Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting October 21, 2014 REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER OCTOBER 21, 2014 Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., October 21, 2014, the Hon. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Lockett, Mason, Harris, Williams, Fennoy, Johnson, Hasan, Davis and Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Absent: Hon. Guilfoyle, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Mr. Mayor: Okay I will go ahead and in the interest of time call the meeting to order and call on Rosland Jones, Associate Pastor of Hudson Memorial CME Church for our invocation. Please stand. The invocation was given by Minister Rosland Jones, Hudson Memorial CME Church. Mr. Mayor: Please join me in the Pledge. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited. Mr. Mayor: And, Pastor, if I could get you to come forward I have a little something for you. Thank you for that wonderful invocation. Office of the Mayor. By these present be it known that Rosland Jones, Associate Pastor of Hudson Memorial CME Church is Chaplain of the Day for her civic and spiritual guidance demonstrated throughout the community serves as an st example for all of the faith community. Given under my hand this 21 Day of October 2014. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor. (APPLAUSE) Okay, we’re going skip around I know for the Employee of the Month recognition the Chief is on his way and wants to be here for that. So we will go ahead and move on to the delegations and come back to the recognitions. Madam Clerk. The Clerk: DELEGATIONS B. Ms. Aimee Hall, Safe Homes regarding numbers of domestic violence in Richmond County. (Requested by Commissioner Mary Davis) Mr. Mayor: And if you could keep it to five minutes, please, ma’am. Ms. Hall: First of all I just want to thank you for taking the time to and invite me to talk a little bit about Safe Homes. October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month and I thought what better time to come and tell our Commissioner’s what we’re doing in our county. As many of you know Safe Homes isn’t the only domestic violence shelter in the ten county area with Richmond County being the largest county that we serve. Last year we provided services to 1,800 people with 1,200 of those people coming from Richmond County. Last year we had to turn away 329 victims due to the lack of space and so in front of you there’s two pictures that I wanted to show you. The first picture the little yellow house that is currently where we are 1 residing. It’s 2,100 square feet we have 16 women and children stuffed in this little home and we are in the process or we are in the midst of a capital campaign right now of a $3 million dollar goal which we reached just shy of $2.2 million. But I tell you all that because I wanted ya’ll to be aware of what we’re doing. You know with a house that we’re currently in we cannot provide all the services that are needed for our women and children. We have to bus them out to different areas which is not safe. So that is one reason why we’re building not only that but because we had to turn away so many people. But I did want to tell you a little bit about because most of you know what Safe House does but the impact that we’re making in this area. Last year with all the people we provided services to 50% of those women and children were not revictimized then we would be saying our counties over $500,000 dollars in law enforcement costs, court personnel as well as hospitals. Also too with the people that come to our program and services 77% of those women were able to keep jobs versus in contract when 50% of the people who are affected by domestic violence lose their job. So we will be able to increase our bed space up to 36 beds which is going to help with the homeless issues that we have in Richmond County and to be able to provide so many more services to these men, women and children that we serve. So I wanted to again I appreciate all of you who are wearing your purple ribbons gain it’s for Domestic Violence Awareness Month. I thought this would be a great time to introduce what we’re doing and if anybody has any questions I would love to answer those. Mr. Mayor: Aimee, I just want to say to you and your staff and your board thank you for the amazing work you guys are doing. I know it’s you know funding’s always an issue times are always tough but you guys are out there doing it every day and it’s greatly appreciated. (APPLAUSE) Commissioner Davis. Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Aimee, I do appreciate you coming over here as well today because I was astonished when you and I met and had coffee and you told me the amount of people that ya’ll do serve and the impact that you do have on these families and individuals. So I am so impressed with what you all do and you know I wish you definitely the best of luck in your new building because I realize how necessary that is. And so keep doing what you’re doing and again thank you and please keep us informed if we can ever help you know promote what you’re doing as well. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you so much. Madam Clerk, on to the next delegation. Oh, see with the computer screen I couldn’t see that you weren’t sitting there. The Clerk: DELEGATIONS C. Mr. Gene Workman regarding proposed animal services ordinance. (Requested by Commissioner Wayne Guilfoyle) The Clerk: (Inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Okay. And if you could keep it to five minutes as well please, ma’am. Commissioner Smith did you want to? 2 Mr. Smith: I wanted to make a proposal that we table this for, so we can get together and discuss some of these rules and this. I’ve had so many calls it’s unreal and about which direction we need to go. And then when we had six people resign off the board it just lets me know that something’s not going the right way and it seems like the county’s divided on which way to head. Mr. Mayor: Okay, procedurally, Mr. MacKenzie, Commissioner Smith would have to reference the agenda item that he’s referring to when you say table this we do want to be specific and make sure that, Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, that’s correct. Right now you’re on the delegation portion of the agenda. I don’t know if the speaker would still like to speak but she would have the five minutes to speak. This item would be tabled. I know the thing that has been done in the past is you can move to option any proposal participation to that actual agenda item if you decide not to send it back to committee. Then you fill out public input when the agenda item is considered later in the agenda. Mr. Mayor: Okay, I think it would probably be a wiser move to send it back through committee to make sure that we could get everybody’s input on this if we have a meeting on it. So, Commissioner Smith, what would you like to do here? Mr. Smith: I believe --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Bragg has took her time out to come down and I don’t know if she wants to address this issue before this body anyway since she’s here. I think we’re in unison about sending it back probably. I don’t think any action will be taken today but if she wants to Mr. Mayor since we’re at the delegation point she would be able to enlighten some of us to maybe educate us that we may be able to make some (unintelligible). Ms. Bragg-Workman: I’ll be happy to do that. Mr. Mayor: Okay, and if you could keep it to five minutes. The, Commissioner Smith’s motion was not seconded but when we get through with your presentation then we can go back and try to address the agenda item. Ya’ll make this really tough on the Mayor you know that? Go ahead. Ms. Bragg-Workman: I know and I’m sorry. Mr. Mayor: Oh, I’m not talking about you. Ms. Bragg-Workman: Oh. Mr. Mayor: I’m talking about Grady. 3 Mr. Smith: On by me, thank you. Ms. Bragg-Workman: Okay, we are of course discussing the proposed ordinance for pet licensing and mandatory spay/neuter among other things. And I know that you’ve been hearing from a lot of different people on both sides of the issue. But I would like for ya’ll to understand is that people on both sides of the issue actually have the same end goal at heart. We are all looking for what is best for the animals of Richmond County. Most of us who are involved as serious dog people in serious dog activities also work in the rescue world also. I personally have five rescue dogs right now. I’ve been doing rescue work for over 20 years with different organizations. We are not at opposite ends of an extreme here. What we have found is as this ordinance was drafted there are some excellent provisions in this ordinance. There are some provisions that I would love to see remain in the ordinance but there are also some provisions in there that are over the top, very extreme and actually dangerous to the animals they are meant to protect and who are detrimental to the county. And they also put the Commissioners and the county in some instances in danger of civil law suits if dog’s lives were to be lost due to some of these provisions in this bill. So what we would like to see, I represent the Augusta German Shepherd Dog Club. There are also representatives here from the Augusta Kennel Club. Dog sports bring tremendous amount of revenue into a community. Dog legislation can bring a tremendous amount of cost to a community. And there are organizations within the state of Georgia who have helped municipalities set up not only reasonable and fair legislation but also legislation that is enforceable and that does not put Commissioners and counties in jeopardy. Okay? And that is done by the group the canine, the Georgia Canine Coalition. And I have placed beside each of your computer screens there a statement from the Georgia Canine Coalition that they sent to me last night stating that they will assist you if you set up a committee of responsible dog people within the community and Commissioners, however you want to set it up. They will assist you in making sure your legislation is fair, reasonable and does not put the county or yourselves in jeopardy. And that’s, that’s basically what I want to say about this. As I said I think there are some very good recommendations in this ordinance very good provisions in it but there are some that are just over the top and that are actually dangerous to the animals. And that’s what we need to modify, delete, replace, whatever. And you can’t do that you cannot do that with a vote this quickly on something that needs a lot of in depth reworking. So I would ask that you table it that you set up --- Mr. Mayor: It’s not from a procedural standpoint people keep referencing table. Table does not mean send it back to committee it’s a different. So you’re saying, you’re recommendation would be to send it back to committee. Ms. Bragg-Workman: No, that would not be my recommendation unless the committee consisted of people from various aspects of the dog community. You cannot have strictly one aspect of the dog community formulating an ordinance like this because then it innately becomes unfair to one or the other group of citizens within the community. We want to make sure it’s fair to the dog owners, the pet owners. We want to make sure it’s fair to the people who do dog sports. We want to make sure it’s fair to the people who do rescue. But, you know, it’s not a question of what’s fair to the people it’s a question of what is best for the animals and what is best for the county. And that can all be instituted in this ordinance but it’s going to take some 4 reworking and it’s going to take people who can deal with it unemotionally, rationally and with a fair mind to everybody (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. I was referring to refer the agenda item back to the Commission Administrative Services Committee not to the Citizens Advisory Committee. Ms. Bragg-Workman: Yes. I would Mr. Mayor: So and, Commissioner Smith, if you want to have a run at this one. recommend a motion to refer agenda item number twelve back to committee and that the Georgia Canine Coalition be invited to present at that committee. Mr. Smith: That’d be fine. The Clerk: Number sixteen. Ms. Bragg-Workman: May I --- Mr. Mayor: Oh, excuse me. Ms. Bragg-Workman: --- may I ask a question? Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. Ms. Bragg-Workman: Is it possible to set up a committee to deal with this, actually bring in people who are active in the dog world of this community? Mr. Mayor: That would be up to the will of the body. I have no problem with that but generally be aware that it is when you set up a committee there are people that are made that they aren’t included on the committee. There are committees can be unyielding at times but that’s up to the will of the body okay so, Grady, have you made that motion? Mr. Smith: Yes. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do we have a second? Mr. Williams: I’ll second that, Mr. Mayor, with --- Mr. Mayor: Okay, hand on and I’ll come back to you because I saw Commissioner Hasan’s hand first. Commissioner Hasan. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, thank you very much. In terms of my colleague’s Commissioner Smith’s comments about the board resigning. I think we’re all aware that all the communities are aware that that happened as a fact of not a fact but at the same time those same board members helped craft an ordinance or crafted an ordinance that we currently have before us. So in light of all of that they still have the best interests at the end of the day of the operation of this 5 facility and the operation of the animals and all of the above. They probably have some of the same interests that the young lady was just speaking about. So I think at the end of the day they’re work ethic and they’re commitment to this process should also be considered. Now in light of a committee I don’t necessarily disagree with that because of where we are. And I’d just like to make a recommendation what I think a committee should look like if we decide to go that way if you don’t mind. I think a committee should be about three from the body that resigned somebody they feel comfortable with, three from the organization here on the local level. I don’t necessarily like outside influence I really don’t. Three from that and a Commissioner like Commissioner Marion Williams parses who loves animals, you know, or to be a part of. An uneven number and let them bring something back to this body. Mr. Mayor: Okay, but it’s here again with establishing a committee, you know, you can make a recommendation that you want three from there three from there and a Commissioner but it’s --- Mr. Hasan: Well, my thing was, Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: --- I think it would be easier if that was discussed prior to the next committee meeting that this agenda item’s addressed on so that we could have those names going in. Mr. Hasan: Okay, I don’t have a problem with that, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted you I wasn’t against that I think (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: Simplify the process for everybody. Ms. Bragg-Workman: May I address one thing that he mentioned there? Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. Ms. Bragg-Workman: The Georgia Canine Coalition would not be mandating anything to the body it would simply be giving you suggestions and it would be sounding board for you to say has this worked in other areas, has this not worked in other areas, if not why not. Would this work in our area if so why if not why not. They would just come in not as a body to tell you what to do but as body to tell you what might work --- Mr. Mayor: And --- Ms. Bragg-Workman: --- and would not work. Mr. Mayor: --- what is worked in other places. And I would say, Commissioner Hasan, no pun intended. They don’t have a dog in the hunt in this situation. Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams and then Commissioner Lockett. 6 Mr. Williams: I was going to just welcome any additional conversation that will help us to get to where we need to be. You’ve got responsible and I think Commissioner Hasan mentioned you have responsible dog owners then you’ve got some irresponsible. And if we’re not careful we’re going to put a burden on one or the other because people who don’t take care of their animals, people just think you can put an animal in the yard and that’s all you got to do. And it don’t work like that. But for someone to come in and give us some insight I would love just to have them to come just to share with us let them see and maybe we can learn something that would be beneficial to this county and to other counties. Mr. Mayor: Exactly. Mr. Williams: But as far as, you know, deciding on who is the committee is now I don’t think we have to do that like you said, Mr. Mayor. We can put something together so we can meet and talk about it. Then we’ll bring this body in here to vote on it. Mr. Mayor: Exactly. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all for the record since my colleague has eluded to the fact that Commissioner Williams is the only one that loves dogs. I don’t own any but I love dogs too so don’t ya’ll start calling me. Mr. Mayor: I’ve got three of them myself. Mr. Lockett: Linda, is your last name Workman? Ms. Bragg-Workman: It’s Bragg-Workman, uh-hmm. Mr. Lockett: Okay, Ms. Workman, I appreciate you being here but I think that what we’re doing is we’re trying we’re getting away from the main purpose. We have an Animal Control Director here and I think that the Animal Control Director should be in a position to get these entities that have been mentioned get with the Canine Coalition get with whomever and see if we can reach a compromise because this is making us look a little foolish with this thing coming back to the Commission. And we’re voting down because of boisterous concerns of our constituents. What we need to do is get the relevant parties together get a good document reach a compromise and bring it back before the Commission because if we want to do something that’s going to make everybody happy we won’t ever get anything done. But I agree with you you’re concerned about the animals whether it be a German shepherd a Chihuahua or whatever we’re concerned but we’re not going to make everybody happy. But I would like to see us work together and when something eventually comes back to this body again we can vote on it and move on. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Ms. Bragg-Workman: May I address his comment there? 