollars being allocated by dilapidated houses. Then we have 129 or 130 court orders demolitions that would run up to $650,000 dollars. So what I’m hearing you say is that if we wanted to we could add that $650,000 in anticipation of? Mr. Schroer: That specific project, there’s some certain criteria that we would be required to use SPLOST funds. The main criteria would be that we own the property. Right now their court order I don’t believe I think we tear down the property and then place a lien on the property so if it’s ever sold we get a reimbursement. On advice of bond counsel they’d be very hesitant to bond that type of project just because we don’t own that property so we’re basically improving somebody else’s property. Mr. Fennoy: Okay, I think Paine College has requested $8 million dollars for a James Brown Performing Arts Center. Mr. Schroer: Yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: Could a project like that be --- Mr. Schroer: Yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: --- definitely included? Mr. Schroer: Yes, sir, because we would have an agreement with the Paine College that would qualify that as a SPLOST project. Mr. Fennoy: Okay and I guess my question is how do we get Paine College’s project on the Tax Anticipation Note? Mr. Mayor: We’ve got to take, well, Tim, you can speak to this. We’ve got to take this first step. And obviously we’ve got to get the SPLOST passed as well. 85 Mr. Schroer: Yes, sir, that’s correct. That would not include Paine College in the Tax Anticipation Note because we don’t know if the SPLOST passes we can issue a bond and I would issue a bond to include Paine College if that’s the will of the body. I would not include Paine College in a TAN because we’re looking for some very short term planning. Mr. Mayor: Which is what, correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s what we did with the HEAL project, is it not? Mr. Schroer: No, sir, we the HEAL project was paid for out of SPLOST collection (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay, we have --- Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor, can I have ten seconds? Mr. Mayor: Yes. Mr. Lockett: Tim, you said something. We don’t own, we will not own the Georgia Regents Cancer Center. Mr. Schroer: Correct. Mr. Lockett: Okay, is that a capital expense? Mr. Schroer: It is capital in nature and the SPLOST project that would qualify, the project that would qualify would be a repayment of the General Obligation Debt, the $8 million dollar TAN. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Williams abstains. Motion Passes 9-0-1. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 37. Motion to approve recommendations for appointment to Urban Redevelopment Agency (URA). (Requested by Mayor Deke Copenhaver) Mr. Mayor: And, Madam Clerk, I am going to ask the Commission for a motion to reconsider agenda item 37 due to the fact that it was placed on the consent agenda and passed with no names attached as to who the URA Board members will be. Can I get a motion to that effect? Mr. Lockett: So moved. Mr. D. Smith: Second. 86 Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Williams: Wait a minute, Mr. Mayor. You asked to vote to reconsider this. Can we talk about this? Mr. Mayor: Yes, because it was put on the consent agenda but and it passed but no names were attached to the URA Board. Mr. Williams: I got no problem with it going back. I think we need to talk about it so. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Where are you getting recommendations from? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy, it was the direction of the Commission several meetings ago that districts --- Mr. Speaker: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: --- Commissioners one and two, District Commissioners 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6, 7 and 8 and 9 and 10 submit to me because the Mayor recommends, the Commission approved. But as I said it behooves us to work together on this but only two names have been submitted in the past month. So I do have we need a five member board. I do have some of my own recommendations to flush out the board but obviously we need to discuss that. Mr. Williams: Commission are you voting to look at it again? Mr. Mayor: Earthquakes, ice storms --- Mr. Williams: We’re voting so we can begin to discuss. We ain’t voting to pass nothing; we’re just bringing it back up so we can begin to discuss it. And we need to vote. And we need to vote, and vote. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Okay, lady and gentlemen, on this item as was stated the Commission gave direction to submit names to me for a five member board for the URA. I’ve had several, two names given but we’ll just move forward from there. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, I remember exactly but this was supposed to come back to committee with the names supposed to be submitted to you and you were supposed to bring it back to this committee so we can discuss it not to (unintelligible). Now as a Super 87 District Commissioner I do have a name. I have contacted someone to serve on the board but you know and we pass each other we’ve been in each other’s presence but I had not submitted that name to you. But I was thinking it was going to come back to committee and that’s what the item said before that we would each district would get together, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 but the two Super Districts Grady Smith and myself would have an appointment. Mr. Mayor: Well, and there’s a time that we’ve been looking at this for I’m not sure how long this has been or how many times it’s been on the agenda. Mr. Williams: I understand but, Mr. Mayor, I’ve got an appointment and no one contacted me just I contacted no one else. Mr. Mayor: It’s not with the process, Commissioner Williams, it is that the Mayor makes the recommendation and then the Commission has to approve the recommendation. And so, Tim, could you speak to this just the timeliness factor of this, why we need to go ahead and get a URA Board in place? Mr. Schroer: Yes, sir, it’s basically the funding of the funding for the completion of this building and for the IT Center, IT building. Previously the Commission approved the GMP for the IT building but it is getting to the point where we don’t have the funds in hand to complete the projects. So that’s why we’re kind of looking at it this way. We need to move forward and have project, a URA Board in place so we can’t issue the bonds. