HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting November 18, 2014
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
NOVEMBER 18, 2014
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., November 18, 2014, the
Hon. Deke Copenhaver, Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Lockett, Guilfoyle, Mason, Harris, Williams, Fennoy, Johnson,
Hasan, Davis and Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, if you’re ready to go. In the interest of time I’ll go
ahead and call the meeting to order. What’s that? And if everybody would please stand. We
don’t have a minister for the invocation so we’ll just observe a moment of silent prayer and a
moment of silence in honor of Governor Carl Sanders of Augusta. Please join me in the Pledge.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States was recited.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: We have some additional information, a deletion and an addition?
The Clerk: Yes, sir. Item 47 is a listing of information relative to item number 47 listing
the pending invoice amount that was requested by Commissioner Williams. Item, the next item
is a deletion from our delegation portion of the agenda. Our addition to the agenda is a zoning
request that was inadvertently placed in the incorrect word flow queue in our electronic agenda
process. The petitioner is here in the chamber today so we’re asking that this item be considered
for addition to the agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have unanimous consent to add this agenda item? Okay.
The Clerk: And we have one other item to be added, a request to be added to today’s
agenda. A request from the Pension Committee that was held today at 1:30 to receive
information and cost analysis related to increased benefits requested by the 1945 and 1949 Plan
retirees.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have unanimous consent on that? Okay, I see Commissioner
Guilfoyle does not agree so we do not have unanimous consent on that. Okay, Madam Clerk, on
to the consent agenda.
The Clerk: Yes, sir. Our consent agenda consists of items 1-40, items 1-40. 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 2: Is a zoning request with conditions for a Special Exception property located at
2230 Walton Way and 910 Johns Road.
1
Item 3: Is a request for a change of zoning from LI (Light Industry) and Zone HI (Heavy
Industry) to a Zone HI (Heavy Industry) affecting property located at 607 Sand Bar Ferry Road.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to those petitions? Mr. Mayor, also on our addendum
item that item was scheduled to be added to our addendum agenda per the Planning Commission.
I don’t know if the Commission would like to consider that as part of the consent agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have unanimous consent to add that to the consent?
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor, what item is that, sir?
The Clerk: Number one.
Mr. Mayor: Number one on the additions. Okay, thank you, ma’am.
The Clerk: For the benefit of any objectors to the zoning petition affecting property from
a Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) to a Zone B-2 (General Business) affecting property on
Poinciana Drive. Are there any objectors to any of those planning petitions?
Mr. Mayor: None noted.
The Clerk: All right. I call your attention to the Public Services portion of our agenda.
Item 6: Is a request for a Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with the location at
1713 Martin Luther King Boulevard.
Item 7: Is for a retail package Liquor License to be used in connection with 2940 Inwood Drive
Ste. Be.
Item 8: Is a request for a Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with the location at
2940 Inwood Drive.
Item 9: Is for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine License to be used in connection
with the location at 980 Broad Street.
Item 10: Is for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine license to be used in connection
with 1238 Gordon Highway.
Item 11: Is for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine License to be used in
connection with Twin Peaks at 277 Robert C. Daniel Parkway.
Item 12: Is to renew all of the existing alcohol beverage licenses, licenses for adult
entertainment establishments, amusement arcades, adult bookstores and dance halls in the City of
Augusta.
The Clerk: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, are there any objectors to any of
those alcohol petitions?
Mr. Mayor: None noted.
The Clerk: Okay. Our consent agenda consists of items 1-40 with no objectors to our
Planning or Alcohol petitions.
2
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I know someone some person was here for the pension
meeting and I want them to know that they don’t have to stay because that won’t be addressed in
case I saw some in the back they can go home. But I want to make sure they didn’t miss that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: They will not be addressed this afternoon.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, sir. Do we have any additions to the consent agenda? No
additions? Do we have any items to be pulled for discussion? Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, I’ve got a list here I’d like to be pulled and to start
with item number 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14. And I’ve got a question on 17 so I guess I ought to pull that
one too. And uh, ---
The Clerk: Do you want to pull 17, sir, or are you just?
Mr. Williams: --- yeah, I want to pull 17. It won’t take but a minute to get it clear. I
don’t need to do it now. And 18, Mr. Mayor. That’s 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14 and 17 and 18.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to pull item number 31. Actually what I
would like to do because I don’t think we’re going to be able to get into the type of discussion
we need to on this floor today I’d like to pull it and send it back to committee.
Mr. Mayor: Um, you want to put that in the form of a motion?
Mr. Mason: I would.
Mr. Mayor: To send it back to committee?
Mr. Mason: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second on that?
Mr. Williams: I’ll second that.
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 10-0.
3
Mr. Mayor: Okay, do we have any further items to be pulled for discussion?
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor, with the support of the distinguished gentleman from Super
District number nine I would like for us to either have another Legal session today or send
agenda item number 45 and 46 back to the next Legal session because we’re going to be dealing
somewhat with real estate and I don’t think this is something that should be discussed in open
session. Of course that’s my opinion. I would like to get a reading from the General Counsel if I
could please, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, this deals with the acquisition of real estate. I would concur that
that would need to be done in Legal.
Mr. Mayor: Does the gentleman from District 9 agree?
Mr. Williams: The distinguished gentleman from District 9 disagrees, Mr. Mayor,
wholeheartedly. First of all these are the two Items I put on and I’m not, this is not about real
estate. I’ve been trying to get a comprehensive report for a long time and if it includes real estate
I‘ve got no problem with that either. This is public record this is not like we’re trying to buy a
piece of land and someone don’t know about it. This has been talked about all over the world so
I’m very adamant about holding on to those and discussing those in detail because I asked for
this months ago and I didn’t get it, Mr. Mayor. So I don’t think this entails buying a piece of real
estate that we potentially might go up on us or something so ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: --- if my attorney agrees or disagrees I’d like to hear from him. If you
believe this ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: If the subject matter is to talk about other aspects other than acquiring
real estate then that would be perfectly appropriate to be on the regular agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda?
Mr. Mason: So moved.
Mr. Fennoy: Second.
CONSENT AGENDA
4
PLANNING
1. FINAL PLAT – MAGNOLIA VILLAS PHASE III – S-694-III – A request for
concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to approve a petition by
Augusta Land Surveying LLC, on behalf of Magnolia Villas Augusta, LLC, requesting
final plat approval for Magnolia Villas, Phase III. This residential subdivision is located off
Magnolia Villas Drive, adjacent to Magnolia Villas, Phase 2 and contains 50 lots.
DISTRICT 3.
2. Z-14-45 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve with the following condition 1) that the applicant understands that any future
construction of structures on the property, or additional land disturbance, may require
further review; a petition by James B. Trotter, on behalf of Church of the Good Shepherd,
requesting a Special Exception to improve an existing Private School per Section 26-1(b) of
the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property containing
approximately 5.77 acres and is known as 2230 Walton Way and 910 Johns Road. (Tax
Map 034-4-121-01-0, 034-4-128-02-0 and 034-4-115-00-0) DISTRICT 3
3. Z-14-47 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve a petition by David Hagler, on behalf of Hagler 3, LLP, requesting a change of
zoning from Zone LI (Light Industry) and Zone HI (Heavy Industry) to Zone HI affecting
property containing 19.96 acres and known as 607 Sand Bar Ferry Road. (Tax Map 062-0-
004-00-0) District 1
PUBLIC SERVICES
6. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 14-43: request by Kyung Hee No
for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Juno & Jaehee, Inc.
located at 1713 King Blvd. Commission District 2 Super District 9. (Approved by Public
Services Committee November 10, 2014)
9. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 14-46: request by Lawanda Pugh for an on
premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Cosmos
located at 980 Broad St. There will be Dance. Commission District 1. Super District 9.
(Approved by Public Services Committee November 10, 2014)
10. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 14-47: A request by James R. Key for an on
premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Executive
Inn located at 1238 Gordon Hwy. There will be Dance. There will be Sunday Sales.
Commission District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee
November 10, 2014)
11. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 14-48: request by Clay C. Mingus
for an on premise consumption Liquor, Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with
Twin Peaks Augusta located at 277 Robert C. Daniel Pkwy. There will be Sunday Sales.