7 Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am and then we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. And then I will get to Commissioner Smith. Ms. Bragg-Workman: I agree with you that we will never make everybody happy. To goal is not to make all of the people happy. The goal is to come up with a reasonable, fair and enforceable ordinance that does what is best for the animals. That is the goal. I think that is the goal that everybody in this room has and I think it can be reached. And I think your point is very good that we need to take it back. We need to form a committee of multiple interests throughout the community and we need to bring it back again. And we need to have something that is you know that has the experienced eye or someone like the Georgia Canine Coalition to know that it’s going to be fair, reasonable and enforceable. Mr. Lockett: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Smith. Mr. Smith: When I made my motion I no way meant to slight Ms. Broady. I think she should be on that committee in as far as listening and bringing forth what’s going on out at the kennel. I no way meant to slight her in any way. And I think it ought to be like we’re talking about a committee that kind of represents both sides. You’ve got both sides of the issue and let’s do what’s best for the animals but then also what’s best for the taxpayer’s of Richmond County. Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Madam Clerk for the, for clarity could you read back the motion. The Clerk: The motion was to refer this item back to committee, Public Safety. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Has the Chief made it to? The Clerk: Yes, sir, he’s here. Mr. Mayor: Okay, let’s go now to the recognitions, Madam Clerk. The Clerk: RECOGNITIONS(S) A. Congratulations: Captain Ian Buckley, Augusta Fire Department 2014 Employee of the Month. The Clerk: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, we’d like to offer congratulations to Captain Ian Buckley of the Augusta Fire Department who is our October 2014 Employee of the Month. Chief James, Commissioner Mason would you like to come down as 8 Public Safety Chairperson. All other department members who would like to share in this recognition. Mayor Copenhaver the Employee Recognition Committee has selected Captain Ian Buckley as the October 2014 Employee of the Month for Augusta, Georgia. Captain Buckley is a Fire Captain for the Fire Department where he’s been employee for almost 29 years. Captain Buckley was nominated by Chief Christopher James. Ian Buckley is a Paramedic Captain on the Fire Department where is current position is with Aerial Truck VI at Station 15. Captain Buckley is the Team Leader and Head Instructor at Station 15 and his duties include fire suppression, fire command in absence of chief officers. He also oversees the training for several companies. In addition to running fire and medical calls within the area Captain Buckley is also responsible for carrying out building inspection preplans and safety fire safety visits. Captain Buckley’s service and dedication are ongoing even on his days off from work. On one of his off days as Captain Buckley was doing some hiking of the South Carolina side of the river he noticed a young lady standing on the other side of the river holding a child. As she appeared to be in distress Captain Buckley walked across the river to offer assistance. He realized that her kayak had hit a rock that caved in the bottom side of it. He got the kayak off the rock and knocked the boat back into shape so she could continue down the river. While transversing hazardous terrain Captain Buckley suffered some bumps and scrapes to his person and was noticeably in pain the following day at work. Captain Buckley’s exemplary efforts make him deserving of this award. The Recognition Committee felt that based on this nomination and Captain Buckley’s outstanding service we would appreciate you in joining us in recognizing him as the October 2014 Employee of the Month. Congratulations. (APPLAUSE) Mr. Mayor: And to go along with that I’ve got this letter for you as well. Dear Captain Buckley. On behalf of the City of Augusta it is with great pleasure that I congratulate you for being recognized as the Employee of the Month for October 2014. Your contribution to your organization Augusta Richmond County Government and the citizens of Augusta has earned you this recognition. I appreciate your willingness to go above and beyond the call of duty and your outstanding work ethic. You are truly an asset to the Fire Department and the citizens of Augusta, Georgia. Please accept my personal congratulations on this wonderful award. You are truly deserving of this recognition. Sincerely yours, Deke Copenhaver, Mayor. (APPLAUSE) Chief James: I just want to take a moment because I definitely wanted to be here to see us recognize Captain Buckley. He went in the water he rescued the lady and her son. He got bumped and scraped and he ended up in the hospital due to it. We’ve all heard of the flesh eating bacteria. Well, in that rescue he acquired the flesh eating bacteria. And so I didn’t hear about it until late one Sunday night and I went to Doctor’s and said you got to let me see Captain Buckley. He came on a year or so before I did but he exemplifies what we look for in our fire rescue personnel. There’s about eight paramedics on the fire department Captain Buckley is one. If you want your horse rescued or your animal rescued we call Captain Buckley. If you need a high angle rope rescue we call, he’s on a GSAR Team so over his 29 years he has continued to you know hone is craft. If you get stuck in a well he call on Captain Buckley so we have some instructions and guidance on how dig in this hole to get this person out. He’s a part of our confined space rescue. So it’s a true honor. I left Savannah this morning from a training class just so I could get here in time to recognize Captain Buckley. He’s a true asset to the City of Augusta and it’s just an honor to be here to see him get this award. (APPLAUSE) 9 The Clerk: Congratulations. Mr. Lockett: He doesn’t talk. The Clerk: He lets his work speak for him. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to the next delegation, please. The Clerk: DELEGATIONS D. Mr. Billy Franke relative to the required match for the SPLOST funds for Pendleton King Park Foundation. Mr. Mayor: And if you could keep it to five minutes as well, please, sir. Mr. Franke: I’ll do it. Can I give ya’ll some handouts? Am I allowed to approach the bench? Mr. Mayor: Yeah, of course. Mr. Franke: I’d like a microphone so I can walk and talk. Can I do that? Mr. Lockett: No, I don’t think so. Mr. Mayor: Are you going to sing and play guitar too? Mr. Franke: Well, sometimes it’s not too good. Real quickly I want to tell you kind of a history of Pendleton King Park and the reason I’m doing this is because I think a lot of times I would talk to a Commissioner at some point and say are you familiar? I’m not going to name names but an ex-Commissioner I asked probably three weeks ago I said are you familiar with Pendleton King Park and the history of it anything about it, you know, who owns it, what’s going on with it? And he didn’t know a thing about it. Anyway over the course of the last two years we of course were awarded a $200,000 dollars SPLOST funding from the city. We deferred it two or three times because others projects were more pressing with the city and we took that in stride and said we’d be glad to do that. We went through three different meetings with different folks at different times. Several of ya’ll have been in some of these meetings. And anyway we were always led to believe that even though the rules which are decided by this body as far as the matches and who has to make matches and who doesn’t have to make matches that we are a private entity, the Pendleton King Park Foundation. But we were told all along, you know, that that didn’t really matter that ya’ll were okay. We had about $50,000 dollars in our bank account. We spent $25,000 dollars roughly building a new waterfall feature at the park with money raised by the foundation, had probably five or six different entities that volunteered time. I think Brittingham Plumbing gave me about $2,000 dollars worth of in kind volunteer help for that project. Starbucks, good new partner with Augusta, they’ve been very active in the project out there at the park not only the waterfall but they totally repainted, cleaned the pavilion and 10 everything. And basically what it boils down to is looking at budgets. If you wanted to compare dollars to dollars assuming that county employees are paid, I just used a figure of $10.00 an hour, that’s probably too low. I don’t have any idea what the wages are these days. But if you compare the total amount of money and what I distributed to you all up there is a little flyer about the wetlands improvement project that’s going on in the park now. And we’ve had probably 25 or 30 boys from Youth Challenge Academy get out there and work with us on two different Saturdays. I’ve got the American Red Cross Youth Leadership is going to go out there and do some painting for me in two or three weeks and we’ve got about 18 members on our board, they’re tireless servants of the park. The bottom line over the past year you use $10.00 an hour for that hours that the volunteers have given to that park plus the amount of the grant that’s being awarded by Wells Fargo for this wetlands project we’ve got about $200,000 dollars invested in that park in time. If you compare that to the $10.00 dollars an hour a county employee might make working eight hours a day seven days a week I think as a part time employee on the weekends that figure might be $50,000. Now I know there’s a lot of other budgets, you’ve got Administrative, you’ve got electrical bills you have to pay, gasoline, tools all that sort of thing and the city has been real good working with the foundation as far as a lot of projects. They provided the power to the waterfalls and they work with us real closely and I’m real proud with them but the budget’s tight. When this park was originally started in 1966 it was started, to give you a little history Allen Park downtown most of you all well some of you all may be are old enough to remember Allen Park. I know I barely do but that’s where the original Tigers played years ago. That park closed it was sold they looked for a replacement park but then the Pendleton King Park Trust had a 64 acre piece of property that’s got a very diverse habitat on it which is very educational. They wanted to let the city according to the will to use this property in perpetuity permanent conservation forever and ever and ever. Anyway the city engaged a committee which had the foundation started to oversee the development of the park. We got a $40,000 dollars grant from the Soil and Conservation Service. The city pitched in $40,000 dollars for $80,000 in 1966 we built tennis courts, a mile and a half of paved paths through the park, a pavilion, restroom, a new dam for the pond and I went back through the history looking at all those pictures and just trying to get a feel for what’s going on with that park and yes the city has maintained that park but not a single improvement has been done to that park. And we’ll be celebrating our, in two years that park will be 50 years old and I consider it the central park of Augusta. The reason I do is because it’s demographically central and it’s very important to this community. There’s a lot of things going on with it and for two years I know I should probably go through a committee but I elected to go in front of the body as a whole just to educate and make sure everybody understands where we are and to entertain any questions you have. But the park has been grossly ignored and it’s a one of a kind park. We had the first dog park. I know the Mayor wanted to do a dog park, we were the first ones in the area that did it. We try to do different things for that park that you don’t see in other places. So we’re real proud of it. We’ve got volunteers all over the place that come in and work. I live in Columbia County; I spend a lot of time there. My number one volunteer’s in North Augusta so it’s not really all about Augusta Richmond County and --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Franke: I’m through. If you have any questions I would like to see this body make a motion, which it has the power to do, to not require us to come up with the 25% match. 11 Mr. Mayor: I and you know I’m a strong supporter of Pendleton Park. I know it’s a huge asset to the community but I do have a question. When you say that you were told that you didn’t have to raise the match who told you that you didn’t have to raise the match because that was for all of the outside agencies. That was the agreement when they were included in that SPLOST. Mr. Franke: One of them is no longer an employee here. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Franke: And another one a Deputy Administrator, I’m not really sure is Bill Shanahan still with the city? Mr. Mayor: No. Mr. Franke: I had a meeting with him and with the former Administrator who led us down that rosy path. And we had another meeting with the trustees at some time. And I think Mr. Russell, two folks from, Ron Houck was there and Bob Levine who is just now become an employee were at that meeting. We had a meeting with about eight or ten people the trustees of the park two or three foundation members trying to see what to do with the park and with this funding. And we were told that at that point as well. And I of course I had a meeting with you and Corey and Tameka back in January not in reference --- Mr. Mayor: Uh-hmm. Mr. Franke: --- to the SPLOST but I’ve been asking for the SPLOST money to start spending it for two years. And we’re led to believe that we’ve spent this money and this is a city park. Mr. Mayor: Well, and let me ask you too so in the submission for SPLOST funds didn’t you have a designated project? Mr. Franke: Yes. Mr. Mayor: So is that shovel ready? Is that ready to be built or is it? Mr. Franke: It’s not a, when you say shovel ready, we’re not building a building. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Franke: But --- Mr. Mayor: So where would the SPLOST funds go? 12 Mr. Franke: --- where we, the SPLOST money is supposed to go for infrastructure, neighborhood interconnectivity, security and we built the waterfall with, you know, with the Southeastern Natural Sciences Academy to help purify the water in the pond. We’ve got lots of water runoff that’s going into that pond so we’re going to work on the trail system throughout the park which is almost 50 years old to try to refurbish it, make it better and at the same time try to control the sediment control going into the pond. Mr. Mayor: But the proposal for the SPLOST funding was actually for a building. Mr. Franke: No, we had original SPLOST requests. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Franke: The building was turned down. The second one was $400,000 dollars for interconnectivity, general maintenance things that have been ignored for 50 years. And that got whittled down to $200,000. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Franke: And I’ve talked to pretty much everybody that has guided me to come back here you know saying that it is ya’ll’s decision not a state ordinance regarding how the SPLOST funds are allocated. It’s up to ya’ll. Mr. Mayor: Well, I you know I whoever told you that I go by, I’d rather here from the Attorney that that’s the case. Then you know --- Mr. Franke: Oh, absolutely. Mr. Mayor: --- I do like to go by the letter of the law. Commissioner Johnson. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First of all, Billy, thank you for coming before us and thanks for giving that brief history on the park. And you’re absolutely correct that park has a wealth of history but not only that it’s centrally located. And it’s a lot of great things that you all have done there over the course I know since I’ve been in office one being the dog park in particular. But one thing that I wanted to make sure that we were clear on because I didn’t want to send the wrong message up here that and I guess, Andrew, Mr. Mayor, we can basically get the information from him just to be correct. But I don’t think we can bypass that match. Andrew, can you correct me if I’m wrong on that and I just need to be clear. Mr. MacKenzie: I haven’t looked at this specific issue. I would be happy to take a look at it. I do believe that it is a consistent requirement that has been utilized by this board. I’d be happy to sit down with him and the administrative team to look and let ya’ll know and get back to you at committee. Mr. Johnson : Yeah, now I think the only thing that I can think of that would constitute that even being a factor that it was something that we were doing as a body for that park we can 13 match of the potentially do that. But I don’t think it’s a way that we can forego the actual SPLOST to actually implement that. What we’ll do though if we can, Mr. Mayor, I would like motion to task Andrew to get that information and bring it back to just at this point make a to this body . And that way we can kind of look a little bit more in depth to see what we can do to initiate that because I do agree it is some things that truly need to be done there for that park. But I think that would be the first line of duty to go ahead and get that information and then hopefully that will give us what we need to make a decision moving forward so. Mr. Mayor: I agree. We have a motion. Is there a second on that? Mr. Hasan: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner Williams then Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I talked with Mr. Franke he called me several times. We talked about the park and I think it is a gold mine that we need to invest in. I don’t know how we can go around this match because if we open it for one than everybody’s going to have to be treated the same way. I do think the park is very significant that we can do some things and I’ve been trying to get creative. And I talked to you, Billy, about some things that you’ve got to do to attract people to the park. It’s not owned by the city. There’s a lease thing agreement but I think the way it’s written up that we just kind of assist with it. And it’s a beautiful piece of property and there’s a lot to be desired. I shared with you when I talked to you on the phone that at one point we had some deer over there some animals that kids go look at. We don’t have a milk cow anywhere around here to look at now. I mean there’s nothing. Pendleton King Park could be used for a lot of different things maybe just a small zoo, zoo type or something to do over there. So I think there’s some ways that we can assist and help. I don’t know unless the Attorney’s got a way to do something with this match because there’s several entities waiting right now for us to do that so that they can come right behind you and request the same thing. So I don’t know how we can do it unless the Attorney can see something that I hadn’t seen how we can defer from the match. But I do want to help I want to do anything we can. It’s a piece of land that’s sitting there that needs to be cultivated I mean it needs to be worked and brought some new ideas in to create something in that park. And I think there’s more than enough room to do a lot of things over there at that park that we keep talking about economic development to attract to Augusta. That park could be one of those things that people come to Augusta for. Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two. Mr. Williams: No, Mr. Mayor, I think I’m going save them two. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to try and help you out a little bit here. As you know the population is getting somewhat older. And one of the fads they have now for parks, and you already have the dogs you said is they make it a grandparents park. You might 14 want to go on line and check that out. You might want to change this name somewhat because the grandparents got the dogs they got the grandkids. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Franke: Can I make one --- Mr. Mayor: Can I just say this age friendly plug brought to you by Commissioner Bill Lockett and the AARP. Yes, sir. Mr. Franke: --- just one more comment to kind of clarify where I’m going with this. Your city finance guy Schroer? I don’t know everybody. Tim, I know him by Tim that’s easy to remember. I had a discussion with him about the ability of you all to change the rules and he indicated that you have that ability it is local rule if you wanted to change it. And number two of course you need to check it out through the Attorney. I’m not bypassing anything, I’m just providing information so that your Attorney may could ask him about it. And secondly this is money going back into a city park, it’s not going into a building being remodeled on Broad Street for a symphony. I can’t list all the other projects I saw in there originally but this is going into a city park which I do determine it is different than going into another private agency. And it’s for very needed maintenance. This city’s not spent any money there. Mr. Mayor: And I know but and I can see how you would differentiate there but once again all other outside agencies you can understand that to be consistent, you know, if you do it for one everybody else is going to want it as well. I mean --- Mr. Franke: And one last comment and I’ll let it go. This is I believe I had this conversation with you and Corey and Tameka since the lease issue was brought up by Commissioner Williams. The lease expires January the first 2018. The trustees of John Pendleton King, they’re in dire need of money and they’ve questioned maybe taking this park and developing it and selling it. Now you’ve got a lot of citizens in this community that don’t want to see that happen I’m sure. So I’ve been working on this for about two years with different discussions with different ones of you all at different times trying to avert this and nip it in the bud sooner than later. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, thank you. First of all I understand that and if the trustees decide to do something that’s up to them. I’d like to have for Tim or whoever gave you them instructions to come up here and to tell us how to do that. It says he informed you that we had that authority and we may have that authority but if it goes for Pendleton King Park or any entity that’s getting SPLOST money it’s got to go for everybody else. So is Tim in here? I’d like to get Tim to share how we can do that and just stop it. And that’s probably some of the reasons --- Mr. Franke: Well, all I’m doing is --- Mr. Williams: I understand. Mr. Franke: --- all I’m doing --- 15 Mr. Williams: I understand now’s the time to talk about it. Mr. Franke: We will raise the money if we have to. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Schroer. Mr. Schroer: Good afternoon. Mr. Mayor: Good afternoon. Mr. Schroer: The 25% match is a local decision that the board made when we started SPLOST VI. Part of that, agencies were not required to have a matching funds. At that point in time the Commission decided that basically everybody should have some skin in the game. So that’s when we came up with and Commission approved the 25% matching. Mr. Williams: If I could ask a question, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. Williams: My question to Tim then since we decided everybody has some skin in the game, how can the game be played and let one not have no skin in but everybody else is going to have the skin in? I mean how can we do that? Can everybody --- Mr. Schroer: I agree with you, sir, that is my concern if you do it for one, every group is going to ask also. Mr. Mayor: But I would say you know six votes can change the rules if you, if the Commission the will of the body was to change the requirement in a situational basis. But that, go ahead Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Wouldn’t it be prudent to change the rules when we know we’ve got to change the rules for everybody. I mean if we made that decision and we sympathize with the park. I think everybody up here wants to see --- Mr. Mayor: Yeah. Mr. Williams: --- it done and move forward. But this ain’t in the back room we’re up front. I mean everybody’s got to know what’s going on with this one. Mr. Mayor: And --- Mr. Franke: I’m out front, Marion, that’s what I’m here for. Mr. Williams: That’s right. 16 Mr. Mayor: --- but I will say too and just for the Commission to consider as well as the public to consider there’s going to be another SPLOST next year. And if you waive the rule this year with one then you’re doing outside agencies next year they’re going to, I mean there’s the potential for them to say well you didn’t, you know, you moved the pieces last year why not move it again this year. Commissioner Johnson then Commissioner Harris. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to add I think the only way that I could possibly see that even being the case if this was a city which we know the city operates the park in a sense. You know we lease it we look at as an initial investment for the city itself because in any facility that we’re dealing with SPLOST funds we don’t match it. That’s only for the outside agencies. That’s the only way I can see that even being the case here. If we look at it as an initial investment from the city as one of our entities --- Mr. Williams: Pendleton King Park (inaudible). Mr. Johnson: --- right in other words because other than that we can’t just do that for an outside agency. Well, let me say we can do it but it wouldn’t be fair to do that without doing it for the others. So we want to look at possibly taking the overall as Commissioner Williams said overall interest of the park and in going forward with the initial buy of it than that would be the only way I could see us initially doing that and it won’t constitute a conflict with the other agencies. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Harris. Mr. Harris: Billy, how much money have ya’ll spent I mean since you first got the SPLOST? Mr. Franke: In the past I don’t know the number since the SPLOST (unintelligible). Mr. Harris: Well, is it plus or minus 20% of this money? Mr. Franke: I looked at our budget and kind of what we’ve gone or eaten through like I said the volunteer hours the grant the $50,000 dollar grant that was coming from Wells Fargo the amount we’ve invested in the waterfall. Collectively if you look at everything just in the last twelve months we’ve got about $200,000 dollars in the game over there already. Now it’s not, you know, the SPLOST too Mr. Harris is supposed to be, you know, the money is supposed to be raised during the period of the SPLOST and it’s supposed to be money used specifically for that SPLOST project. And if we’re over there cleaning out some gardens or building a waterfall that’s got nothing to do with security or some of these other issues that are applied from the SPLOST they would not apply. But $200,000 dollars is a pretty healthy dime. Mr. Harris: Well my --- Mr. Franke: The city didn’t have to pay that. 17 Mr. Harris: --- and my thoughts are we lease the property from ya’ll and I would think if we do work this out I’d like for a new long term lease because I’d hate to spend that money and then they lose interest and decide to sell it again later or whatever. And I think that would be a good thing. And then I mean we operate it you know we lease it. I mean we do everything but actually own it. You have probably put more money into it then most of the 25% stuff required for other SPLOST’s so you know I would be in favor of working with you if we can iron out the details. Mr. Franke: And, Mr. Mayor, I know probably a year or so ago I asked you to contact the trustees and start negotiations on that lease for a purchase. Mr. Mayor: Uh-hmm. Mr. Franke: And you asked me to go to the Georgia Conservation Department to see about some help there. I did that and I reported back to you pretty expeditiously within a couple weeks. Called up a couple more times to say have you followed up with the trustees. The ball got dropped and we lost a year. You know people change their positions, city employees change their positions, the people that told me this thing are no longer here. You know there’s change every time we turn around. Mr. Mayor: And I understand and I will tell you, Billy, I apologize for that but it’s hard for without the authorization of the Commission for the Mayor to negotiate on behalf of the city to and it’s an unusual situation that once again the city doesn’t own the property. You know you’re telling me that the owners might potentially want to sell when the lease runs out. But you guys so the foundation doesn’t own the property, correct? Mr. Franke: That’s correct. Mr. Mayor: So you’re dealing with private owners that but who’s going to be the one negotiating the deal on behalf of the city or, you know, the foundation. It’s a very convoluted real estate deal at the end of the day. Mr. Franke: And that’s why I pushed a year or two ago to start working on it and everything just kept getting dropped. Mr. Mayor: Yeah. Mr. Franke: I’ve been trying. Mr. Mayor: Yep, well once again you know having had a background in real estate in general you’ve got two principals that are, I mean two agents that are dealing for one side and the other to put the deal together that then hopefully you know you’d have a meeting of the minds. But right now there’s so many fingers in the pie that I don’t think anybody knows who’s the deal maker here. Mr. Franke: I know who the deal maker is. 18 Mr. Mayor: Who’s that? Mr. Franke: A guy named Clarence Barinowski. Mr. Mayor: Who? The guy who owns it? Mr. Franke: One of the three trustees who controls the trust. Mr. Mayor: And that’s, that’s a so you --- Mr. Franke: One person. Mr. Mayor: --- yeah. But you’ve got --- Mr. Franke: Without him you can’t get something done. Mr. Mayor: --- the city operate it you guys own it they’ve got three trustees that own the property. Once again convoluted real estate deal for sure and you’re in real estate so you know. That’s not an easy one to sort out. Mr. Franke: I do fix problems though. Mr. Mayor: Yep. Mr. Franke: I love problems. Mr. Mayor: You do. Then I think --- Mr. Franke: Bring it on. (Unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: Come sit in this seat for a while. But we’ve had a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. And I will say I appreciate you coming before the body. I don’t think that there’s anybody sitting up here that does not want to help Pendleton King Park. It’s just figuring out how best legally to help the park. I think that’s the general consensus that I’ve heard today. Mr. Franke: So what’s the next step? Mr. Mayor: It is for the Attorney to look at what we can do to help the park legally. I believe that was the motion. Okay and report back to this body. Mr. Franke: Okay. 19 Mr. Mayor: So this is the first time since you’ve been coming to talk to Commissioners individually myself and all the body is taking action to move forward. So I think you’ve made a good step forward today. Mr. Franke: I appreciate your time. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 9-0. Mr. Franke: Thank you, Commissioners and Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Madam Clerk, let’s go to the consent agenda. The Clerk: Yes, sir. Our consent agenda consists of items 1-26, items 1-26. For the benefit of any objectors to our Planning petitions once those petitions are read would you please signify your objections by raising your hand. I call your attention to: Item 1: Is a request for a Special Exception to establish a telecommunication tower on property located at 4368 Windsor Spring Road. Item 2: Is a request for a change of zoning with conditions from a Zone A (Agriculture) and Zone HI (Heavy Industry) to a Zone LI (Light Industry) affecting property at 2012A Westside Court. The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of those Planning petitions? Okay. I call your attention to our Public Service portion of the agenda. If there are any objectors to our alcohol petitions would you please signify your objections once the petition is read. I call your attention to: Item 4: Is a request for a transfer alcohol license affecting property at 544 Broad Street and 830 Broad Street. Item 5: Is for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Fuse Restaurant located at 1855 Central Avenue. Item 6: Is an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Cypress Golf Management located 2023 Highland Avenue. Item 7: Is for an on premise consumption Unique Bistro located at 2834 Washington Road and that would be a Liquor, Beer & Wine license. Item 8: Is for an on premise consumption license Liquor, Beer & Wine to be used in connection with Slicerz Restaurant located 1501 North Leg Road. The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of those alcohol petitions? Mr. Mayor: None noted. 20 The Clerk: Okay. Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, our consent agenda consists of items 1-25 with no objectors to our Planning or Alcohol petitions. Mr. Mayor: Okay, before we get into the consent agenda we’ve got one addition. It’s to ratify the legislative appointments to the various ARC Boards Authorities and Commissions. Can I get a motion to add and approve this agenda item? Mr. Lockett: So moved. Mr. Johnson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there is no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: I just want to note for the record on item number 13 which is the TestDay agreement. I’ve distributed an updated copy of the agreement updated from the draft that was in the system. I just wanted to note that for the record. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, sir. Commissioners, do we have any items to be added to the consent agenda? Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If we refer quite a bit from our Public Transit if we don’t have any issues I would like to add 27 to the consent. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, what do you have 27 as? The Clerk: The Public Transit Fort Gordon Route 10 proposal. Mr. Mayor: I’ve somehow got a different. The Clerk: You’ve got a different agenda? Mr. Mayor: But I agree with you for sure on that one my friend. That’s the right one. Put that one on there all day. Ms. Davis: Mr. Mayor, could I just get a couple of clarity, Commissioner Mason, I’m good with you adding it. I just wanted to ask a couple of questions. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Davis. Ms. Davis: Thank you. Could you, I guess Ms. Allen, correct? 21 Ms. Allen: Yes, ma’am. Ms. Davis: Could you just clarify as far as how the funding will be handled for that pilot project? Ms. Allen: Yes, ma’am. Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, the first two months of this pilot project will be taken from contingency because we’ll be doing it in November and December this year. And the next four months will be included as part of the proposed 2015 budget. Ms. Davis: Is that okay that we haven’t approved the budget for 2015? Ms. Allen: It’s part of the proposed budget, hopefully you guys will approve it. However we’ll have to find additional funding if not. Ms. Davis: What was the total cost one forty? Ms. Allen: $152, around a $152,000 roughly $25,000 per month. Ms. Davis: Okay and just one more question, Mr. Mayor. If, so we have the money in contingency for two months. If for some reason we don’t have additional funding, would we end the pilot project? Ms. Allen: We would have no choice, yes, ma’am. Ms. Davis: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Hasan then Commissioner Harris. Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. If my memory serves me correctly I was thinking possibly contingency funds as well as a grant that was supposed to have taken care of this. Am I making a mistake on that? I want to say a grant I think about $100,000 dollars was coming from somewhere about a $50,000 grant was in play to make this happen. Ms. Allen: No, sir. There is no, we had a grant that’s been allocated and I’ll let Ms. Dottery explain that a little further. That’s been utilized for operational costs but not for the actual pilot program. Mr. Hasan: So the word, when this was presented to us a couple of weeks ago the word grant in terms of how we would pay for this never entered the equation? Ms. Allen: I don’t recall that being discussed, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Harris then Commissioner Williams. 