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams, you still have the floor. Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I understand what Tim just stated and I’m in agreement but I guess my position is that I have an appointee and if this Commission is going to get together and come up with someone and each Super District has an appointee and you got a list, that list is not mine and no one contacted me like I contacted nobody else. Mr. Mayor: No, but Commissioner Williams that’s what I’m saying that it was the direction of this body that those sets of Commissioners submit a name to me and only two names of the five have been submitted to this point. Mr. Williams: To bring it back to committee. Mr. Mayor: That was, no, that was not to bring it back to committee. Mr. Williams: I need the Clerk, I need the Clerk to go back and get the minutes --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams once again that’s you know that was the direction of this body. And after a month now I’ve only gotten two names, so --- Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, we agreed to that I understand. And I mean I have a name, I have an appointee. I had to make sure that – 88 Mr. Mayor: The direction of the Commission was that you and Commissioner Smith would get together and come up with a name. Mr. Williams: No, no, Commissioner Smith was supposed to have one and he --- Mr. Speaker: That’s for another board. Mr. Mayor: No, this is for the URA because it was Commissioner Smith, Donnie Smith that made the motion that district Commissioners from 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6, 7 and 8, 9 and 10 would get together and come up with a name that would then be given to me. Mr. D. Smith: Each district would have two Commissioners, District 1 and 2 would --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Smith. Mr. Smith: --- and one person, thank you, Mr. Mayor. District 1 and 2 would nominate one person, District 3 and 4 would nominate one person, 5 and 6 would nominate somebody, 7 and 8 would nominate somebody and 9 and 10 together would nominate somebody so there will be five appointees, one for every other district. And Mr. Guilfoyle and I nominated Brad Owens. And Commissioner Mason and Ms. Davis nominated Bob Young. And so we’re waiting on the other six to nominate three people. That was what the motion was and that’s what passed up here. Mr. Mayor: And I will tell you and Commissioner Mason I’ll go to you and then I’ll tell you I’ve got some names that I would throw out there for consideration in the absence of having those names submitted. Commissioner Mason? Mr. Mason: Yes, the intent was twofold. One it was to get Commissioners to work together which is what some of us have done and then to come up with a, to be able to work together and come up with a consensus on a name between the two individuals. So it was clear to me at that point that do what Commissioners 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 7, 8, 9, 10 like that, no one particular commissioner had a separate appointee to be placed on from what I recall. So the question is now where we’re at at this point do the Commissioners have some names to put out those that have not put any out so that we could possibly get to moving? Mr. Mayor: Well, and I’m going to say and I will give you my reasoning behind this. Just that I’ve got three other names to consider. Terry Elam is representative of higher education, Henry Ingram as a representative from the Development Authority and Larry Jones as Chairman of the Board of the Chamber. I think that makes sense to have, you know, the Chairman of the Boards of our two largest business entities in town and then a representative of higher education. Commissioner Davis. Ms. Davis: I’d like to make a motion to approve the names you just mentioned with the two that the other four Commissioners have given you. Mr. Mason: Second. 89 Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’ve got some issues with that. Mr. Mayor: Go ahead. Mr. Williams: I mean I don’t think Commissioner was my friend and Commissioner will support me but I think I need to make, at least me and Grady ought to have an opportunity to say something. I mean I was under the impression that we were making separate appointments. Now no one contacted me and through cell phone, emails or anything else. Now there’s a lot of communication that’s been out now and I need the Clerk to give me a copy of the minutes because I’m under the impression it was supposed to be brought back to you through committee then finalized and then brought to here. And if that’s the process, that’s the process. But I mean I’ve got no problem with none of those names you mentioned but I think me and Commissioner Smith need to at least have the opportunity to agree or disagree without somebody just having what they want to have. I mean that’s an appointee that’s not a (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Okay, Grady are you okay with those names to submit? Mr. G. Smith: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Okay and we also, you know, here again it’s I’m supposed to recommend I would say that with the reasoning behind the other three candidates. And then we need to come up with a Chair, a Vice Chair. Mr. Williams: My Chairman told me, he’s