Commission District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee
November 10, 2014)
13. Motion to approve Dedication of Advance Voting Center and Community Room in
honor of Linda W. Beazley. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 10, 2014)
PUBLIC SAFETY
5
15. Motion to approve the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office (RCSO) request to use monies
from the sale of surplus firearms (152,500.00) to enhance operations within RCSO by the
purchase of equipment. (Approved by Public Safety Committee November 10, 2014)
16. Motion to approve AT&T VIPER Call Handling Upgrade contact. (Approved by Public
Safety Committee November 10, 2014)
ENGINEERING SERVICES
19. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of property for right of
way, (Parcel 227-0-093-00-0) 4764 Windsor Spring Road. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee November 10, 2014)
20. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of property for right of
way, permanent easement, and one temporary driveway easement (Parcel 227-0-263-00-0)
2504 Highway 88. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 10, 2014)
21. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of property for right of
way, permanent construction and maintenance easement, and one temporary driveway
easement (Parcel 227-0-095-04-0) 2491 Railroad Avenue. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee November 10, 2014)
22. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of property for right of
way, permanent easement, and demolition easement (Parcel 193-0-033-00-0) 4630 Windsor
Spring Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 10, 2014)
23. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of property for
temporary easement, (Parcel 053-0-173-00-0) 3628 Belair Road. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee November 10, 2014)
24. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of property for
temporary easement, (Parcel 052-0-433-01-0) 3861 Belair Road. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee November 10, 2014)
25. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of property for two
permanent access, utility, and maintenance easements (Parcel 067-0-001-00-0) 2395
Gordon Highway. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 10, 2014)
26. Motion to approve adoption of the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and the Flood
Insurance Study (FIS) as revised by Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) 14-04-2417P.
Effective November 14, 2014. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November
10, 2014)
27. Motion to approve adoption of the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) as revised by
Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) 14-04-4315P, Effective November 14, 2014). (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee November 10, 2014)
28. Motion to approve entering into Temporary Access Easement for Construction
Agreement with Church of the Good Shepard (Episcopal Day School) for playground/ball
field expansion at Episcopal Day School and authorize Mayor to sign associated documents
as requested by the Augusta Engineering Department. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee November 10, 2014)
29. Motion to approve funds in the amount of $125,401.30 for emergency water main
relocation work for GDOT SR 56/Mike Padgett Highway Widening Project. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee November 10, 2014)
30. Motion to approve entering into Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with three (3)
local Non-profit Organizations (Phinizy Center for Water Sciences, Savannah River
6
Keepers, and Brier Creek Soil and Water Conservation District) to create opportunities for
Augusta citizens to participate in activities designed to reduce pollutants in local streams.
Also authorize Mayor to sign MOU, as requested by AED. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee November 10, 2014)
31. Motion to approve Augusta Utilities Sanitary Sewer Connection Services Program.
(Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 10, 2014)
32. Motion to approve funding to Cranston Engineering Group, P.C. in the amount of
$85,000 for the fees associated with performing the required NPDES Storm Water
Monitoring on various Augusta Utilities Projects. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee November 10, 2014)
33. Motion to approve entering into a Mowing and Maintenance Agreement with GDOT in
the vicinity of Rae’s Creek between John C Calhoun and Broad Street in conjunction with
Broad Street Off Ramp over Rae’s Creek Bridge Rehabilitation Project. Also, authorize
the Mayor to sign the Mowing and Maintenance Agreement and the associated Indemnity
Agreement as requested by AED. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee
November 10, 2014)
34. Motion to approve the assignment of the engineering firms to specific Augusta Utilities
CIP projects with a change on the first item under Water Design from Gordon Highway
24” Water Line Olive Road to Doug Barnard Parkway to Alternate Downtown Feed.
(Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 10, 2014)
35. Motion to approve and accept an easement swap with Crowell & Co. on the Gordon
Highway 30” Water Main Project. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee
November 20, 2014)
36. Motion to approve and authorize submitting an application to GDOT for fiscal year
2015 Local Maintenance and Improvement Grant (LMIG), t be used for resurfacing roads
and repair as requested by AED. Also approve and authorize the Mayor to execute LMIG
application on yearly basis as required by Georgia DOT. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee November 10, 2014)
37. Motion to authorize Notice of award of an Emergency Task Order in the amount of
$79,919 for the Lakeside Drive 6 Inch Water Main project by Quality Storm Water
Solutions. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 10, 2014)
38. Motion to approve award of Consultant Service Agreement for On Call Field and
Laboratory Testing for Soil and Construction Materials, and Geotechnical Inspections and
Investigations to Moreland Altobelli, AMEC Environmental & Infrastructure, Cradno
ATC, and MC Squared Inc., subject to receipt of signed contracts and proper insurance
documents. Also approve $500,000 to fund the proposed on-call CMT_Geotech services.
Funding is available in TIA Projects Funds and TIA Discretionary Funds as requested by
AED. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 10, 2014)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
39. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held
November 4, 2014 and Special Called Meeting held November 10, 2014)
APPOINTMENTS
40. Motion to approve the appointment of Ms. Dorothy L. Williams to the Augusta Animal
Control Board representing District 3.
7
ADDENDUM
49. Z-14-46 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve a petition by James B. Trotter, on behalf of Beverly A. Ford, requesting a change
of zoning from Zone R-1C (One-family Residential) to Zone B-2 (General Business)
affecting property containing approximately 1.3 acres and is known as 110, 112, 114, 116,
118, 120 and 122 Poinciana Drive. Tax Map 011-0-007-06-0, 011-0-007-05-0, 011-0-007-04-
0, 011-0-007-03-0, 011-0-007-02-0, 011-006-00-0 & 011-0-007-01-0 DISTRICT 7
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion Passes 10-0. [Items 1-3, 6, 9-11, 13, 15, 16 19-40, 49]
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, let’s move on to the pulled agenda items first.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
4. ZA-R-234 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission
to approve a petition to amend the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance by adding a new
Section 25-G, Mixed Use District Zoning Classification, and for other purposes.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The reason I asked this to be pulled because we
had committee meetings but we really didn’t have committee meetings if that makes any sense.
We passed through a lot of these different items so I need to know from somebody from
Planning and Zoning what am I approving? Paul, tell me what I’m voting on.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. DeCamp.
Mr. DeCamp: Yes, Mr. Williams, Commissioners and Mayor, this would be a new
section of the zoning ordinance a new classification that would permit a mixed, mix of uses on
sites of 20 acres or more. It’s designed to encourage efficient use of the land, high quality
housing and obviously accommodate where desirable some light commercial uses along with the
housing and also set aside property for green space in the development as well.
Mr. Mayor: Smart growth.
Mr. DeCamp: Essentially.
Mr. Williams: Like some of the smart phones, Mr. Mayor, they ain’t that smart if you
look at them but I’ve got no problem. I’m in support, Paul, but when I get something to vote on
like this and it went through committee but we really didn’t have the committee we kind of
8
passed it through so to speak. I hate to vote on something then somebody sees me on the street
and says well what was that change?
Mr. DeCamp: Right.
Mr. Williams: When it comes ---
Mr. DeCamp: --- well ---
Mr. Williams
: --- to committee we and I know we get long up here not you but up here
we get long. People don’t like to stay they want to do a consent item and consent everything and
said you had committee. That’s not having a committee to me. Discussion about it knowing
what you’re voting on and why you’re voting on so, Mr. Mayor, I’ve got no problem with that. I
think we’ve always tried to do that be comprehensive and do the right thing, build nice facilities.
I don’t think we had a problem where people were trying to build and do things that’s really
a motion to approve
undesirable but I’m going to make because I did get some explanation not
just (inaudible).
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 10-0.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
5. Motion to approve the Resolution authorizing the Airport Executive Director and
Airport Finance Director take all necessary actions to redeem the required services and all
required resolutions or ordinance amendments to conduct the redemption of the below
listed bonds as approved by the Augusta Aviation Commission at their October 30, 2014
meeting. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 10, 2014)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This bond issue is something we did here and I
didn’t understand or didn’t realize until now the same bond agency that does the bonding here
does the airport and everything else we do. Is that how that works?
Mr. Mayor: I’m told that Diane McNabb is on the way so that she could address it when
she gets here.
Mr. Williams: She’s too late for today and too early for tomorrow, Mr. Mayor. I need
somebody to tell me what are we doing.
9
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Plunkett and Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Plunkett: PFM is the financial advisor to Augusta and these bonds will be issued by
the City of Augusta so therefore she’d be serving that same role.
Mr. Williams: Okay but Jim, and I didn’t know what we approved here especially with
the bonding agency there’s a lot of conversation about bonding and how much money’s being
made, who gets the bond. And then when this came through committee or was passed through,
you weren’t part of that were you, but anyway it was passed on through and now I’m finding out
that the same agency is doing the airport. What other agency what other part of this government
bonding is that same agency doing? We know we talk about making sure that we are doing this
thing where everybody had to be able to come to the table. But, Mr. Johnson, I see you standing
there. Have you got any comment?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: No, sir, Mr. Commissioner, other than the fact that it did come through the
Aviation Commission and we voted on it.
Mr. Williams: So who decided on this firm for the Aviation Commission? I thought Ms.
McNabb was doing for this body not just for the entire city. Can somebody help me with that,
Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Plunkett, do you?
Mr. Plunkett: Well, PFM, sir, is the financial advisor to this body and this body is the
city.
Mr. Williams: That’s right.
Mr. Plunkett: So with the airport bonds it would be issued by the City of Augusta so
she’d be serving in that capacity. If you recall with the Water and Sewer Bonds there was
discussion about negotiated versus competitive bids and one of the things that we have been
talking about relative to this transaction and we talked to Ms. Sams is to bring a recommendation
to the body for a underwriter for this deal and using, working with Ms. Sams in terms of DBE
involvement in this transaction. I’m not sure if that’s what you’re kind of concerned about
possibly, Mr. Williams, but that was to be done, this motion is actually to get the process started.