22 Mr. Harris: Ms. Allen, do we have an idea of what like breakeven or somewhere if a timeframe that says if this doesn’t work I mean we tried this before from what I’ve been told. I don’t go out to Fort Gordon enough to know but I know we’ve tried it before (inaudible). Ms. Allen: Yes sir, uh-huh. Mr. Harris: So is there a timeframe that says we don’t have the readership, I mean the ridership. I mean we’ve got a lot of people that drive taxis you know that’s their bread and butter for Fort Gordon. And we certainly don’t want to put them out of business and I’m for giving it a shot but I’d like to know that there’s a you know somewhere there’s a timeframe so if we’re going to pull the plug in ‘x’ number of months if the ridership is below a certain percentage. Because I mean that’s you know if there’s a handful of them riding on the bus and you’re going to have to say you know it be easier for us to rent some cars. Ms. Allen: Yes, sir and you’re correct in that. We are looking at within the next 60 days to 90 days bringing back what kind of response, you know, whether or not we had a good response to it or not. And at that time you guys can make the decision as to whether you want to continue. Mr. Harris: I mean is there like a target? Is there you know if it’s inside this size, this size number? Ms. Allen: Yes McDonald (unintelligible). Mr. Harris: I mean are you going to be able to say this is actually working --- Ms. Allen: Yes, sir --- Mr. Harris: --- or not working? Ms. Allen: --- McDonald has been working on that as well as well as our Transit Planner to come up with some projected goals for this route. And if we do not meet those projected goals we will definitely come back to the Commission and make a recommendation that we do not continue. Mr. Harris: The hundred and fifty plus thousand dollars is kind of we’re gambling I mean more or less and if it doesn’t work we can pull these buses and put them back in line to other places I guess. Ms. Allen: I wouldn’t want to say gambling. I want to say it’s the, what it is is a pilot project. Actually Fort Gordon has also implemented a new program. And Mr. Price is here that can address that. They’ve implemented a program that provides actually a funding level for their soldiers to be involved in public transit. So that will encourage even more of the military to actually utilize the public service. So I don’t think it’s you won’t really know until we actually go out there and try it. It’s been such a long time since we’ve done. 23 Mr. Harris: I think it’s a good idea if it works. If it doesn’t work I just wouldn’t want to see it last longer than it needs to be if it is not working. Ms. Allen: Yes, sir and I think you’re exactly right. We need to carefully monitor the usage of it. And we will be reporting that to you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Ms. Allen --- Ms. Allen: Yes, sir? Mr. Fennoy: --- during one of the presentations on this Fort Gordon route, did not one of the presenters say we’ll take about a year’s time in order to establish ridership on the new route? Ms. Allen: It could potentially take a year’s time to see whether or not it’s, I mean for it to explode pretty much what the guy was talking about at one of the public hearings that we had if I’m recalling what you’re talking about. When one of the guys responded from the audience one of the Transit Planners from the Planning and Development Department yes, he was discussing how the ridership I think it was outside in California was very low at the very beginning. Within a year’s time it I mean it quadrupled as far as the amount of people who were taking public transit. Mr. Fennoy: And I guess my question is how much time are we going to give this? I mean um, six months? Ms. Allen: Yes, sir that would be our recommendation but if we don’t see any potential increases and we’re encouraging you know the people to utilize the public transit. The whole thing is to rebrand public transit and that’s going to have to be a mission if this Commission wants to take that on to rebrand public transit. Public transit is not for certain people as it has always been looked upon in Augusta. Public Transit has to be a means for everyone to want to get from one place to the next. So we have to rebrand it and this is one of the things that we’re looking at in order to rebrand it. Mr. Fennoy: And I guess my last question is that public transit is not expecting to make enough money off of that new route to justify the route. I mean the cost I mean rarely does transportation generate enough funds to but it’s more of a service to the people? Ms. Allen: Exactly, it is a service. Mr. Fennoy: Okay, thank you. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d be one of the Commissioners that have worked with this since it was just a dream I guess you might say. And I’m really excited because Fort 24 Gordon is willing to allow us to come onto a military installation. We are attempting to provide a service for our service members and not only our service members we have so many people in this community that are taxpayers that don’t have transportation and would love to have employment on Fort Gordon but because of lack of transportation they cannot get to and from. And I know that someone mentioned trends. In the United States of America in particular the younger generation many of them are not buying automobiles they’re relying on public transit. They’re called Green Riders. This is what businesses and industry look for when they want to relocate. We’re talking about the expanse of Cyber Command; we’re talking about thousands of additional students coming in for Georgia Regents University and many of these of these people are going to want to rely on public transit. Public transit is being paid for by the taxpayers. Many of those taxpayers have a need for it, some don’t, but that’s just life that’s reality. And I would think that this is going to be a success but I will not be one to support terminating it if it wasn’t making a profit which we’re not expecting to make a profit anyway at the end of six months. This is just a service we need to provide to Fort Gordon and we need to expand it throughout the city and county. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Okay, do we have any further items to be added to the consent agenda? Okay hearing none do we have any items to be pulled for discussion? Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, can I add one? If I can add 29 to --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: --- can I add 29 to the consent which is something we had at our last meeting that the Attorney had drew up. Mr. Mayor: Everybody okay with that? Mr. Lockett: What was the? Mr. Mayor: Twenty-nine. Mr. Lockett: To what? Mr. Mayor: To add it to the consent. Okay, do we have any items to be pulled for discussion? Commissioner Fennoy? ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 30. Rescind the decision relative to the suspension of Mr. Stan Brown; and discuss the suspension of department directors who mishandled the employee’s reporting of the workplace violence incident. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams) Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, is item number 30 something that should be discussed on the floor or discussed in legal? 25 Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie, I believe that is a personnel issue that should be discussed in Legal. Mr. MacKenzie: I agree with that assessment. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: Hold it, now hold it. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: I put this on the agenda to be discussed on Commission. There is a personnel matter but this is not a personnel issue. We need to talk about it here. You can’t talk about anything in legal we can’t make a vote or even a motion in legal. But if we can’t discuss it in here then where are we going to discuss it at? Mr. Mayor: In legal. Mr. Williams: No, I mean he had it in legal that’s why it’s out here because there’s nothing, nothing happened in legal. We don’t have the authority to take any action in legal so it’s on this floor to be discussed so we can take some action. Mr. Mayor: But it can be discussed in legal and then action taken on the floor but it is --- Mr. Williams: We discussed it in legal, Mr. Mayor, that’s why it’s out here so we can take some action now. Mr. Mayor: Well, I will tell you with all due respect, Commissioner Williams, I think it’s, it puts us in a situation of liability just discussing you know on the floor personnel decisions. And it is it’s relating to personnel based on the way it’s written up. Mr. Williams: Okay, well I’ve got no problem going into Personnel. I don’t want to postpone to the next meeting. We had it last week if we’re going to Personnel then you know the name is out there but this is not about Mr. Brown this is about the action that happened to Mr. Brown. Mr. Mayor: Okay. All righty, moving along. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman if I may I would like to have somebody read into the record Ordinance 63-63 as it relates to contact with the employees by the Mayor and the Commission. I would like, yeah I would like for you to read this into the record if you would please. And then, Mr. Mayor, I’ve got a couple of items I’d like to pull if I could. 26 Mr. Mayor: Okay. Madam Clerk? The Clerk: Item 63-63 Contact with Employees. Except for purposes of inquiring investigation including but not limited to constituents requests members of the Augusta Richmond County Commission including the Mayor and the Commissioners shall only deal with employees of Augusta, Georgia who are below the level of Assistant Director through the Administrator, Deputy or Assistant Administrator, Department Directors or Assistant Directors and shall not give any orders or direction to such employees either public or privately, directly or indirectly. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, ma’am. Commissioner Lockett, you had a couple pulls? Mr. Lockett: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I’d like to pull 13, 14 and 15 please. The Clerk: Thirteen --- Mr. Lockett: Fourteen and fifteen. The Clerk: --- fourteen and fifteen. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Davis. Ms. Davis: On number 22 can I just a clarity from Mr. Cassell please. I don’t want to necessarily pull it. I just have a couple of question sent to me number 22. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cassell. Mr. Cassell: Yeah, that item is for a letter of support for consideration of a roundabout at Bath Edie and Highway 88. It’s not guaranteeing installation. I think Commissioner Guilfoyle wanted to make sure in the record that that’s not saying that we want a roundabout. Pretty much if you read what the letter of support it’s for the maintenance of the landscaping or the lighting should there want to be one discussed. But what DOT is looking at is the type of access (unintelligible) safety project the type of actions that would be corrected by a roundabout. But this is in not in no way guaranteeing a roundabout’s going there. Ms. Davis: Okay, thank you. Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any further items to be, Madam Administrator. Ms. Allen: Mr. Mayor, can I ask the Commission to pull item number 17? We were supposed to bring back some financial information for that item and looking at that financial information that is something that I would recommend we not approve today but include as part of the 2015 budget. Mr. Mayor: Everybody good with that? 27 Mr. Williams: No, Mr. Mayor, I need --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: --- I need to know a little bit more information than that. But I mean if it’s on the agenda what are we doing? If we don’t move forward with this, what are we doing, Ms. Allen? Ms. Allen: Yes, sir, I spoke to Warden Joseph and we also talked to our Finance Department. The present, the financial numbers and the financial funding is not available to do what we’re looking at doing or what --- Mr. Williams: (unintelligible). Ms. Allen: Yes --- Mr. Williams: Okay, I (unintelligible). Ms. Allen: --- yes, sir, so we did --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. Ms. Allen: --- put it in the proposed 2015 budget, sir. Mr. Williams: Okay, I understand. He requested it that’s what you said in the beginning. Ms. Allen: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Hasan: Excuse me, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Everybody’s good with that? Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hasan. Mr. Hasan: I’m sorry, Ms. Allen, you probably answered this question so forgive me if I ask some redundant question here. So are you saying Mr. Evan Warden, Warden Joseph his budget is not the same as it was last year it’s been cut? Ms. Allen: No, sir. Mr. Hasan: Okay. 28 Ms. Allen: I’m just saying that in order to meet those obligations for 2014 we cannot meet those obligations and so what we’re recommending is what he originally proposed is to put it in the 2015 recommended budget. Mr. Hasan: So is he satisfied with that because he was the reason I asked is the budget being cut because in his request for that he was requesting out of money that was already in his budget. Ms. Allen: Yes, sir. Mr. Hasan: So I’m assuming that you cut his budget if he can’t do it unless he found another reason to do it in 2015. So that’s where my question is coming from. That’s why my first question was initially have you cut his budget and the second thing if his budget is the same and has he made a decision that he don’t want that anymore because he was eluding to giving the raise out of his current budget remaining the same. Ms. Allen: No, sir. Once the expenditures were reviewed, you know, to this point we realized you cannot do, we cannot financially afford to do that in 2014. Mr. Hasan: So he’s aware of that? Ms. Allen: We had this discussion with Mr. Joseph and he’s here to address any concerns or questions and we’re looking at keeping it in the 2015 proposed budget. Mr. Hasan: Okay, I don’t have a problem I was just asking was he aware of that. Ms. Allen: Yes, sir. Mr. Hasan: Okay, okay that’s fine. All right thank you. Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any further items to be pulled? And just for the record 16 was actually disposed of correct, Madam Clerk? The Clerk: Yes, sir, we also, we have items 27 and 29 added to the consent agenda. Item 13 was updated with the negotiated agreement as per General Counsel. Commissioner Lockett asked that items 14 and 15 be pulled. Item 16 was referred back to committee. Item 17 will be deleted and deferred to the 2015 budget. Mr. Mayor: Okay, but, Commissioner Lockett, you also did request 13 to be pulled? The Clerk: Thirteen. Mr. Mayor: Okay. The Clerk: Thirteen and item 30 will be referred to the Legal meeting. 29 Mr. Mayor: Okay. Can I get a motion to approve --- Mr. Mason: So moved. Mr. Mayor: --- the consent agenda? Mr. Johnson: Second. Mr. Mason: So moved. PLANNING 1. Z-14-43 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to approve with the following conditions 1) An improved (gravel, asphalt) access easement to the tower compound must be installed and maintained by the applicant; a petition by Jennifer A. Blackburn, as attorney for Verizon Wireless, on behalf of Kristie Edison Mays, requesting a Special Exception to establish a telecommunication tower per Section 28-A-5 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property containing a .23 acre portion of a 13.26 acre parcel known as 4368 Windsor Spring Road. 9part of Tax Parcel 179-0-003-03-0) DISTRICT 6 2. Z-14-44 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to approve with the following conditions 1) a demolition permit must be obtained within 30 days of approval for the dilapidated structure on the property; 2) the demolition must be completed within 60 days 3) no permits will be issued until the demolition and any related cleanup is completed; a petition by Blanchard and Calhoun Commercial, on behalf of Southeastern Family Homes, requesting a change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) and Zone HI (Heavy Industry) to Zone LI (Light Industry) affecting property containing approximately 6.21 acres and known as 2012 and 2012A Westside Court. Tax Map 007-0- 009-04-0 and 007-0-008-05-0 DISTRICT 7 PUBLIC SERVICES 3. Motion to approve the 2015 Cooperative Agreement with CSRA Regional Commission for Senior Nutrition Services for Augusta-Richmond County. (Approved by Public Services Committee October 13, 2014) 4. Motion to approve Alcohol License Location Transfer: A.T. 14-1: request by Raiford C. Dunbar, Jr. to transfer the location of the Alcohol License formerly Bar 544 & Grill located at 544 Broad Street to 830 Broad Street. (Approved by Public Services Committee October 13, 2014) 5. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 14-37; request by Karen Draper for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Fuse Restaurant located at 1855 Central Avenue. There will be Sunday Sales. Commission District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee October 13, 2014) 6. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 14-38: A request by John Fogel for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Cypress Golf Management, located at 2023 Highland Ave. There will be Sunday Sales. Commission District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee October 13, 2014) 30 7. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 14-39: A request by Wanda Weldon for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Unique Bistro, located at 2834 Washington Rd. There will be Sunday Sales. Commission District 7. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee October 13, 2014) 8. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 14-40: request by Mary Pennington for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection with Slicerz Restaurant, located at 1501 North Leg Rd. There will be Sunday Sales. Commission District 5. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee October 13, 2014) 9. Motion to approve Amendment #1 to Cooperative Agreement FY 2015 for nutrition program for senior services with the CSRA Regional Commission. (Approved by Public Services Committee October 13, 2014) 10. Motion to approve the contract between the Augusta Regional Airport and SDI-I-SYS as approved by the Augusta Aviation Commission at their September 25, 2014 Meeting. (Approved by Public Services Committee October 13, 2014) 11. Motion to accept the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) Grant in the amount of $47,751.00 for various projects as accepted by the Augusta Aviation Commission at their September 25, 2014 Meeting. (Approved by Public Services Committee October 13, 2014) ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 12. Motion to authorize Submission of all Application Exhibits and documentation for the Continuum of Care Application to HUD and grant the Mayor the authority to execute all forms associated with the application, which also include Submission of the Follow-up Technical Submission Application, Renewal Grant Agreements and Annual Progress Reports (APR). (Approved by Administrative Services Committee October 13, 2014) PUBLIC SAFETY 16. Motion to approve an ordinance to amend the Augusta, Georgia Code Title Four, Chapter One, Article Two, Section 4-1-6 related to definitions; Section 4-1-19 related to Collar and rabies vaccination required tags; Section 4-1-21 related to Duty of Owners to Keep Animal Under Control; Section 4-1-26 related to Abandonment of Animals; Section 4-1-27 related to Cruelty to Animals; Section 4-1-29 related to Disposal of Dead Animals and Fowl; Section(s) 4-1-36 thru 4-1-50 reserved section related to the creation of new section 4-1-36 thru 4-1-46; to Provide Licensing and Sterilization of Certain Animals; and section 4-1-53 related to Impoundment of Straying Livestock; and to repeal all code sections and ordinances and parts of code sections and ordinances in conflict subject fee schedule being provided. (Approved by Public Safety Committee October 13, 2014) 17. Motion to approve the proposed the salary structure for the staff at the Richmond County Correctional Institution to include the Warden and Deputy Warden as presented by Warden Evan Joseph subject to staff bringing back the financial numbers’ impact to the full Commission for final approval. (Approved by Public Safety Committee September 29, 2014) ENGINEERING SERVICES 31 18. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of property in right of way, permanent easement, and one driveway easement (Parcel 193-0-018-00-0) 2514 Patterson Bridge Road with the exclusion of attachment pages 2 and 3. (Approved by Engineering Services October 13, 2014) 19. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title to a portion of property for right of way, permanent construction and maintenance easement, and two temporary driveway easements (Parcel 193-0-005-00-0) 4585 Windsor Spring Road. (Approved by Engineering Services October 13, 2014) 20. Motion to approve the adoption of the Floor Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) as revised by the Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) 13-04- 2899P, Effective October 17, 2014. (Approved by Engineering Services October 13, 2014) 21. Motion to approve funding for Design Consultant Services Supplemental Agreement Two and Change Number Two to Pond and Company in the amount of $30,320.00 for the Berckmans Road Widening, Realignment and Bridge Replacement Project as requested by the AED. (Approved by Engineering Services October 13, 2014) 22. Motion to approve Indication of Roundabout Support as well as lighting and maintenance agreement for possible roundabout at Highway 88 and Bath Edie Road as requested by AED/TE. (Approved by Engineering Services October 13 2014) 23. Motion to approve funding for Design Consultant Services Supplemental Agreement One and Change Number One to Civil Services, Inc. (CSI) in the amount of $30,800.00 for the Old Waynesboro Road Bridge over Spirit Cree-Bridge Replacement as requested by the AED. (Approved by Engineering Services October 13, 2014) 24. Motion to approve one year extension of the current On-Call Vegetation Maintenance Contract for Roadways and Street Shoulders, Right-of-Ways, Easements and Detention Ponds with Augusta Lawn & Turf as requested by AED. (Approved by Engineering Services October 13, 2014) 25. Motion to approve Capital Project Budget (CPB #322-041110-207822001) Change Number Four and Supplemental Agreement Six in the amount of $671,334.00 for the Rock Creek/Warren Lake-Augusta Canal Basin Dredging to Cranston Engineering Group, PC for design, expanded environmental risk analysis & assessment, regulatory agencies review comments response, and permitting from US Army Corps of Engineers. Funding is available in the project account for the Engineering Department. (Approved by Engineering Services October 13, 2014) PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 26. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held October 7, 2014 and Special Called Meeting held October 13, 2014. PUBLIC SERVICES 27. Motion to approve Augusta Public Transit’s Fort Gordon Route 10 proposal for six months pilot project. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 29. Motion to approve an Ordinance to Amend the Augusta, GA Code Title One Article Four Section 1-7-51 Relating to the Adoption of Personnel Policies and Procedures of Augusta, Georgia; To approve edits to the FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF Chapter IV of 32 the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual: 900.001, 900.006, 900.009, 900.011, 900.012 and 900.202; To Repeal All MANUAL PROVISIONS, Code Sections and Ordinances and Parts of Code Sections and Ordinances in Conflict Herewith; To Provide an Effective Date and For Other Purposes. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams) ADDENDUM 33. Motion to ratify the following legislative appointments to the various ARC boards, authorities and commissions: Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Guilfoyle out. Motion Passes 9-0. [Items 1-12, 16-27, 29,33] Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, on to the pulled agenda items. The Clerk: PUBLIC SERVICES 13. Motion to approve agreement with TestDay Corporation to provide third party hosted software and licensing to use TestDay software for the purpose of establishing effective drug screening in the Accountability Court program subject for final contract negotiations by Commission meeting. (Approved by Public Safety Committee October 13, 2014) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett, I believe this was yours? Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The only reason I pulled that is I wasn’t in the committee meeting and I went for my backup materials and there wasn’t anything on this. And General Counsel just passed it out today and I’m not the only one who hasn’t seen this. The Clerk: No, sir. A copy of it was presented in committee and the committee and those members of the Commission who attended that committee meeting received those, a copy of the agreement. And we apologize for it not being scanned into an attachment for the agenda item. Mr. Lockett: Okay, in that case, Mr. Chairman, I move to approve on item number thirteen. Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second? Mr. Mason: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there is no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. 33 Motion Passes 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next pulled agenda item please, ma’am. The Clerk: PUBLIC SAFETY 14. Motion to approve holding two public hearing in the next sixty days to discuss a downtown parking meter management plan with times and dates to be forthcoming and with information on capital costs and revenues regarding parking and enforcement to be provided. (Approved by Public Safety Committee October 13, 2104) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My concern is as I look at the information provided and Steve is like me we’re probably going to be playing Russian roulette with this thing because many of the monies that we are anticipating coming in I don’t see how it’s going to happen. It may happen but what’s going to happen if it doesn’t happen. And it seems like we went through this thing a couple of years ago and we didn’t have adequate information then and it doesn’t appear that we have adequate sound information at this particular time. Mr. Mayor: I just want to, I was in Lexington, Kentucky last week. City of 300,000 versus 200,000 for us. It is a city county consolidated government. They have a university as we have a university. They’ve got the state medical school but they have a parking authority and met with the head of their parking authority. They do generate significant revenues. I’ve invited him to come down and speak to us I think because they had the same concerns going in. But they’ve also found that businesses tend to increase revenues due to increasing turnover. But I would I can put Mr. Cassell in touch with this gentleman as well to sort of, it goes back to with the dog group you know bring in somebody that’s had some experience that can speak from that. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, if I may, what does that mean to this agenda item? I think it would be great if someone that’s done this or been there and be successful to come in and talk but how would this impact the public hearing that we’re requesting now? Mr. Mayor: Well, that’s a good point but I can get him together with I mean bearing his schedule I’d love to get him down here. Steve. Mr. Cassell: Yeah, this agenda item has been a renewed interest in looking at the parking meter issue on Broad Street. So at the last Commission meeting it was decided that, we’ve had so many new businesses come in so many new residents since the last time the issue was brought before the Commission and so we thought it was important to allow those people to at least see the information, digest it themselves and you know we can help you all make an informed decision for the downtown residents and the business owners down there. But so therefore we recommend to hold two public hearings within the next 60 days. The DDA and the Executive Committee of the Chamber of Commerce are in support of helping secure those meetings and 34 help moderate them I guess. And that’s pretty much it and we’ll see what the downtown residents want. Mr. Lockett: Mr. Chairman, if I may follow up on this? Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: You think the DDA and the Chamber would be willing to pay to fly this guy in to talk to us? Mr. Cassell: I can ask. Mr. Mayor: It’s worth a try. Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I serve on the DDA Board and I brought this agenda item forth. Being in Columbia, SC downtown I went into a restaurant there, Commissioner Harris, and the owner of the restaurant came out and spoke with me and said he tried to come to Augusta and he still wants to come but there’s no place for parking. And he talked about how when he decided to go downtown Columbia, SC that people said it wasn’t going to work. Mr. Cassell can you give me some information on a company that will come in and set everything up that wouldn’t cost this government any money to set it up and monitor it. After 6:00 o’clock parking is free I think 5:00 or 6:00 o’clock and there wouldn’t be any meter reading after that point. But every progressive city that I’ve been in has to have a turnover. If not people will sit there go to work leave their cars all day, the businesses won’t be able to thrive. When you come into a city you want to find a place that you can at least stop for a few hours. But some people are vacationing with their parking and they get there and stay there. So I’m in full support of this, Mr. Cassell, and I’m just glad we’re having some public meetings so the general public here can understand what we’re doing. Every progressive city has got of way of guiding and doing some parking that can be managed some kind of way. Savannah, we go to Savannah and they’ve got parking meters all over the side streets. And we’re talking about our main streets with stores and store fronts that people park in front. We got lots of apartments that people live upstairs and park in front and so we’ve got to manage this growth that we’ve got coming now. Everybody’s saying we ain’t growing, now we’re growing and we don’t want to do nothing about it. You can’t have your cake and eat too now. You’ve got to give the cake away if you’re going to bake it. You just can’t sit there and cook it and eat it yourself. So I’m saying that to say that --- Mr. Mayor: You need two more? Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, I think that’s a good thing, Mr. Mayor, that we’ve got this kind of problem. I think that we’re seeing some sign of some growth. If you go downtown on any given day you can’t find a parking space anywhere and there’s no cost. So I’m in full support that we look at anybody that can give us assistance whether they walk in, fly in, drive in, I don’t make no difference I want, I’d like to see this move forward. 35 Mr. Mayor: I’ll make a couple of comments and then I recognize Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Harris. An old friend of my Dad’s used to tell me if your downtown doesn’t have a parking problem, you’ve got a problem. And one of the new app’s that they’ve employed in Lexington you can get an app on your phone that tells you where there’s an open parking spot so you can just, I mean it makes it easy. It’s not like you’ve got to drive around forever and look for one. So the technology on this is way further along than it used to be. Mr. Speaker: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Exactly. Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Harris. Mr. Fennoy: Steve, I think one of the one of the big issues with parking downtown the fact that we do have residents and employees that are using up all the space. I mean I don’t have a problem with parking meters but I also think that we should look for a place for the people that live downtown and the people that work downtown, a place where they could park. You know we could put parking meters downtown and depending on the cost of the parking meters you could have an employee or to tie up that parking space all day. So that’s really not going to help solve the problem. I think the problem is we have a high percentage of employees and residents that are utilizing that space that should be utilized for perspective shoppers. So hopefully by the time we come up with a public hearing we will have a plan, a proposed plan for the people that live and work downtown to park their vehicles. Mr. Cassell: Yeah, you know and along with the parking meters we have to revise the parking ordinance and the plan would provide an opportunity for residential permits for residents downtown. Like you said we’re getting a vibrant downtown because we’re getting that mix of live work and play which any big city like us look for and it’s just causing an issue with parking on the streets. I know the DDA and some of the other groups have tried to help. There’s a lot of off-site private managed parking lots that a resident or company could get for their employees. I’ve worked several places where I’ve had to pay for parking when I went to work. That’s just what cities do anymore. We’ve got a parking deck that’s underutilized right now because there’s free parking on the street. So a part of the public meeting would be to look at some of the issues that you brought up, Mr. Fennoy, and go forward. You know it’s really kind of to introduce the program. I’d love to speak to the contact that the Mayor pointed out and see what his strategies were. If he could even review our plan to see if we’ve got some pitfalls that maybe he came across when he was in Lexington or even in Columbia. But parking management is going to become a key. The growth downtown it’s continued it’s going to get worse before it gets better and if it gets better like the Mayor said that kind of means we might have problem coming about but a lot of the retail that’s approached to expand too are downtown just like Commissioner Williams said they’re kind of turned off by the fact that we don’t have a good parking management, you’re not getting the turnover that a restaurant requires to really get you know to make the money. I mean it’s similar to somebody that goes to the restaurant that eats the free bread drinks the water and sits there all day. That table’s not generating any money for that restaurant. But anyway moving forward I got a little long winded on that I think and Mr. Mason agrees with me. The, to go forward with the public meetings and see what the city desires. Mr. Williams: So moved. 36 Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second? Mr. Mason: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner Harris. Mr. Harris: Steve, all I’ve been asked that when we do these meetings that they’re later in the evening, afternoon. They can’t be in the middle of the day because those who really have want to have some input you can’t get to those meetings. Maybe we could take the buses we’ll get them gassed up for Fort Gordon we’ll use those but the meetings have to be, you know, 6:00 o’clock on or something. I mean I’m assuming people will show up at this as this is enough of a thing but the middle of the day like a lot of times they can’t get to those meetings. Mr. Cassell: Yeah, and when we did them previously that’s what we did typically early evening to let people get a chance to go, after work. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Steve, is it possible or is there a location downtown on Broad Street where we could possibly have this meeting so that the people that work downtown and live downtown won’t lose their parking space? Mr. Cassell: Well, like I say the DDA and the Chamber of Commerce will help us you know organize the meeting and get a location. I think the last one’s they held were at the J.B White Building was central to the downtown. We’d probably look for a similar spot. Mr. Fennoy: All right. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Motion Passes 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next pulled agenda item. PUBLIC SAFETY 15. Motion to approve Sentinel Offender Services Contract. (Approved by Public Safety Committee October 13, 2014) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett, this was you? Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There again I wasn’t present for the last committee meeting but I have a multitude of concerns relative to the potential charges that some of these offenders are going to have to pay. And I understand that the same company in other 37 states is charging a different and much smaller rate. What I would like is if I can get the support I would like for this to go back to committee and I would like Judge Slaby to provide us all of the documentation relative to this to include the amount of money that the Sentinel made over the last twelve month period off of our offenders. Mr. Mayor: Are you putting that in the form of a motion? Mr. Lockett: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Yes, Commissioner Lockett, I think Judge Slaby did an excellent job in presenting the fee scale, how the fee scale compares with other cities at the last committee meeting. He also talked about the changes that were made in the contract and the issues that were brought up at a, I forgot the name of the organization that brought up the discrepancies but and how they made various changes in the contract to address those differences. And he even sent us a copy of the contract with the changes that were made. Mr. Mayor: Did you want to put that in the form of a motion at anyone? Mr. Fennoy: Motion to approve. Mr. Mason: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Mr. Lockett: If I may comment, Mr. Chair, before we vote. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. Lockett: Judge Slaby, as you know, a year ago I supported this but I’ve done lots of soul searching since then. And it seems that we are putting our offenders in a rather precarious position. And it seems that some of these charges are exorbitant. In fact I have information that shows that this same company in at least another state is charging much less for the same service. And I don’t think that’s because their cost of living is not as great as ours. So I’m concerned about the person that’s gotten in trouble that’s working a minimum wage job that’s having to pay for the ankle bracelet and all these other things. And my colleague said that you went through all this and I apologize for not being here but would you be so kind as to tell me what the profit was for Sentinel over the last contract? Mr. Mayor: Judge Slaby. Judge Slaby: I’d be glad to. First of all I want to thank each one of you for meeting with me and let me going over this contract with you before we presented it. I started this procedure back in June starting to renegotiate. And the process that I use initially is meet with our other judges and to ask them number one are we satisfied with our provider, do we want to look 38 somewhere else and we all agreed that we were satisfied with the services that we were receiving from our current provider. The next thing that I told the judges was that I wanted to make sure that we were being fair to a probationer who appeared before us insofar as fees are concerned. I went, I’ve got about oh roughly twenty-five or maybe more different courts that are using private and a couple public government run probation services, $35.00 dollars, $45.00 dollars, $35.00 dollars, 36 plus 9, 41 plus 9, 35, 30, $20.00 sign up, 30 plus 9 they’re considering a $50.00 dollar probation fee, that’s a public run county run. There’s one that’s $27.00 dollars, $45.00, $40.00, $34.00 and $25.00 and then it goes to $39.30 then it goes to $35.00 and $45.00 depending on the situation. $35.00, $35.00 going to $45.00, 41 plus 9, S35.00 and another one is $44.00. We’re at $32.00 and for an individual who only has to pay a fine. Now we do not frontload fines, I mean probation fees. If an individual is unable to pay a fine and he pays that off in one month all he pays is one month probation fee. If it takes two months he pays two months. After that period of time the probation his terminated and that’s all he pays in a way of a probation fee. If he has to be supervised then of course it’s $35.00 a month but then again once all the conditions are complete if he’s done everything except pay a fine then it drops down to $32.00 until that fine is paid or if he’s done everything and they’re unsupervised, no probation fees are paid after that. We waive probation fees, I did that this morning. Judge Booker came to me with a situation where there was some $300 and I think it was $86.00 dollars that was owed. The individual had done everything else that was requested of him except payment of the probation fee and we, she asked for my opinion on it and I told her I think you need to terminate it. Mr. Lockett: Judge Slaby, I respect my colleague they said that you did a very thorough job at the last meeting but my only other question I have is the one I previously asked. How much money did this company make off of us over the last twelve months? Judge Slaby: Well, they’re not making any money off of the county. Now the probationer does have to pay a probation fee whether they’re supervised by the state --- Mr. Lockett: Yeah --- Judge Slaby: --- the county or anything. Mr. Lockett: --- that’s what I’m talking about. How much? Judge Slaby: I have no idea what they made that’s a, you know, that’s between the corporation. I mean there’s a private corporation, unless the county wants to take it on and they intend to make a profit or break even on it, my only concern was whether or not we were being fair based on what other companies were charging in the State of Georgia. We were below that in most instances. That was my concern on how much money, quite frankly in Richmond County I don’t think they make any, a profit. But I don’t ask them to tell me how much they’re making any more than I ask Mr. Mayor (inaudible). Mr. Lockett: But, Judge Slaby, and I’m going to let this alone but don’t you think that with them coming up with what the fee structure and so forth that it would help us if we knew that they were making millions that we might want to reduce this? Or if they’re losing money we might want to increase it? You don’t see where this would be important to us? 39 Judge Slaby: I can see where that would be important to you. I don’t think we can come to an agreement to reducing it and I don’t want to increase it. What I want to be is fair and I thought $32.00 was fair. Now the agreement we have with them if an individual is noncompliant for three months probation fees cease at that time. They then come before us to determine whether or not the probation should be revoked. If we revoke them we revoke them if we don’t the probation’s reinstated probation fees pick up again. If they’re on electronic monitoring we don’t charge a probation fee during that period of time. I really feel that we try to go overboard to be fair to the public. It’s, I want to be fair to them I want to be fair to the company. You know this was a hand that was dealt us by the legislature. I was given the opportunity to do one or two things either ask the county to provide a county probation system or go to a private company. I don’t think the county wants to take that on. If you do God Bless You, I’m all for it, I’m behind you and I’m out of the probation business which suits me fine. Mr. Lockett: Well, when you come back next year we may find that we want to take it over (unintelligible). Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Judge Slaby: That would be good. 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 9-0. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, on to the regular agenda please. The Clerk: Yes, sir, I believe we’re at item 28. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 28. Discuss the city’s retroactive pay policy. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams) Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Thank you. Mr. Mayor. I don’t know whether we can discuss this or not. We’ve been told what we can discuss and sometimes --- Mr. Mayor: It’s policy. Mr. Williams: --- and some days, well I was talking about policy before and we’ll get to that but what does the policy say about retroactive pay I guess is what I need to answer, ask the Attorney I guess someone from that side of the bench. Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. 40 Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I’d be happy to respond to that. I think it’s important to draw a distinction between retroactive pay and back pay. And the main legal difference between those two is retroactive pay is a decision after there’s already been an agreement how much a person would make over a specified period of time. For an example if an employee was to make you know $20,000 dollars for a year if after that year was over the Commission said hey, we want to go back and pay you more for that year after the year is over that would be retroactive pay. Back pay would be the city agreed to pay him $20,000 dollars but there was some kind of mistake or error and the employee only made $19,000. And in the year he said wait, you agreed to pay me twenty but you only paid me nineteen. Back pay would be paying him back what they were already due so $1,000 dollars. The city does not have a retroactive pay policy because that’s inconsistent with the requirements with the gratuities clause. The city does allow for back pay if it’s appropriate if there was some kind of mistake or error that was made when an employee was supposed to be paid something they weren’t paid. There are policies and procedures that relate to that and it would depend on the nature of the back pay as to how that process is done. Mr. Williams: Well, now I’ve been told several times that we don’t do back pay. I’ve been told several times we don’t do back pay but now we’re getting hung up on words where the retroactive pay or back pay. If you pay, thank you, Mr. Mayor, if you pay for someone who provides a service and didn’t get paid would that be considered back pay if someone provided a service and they should’ve been paid for it and they didn’t get paid for any period of time whether it be six months, six years or whatever. Would that be back pay because it’s all in the words now I hear you saying that retroactive or back. So I’m asking the question. If someone performed a service in this government and they were not paid for that when we pay them, what are you going to classify that is? Mr. MacKenzie: That would be properly classified as back pay. Mr. Williams: Okay, so retroactive we’re getting hung on words but so just throw out the retroactive let’s go back to someone performing a service and didn’t get paid for it. Now you and your staff told me, I say your staff, your people said that we didn’t do back pay. We had a young man that worked in Utilities and we can’t call names that performed a job for almost two years at a different position. And he asked to be paid for that and the department head came in and wanted to pay him your office said, the Law Office I mean in government said that we cannot pay him because that was considered as back pay. So I’m trying to determine now what’s what. Mr. MacKenzie: Well, let me say if we’re getting into a specific individual which I think --- Mr. Williams: No, no I ain’t called no names I’m giving a scenario and we don’t get hung up on that. I didn’t call no names so I’m just giving you a scenario. Mr. MacKenzie: Okay. Mr. Williams: So if you pay someone for doing a service, you realized they didn’t get paid and you pay them it’s essentially back pay, isn’t it? 41 Mr. MacKenzie: Yes. Mr. Williams: Okay, that’s all I needed to know, Mr. Mayor. Why is it then that we can do some --- Mr. Mayor: Do you need another two? Mr. Williams: --- yes, sir. Why can we do some if we can’t do the other? We just did something with the Fire Department but we’ve got a young man who performed work and now it’s in the hands of the EEO Department in Atlanta I believe because we didn’t do what we’re supposed to do. And we talked about it in legal several times but now how can you rule that that’s all right but then this other case is not all right? So I’m trying to figure out who’s on first and what’s on second. Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I’m glad you raised it that way because these are very spatially specific and it’s depending upon different facts as to why one would possibly be more appropriate than the other. There’s statute of limitations involved, there’s all kinds of potentially complex legal issues than can mean --- Mr. Williams: Okay. Mr. MacKenzie: --- one would have more issues related to other. That’s why we on an individual basis do those in legal because we don’t want to bring that information on the floor. Mr. Williams: Okay, if there was no statutes we’re not talking about no limitations. I’m just asking a simple plain question as is if one gets paid for service performed and that would be considered back pay because they did the service and didn’t get paid we got to go back and pay them. If another person or a group of people do the same thing then they should be paid as well. Wouldn’t you agree with that, Mr. Attorney? Mr. MacKenzie: I would agree if it was the same thing. It would take us back to this very spatially specific and if it’s the same thing then you know and obviously all these decisions are ones that you all make typically in legal on a case by case basis. All we did was give you the rules, the legal rationale and if it’s the will of the body to decide in Legal then we give you that information to make a decision. Mr. Williams: Well, I’m at a standstill, Mr. Mayor, because I’m told in legal we can’t make a decision back there. Then we come out of legal then we won’t make a decision out here. Now it’s on the table. I can’t see how we can pay anybody back pay at one point but can’t pay somebody else that worked for the same government. I don’t understand that. I mean that’s above my pay grade right there. But I don’t know how we can be told by the attorney who says and this body didn’t say that the Legal Department said we cannot pay. Ms. Smitherman’s going to stand up if she wants to come up maybe she can address it. Maybe she can tell me how that happened. I need to know how we do one and not do the other one. 42 Mr. Mayor: Okay, Ms. Smitherman. Mr. Williams: This is the third one. If you want me two in one department and that’s the Fire Department and the other one is in Utilities. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Smitherman. Ms. Smitherman: Thank you, members of the Commission. The issue between a retroactive pay and back pay boils down to one simple thing and that is what the employee was entitled at the time the services were performed. In each instance it is a legal analysis to determine what the employee was entitled to at the time the services were performed. And as Mr. MacKenzie stated that is going to differ on a case by case basis. We’d be more than happy to talk to you about this specific individual that you’re referring to in Legal and once again we can explain to you the legal analysis how we got to the legal opinion that that employee was not entitled to those services those funds at the time the services were performed. Mr. Williams: Ms. Smitherman, who made that decision whether it was back pay or retroactive pay? Who made that, this body hadn’t made that decision so somebody in your office had to make that decision. Who made that decision? Ms. Smitherman: We simply provide a legal opinion based on the facts of each particular circumstance. What the policy is and what the facts are of each case will determine whether or not the employee was entitled to certain money at the time the services were performed or not. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, that don’t help me very much and we can talk about it all day. If this body don’t make that decision someone in that office had to tell us that we couldn’t legally pay the back pay. But we did that and a large sum twice but then we got one employee, Mr. Lockett said we’re not supposed to go below a certain level and I understand that. I’ve got constituents here and they (unintelligible) this government. Mr. Mayor: You’re second two minutes is up. And but I would say just for clarity, you know, they’re basing their legal opinion on what the state law says so Commissioner Hasan. Mr. Hasan: Yes, I’d like to ask Ms. Smitherman a question please. Mr. Mayor: Sure. Mr. Hasan: Ms. Smitherman, you just made a statement in terms of Commissioner Williams’ question in terms of the back pay and the retroactive pay, difference circumstances create different outcomes. You also made mention that and I seen that this was universal meaning that also applies to both issues that you would come back to this body and we would decide. So that’s my question in the latest issue in terms of the mass pay scale that was a mishap was the Commission involved in that and if we were not involved in it, why not. But there was a lot of applicable in this case? 43 Ms. Smitherman: The latest situation with regard to the fire fighters is currently subject to a law suit so we would ask that we take that back into Legal under Pending Litigation to discuss that subject matter if that would be okay with the Commission. Mr. Hasan: Okay, yeah, Ms. Smitherman, just one more question about that. And I may get the same answer but I’m used to getting the same answer. All I’m asking is I’m not questioning that part of it I’m just trying to question that was it I remember and I was told that this body was not informed about the payout. So I’m just asking was this not did that not supposed to be coming before us to make that decision? Ms. Smitherman: I mean I can honestly tell you. I’m sure what was presented to the Commission or how that issue happened. Again I’m sure we’d be glad to talk in Legal about how this event occurred and answer any of the Commission’s questions with regard to that. Mr. Hasan: Same answer and I’m used to it. Mr. Mayor: Okay, can I get a motion to receive this as information? Mr. Johnson: So moved. Mr. Smith: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, a point of personal privilege if I can. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: How can we resolve this issue? Do I need to put it back on the agenda because in Legal we do the same thing, we can’t take no action just like we can’t take no action here. And we’ve got an attorney who advises us but they don’t advise us on the floor so we can do something. So how when will we ever be able to resolve or to say what’s good or what’s bad? Mr. Mayor: But I would ask and I think what you’re asking, Commissioner Williams, is a policy question that we would as a body need to adjust the policy. You know when you put to discuss the city’s retroactive pay policy once again I don’t think that that’s a, gives a really clear direction. We as policy makers need to change the policy if we don’t like the policy. Mr. Williams: I understand but no one can defend either side. What we’re from the attorney and you heard it yourself in Legal how we’ve been told well, we don’t pay back pay but then you look at the three at least three scenarios that I know about where we have done that and we call it retroactive. I understand the attorney jogging in how they can it ain’t all what you said it’s how you said and the way you say it. I understand that we can switch words up but it means 44 the same thing. If you paid any employee in this government you can call it retroactive, you can call it back pay, he knows she or he or she got paid or didn’t get paid. Mr. Mayor: Well, I will tell you Commissioner Williams and then we need to move on to the next items but, but it’s like with the request from the gentlemen of SPLOST funds. We have a policy that we require the outside agencies to adhere to. And I’m not going to say that this body is constantly consistent but I think that’s the best way for us to keep ourselves out of trouble as we don’t make exceptions. I mean that’s if we if we’re going to do it for one we ought to do it for everybody or do it for nobody. Mr. Williams: That’s my point, Mr. Mayor, we done, done it for some (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: But you can’t blame staff for that because it takes an action of the body to authorize action. You know, so it’s if we’ve made exceptions as a body that’s on us. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t know if this is going to help my colleague at all but probably within the next two weeks we’re going to, I don’t know if we’re going to have a work session or what but we’re going to do the Personnel, Policy and Procedures Manual. And I think it would be a good time for us to get those wrinkles ironed out. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, would it be out of line to make a motion that all employees that are due back/retroactive pay get their back pay and retroactive pay? Mr. Mayor: I --- Mr. Fennoy: Because I think that’s what the Commissioner wants to do. Commissioner Williams he wants to make sure that the employees that are due back pay, that are due retroactive pay get their money. If that be the case why can’t we just make a motion since we have done it in the past that those that are due back pay that those that are due retroactive pay get their money? Mr. Mayor: Well, and I’ll hear from Mr. MacKenzie in a second. I think and this is just my take on it that’s it’s basically case by case. I mean you can have somebody say that they’re owed, you know, back pay but if they don’t have the, you know, the evidence to back it up so it’s just to me --- Mr. Fennoy: But they’re going to have the proper documentation to back up and it would probably go through H.R. and H.R. based on what the employee said they did and didn’t get paid for it would come to us and just go ahead and pay them. Mr. Mayor: But I’m going to tell you the scenario that I see that concerns me there is if H.R. determines that one employee is not eligible and that employee doesn’t like it they’re going to come back to the Commission and say, you know, I was wrong. So I want to get to I want 45 everybody to be treated fairly and equitably and everybody get paid what they’re supposed to be paid but you know that’s my interpretation. Mr. MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: I just was going to agree with some of what you just said and also I think what Commissioner Fennoy may be touching on is possibly a policy change that would possibly delegate the decision making authority up to maybe a certain amount to make the determination of whether or not an employee or a set of employees would be eligible for back pay without those everything single one of those having to come before this body. That is something that could be done on a policy level so that ya’ll wouldn’t be looking at every one but maybe just set a threshold dollar amount. If the individual amount of back pay exceeded a certain amount then that would maybe something that you would consider in Legal to make a determination on that. That could be addressed as part of the PPPM adjustment if that was the will of the body. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett was referencing. I’ll tell you, Commissioner Williams, we do need to move on. We’ve, you know, I’ve recognized you twice plus given you a minute and we’ve had discussion on this so we need to move along. And I’m sure there’s going to be particularly with, you know, Commissioner Lockett having a work session there’s going to be plenty more time to discuss this. Okay, Madam Clerk, on, if it’s okay with everybody --- The Clerk: We need to vote on this. Mr. Williams votes No. Motion Passes 8-1. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ll go to agenda item number 30. The Clerk: That was referred to Legal. Mr. Mayor: Okay. The Clerk: Thirty-one? Mr. Williams: No, no (unintelligible) referred to Legal. Commissioner Lockett had the Clerk to read something into the minutes and I agree with what was read. I have not direct to get any direction but I do have constituency that worked for this government that votes and everything else. And I stand to represent them like anybody else. I don’t think we can say because they work for this government that we’re supposed to exclude them from being addressed when they’ve got a problem. This is a serious problem here. Mr. Mayor: But, Commissioner Williams, it is a personnel issue and, Madam Clerk, I believe when you read back the motion it was to refer Item 30 to Legal. Was that not your recollection? The Clerk: Yes, sir. It was included in the consent agenda, Mr. Williams. 46 Mr. Mayor: That was included in the motion. Mr. Williams: Okay, well I need to put it back on the agenda then, Madam Clerk, because and we’re not going to get anywhere going to Legal and not talking about it and coming in here and not talking about it. If we have to face it every week we have to face it every week because --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Williams: --- it’s not fair, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, so on to agenda item 31. The Clerk: The Administrator asked if we could consider 32 prior to 31. Mr. Mayor: I will call 32 prior to 31. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATOR 32. Update from the Interim Administrator regarding Clerk of Commission’s Office Space. Mr. Mayor: Mr. Cassell. Mr. Lockett: We don’t got all day. Mr. Cassell: Yeah, as I told you at the last commission meeting we met with Ms. Bonner to get the sign off on the space and then get the final pricing for the improvements. Back when this you know first came to the attention of the Commission to modify that space over there to accommodate the Clerk for the vault and some other conference room and some other improvements. And I can show them on the overhead if you want. At the time we were given approval to, up to $500,000 dollars for the improvements and now that we’ve gotten the final cost figures from the contractor as well as the shelving and furniture supplier the total cost of the renovation plus the shelving a furniture is about well it’s exactly $323,784.66 which is well within that original authorization. You know my recommendation would be to move forward with the improvements to give the Clerk the space she needs as well as the type of facility she needs to store the documents that she needs as well as the conference and space for the public to view the documents that she require as well as the spots for the where she serves the Commission with the mailboxes, et cetera. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason the Commissioner Williams. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Steve, can you give me the dollar figure again? Mr. Cassell: Yeah, I’m trying to get it on the overhead. Real quick it was $323,784.66. 47 Mr. Mason: And we had a government cost estimate, I don’t know if it’s just that but this estimate is, what was the estimate or what did we approve as far as that going exceeding the amount not to exceed amount. Mr. Cassell: Yeah, the original estimate was an authorization of up to $500,000 I think is what the motion was back in, I was trying to remember the date but that was what it was back then. Mr. Mason: So would this, if this is approved we can get this movement going? Mr. Cassell: Yes. Mr. Mason: Move to approve. Mr. Lockett: Second. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams. Mr. Williams: Yes, Steve, what was that initial price in the beginning that we were quoted? And I said that we shouldn’t be paying anything for the minor changes that we’re talking about doing. The vault was supposed to be built anyway, wasn’t it? Mr. Cassell: Well, the vault wasn’t in the original plans. You know I agree with you that the vault should’ve been included in something so we would’ve been paying for this, you know, anyway. If the space had been provided the way Ms. Bonner needed with the fire proof vault --- thth Mr. Williams: We were going to put the vault on the 9 floor, the 10 floor or in the roof. We had no plan for the vault is what you’re saying? Mr. Cassell: Right. Mr. Williams: It wasn’t calculated. th Mr. Cassell: I think we tried to retro it onto the 4 floor which was kind of it really nd didn’t fit her operations. So we wanted to keep everything to the 2 floor --- Mr. Williams: No, no, no, you’re losing me now. I understand about floors. I’m saying stth it was added in at one point somewhere whether it be on the 1 or 15 floor, it don’t make no difference. But it was calculated at one time to be in there right, somewhere. Mr. Cassell: Not to my understanding, sir, no. Mr. Williams: So the vault never was --- 48 Mr. Cassell: No. Mr. Williams: --- approved, I guess. th The Clerk: (inaudible) 7 floor. th Mr. Cassell: It was on the 7 floor? Okay, all right, I wasn’t involved at that time but --- th Mr. Williams: Okay, if it’s going to go on the 7 floor we’re getting somewhere now. If thth it’s going to be on the 7 floor we already know it was going to be on the 7 floor and there was th a cost associated with it being on the 7 floor. Now we’re moving it, don’t worry about where it’s going, but there was a cost associated with it going wherever it’s located, right? Mr. Cassell: I would assume so yeah I can check but I can’t speak for (inaudible). I agree. Mr. Williams: I can’t find nobody, I can’t find nobody. Mr. Mayor: Be down here every day in this place. I don’t disagree. Mr. Williams: How much was the price again that the total? And you’re saying it’s coming out less now is that what you’re telling me? Mr. Cassell: Yes, less than the original $500,000 that, it was sort of the back of the envelope not to exceed at the time. Mr. Williams: And it’s coming out to three sixty what? Mr. Cassell: $323,784.66 and that includes the vault construction, the cabinets and the all the associated (inaudible). Mr. Williams: Now how soon will we be able to make this transfer again? Has the date been changed again? Mr. Cassell: No, what we’re looking is as soon as possible. I’ve spoken to Ms. Bonner, there’s going to be some demo. Mr. Williams: That ain’t on the calendar possibly. Possibly ain’t on the calendar there’s a date on the calendar. Mr. Cassell: I will get her in there as soon as possible. We’ve got to order some furniture for the storage rooms, rooms 250 and 251. I can show you on here. Mr. Williams: So what date is that, Steve? We done moved the date now we gave dates before. We don’t have a date now? We can’t say --- 49 Mr. Cassell: I don’t have an authorization to move forward with anything so I can’t give you a date but the whole construction will be 60 days. To get Ms. Bonner in there we’re going to have to demo two walls and we’ll have to get some storage space in there to 205 and 251 which is right over here and until those spaces have the storage space required by her so she could start moving stuff over there we’ll have her move in during the construction of the vault as well as the conference room. Mr. Williams: Ms. Bonner, can you give me the first two dates they changed? What was those dates because the first time you were supposed to be moved was what? The Clerk: End of October. Mr. Williams: Okay, then it changed to what? The Clerk: Well, last week Mr. Cassell recommended that we move in around the first of November area, timeline in conjunction with the construction of the vault area and the reconstruction of Room 234 and 236. Mr. Williams: Well, November’s not going to happen so I’m asking when is the dates, Steve, that’s why I’m asking that. If things are approved today or if not tell me give me some number. Mr. Cassell: The goal is to get her in there in November. I’ve got to get the first of all I’ve got to get the authorization to move them forward. So they’re going to have to start the demo on the walls and get the furniture ordered so that they can get the shelving in 250 and 251 so that she can store the stuff that doesn’t require the vault. And then we’ll move her in there once the demo’s done. I recommended to her and I recommend to you that she doesn’t want to be in there when the demo’s going on it’s going to be dusty, it’s going to noisy, you know, it’s going to be disruptive. Under the construction while they’re doing that you know we could block off an area so that she’s not so much impacted by the construction and the contractor has indicated that that’s a definite possibility. And I know I’m not giving an exact date but I can give you an exact date when I know from the contractor. Mr. Mayor: Well, Commissioner Williams, to get the process started would you like to make a move to approve? Mr. Williams: So moved. The Clerk: Mr. Mason (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Already been and seconded. Okay. Commissioner Hasan. Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor I guess as you know when we had the retreat our Administrator Ms. Jackson was in town. And as you very well know she ended up here in the building. I think she had a sit down with you for a short spell there. While she was in the building we had an opportunity to be on this floor and share with here right by the Mayor’s 50 office there at one time Commissioner former Commissioner Donnie Smith and Commissioner Wayne Guilfoyle put before this body the opportunity she had an opportunity to be on the second floor. And she wanted to she said she would like to be on the second floor. Now somebody can call for confirmation if you feel better but I would like to see us tie to that motion to also task the Deputy Administrator the Interim Deputy Administrator also to move forward and make room for Ms. Jackson on the second floor for the Administrator’s suite as well. Mr. Mayor: Let me ask you and I will tell you I think collocating the Mayor and the Administrator is by far the best way to go. Did she, did she feel like there was enough space in there for her? Mr. Hasan: Where it was being shown it’s going to come all the way out to that walkway. You know from there she came in and she went in those rooms there and knowing that it was going bring it all the way out to the front. I mean you can call I don’t want to impede what we’re trying to get done for our Clerk of Commission at this particular time but I did want th to keep us on task in moving forward knowing that she’s coming in November 17. I’m not anticipating we’ll be through at that time but she did have a desire to be on the second floor near the Mayor and near the Clerk of Commission and whatever. Like I say I feel very confident somebody needs to call and confirm that before you actually act on it. I have no problem with that and I wanted to put that before the body. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you. Commissioner Davis. Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Cassell, have we started any construction where the Administrator was going to have their offices on the ninth floor? Mr. Cassell: Yes, ma’am, because Risk Management is also going up there as well as the Administrator was originally planned so yes all those rooms have been framed. I think they’re mudding the walls right now, the drywall’s been hung so yeah they’re moving forward with the ninth floor. My only question to Mr. Hasan if she wants to relocate to the second floor, you know, if it involves demolition or construction you’re probably going to be looking at additional costs to do that. I just want to make sure (inaudible). Mr. Hasan: I think in a previous conversation --- Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hasan. Mr. Hasan: --- I’m sorry, I’m sorry, Mr. Mayor. In a previous conversation in speaking with Heery I can’t speak of the gentleman’s name can’t think of his name, Forest, Forest. He made mention and we had a previous conversation he was showing me the floors and everything. I asked him about that particular space at that particular time and he gave in the neighborhood of about $157,000 or something like that. Now if you take and do some modifications to that building the great thing about that if that number holds true it does not exceed the $500,000 that was allocated to the Clerk of Commission’s space. So you’re getting two for one, if you ask me, for the money that was allocated. 51 Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Williams then Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, with the Administrator’s office being worked on, on the ninth floor with the perspective potential office could be down here you as the Mayor, me as a Commissioner nobody asked me anything. Nobody voted on nothing. How can we allow people to come in and just say this is where I want to be? We make that decision. We should say, hey, look this good whatever. Even getting to that point no one have came to this body and said is this okay, is this what you want? The old days are gone, Mr. Mayor, we need some people to come before us and at least inform us and quit telling us what we’re going to do because we are the ones that, Mr. Lockett, help me out, we’re the governing body. Is that what you would say? Mr. Lockett: Yes sir. Mr. Williams: Okay, but then we’re not governing. Mr. Hasan: I’m asking your permission, Commissioner. Mr. Williams: No, no I don’t mean my Commissioners I was talking about the Administrator’s office was talked about at several different locations but as, I’ve been here the last two years have missed no meeting yet but nobody have came and said, well look this is the plan. I asked for those plans to be brought back so we can see what’s going on. People decide where they want to go? We have to make those decisions and put people in those positions I thought. Mr. Mayor: And I will, I agree with you completely, Commissioner Williams. I will say that Madam Clerk and I have had many discussions that from a functionality standpoint to be collocated you know as with, she’s moving across from the Mayor’s office just in having had the Administrator’s office on the eighth floor functionally it worked a lot better than what we’ve got working now. I’ll just tell you that I mean from having, Madam Clerk, would you back that up? The Clerk: Yes, sir, 200 percent. Mr. Mayor: All right. Thank you, ma’am. But I agree that it needs to be a decision of the body. Mr. Williams: We ought to be saying yeah or nay then. People can’t tell us where they’re going to go. Mr. Mayor: And I don’t disagree. Okay, Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Cassell, I don’t know if you or Ms. Allen can answer this question or not. But when we first started talking about the renovation of the Municipal Building how much money were we talking about initially? Do you have that number, Ms. Allen? The Clerk: Mr. Schroer could probably give it to you. 52 Mr. Mayor: Mr. Schroer? Mr. Fennoy: And, and the second part of that question is how much money are we up to now? Mr. Schroer: Sir, the original budget for the Municipal Building itself is $32 million dollars. Right now we’re at thirty two and a half million dollars for this building. The other $8 million dollars is the addition of the I.T. Building for $7 million dollars and renovation of some of the Engineering Building for a million. So now we’re up to forty and a half million dollars. Mr. Mason: What? Mr. Mayor: Forty and a half. Mr. Fennoy: So what I’m hearing that we’re only maybe $500,000 dollars above the original renovation costs of this building. Mr. Schroer: Yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay, can I get a motion to receive this as information? Mr. Mason: Wait a minute, I thought we --- Mr. Mayor: Oh, excuse me. We had a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. The Clerk: Well, did you want to amend the motion to include tasking the Interim Administrator with proceeding with plans to relocate the Administrator’s office to the second floor? Mr. Mason: My motion is to deal with the agenda item that’s before me --- The Clerk: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason. Mr. Mason: --- and move forward. I mean if somebody wants to do something different but that’s my motion. Mr. Mayor: Let’s try not to confuse everything. Let’s take it one at a time. The Clerk: The motion was to approve the estimated costs in the relocation of the Clerk’s space --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. 