chairman of the committee when we met. We’re going to go with Larry Jones. Mr. Mayor: Okay, great. Okay and we need to gosh and they’re going to love us for putting this on their plate but --- Mr. Williams: Do we have a talent bank on them? Do they live in Richmond County? Mr. Mayor: Yes. Mr. Williams: That’s something else somebody talked about. Mr. Mayor: And we need to nominate along with that a Chair, a Vice Chair um, how do ya’ll feel about that? Mr. D. Smith: Out of those five we nominated? Mr. Mayor: Yes. I would feel certain Henry Ingram would be. Do we have, yes, sir. 90 Mr. Plunkett: The recommendation comes from the body to, or from the Mayor who to be the Chair and the Vice Chair. The body itself will select their own secretary and we try to have a rotating board so if you go in that order but to people to at least three years, two years one year and they’re reappointed probably to serve again. But if you could designate in that order --- Mr. Mason: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to make a recommendation. Mr. Mayor: I’m going to make my recommendation. Mr. Mason: Oh you, oh okay. Mr. Mayor: Henry Ingram is Chair, Larry Jones is Vice Chair. Okay. Okay, the maker of the motion is willing to amend their motion to reflect that? Okay, you are? Mr. Mason: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Fennoy and Mr. Lockett out. Motion Passes 8-0. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, next agenda item. The Clerk: FINANCE 43. Update from the Interim Administrator regarding budget reductions. (Requested by Commissioner Wayne Guilfoyle) Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle. Mr. Guilfoyle: Why don’t we sent this back to committee and if I can get support from motion to send back. my colleagues Mr. D. Smith: I’ll make the motion. Mr. G. Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Fennoy, Ms. Davis and Mr. Lockett out. Motion Passes 7-0. 91 Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, what I believe is our final agenda item. The Clerk: ENGINEERING SERVICES 45. Discussion regarding storm damage clean-up and emergency removal. (Requested by Commissioner Jackson) Mr. Jackson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Commissioner Jackson. Mr. Jackson: I need to see if Abie Ladson or Mark Johnson’s available to help me with this. We’ve got basically 47 days until Masters Week and there’s a lot of debris to be removed. Along with that I’m not going to get into I’ll put that on the next agenda with Ms. Melanie Wilson. But, Abie, if you could bring us up to date just briefly on the needs and where we’re at and where we need to head if we have enough resources. What do we need to do to get the, to get ready for the next step. Mr. Ladson: Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: Mr. Ladson. Mr. Jackson: First and foremost thank you again for you and the whole staff for being at the (unintelligible) and taking care of all of the debris removal. Mr. Ladson: Thank you. I mean it was definitely was a team effort with all departments from Ms. Allen all the way down so we all worked real good together and I felt we did an excellent job. Mr. Jackson: Just don’t listen to Johnny Edwards, that’s fine. Mr. Ladson: Yeah, we saw him out there. Basically where we’re at right now we kind of went into different stages. The first stage was the emergency and especially when all of the actual weather took place. And basically the trees and ice everything coming down all over so our response was to have the city workers and also the contractors on call contractors to remove the debris, trees rather at the side of the road and to help clear the ice. Our next step which we’re in right now in the second phase is to basically gather the debris and take them to the stage points around the county. And that’s actually being conducted by Environmental Services, Mark Johnson. But what we’re incurring is the, a lot of funds I mean a lot of funds will be needed and that’s actually to pay our contractors, on call contractors. But at this point we’re probably at, I mean we’re probably in between right now $500,000 to a million dollars and actually work that has been done by all on call contractors and we’re talking about seven on call contractors. So if we can actually get some funds to because these guys are going to want to get definitely get paid probably pretty soon here. 92 Mr. Jackson: Well, I guess --- Mr. G. Smith: Times up. Mr. Mayor: I will tell you, Abie, because I know that we don’t have a figure yet but when, you know, when you get that, when do you anticipate coming before the body to make to ask for the emergency funding? Mr. Ladson: Currently right now we’re working with FEMA. We’ve actually been working with them pretty much all day and the Chief probably can even give you even more details on that. But we met with him today and rode around with them and --- Mr. Mayor: We live in the middle of a disaster movie, man, come on. Mr. Jackson: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Commissioner Jackson. Mr. Jackson: Abie, more to a point in question are we going to be able to get this pulled off in 47 days and get it cleaned up and be back to somewhat a normal life. Do we need, what other resources do you need? Fire Chief, did you pull the fire alarm? Mr. Mayor: Okay, can I get a motion to receive this as information? Mr. Johnson: So moved. Mr. G. Smith: Second. Mr. D. Smith: I got a motion we adjourn. Mr. Mayor: All in, Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Fennoy, Mr. Lockett and Mr. Williams out. Motion Passes 7-0. Mr. Mayor: With no further business to come before the body we stand adjourned. Chief James: Everybody downstairs now. Get out of the building. [MEETING ADJOURNED] Nancy Morawski Deputy Clerk of Commission 93 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 February 18, 2014. __________________________________ Clerk of Commission 94 95