It’s kind of a two-pronged deal comparatively speaking so the airport body would vote but also
before anything gets further approved, it’s approved by this body.
Mr. Williams: I understand that, Mr. Mayor. If I can follow up. So you’re telling me,
Jim, that the same bonding agency that Ms. McNabb works for, operates, would be the same one
to do the bonding for the water and sewage and for the airport.
Mr. Plunkett: They would serve as your financial advisor, yes, sir.
10
Mr. Williams: Okay, I listen and learn, Mr. Mayor. I mean I don’t have anything to add
to that it just that I didn’t know that (unintelligible).
Mr. Guilfoyle: Motion to approve.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Lockett: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have ---
The Clerk: Who, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Lockett. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Lockett seconded. Okay, we have a motion that’s
been made and properly seconded. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now vote
by the usual sign.
Mr. Williams vote No.
Motion Passes 9-1.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item.
The Clerk: Item number 7 is to approve ---
Mr. Williams: Madam Clerk, you can take 7 and 8 together they’re both going to be
related.
The Clerk: Okay, they’re companion items.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair decides that we will take those two together.
Mr. Williams: Okay, well, Mr. Chair says we can do that. We can do them one at a time
that’s fine.
Mr. Mayor: No, we can take them together.
The Clerk: So it’s been approved they be companion items, right?
Mr. Williams: That’s right.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
7. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 44: request by Aritiben Vijaybhai
Patel for a retail package Liquor License to be used in connection with Inwood Spirits
11
located at 2940 Inwood Drive Ste B. Commission District 5. Super District 9. (Approved by
Public Services Committee November 10, 2014)
8. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 14-45: request by Aratiben
Vijaybhai Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with
Mahakali Food Store, located at 2940 Inwood Dr. Commission District 5. Super District 9.
(Approved by Public Services Committee November 10, 2014)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Since we’ve got a companion item passed I’m
not opposed but what I did ask about in committee because we did have a committee about those
addresses. This building faces Deans Bridge Road and the address says Inwood which is a side
street that goes in there. And think you mentioned that you would check into finding out about
how do we get that changed to make sure that it is a Deans Bridge Road address versus the
Inwood. I’ve got people in that neighborhood calling me wanting to know what kind of liquor
store is going down the street from them and it’s not in their neighborhood, it’s on Deans Bridge
Road.
Mr. Harris: Yes, sir, I think Mr. Sherman did speak with someone in GIS about seeing
what the process could be to have those addresses changed. But what has happened in that
situation that property at one time faced Inwood Drive and when it was bought it had the egress
on Inwood. The building was built where the egress is now on Deans Bridge Road so that’s why
it has a 2940 Inwood Drive address.
Mr. Williams: And that’s why I’m requesting to get it changed to the proper way it
should be on Deans Bridge Road which is the way it faces. Now at one point I mean I used to be
a little boy I used to be ten years old but I’m past that now. You can’t stay the same and that’s
why I asked Rob, I thought it was you but someone to correct that. There’s no problem with the
business, no problem with it going up there but I just think that’s because other neighborhoods
will say well they’re in that neighborhood and that’s on Inwood Drive and they’re not, they’re
really on Deans Bridge Road which is zoned for where they are and versus the residents. So
that’s a small thing, Larry, but I hope somebody would ---
Mr. Harris: Yes, sir, we’re working on it. And like I said Mr. Sherman spoke with
someone in GIS and they’re looking at the process and if it can be changed it will be.
Mr. Williams: So moved, Mr. Mayor, for both of those.
Mr. Mayor: Motion to approve items 7 and 8? Do we have a second?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion Passes 10-0.
12
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
12. Motion to approve a request by the Planning & Development Department to renew all
of the existing alcohol beverage licenses for the adult entertainment establishments,
amusement arcades, adult bookstores, and dance halls in the City of Augusta. District 1
thru 8. Super Districts 9 and 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 10,
2014)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just need to know from someone when we
restructured these things have they been discussed with this body so we’ll know again what
we’re voting on, what’s been changed because when you office made the changes then we don’t
know but we vote on it how can we respond or how can we share. And it’s no knock on you,
Mr. Larry, because you don’t sit up here when the committee is rushed through. But how do I
know what I’m voting on?
Mr. Harris: Okay and what changes are you referencing because other than we’re just
asking for the routine renewal of the people who are already licensed in the city. I don’t know of
any other changes. Any other ordinance changes would’ve been brought before you in the past
year for the changes and you should be aware of them. But other than that I don’t know of any
structural changes that would make any difference at this time.
Mr. Williams: Well, and we talked about in committee when we did discuss some of that
that the adult entertainment the license fees I think we made adjustments on that. I think you all
prorate the license fees now because we at one time you had to pay the license fee from half the
year to the remaining of the year or pay the whole year depending on when you came in. But I
think there was an adjustment made. I’m like you I don’t have no way of knowing when stuff
gets in here and not discussed whether it’s new, old or just beginning. So if there’s no changes
I’ve got no problem but by not discussing it I didn’t, I mean these guys up here are smarter than I
am. I know Mary Davis is smarter than I am but these guys up here are smarter than I am so
they already know this stuff so that’s why they don’t ask no questions. Help this guy here
. So moved, Mr. Mayor, I’ve got no problem I just
because he’s already on top of this stuff
wanted to ask that question.
Mr. Mayor: Okay and Commissioner Davis is better looking as well. We have a motion
that’s been made. Do we have a second on that?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner
Mason.
13
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to insure that all of the existing
establishments and businesses are currently in good standing.
Mr. Harris: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mason: Okay, I just need to put that on the record. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, 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 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk next agenda item please.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
14. Motion to approve Amendment to the Code Regarding Vacant Lot Clean up allowing
for 14-calendar day notification to property owners. (Approved by the Commission
November 2, 2014 – second reading)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I talked with License and Inspection on yesterday about the
cleanup of lots and they said that the Environment, that Mark Johnson’s crew will be handling
that. But over on MLK there’s a fenced in area where the lot is overgrown and they can’t do
anything about it they said. They talked with someone who owned the property that lives in
Maryland and my question is why is it that we’re changing this ordinance and trying to get this
cleanup to happen within 14 days. How is it that some areas can get by with not doing it then
some areas that we can go in and just move? It seems like it’s some, two sets of rules and that’s
putting it mildly. But this overgrown area is there with a gate around it with a fence with a lock
on it and it has not been cleaned. I requested this over and over and over. Finally they did get in
touch with someone and said that they maybe they would be able to do something around the
first of December. And I guess I’m just trying to figure out how we can have a rule on one side
where people don’t have a fence and going in a doing it. But because your area is fenced off
then you can’t go inside and make sure that these people follow the guidelines of Augusta
Richmond County. So can somebody tell me how that?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: The way our business practice has been is if we have access or egress
otherwise it’s considered a secure piece of property which typically goes through License and
Inspection which will go through the appropriate court process to get us right of entry. We don’t
have the authority to go remove personal property to gain egress into, we can’t disassemble to
get access into with a, that’s been it, it’s secure property.
14
Mr. Mayor: Mark, I just have a question for you. Is that state law because we have a
very strong property rights state?
Mr. Johnson: I don’t know. When we took over we basically took over anything that
was unoccupied or unsecure. Everything else is maintained going through the court process so if
it’s an occupied property where it gets overgrown it goes through a court process. If it’s a
secured property then License and Inspection runs it through a conventional process and then we
take it over once we get right of entry and then we cut it and clean it.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams, you still have the floor.
Mr. Williams: I’ve got a problem when the little old lady who don’t have a fence around
her property is being charged or being billed for something we walk up there and do whether we
check with her or not. And I know this, what kicks that, this I’m going to change that. But then
we can take people and put a fence around their property and put a gate on it and we can’t do
nothing but ride by because we got to find a way to get them to court. Now I talked with License
and Inspection yesterday ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you two more minutes.
Mr. Williams: --- talked with License and Inspection yesterday about this and I think like
I said we’ve got two sets of rules. If you own a piece of property in this city, we talked about
absentee land owners anyway how in other cities don’t allow people to own property and don’t
have somebody here physically to take care of that property if they live somewhere else. I got no
problem with them living around the world but there ought to be somebody here to make sure
that we just don’t pass by this. And it only happens in certain areas of this city. So that’s the
issue that really bothers me when we have people who are trying to obey the law and do right.
We put fines on them but other folks we let them go.
Mr. Mayor: Can I get a motion to approve?
Mr. Harris: Motion to approve.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to approve. Is there a second?
Mr. Hasan: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Johnson, are there any provisions in place
or are there any coordination between your department and Environmental and License and
Inspection? If 311 or someone should give you a request to clean a vacant lot and you get there
and you found the lot is secured do you automatically report this concern to License and
Inspection or do you just say I can’t get it because it’s secured?
15
Mr. Johnson: No, we partner with Pam at License and Inspection or even the Marshal’s
Department if we feel that it’s criminal and then turn it over to them to get assistance.