53 The Clerk: --- and the amendment to that. He offered the amendment. So you --- Mr. Mayor: But the maker does not want to include the amendment. The Clerk: --- (inaudible). Mr. Mason: Not at this point. The Clerk: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Ms. Davis and Mr. Smith vote No. Motion Passes 7-2. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to our final agenda item. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATOR 31. Receive as information 2015 proposed budget. Mr. Mayor: Madam Administrator. Ms. Allen: Yes, sir. Mr. Lockett: You’ve got five minutes. Ms. Allen: Okay, it won’t take me but five minutes. Mr. Mason: Three and a half. Ms. Allen: All right. Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, today I present you with a proposed balanced budget for 2015 that does not utilize any reserves or include any additional millage increase. Please keep in mind as we as I stated in the budget memo that’s included in your package that this was not an easy task and there were tough decisions that had to be made. Like our citizens we are continuing, we continue to be faced with the rising costs of doing business with limited resources. We are not only looking at zero percent growth in our tax digest but an estimated one-million dollar revenue decrease from the Energy Excise Tax. The departments were asked to maintain their 2014 budget funding level which included that 2.4% reduction across the board and believe me additional reductions were made after the trends and budget line items were reviewed. I would like to also mention that the Sheriff’s Office has been a great partner by agreeing to operate at the same 2014 budget funding level that he had received. The Finance Department and Steve have been great as we worked toward meeting your mission 54 and meeting your goals and again all of the departments and elected officials have worked to make this happen. As you recall keep in mind that there was an increase in the millage rate, a 1.75 millage increase. That merely balanced the budget. Though it was significant it merely balanced our budget. The remaining balance has been factored into the proposed 2015 budget proposal. Therefore there had to be some assumptions made for us to get through this process. One would be the storm water fee being implemented. There has been positive discussion held regarding the storm water fee. This fee will allow the city to increase the level of maintenance, accelerate our capital projects for drainage to include east Augusta, National Hills and Bransford Road to name a few. Also will provide an actual budget for storm water maintenance which the city has never had in the past. If the Commission chooses not to proceed with this fee of course we can look at other alternatives. As with any of the items we’re discussing today please keep in mind this is a proposed budget and this budget is a living document that things may change, however this is what we felt would be best to present and for us to proceed to move forward. The next item on the list is Payment in Lieu of Franchise Fee raised to 5%. If it is the will of the Commission, we will prepare an official ordinance for the Commission to adopt. We have spoken to the respective departments that will be affected by this and both departments have agreed that they can take on this task without drawing additional costs out to our citizens. The other item which is a very difficult item because each of our outside agencies have great programs that they provide to our community. I think we heard one of the delegations today but as each of us can and each of us can be passionate about those respective programs. Unfortunately I feel that the focus needs to be on streamlining and making our internal operations more efficient and more effective. And in doing that these respective departments had to endure not only the 2.4% reduction that they did in 2014 but additional reductions in their budget so that I ask that all non-mandated outside agencies have to endure reductions as well. And I’m proposing a 25% reduction. Therefore I am presenting the following. Revenue enhancement, the payment in lieu of franchise fee as I had mentioned have gone up to 5% would give us $1.8 million dollars estimated $1.8 million dollars. For the cost adjustments I’ve included the Sheriff’s salary increases to $1.6 million. I feel that an organizational assessment needs to be conducted. We have had organizational assessments done on three departments, our Finance Department, our Planning and Development Department, and our Human Resources Department. I think that’s the first step in streamlining our organization and making it more effective and efficient. I also have the Procurement Department which is being worked on right now by the Carlson Vinson Institute and we should have something back from them within the next 30 days. So holistically I think the whole organization needs to be reviewed. I think we need to continue that and have an RFP put out so we can bring someone in and conduct that. Now I’m not one for consulting and having things that sit on the shelf. I’m one that feels that when they come back with this assessment we need to bring the best recommendation back to this Commission and we need to take action on it. And by doing that that’s why I’ve included compensation/organizational assessments and adjustments. If they come back with a proposal that certain departments require additional increases in respect to salaries and/or modifications that needs to be done. There’s no need to do an assessment or to do an efficiency study when you’re not going to fund anything to take place. That’s why you’ll see that allocation there. Do we need that entire allocation, maybe not, but we may need more so I wanted to have something earmarked for that. I know constantly we talk about people not being actually paid what they’re worth and we need to look at that. So we need to, as we take care of our Public Safety we also need to take care of the other employees as well so I’ve included that in the package. And I felt 55 that if we’re going to do this strategically we need to make sure that we look at all of the, the whole entire picture. So I’ve included $700,000 dollars for that. The storm water fee of course again that could be something that could be looked at and hopefully that the Commission will proceed with but it will bring in an estimated and this is being very conservative and estimated $1.2 million dollars in administrative relief to the general fund by those costs being taken care of in the storm water fee. The 25% reduction in funds to non-mandated agencies as I’ve mentioned the personnel I have a recommendation that you’ll see behind tab five that explains what I’m looking at or recommending to you in the proposed budget for 2015. Believe me those are positions that I’ve carefully looked at, staff has looked at we have looked at this budget line item line item. I can assure you I’ve looked at so many numbers now that I’m wondering should I have focused on being in Accounting and Finance. But these are the things that I think will help get us forward. We can discuss those at our work session but I think those are justifiable move forwards as again there are pretty, everybody had a great justification to why they needed certain things but these are some of the items that I think we need to move forward with. The same goes for Program Enhancement they’re also behind on tab five. That explains some of the programs that I think we need to conduct and perform and that funding has also been identified and that’s $683,250 and $515,000. I’ll go back to the conversation/organizational assessment for one minute. The efficiency that I’m looking, I recommending we proceed with I know some of you have had some concerns that maybe the city has too many people or we have too many of this and too many of that that we need to look at. This is what justifies whether or not we do that. It’s not easy for anybody just to come in and say we have too many people in this certain department. Let someone come in and do the assessment as they have done with those other three departments in currently doing with our Procurement Department to give us the path forward to what we need to do to make sure that this government is operating as efficient as possible. Next steps I’m trying to keep it to my five minutes. Please keep in mind Mr. Commissioner, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission that this is merely a proposal for you to receive as information today. There will be of course future work sessions and I’m actually th recommending that we look at October the 30 to have our first work session to give you time to review the proposal, give you time to review all the information. I know this is you know this is something that it takes a little time to look at so please take the time to review this information and look and I look forward to our future discussions. Again it is a balanced budget, it does not dip into reserves and it does not ask for any increase in the millage. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner Davis. Mr. Fennoy: Ms. Allen. Ms. Allen: Yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: I think one of my concerns was when Dr. Malik, he did an assessment on the Finance Department and said that the finance was finance for like I mean the 22 positions and I think they had 18 I mean eight unfilled positions. Do we have departments that are funded for positions that we’re not advertising for and these departments have directors have no intent on filling these positions? And if that be the case what happens to the money? 56 Ms. Allen: What happens is we have what we consider lapsed salaries that is included in the budget and a portion of that goes to, well, not a portion of it all of it goes to the lapsed salaries as long as the position is not filled. The only way that you’re going to see a reduction in the actual staffing levels right now is if you actually got people, sent people home. That’s the only way you would actually see a reduction in personnel costs at this point. But right now what has been captured in the 2015 proposed budget as has been previously is the actual vacant positions and they’ve been funded in the lapsed salary which offsets the overall budget. So it’s included so that money is not being lost. It’s being accounted for, yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: Okay. And I guess and this would hold true with the Sheriff’s Department and the Fire Department? Ms. Allen: Yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: Okay. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Davis. Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Allen, first of all thank you for presenting to us a balanced budget without pulling money from reserves. I think when I was up here for two weeks we were presented with a $4 million dollar deficit pulling out of reserves and for us to work it out. So this gives us with different options to tweak and discuss and work out what’s best for Augusta Richmond County. I wanted to ask on those franchise fees if we are you know if we decide to raise this to the 5% I know Tom Wiedmeier had said at our retreat that you know that might mean he’s going to have to reorganize his capital projects. So I don’t want us to go backwards on capital projects because we know where we are right now in our infrastructure needs. That’s one thing I want us to think about. And also what’s to stop us from continuing to increase those franchise fees? Do we have controls so that doesn’t get to be you know higher and higher? Ms. Allen: And that’s why we’re going to ask that an actual ordinance is put in place that the Commission so chooses to proceed with up to the 5% that we actually have an ordinance put in place to contain that. Ms. Davis: Okay and will we have further discussions of what this could do as far as not getting these capital projects done and what affect that would have? Ms. Allen: Yes, ma’am, we can make sure that’s included on our first work session. Ms. Davis: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams then Commissioner Harris. Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Allen, I had this folded and just handed to me but are you saying that there’s no cuts, no cuts in any of the parks or any of the other stuff that we had not talked about here? 57 Ms. Allen: No, sir, I didn’t say there weren’t any cuts. Mr. Williams: Okay, well I need to know everything. When you talk about a balanced budget I need to know how it was balanced because I can’t support something that’s going help on one end but hurt on the other end. So I need to know those cuts that are being made because most times the same people the same area gets cut every time. And I know we’ve got to make some hard decisions. I’ve got no problem with that but if I don’t know those things and I’m looking at a balanced budget. And I want to give you a magic wand because you need to get Tom Wiedmeier and everybody else. If you can come up with this balance like that and everything stays the same I mean everybody ought to want to do that. But that’s my first question what cuts is going to be made and where. The other thing is the fees you’re talking about those fees raising to 5%. I asked the question and I’ve requested the Clerk, I request it every time how much money are we starting with? What’s in those accounts? As an elected official I want to know how much money we started with. I heard Ms. Davis mention about not raising those fees and I understand because that’s the perception that’s going out there if we do this it’s going raise fees. The water bill goes up 3% if not more every year anyway. The average person just said my water bill’s a little bit high but every year it goes up. So that’s a standard and I’m not talking about increasing that anymore. But I don’t know what’s there already. How do we know the 5% is enough? How do I know that we can’t do six or seven percent? I see you shaking your head but I don’t know that because I don’t have no numbers. Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two minutes. Mr. Williams: I don’t have no numbers, Mr. Mayor, to look at to see. We’ve got two enterprises I know the money’s being raised in the landfill from the gas that’s been sold. Even the garbage that comes in here we make money off of that and nobody’s talking about that. The general public don’t even know that. We want garbage to be transferred in here because it’s a money generator for us. So we’re not talking honestly and openly. I need to know, have all those numbers where I can look at a balanced budget and say hey, that’s good because some of those cuts we’re making may not have to be made if we go into those funds and get something, not to deplete them or to put them in a bad situation. There ought to be some safe guards put in to make sure that that don’t happen. But for 18 years it’s been going up 3% every year and the sky’s the limit. I requested that I’m going to request it one more time, Madam Clerk. I need to see those numbers everything in those accounts. I need to see those not with somebody standing and tell me oh we ain’t doing that good or we’re doing okay. I need to see some documents that I can compare to and make sure they’re there. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you, sir. Commissioner Harris. Mr. Harris: In a perfect world we do our next SPLOST we sell the residents, the citizens on 100% of this money is going to go to fix the stuff that needs to be fixed. We earmark tons (unintelligible). And also he’s flush with this money to do all this stuff. Can this money, can these fees be rolled back? I mean midterm all of a sudden it passes and we can say we can take this off his back because that money is going into the projects that may be getting beat up because we’re taking money away from him. I mean that’s working on the assumption that 58 SPLOST passes. But I really believe the people that voted against it the last time because we just had a lot of stuff in there that they ain’t going to pay for. I really think the people of Richmond County will look around and say fix the stuff that needs to be fixed and we’ll work with you. And if we could come up with a ton of money that’s what’s on the main thing I think is our water problem and the catastrophe that’s around the corner something’s going to go south on us. So I was just thinking if the citizen’s vote for SPLOST, you know, if it works out that way it needs to be rolled back. Ms. Allen: Are you talking the storm water fees? Mr. Harris: Yes, the franchise fees that stuff that’s (inaudible). Ms. Allen: That can be changed at any time if it’s the will of the Commission, yes, sir. Mr. Harris: Which is even a better selling point on trying to get the SPLOST done. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Lockett. Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Allen, I think you and Finance and others are doing an outstanding job putting this proposed budget together. I’m quite sure that once we get into the work session we’ll get down to the more finite things in reference to what my colleague Mr. Williams said but I think ya’ll did a great job. And my colleague Commissioner Harris there even with everything that we have here to include the possible passage of SPOST November of next year we are still are going to need every penny we can get because I think you more or less made the comment that I’ve been making all along. Our infrastructure was put in place when Abraham Lincoln was president so it’s going to take every dollar that we have in order to get us on the right track. But there again thank you very much I think you did a great job. Ms. Allen: Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you. Commissioner Fennoy. Mr. Fennoy: Motion to receive this as information. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. Mr. Johnson: Second. Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there is no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign. Mr. Mason out. Motion Passes 8-0. Mr. Mayor: I believe that’s the final agenda item, ma’am? 59 The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay with no further business to come before the body we stand adjourned. [MEETING ADJOURNED] Lena Bonner Clerk of Commission CERTIFICATION: I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Augusta Richmond County Commission held on October 21, 2014. ________________________ Clerk of Commission 60 61