Mr. Lockett: Well, do you follow up with License and Inspection to see whether or not
the task was accomplished or once you turn it over to them you’re out of the picture for that
particular property?
Mr. Johnson: Typically once it’s resolved it comes back to us. I don’t know that we
have a defined reminder system in play but typically once something goes over when they
resolve it, it does come back.
Mr. Lockett: Well, I thought my friend from Super District 9 had asked you about a
specific property. If that is the case or has that situation been resolved?
Mr. Johnson: It has not been resolved. Our department turned it back over to License
and Inspection once it was a gated property that we couldn’t get access to.
Mr. Lockett: Right.
Mr. Johnson: And then License and Inspection is currently looking into that.
Mr. Lockett: Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Yes, sir, on Richmond Hill Road there’s a piece of property with a
privacy fence around it. And we, I’ve got calls I mean I had told the young man to come before
the Commission who have been fined because he’s got a privacy fence around some property
that was evidently zoned to (unintelligible) and because stuff was behind the privacy fence that
you could not see. But there’s a privacy fence and I’m wondering how in the world, you thought
you had me, how in the world can we allow someone with a fence with a gate that you can see
around it and not get that cleaned up but we’ve got people with privacy fences that we go behind
their privacy fence and charge them. So it’s two rules and that’s what I was getting at, Mr.
Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: I think you could take a couple of goats out there and throw them in the
middle of the night over that fence. They’ll eat about anything. We have a motion that’s been
made and properly seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion Passes 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: It’s called a goat bomb.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
16
17. Motion to approve appointment of non-board members to the Animal Services
ordinance review sub-committee. Non-member appointments will be Dr. Mark Tribby,
DVM; Linda-Bragg Workman; Sgt. John Gray, RCSD; Sammy Sias. Proposed alternates:
Hayley Zielinski, DMA Rescue and Dr. Thomas Clark, Phd. (Approved by Public Safety
Committee November 10, 2014)
The Clerk: And for the record, Mr. Mayor, if I could Ms. Linda-Bragg Workman called
and asked that we correct the spelling of her name to Lynda, for the record.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you. My good friend the elected position in District 4 Mr. Sias is
on this committee. I just want to be clear that that’s not going cause any problem for him being
as an elected official to serve in that capacity or will that change anything or not?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: It appears this is a subcommittee appointment and it’s my anticipation
that this appointment would be finished before he would become on this body so there would be
no conflict unless I’m incorrect about the timing on that.
Mr. Williams
: Okay, so I get that’s a no answer. I mean that’s, thank you that’s a no.
So moved.
I just want to be clear.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made.
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Do we have a second? We have a motion that’s been made and properly
seconded. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion Passes 10-0.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
18. Motion to approve funding for final Design Consultant Services Supplemental
Agreement two to Cranston Engineering Group, Inc. in the amount of $84,960.00 for the
th
15 Street over the Augusta Canal (Broad Street On-Ramp over Rae’s Creek) as requested
by the AED. This project will be funded through SPLOST Phase VI for the Engineering
Department. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 10, 2014)
Mr. Mayor: It’s the last one, Mr. Mayor, that’s the one you were looking for so that’s the
last one I got. I need to know first of all is that those monies that SPLOST money’s there I know
but is that the end, is there any more money left in there for that particular project? Is that, just
what is that doing, Abie?
17
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Ladson.
Mr. Ladson: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, this is a regular SPLOST project
and the funding that you actually see this should be the very last, it’s actually a change in the, it’s
not a change in the scope, it’s just a supplement to the contract. Initially what we do is when it
comes down to bridges we normally do an assessment and a concept to actually figure out what’s
actually wrong with the bridge. And then from that point we do a supplemental agreement based
on what we found out.
Mr. Williams: So, Mr. Ladson, you’re saying if the bridge comes back with some issues
then we’ve got more money in SPLOST to go forward with?
Mr. Ladson: What I’m saying is that based on, we have money in SPLOST to take care
of the design phase of this.
Mr. Williams: I heard that but my question to you was if it comes back with some
issues?
Mr. Ladson: We already found the issues. That’s why we’re doing the supplement to the
(inaudible).
Mr. Williams: So this will fix the bridge it’s not to ---
Mr. Ladson: This is to complete the design, to do the preliminary design and the final
design of the bridge. We hadn’t gotten the, once we do the preliminary and final design then
we’ll actually send out bids for construction.
Mr. Williams: So there’s money and my first initial statement was there money left to do
to continue this work. You find some issues we’ve got money in the SPLOST VI to ---
Mr. Ladson: There should be money left to do it. Now we’re still going through the, we
would still have to go through the preliminary and final plans and then the project would have to
bid. We won’t know until the bids actually come in. We have a budget and we have an estimate
and it meets, you know, it meets that right now but you really won’t know until the bids come in
because the bids could be high and the bids could be low.
Mr. Williams
: But my question is, is there money left in this SPLOST VI. Not how
much I didn’t ask you the dollar figure but you know you’re talking like you were scared to tell
so moved, Mr. Mayor.
me you’re going to have some left. Okay,
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion.
Mr. Lockett: Second.
18
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign.
Motion Passes 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, on to the regular agenda.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
41. Motion to approve the Christman Company, Construction Manager at Risk Contract
for the Augusta, Georgia Transit Operation and Maintenance Facility on Highway 56. (No
recommendation by Public Services Committee November 10, 2014)
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I still have a problem with this
agenda item. Our distinguished attorney Mr. Plunkett at our last meeting told us that he was still
in the process of getting some supplemental data. And if he doesn’t have that supplemental data
today in place I would like to refer this back to committee.
Mr. Mayor: Are you putting that in the form of a motion?
Mr. Lockett: Yes, sir.
Mr. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Plunkett, do you have?
Mr. Plunkett: Mr. Mayor I’m not, I don’t recall anything about supplemental materials. I
believe you’re referring to the limitation of liability letter to be issued by the EPD that has not
been issued. But I’m not familiar with any supplemental material I was supposed to provide to
the body.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Plunkett, it’s just a matter of semantics.
You know exactly what I was talking about and you just identified. Now do you have it?
Mr. Plunkett: Well, the reason I’m saying that is that’s not material I can provide. I
mean that’s coming from EPD.
Mr. Lockett: But ---
Mr. Plunkett: The letter has not been issued.
19
Mr. Lockett: --- it has not and so I move that, I’ve already made a motion to go back to
committee pending issuance of what our distinguished attorney has indicated.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion to refer it back to committee that’s been made and
properly seconded. Commissioner Fennoy.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Plunkett, what has been your experience in the past in getting this letter
issued?
Mr. Plunkett: My experience has been predominantly with no further action letters in
terms of closures of underground storage tanks and that has been that once you kind of get a
action letter to go forward with the cap plan which is what we did but it could be some extended
period of time before you actually got the closure letter. You know one would have hoped that
we already would’ve had it by now but based on the record references by Sutherland Asbill
which is the counsel to Augusta and the Board of Education relative to environmental side as
well as our environmental engineer ASIS. It’s going to be some time; I mean it’s a state issue
that we can’t push them to make it any faster according to our folks.
Mr. Fennoy: And I guess my next question is that what would be the financial impact on
I guess delaying this issue until the letter is issued.
Mr. Plunkett: I think you can look at the financial impact in two different ways. One is
you know the cost of construction may be going up and things of that nature that Ms. Sharon
may be able to talk to you more directly. As far as if the letter is not issued now versus
sometime in the future would there be any additional environmental costs, the answer would be
no. If you have to do additional cleanup you have to do additional cleanup if you don’t have to
do any more there’s no problem there. As Mark Hartz had indicated you know the area we’re
talking about being involved is not in a contaminated area so we can move forward but Sharon
would probably be better to address, you know, the issues in terms of the grants for the project
and things of that nature in terms of what the funding is going to and, you know, the costs that
are escalated and things of that nature. I’m just doing the land so to speak.
Mr. Fennoy: All right and I’m quite sure that this Commission does not want to move
forward on anything that’s going to put the safety of the people that’s going to be working out
there at risk. But at the same time we need to I need to know the I guess Ms. Broady whether if
it’s two years from now before this letter is issued will we still be able to do this project at the
same cost as we have now.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Broady. And I know that’s a, that’s a ---
The Clerk: Ms. Dottery.
Mr. Mayor: --- Dottery, excuse me.
The Clerk: That’s Animal Control.
20
Ms. Dottery: I get her emails too. Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, we do have grants
associated with this project. As a matter of fact we have three grants that we are utilizing with
this project. And one of the grants will expire 2016, one will expire 2017 and we have one that
we’re currently using that will expire at the end of this year. Now what happens with the grant
that we’re currently using as long as you can show to the FTA that we are still utilizing those
funds there are activities going on we can continue with that grant. But it will expire at the end
of this year.
Mr. Mayor: And what’s the dollar value on that grant?
Ms. Dottery: Just for the 56 project we have $271,329.00 still remaining.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Were you finished questioning or?
Mr. Fennoy: Yes, I guess my final question is from and I think the Richmond County we
paid about, we paid 20% and 80% of that is ---
Ms. Dottery: FTA.
Mr. Fennoy: --- FTA?
Ms. Dottery: Yes, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay. And the monies that is expiring in 2016 and the monies that expire
and I think you said 2017?
Ms. Dottery: Yes, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: Will the, I mean I know you have no way of knowing but if this is
prolonged to 2016 or 2017 the cost of that project will probably be go up because of inflation.
And where would ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two.
Mr. Fennoy: --- if we get the additional funding in order to complete that project?
Ms. Dottery: I’m going to answer that to the best of my ability and I may need Mr.
Lewis to come up because he does the grants for us. I would see with inflation costs going up,
Mr. Lewis would have to prepare new grants to make a new request for additional dollars.
Understand that one of the grants that we have right now it has 2010, 2011 and 2013 monies
combined in that one grant for this project and FTA allowed us to do that so we could utilize
those dollars that were left over that we hadn’t applied for. So we’ve combined one grant to do
this and that grant came out to be $6.4 million dollars that we have just for this project.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Lewis.
21
Mr. Lewis: I was hoping I didn’t have to come up here. Well, the first amount that she
gave you is just for A&E, Architecture and Engineering Design, two-hundred and some thousand
dollars. And we spent over three-hundred and some thousand already for A&E for the 56
Project. We combined money from 10, 11 and 12 $6.5 million dollars for 56. We used ’09
money $2.5 million dollars to go to 56 so in reality we have right about $8 million dollars
slightly over for construction, okay? And we haven’t touched any of that money because of
course we haven’t started building. We have used our A&E money and we still have a balance
of A&E money left. The only problem that we have here you have to spend old money first.
This is ’09 money 10, 11 and 12 money. I have a grant sitting on my desk now for $3.3 million
dollars for FY ’13 money. We haven’t gone after ’14 money and ’15 money became available
October 1st of this year. So that’s the picture we’re looking at here.
Mr. Fennoy: And I guess my final ---
Mr. Mayor: Your final, final question?
Mr. Fennoy: --- and I guess it’s really not a question as much as it is a comment but is
there any way that we could call upon our legislative delegation and get them involved in the
process to see if there’s any way that they could, I mean if the project is safe then we need to go
ahead and start. If there’s some issues out there, the issues need to be corrected. But in order for
us to move forward we need to I guess hear from the people in Atlanta and maybe we need to,
Mr. Mayor, get our legislative delegation involved so that we could do what needs to be done
with this project.
Mr. Lewis: Well, we don’t need the legislature; we got our sitting commissioners to
decide this right now. When we went to Atlanta when this project first hit the table in 2009 we
got the project, we got the money for it, we just haven’t acted on it. We don’t need the
legislature we need our commissioners to go ahead and make a decision on this thing. And the
FTA has spoken, they’ve sent their crew down here. They wouldn’t give you $8 million dollars
if they thought it was contaminated. The only problem we have right now is not acting on it.
That’s what I see is the problem.
Mr. Fennoy: And my final comment, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: You’ve got a minute and nine seconds.
Mr. Fennoy: All right, okay and I think what some of my colleagues issues, the issues of
some of my colleagues have is documentation from Atlanta that this area is --
Mr. Lewis: The documentation is the grant. The grant was approved though the FTA.
We went to Atlanta we took a crew of six people. I was so happy when we left Atlanta; I didn’t
have to drive back I could’ve floated back. They allowed me to combine 10, 11 and 12 money
and that’s unprecedented.
Mr. Mayor: I think you called me on the way back.
22
Mr. Lewis: Yeah, so we still haven’t acted on it and that’s going on two years. Now I
would hate to submit a grant and they’re going to say hey, Lewis, what’re you doing? You’re
sitting on ’09 money.
Mr. Fennoy: All right, okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Hasan then Commissioner Lockett then Commissioner
Williams then Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Lewis, how long have you been dealing with the FTA in terms of
securing grants for the city?
Mr. Lewis: Almost twenty years.
Mr. Hasan: Almost twenty years?
Mr. Lewis: I’ve got a good record. I don’t want to spoil it.
Mr. Hasan: In terms of what we’re requesting right now in terms of the letter what
impact if any, you just mentioned that they’re allowing you to combine resources from several
years which is unprecedented. Were they aware where there was considered contamination on
this site at any time?
Mr. Lewis: Oh yes, they’ve sent their people down here and they reviewed it. They first
came in 2009 and they saw the raw project and they moved on from there. We went out there
before the board had started up.
Mr. Hasan: So what document, I’m sorry go ahead.
Mr. Lewis: I’m just saying they went ahead and approved everything.
Mr. Hasan: So what documentation in a sense that even though they approved it they’re
assuming we’re going to do what we’re supposed to do on our end especially when we had the
resources to do it. So what documentation if any had we provided to them that we have stepped
up to the plate and lived up to some of our obligations thus far?
Mr. Lewis: We had to do what’s called an Environmental Assessment Package and it’s
almost thirty items, it’s a checklist. We processed that and it took about eight or nine months
and you got approval. That’s when they approved the $6.5 million.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, the last question I think here. Is the letter that we’re requesting what
would you think if any would have an impact on this particular project and how long? There
may be, this may be for the attorney how does it normally take to receive that documentation and
does it preclude us from proceeding on at this point?
Mr. Lewis: That’s out of my realm. I just stick with the grants so --
23
Mr. Plunkett: It does not preclude you from going forward. There’s no reason why, you
own the property with the Board of Education. The Board of Education’s going to convey their
interest in the property. You have every legal right to move forward. You have engaged in an
environmental I mean an environmental remediation company, they’ve done their work, they
submitted the plan back in ‘09. They implemented the plan and they submitted a report to the
state and we’re simply waiting for a bureaucratic response with the limitation of liability letter.
So it’s all done as far as fixing any problems that were required to be fixed.
Mr. Hasan: In terms of the front part of the property we’ll say for lack of a better term
what the school board has done and what we have done what we’re concerned about right now
were these projects done simultaneously and were they done by the same firm?
Mr. Lewis: It was, the Board of Education actually was in charge of taking care of the
remediation because they had to get on the site first. After that was done the Board of
Education’s been there probably 18 months or more. They’ve been out there on the, you know,
next door to where we’re talking about doing work. I mean it’s not like it’s a new uncharted land
for us to go to. I mean it’s next door to the Board of Education’s site so it’s ---
Mr. Hasan: Did the same firm do the work in terms of testing for toxics?
Mr. Plunkett: One report for both groups.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, last question is does anybody know what the status is with our current
th
transportation facility on 15 Street and are we getting are we in heading in violation of that
particular lease or do we have a lease or do we own the property? What’s the status on that or
have we sold it?
Mr. Plunkett: The property’s been conveyed to the Land Bank for the purpose of
ultimately conveying it to the, by contract to the name may have changed but the MCG
Foundation. That lease allows us to be there until we vacate the property. Obviously the
foundation would like us to vacate that property as sooner than later because that is the center of
th
a project that’s going to basically renovate from Walton Way to Calhoun Expressway, 15 Street
over to Chafee Avenue. And they’re kind of a little bit limited to what they can do until they get
site control over this property.
Mr. Hasan: Okay and my final question to Mr. Lewis. I want to make sure I understand.
Bill Fennoy, this stuff is catching. For the final purpose of making a statement here, Mr. Lewis,
in your 20 years or so of experience you’re saying at this point you feel that we’ve satisfied all
the regulations of the FTA at this point in terms of contamination, those kinds of things and what
you’re saying to this body is the mere fact that you have grants in hand as a testimony to that fact
that they’re in compliance that we’re in compliance and they agree with that at the end of the
day.
Mr. Lewis: Well, all I can go by is the, I’m not an environmentalist so I turn all the
paperwork over to the FTA people. And once they saw it and they approved it, so from the grant
standpoint they issued me the grant so, issued the city the grant so.
24
Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Lockett then Commissioner Williams then
Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Lewis, from a grant standpoint it seems as if they took what you said
for granted. But I’m not going to do that. I take issue with you making a comment that this
governing body has been the holdup on this project.
Mr. Lewis: I didn’t use those words.
Mr. Lockett: I’m not quoting you, let me finish. If you go back to the minutes I think
about 2009 it indicated that this project on 56 would be completed in about eight or nine months.
You and I we had a very deliberate conversation some months ago before this governing body
about contamination about a timeline of documentation that you had received from them. Quite
a bit of it was missing. We had to go back to the school board and brought in a big book still
stuff was missing. Now I’ve been up here for five years and I’ve seen some promises made that
weren’t exactly accurate and I’m a little skeptical about if I can’t see it in writing because
obviously the lots of words over the last five years and some of them just didn’t prove to be
accurate. And I’m not just talking about you now please don’t take me wrong. The architect, I
think it was October of probably 2013 maybe 2012 indicated that there was indeed
contamination out there. We had environmental Mr. Mark Johnson and his people out there
digging and so forth to let some of this stuff come out of the ground. So we know something is
wrong with it. We just found out a couple of weeks ago that we can’t apply federal funding
because we don’t have the rights, we just made that adjustment.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner, that’s the second time I’ve recognized you but I’m
going to give you one more minute for a point of personal privilege.
Mr. Lockett: I don’t need any more, Mr. Mayor, thank you. And after owning the air
rights to the parking garage if you don’t show me in writing I’m like my colleague the
distinguished commissioner for Super District 9 show me in writing because right now some of
the words that we’re getting is just not living up to what I would expect. Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. With all of the money that Mr. Lewis talked
about with the grants and whatever money’s there evidently this is an expensive piece of project
we’re working on. But like the District 5 distinguished commissioner said if we don’t have
something in writing that’s what we’ve been waiting on. If it’s that important if it’s that much
money why hadn’t we got the letter? Now I’m not talking about someone coming down here
and physically digging a hole I’m talking about somebody just sending an email to your office or
sending an email to someone saying hey this is, we got no problem. Now when you say the
Commissioners and you did make that statement that the commission needs to move forward as
if we were sitting here just holding it up because that’s all we had to do. I’ve got 212 things I
could be doing right now but I’m here trying to make sure we make the best decision and that is
25
to get something in writing and if it ain’t no problem, why don’t we have that? You drove to
Atlanta and floated back you could’ve brought a letter back with you but you chose not to
because they didn’t give you that letter.
Mr. Lewis: I didn’t know that process was involved.
Mr. Williams: Okay, but that process is involved.
Mr. Lewis: (inaudible) and like Commissioner Lockett said we thought we had approval
from the Commission. When we brought this big book and Commissioner Lockett in your own
words you said that’s satisfactory.
Mr. Williams: Okay ---
Mr. Lewis: I can only go by that. If you’re going to go back and pull minutes, that
should be a part of the minutes.
Mr. Williams: Put the time on the Planning Director ---
Mr. Lewis: No, I’m not the Planning Director I (unintelligible).
Mr. Williams: ---- the grant, the plan is where it is.
Mr. Lewis: All I know is we got the grant funds.
Mr. Williams: And the money’s no problem that’s not the issue.
Mr. Lewis: The money will be a problem ---
Mr. Williams: It would have to be a problem because the first thing ought to be first. If
you don’t have a certified letter to build on and then you vote for it you’re going to be walking
the streets shaking your head, well, why they did that? You’re not in this chair. Now you did
your job and I appreciate that, Mr. Mayor, but I’m saying that we need something certified
saying that it’s okay. If it’s okay that shouldn’t be a problem.
Mr. Lewis: Commissioner Williams, our attorney Mr. Plunkett, I’m pretty sure he’s
going to get the letter.
Mr. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: If you get the letter we’ll vote on it.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle.
26
Mr. Guilfoyle: Wow. Mr. Plunkett ---
Mr. Plunkett: Yes, sir.
Mr. Guilfoyle: --- as far as the request we have been working on this bus barn property
in unison with the school board. They had passed all the requirements for approval to have their
building built.
Mr. Plunkett: Yes, sir.
Mr. Guilfoyle: And it’s in full operation at this moment.
Mr. Plunkett: That’s correct.
Mr. Guilfoyle: What is the holdup for our side of the property which is on the same lot?
Is there any reason why it’s, the do not proceed forward at this moment. I hear about this letter
but is that?
Mr. Plunkett: The letter is, in ’09 a letter was issued which gave you, you know,
preliminary approval for your plan for cleaning it up.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Right.
Mr. Plunkett: You implement the plan, you submit a report the plan it’s been cleaned up
and then they send a final letter that says we accept all the stuff you have no further action, no
requirements to do anything further. Once the cleanup was done the Board of Education moved
forward. There’s no requirement that you get approval from the FTA or EPD to be able to move
forward on constructing on your land. It is to prohibit you from having any other cleanup in the
future, okay? It’s limiting, it’s limiting your liability for any type of contamination that occurred
in the past. Obviously if you do something to your land in the future that’s your problem. So
what you’re doing is just setting a kind of a bar date that says you’ve done everything to clean up
past problems. So once your engineers clean it up and your professional says it’s been cleaned,
then you’re good to go ahead and start doing your project. That’s what the Board of Education
did. Okay? This limitation of liability letter is for the site. It is not for the Board of Education,
it’s not for Augusta. It will come out for the benefit of both parties. So when it’s issued it will be
benefitting the board as well as this body. So they don’t have one that we don’t. I mean it’s a
commonly owned piece of land in that regard.
Mr. Guilfoyle: And the timeline to receive this letter for documentation so we could put
it in the folder is the unknown entity.
Mr. Plunkett: I mean it’s my understanding through talking to Randy Quintrell the
environmental lawyers that they submitted the application the EPD had some other questions or
wanted some additional information. They provided that information and they’re waiting on
EPD to respond. I don’t deal directly with the EPD, there’s a lawyer involved in that and I
presume that it’s a matter of days, months or years just on terms of how often, you know, I don’t
27
know their workload at the EPD but that’s really what we’re at the peril of their staffing, I guess
you would say.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Right, by approving this item 41 and 42 we still got to go through the due
process of actually coming up with the engineers, site drawings before we can even proceed or
has that already been completed at this time?
Mr. Plunkett: I’m not, that would go back to Mr. Lewis in terms of I think the A&E has
been doing, we’ve, they’re working on the process so that once the deed is accepted then we
would have ownership of the land and then the contract could be let and they could start
building. But I believe most of the design work may be have already been done.
Ms. Dottery: Commissioner Guilfoyle, the site design has already been done.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. So the only thing we have to lose by procrastinating of our
waiting, wasting or waiting down the road for this letter is to lose our grants at this moment.
Ms. Dottery: That would be about it.
Mr. Guilfoyle: I make a substitute motion to approve this.
Mr. Johnson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. We have a substitute motion that’s been made and properly
seconded. Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Jim, let me play devil’s advocate here for a quick
moment. If we go ahead and move forward with this today and somewhere in the future there is
an environmental issue, okay? What is the course of action at that time and what liabilities do
we have absent this letter?
Mr. Plunkett: There’s no greater risk because if there was contamination that existed that
was missed and it was supposed to have been cleaned up you’d have to clean it up. Okay?
Whether or not you build or don’t build it’s still an obligation. That risk would be borne with the
Board of Education and Augusta because we’re joint owners of the land so we own that one
piece that particular piece of property. It doesn’t increase your risk by moving forward and
particularly in light of where the building is relative to where most of the contaminants were
found which is on the back part of that land not where the buildings were. And if you, I mean
just logically think that if you’re sandblasting and refurbishing, you know, trucks that’s probably
not going to be under the Butler building where there’s a concrete floor. It’s out there in the field
and that’s where they found most of the problems. But it does not increase or decrease your
exposure.
Mr. Mason: Okay, is there a building on this land that we’re talking about now. Is there
currently?
28
Mr. Plunkett: There’s five or six existing buildings. We’re talking about renovating one
of those buildings. I apologize, I’d be happy to put something on the overhead if that would help
but it’s an administrative building and five large Butler buildings I want to say in the 40 to
80,000 square feet. And we’re renovating one of those buildings for our bus maintenance
th
facility to relocate it from 15 Street out to there. So it’s an existing structure. I don’t think
they’re doing whole lot to it and in fact I think one of the design people said it would be easier to
start over than try to renovate but that’s where we are so it’s an existing site.
Mr. Mason: And these that particular building that you’re referencing has had been
tested for asbestos and lead and all of that?
Mr. Plunkett: That would be a different type of environmental issue. Now that would be
part of the construction process of abating the type of asbestos that may be found. What we’re
talking about is contaminations more like, you know, leads and methane and things of that nature
that are in the ground itself. Obviously if they’re removing paint that’s lead based part of your
contract that you’re awarding is going to be for the purpose of abating lead or, you know, the
lead paint or if there’s asbestos wrapped, you know, pylons they would be removing that as part
of the contract. That’s a difference type of asbestos I mean it’s a different type of environmental
concern.
Mr. Mason: Okay, being a different type of environmental concern I just, you know, I
don’t know all the differences between all these different environmental concerns so but when
you say environment that came to mind to my mind.
Mr. Plunkett: Let me say it this way the difference between having lead paint on your
window sill and an underground storage tank in the back yard of your home, okay? If the
contaminated dirt by the underground storage tank that would be one problem but if in the
1960’s they put lead paint in your house and you’re redoing your windows they may have to
abate for that. But there’s two different types of concerns.
Mr. Mason: Got it but either way the scenarios that you just gave me there’s some
monies that are going to come out of my pocket one way or the other to fix the issue right?
Mr. Plunkett: The dirt has been done, okay, that’s been done.
Mr. Mason: Okay.
Mr. Plunkett: If there’s stuff that’s in the building that’s been renovated that’s part of
your contract which already will be available through these grants.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was going to actually do a substitute but
Commissioner Guilfoyle beat me to it. But I think Commissioner Mason made a good point
here. And what I wanted to say primarily is if the soil has been remediated and it’s clean than at
this point there’s no reason why we can’t move on that aspect of it. The facility itself is totally
29
different and that’s something that will be abated or remediated through the contract itself. So in
a nutshell us proceeding to go ahead and start with the continuation of this contract or initiate the
contract if you will wouldn’t be a hindrance or a threat to the city as we move forward. And I
prefer, rather take a chance moving on this than to lose the funding that we do have as far as the
grants because we are being allowed to use several years of funding which is unprecedented but
if it’s allowing us to do this then let’s go ahead and proceed forward. Again the only piece of
documentation that we’re waiting on is something from the EPA or EPD and that could take
months because of the work load that they may have. But in all essence I think we’re clear to
move forward so in my opinion I think the city would be safe to go ahead on and proceed so but
I do support the substitute motion. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Fennoy I’ve recognized you twice so I’ll give you a
minute for personal privilege.
Mr. Fennoy: I have one last question, Mr. Mayor and ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ve heard that before.
Mr. Fennoy: --- maybe you can answer this question, Mr. Mayor. To your knowledge
have we received any letter from the state or the federal government concerning the cleanup that
took place on Reynolds Street when that property was contaminated and we were supposed to
have had that area cleaned up?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Plunkett, do you know? I’m sure we did.
Mr. Plunkett: If you’re referring to the Depot site we were in the process of selling that
property to a developer I think it was called the Kitchens Group for a multi-use facility. That site
had been used by the railroads in the past for basically a dump and in order to sell that property
we were having to do remediation on the front end. It was found by us in the process of due
diligence.
Mr. Fennoy: But my question is did we ever get a letter from them?
Mr. Plunkett: I believe we did at the end of the day from that but I could certainly look
into the file. I wasn’t involved in the environmental side of that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion that’s been made and properly seconded.
If there is no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the substitute sign of voting to
approve.
Mr. Lockett and Mr. Williams vote No.
Motion Passes 8-2.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please.
The Clerk:
30
PUBLIC SERVICES
42. Motion to approve and authorize the execution of an Augusta and The Board of
Education jointly purchased tract of land on Highway 56 in June, 2009 for a common
maintenance facility. However, in order to utilize FTA grants to improve the site for a bus
maintenance facility, Augusta must solely own the tract of land where the grants will be
used. The BOA has agreed to convey its half interest in the tract where Augusta will
relocate its bus maintenance facility. To reallocate the ownership of the land and to account
for investments by the parties in the joint property, and Intergovernmental Agreement
must be executed between the parties and the Mayor and Clerk of Commission need to be
authorized to accept the deed from the BOE regarding the allocation of ownership of the
Highway 56 Bus Barn property by the Mayor and Clerk of Commission and the authorize
the Mayor to accept a deed from the Board of Education conveying its half interest in the
8.06 acre tract where Augusta is to relocate its bus maintenance facility. (No
recommendation by Public Services Committee November 10, 2014)
Mr. Guilfoyle: So moved.
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.
Mr. Lockett and Mr. Williams vote No.
Motion Passes 8-2.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, next agenda item please.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
43. Discussion: A request by Jason Voulgaris for a Therapeutic Massage Operators license
to be used in connection with AA Massage located at 3540 Wheeler Rd. District 3. Super
District 10. (No recommendation from Public Services Committee November 10, 2014)
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. Harris: Good evening. Commissioners, this agenda item was brought before you at
th
our November the 10 Public Services Commission meeting. It is a request by Mr. Jason
Voulgaris for a Therapeutic Massage Operators license to be used at 3540 Wheeler Road, Suite
107. District 3. Super District 10. At that meeting the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office and the
Planning and Development Department recommended that this request be denied. The Sheriff’s
Department recommendation was based on their background checks of the applicant and the
Georgia State Certified Massage Therapist that he chose to use as his certified therapist. Our
recommendation to deny was based on the Therapeutic Massage Regulations for the City of
Augusta. The ordinance is 6580 under Subsection 6-4-3 Articles 12 and 14. At this time I will
31
let the Sgt. Elam from the Sheriff’s Department explain their position and then I will finish ours
when he’s finished.
Mr. Mayor: Through the Chair. Yes, sir, thank you.
Sgt. Elam: Excuse me, Mr. Mayor. Good afternoon, members of the Commission. The
Sheriff’s basic reason for denying this license is one Mr. Voulgaris’ wife who is a masseuse who
is he was our information was he was planning to use the massage parlor was arrested by our
agency for one night of last year. When we, as we did a background on her at that time we
learned that she had also been arrested a year prior, excuse me she was arrested the beginning of
last year again this year and then also she was arrested the year before almost a year within a
couple of days in Houston, Texas for prostitution. She was arrested here for prostitution in an
undercover sting operation we would conduct here along with about ten other people. During the
course of that in our arrest she was transporting another masseuse to that location. The things
that we found between the two of them suggested that they were both involved. The information
that we gathered at that time we knew they were involved so we arrested both of them.
Subsequent to that those charges were dropped against Mr. Voulgaris’ wife. He contends
something was different. Our contention is the charges were dropped. Judge Jennings of our
Magistrate Court since she had transported she’s a transporter and the other person was the
primary participant in the arrest that we made, she was the proposed prostitute. For lack of better
words she would be like what we would call a pimp, transporting her. But we charged them both
with prostitution, that’s the way our ordinance is written. He wanted to use her to translate
which was in Mandarin for the court proceedings and she agreed along with her attorney.
Subsequent to that I believe there was some breakdown between the two of them who are friends
and the other party did not agree, did not want to agree to her being a translator. Subsequent to
that Judge Jennings still honored the drop in the charges because she made a good effort to do
what he had asked her to do and now those charges are still pending against the other person
involved in the incident that we made. The Sheriff’s contention, excuse me, on that particular
night that we made our initial arrest Mr. Voulgaris was not aware of what his wife was doing as
the conversation was related to me through an Internal Affairs report. He stated that he knew
that she was driving a friend around. He didn’t know any prostitution was going on and
subsequent to that the investigator asked Mr. Voulgaris did he have any knowledge that his wife
was already involved in an arrest in Texas for prostitution. He advised at that time he did not
and that’s our contention. If he’s going to be a caretaker of a massage parlor in our town and not
to criticize Mr. Voulgaris, not to impune on his marriage or anything like that we would, when
you have savvy people working on those type places this particular person was his spouse. The
Sheriff feels that he would not be a good caretaker in the license for holding for a massage parlor
operator’s license in the city. He understands that Mr. Voulgaris himself may not have been
involved in this incident but he still states that the, the word that I’m looking for the latitude
that’s involved in the ordinance approval process gives him the right or gives him the right to
request that you deny that license.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, can we hear from the applicant then I’ll, yes, sir.
Mr. Harris: Can we finish our side first then we can hear from the applicant if you don’t
mind? Okay, as I stated earlier Planning and Development recommendation is based on City
32
Ordinance 6580 Subsection -643 Articles 12 and 14. Article 12 states the Augusta Richmond
County Commission may decline to issue an operator’s license on any person having any
ownership interest in or control over the land or building in which the establishment to be
operated pursuant to the license will be located does not meet the same character requirements as
set forth in this section for the licensee. Article 14 states an application for an operator’s license
may be denied where it appears to the Augusta Richmond County Commission that the applicant
does not have adequate financial strength or adequate financial participation in the proposed
business to direct and manage its affairs or where it appears that the applicant is intending or
likely to be a surrogate for a person who would not otherwise qualify for an operator’s license. It
is our contention and our belief that Mr. Voulgaris knew full well that his wife would not meet
the qualifications for the City of Augusta’s ordinance governing massage. Therefore he thought
that he would apply and then he would get the license and she would be allowed to operate the
establishment. These two statutes here one of the things that we require, there are a few things
that we require when you apply for a massage license. You have to fill out a package. This
package consists of everything that you will need along with a cover letter and an ordinance.
And one of the things we tell the applicants is to familiarize yourself with the rules and
regulations that govern massage in Augusta. We also ask for the applicant to provide us with a
financial statement. Mr. Voulgaris provided us with a financial statement. The joint account
holder on that statement is Ms. Ping Hong Tang who would be the certified therapist at that
location. The funds in that account are the funds that were used to purchase the building, the
land, the property where the massage operation would be located at. Ms. Tang having access to
that account makes her relevant to this application. Therefore I think they’re in violation of
Article 12. We also know that the Article 14 stated that if it appears that someone is acting as a
surrogate Ms. Tang has been a Georgia State Certified Massage Therapist since 11-21-2012,
some two years ago. As Sgt. Elam stated she was arrested January, let me get the date but
January of 2013 some 30-40 days after she was approved by the Georgia State Association of the
Secretary of State’s Office. And their rules are similar to ours moral character is one of the
things that they stress. In our ordinance moral character is a reason for denial. One’s actions or
the accepting of someone else’s actions are condoning activities that may not be generally
accepted ---
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Harris, can we begin to wrap this up?
Mr. Harris: --- yes, sir. I’m getting to that behavior. I’m tying it into Article 14. So if
his wife was not able to get a massage therapy license quite naturally the other ordinary and
sensible thing to do would be for him to get it. And if he gets it then she can operate. He is
acting as a surrogate for his wife. Article 14 says you can deny it for that reason.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Harris: Therefore we recommend denial.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, can we hear from the applicant then I’ve got several Commissioners
that want to speak.
33
Mr. Voulgaris: My name is James Voulgaris. I live at 240 Belglade Court in Grovetown
Georgia 30813. I just want to state that in Texas she was arrested. Her mistake was pleading
guilty. She didn’t want to tell me because she was embarrassed and she just wanted to plead
guilty. They told her if she pled guilty that, you know, pay a fine let her go. That’s what she did
and she didn’t realize it would stay on her record. But she, I found out the facts later on and she
never should have pled guilty because she should’ve fought that charge like she did this one and
the charges would’ve been dropped because it just so happens that someone else in the store got
arrested. So they arrested everybody in that store because they weren’t sure so we speeded up to
Augusta. In January of 2014 is when she got arrested not 2013. It was 2014 she got arrested
here. Finally she did nothing wrong, they let her go. Five minutes later they pulled her over on
the side of the road and with no probable cause they searched her vehicle and they found a phone
with God forbid contact information in it and two condoms and they arrested her. And that’s
why they dropped the charges. They didn’t drop them because she was a translator because she
was not a translator. The co-defendant said she didn’t want my wife to be a translator so the
court was well aware that my wife wasn’t going to translate for them. As far as my moral
character goes that money I, the money I received I’m a disabled combat veteran and I was at the
Sheriff’s office for three years and I saved that money up, it’s my life’s savings that I spent to
purchase that property. My wife had no access to that money because she’s not allowed to work
in this county because she doesn’t have a business license. So she’s not contributing any money
to my account, it’s all my money. So as far as my wife being in control of my money she’s not
in control. And she can’t, I have to hire somebody who’s a massage therapist who has to go
through the business license office to get a background check to be approved to work in this
county. If my wife gets denied I’ll have to hire someone else. So to deny this based on my
wife’s past misdeeds I think that’s a mistake because if she can’t work for me I’ll hire somebody
else. But I think just because someone makes a mistake they shouldn’t be suffering, they
shouldn’t suffer for it for the rest of their lives. That’s pretty much all I have to say. And one
more thing the application was in my name. My wife’s name was on it listed as spouse not as
my employee. She has to apply for herself after I get my operator’s license so I don’t know why
they did a background check on my wife. My wife’s name is not on the application.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Davis, then Commission Mason then Commissioner
Williams.
Ms. Davis: Mr. Mayor, I was just going to, based on Mr. Harris’ and the Sheriff’s
office recommendation I was going to make a motion to deny.
Mr. Hasan: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioner
Mason then Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Mason: Oh boy, where do I begin. It’s kind of hard to figure out all that was going
on here so let me try to make sure that I’m clear as mud. The application is in Mr. Voulgaris’
name.
Mr. Harris: Yes, sir.
34
Mr. Mason: The wife’s name was on the application in terms of who was going to be the
masseuse?
Mr. Harris: He told us who his masseuse was going to be.
Mr. Mason: Verbally.
Mr. Harris: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mason: So it’s not on the application anywhere.
Mr. Harris: No, sir.
Mr. Mason: You laid out a beautiful scenario. I mean it could be true, it could be false I
don’t know. I don’t know how I begin to decide that here. Now what I do know is you said
there’s been two arrests for prostitution and utilizing the codes that you’re referencing gives us
the latitude to use that potential moral character of the masseuse in determining even though
she’s not on the application in determining whether or not Mr. Voulgaris should be able to get a
license.
Mr. Harris: What I’m trying to say, Commissioner, is that we’re making a connection.
And Article 14 says where it appears that it is intended or likely to be a surrogate for another
person who does not meet the same standard as the licensee.
Mr. Harris: And it’s your belief that it appears that way based on information that’s been
given.
Mr. Harris: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mason: Now, Mr. Voulgaris, you’re a former member of the Sheriff’s Department.
Mr. Voulgaris: Yes in the Jail and Road Patrol before I resigned.
Mr. Mason: But you don’t work for the Sheriff’s Department now.
Mr. Voulgaris: No.
Mr. Mason: Did you work for the Sheriff’s Department when your wife got arrested by
the Sheriff’s Department?
Mr. Voulgaris: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mason: This whole thing is ---
35
Mr. Voulgaris: But I contend she never should’ve been arrested because she left the
scene and they pulled her over and then searched her vehicle. The reason why I went back to ---
Mr. Mason: Before you go through all of that I’m not sure how I as a Commissioner can
sit here and try to determine the truthfulness of one side of the other or what happened as a result
of that or how that came to pass. Really that’s really a lot more than what I really even want to
know. But I guess there’s a decision that’s got to be made here and there’s been a motion made
so I mean I guess we can do whatever but I’m really unclear. I get what you’re saying. There’s
some logic to what you’re saying but it’s not 100% and so for me, Mr. Harris, I’m a little, I’m
concerned both ways, one of preventing somebody from being able to open up a business in their
name and giving them the opportunity to fall off the horse if they so chose or to run a decent
business or take this assumption and say no we’re not even going to give them an opportunity at
all and we’ll move on to the next agenda item. That’s a, you know, that’s a balancing act that
we’ve got to do up here.
Mr. Harris: Can I add something to that?
Mr. Mason: Sure, through the Chair.
Mr. Harris: Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Go ahead.
Mr. Harris: --- as I said earlier Ms. Tang was arrested in Houston Texas in 2013.
Mr. Mason: Is that her real name?
Mr. Harris: Ping Hong Tang, yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Mason: The young lady that she was delivering to that sting operation was also
arrested in Houston Texas in 2013. Coincidence or something else.
Mr. Voulgaris: In the sting operation they did let her go though. They let both ---
Mr. Mayor: Sir, through the Chair and you need to be recognized. Okay, Commissioner
Williams then Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Like Mr. Mason I can’t sit here and say that I can
prevent this applicant from opening up a business. Now if he breaks the law and the Sheriff has
an undercover sting or just walks in there and does anything undercover and finds them breaking
the law then something needs to happen. But I don’t think that this body has the right to deny
because we assume what’s going to happen or what might happen. Now if he gets a license and
he hires a person who don’t pass the scrutiny test then he ought to be closed down if he don’t
have those things in place. But because of what happened in Texas or what happened in
36
Waynesboro don’t affect here. What we’ve got to do is give that person that opportunity to
either do good or do bad. Now I’m hearing what you’re saying, Larry, and the code 11, 12 and
25 and I heard all of that but this is a business who’s going to pay a fee to open up. And if they
break the law then they ought to be dealt with accordingly to that. But I don’t think this body
has a right to say well no we don’t like your background or your history so we’re going to deny
you because there’s always a way to do anything. I mean you’ll always find justification why
you’re doing it but I think this body ought to at least give him the license and give him an
opportunity. He knows because his spouse has been arrested in several places so and he was
doing that job himself. He knows that can happen right here. Now that would be a foolish man
to spend his money then go out there and just do something deliberately like that. So I take issue
with that, Mr. Mayor. My substitute motion is because a motion is on the floor to deny. My
substitute motion is to approve ---
Mr. Mason: Second.
Mr. Williams: --- and give him the opportunity to mess up. I mean that’s like you’re
going to prevent what’s happening down on Broad because you’re going to go down there and
stand on the corner.
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. What’s going to happen is going to happen. So I
understand License and Inspection, I understand you bringing all this and explaining it to us but
look how many times we done tried to prevent stuff that’s still going on and not in that type of
business but in business period. So I’m just saying that we can’t deny him. I don’t see the legal
right we have to deny him. Now if his wife was on the application fine but she’s talking about
somebody who worked there. So my motion, Mr. Mayor, and I got a second to approve so ---
Mr. Mayor: Substitute motion.
Mr. Williams: --- substitute motion is to approve.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. My question would be directed to Mr. Voulgaris, is that
the correct pronunciation?
Mr. Voulgaris: Close enough.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir. Mr. Voulgaris based on what you just said a few minutes ago you
made mention that if, you know, if you were denied that you would hire someone else to do to be
the masseuse and you would keep moving if you’re allowed to do that. You made that
contention just a few minutes ago?
Mr. Voulgaris: Yes, sir.
37
Mr. Hasan: Okay. Knowing what you’re up against and knowing that in Texas let’s not
talk about Richmond County because you said the deal was broke there’s nothing in her record
there. Knowing in Texas that this came up as you was applying for this license and knowing that
character was going to be an issue even whether you agree with her pleading guilty or not, you’re
in law enforcement there was no expungement involved so it is on her record. Why did you
decide to proceed forward at the end of the day to pursue the license knowing that that was an
issue with moral turpitude here?
Mr. Voulgaris: My wife told me the story about Texas and I believe her what happened.
She hid it from me, yes, but when she did ultimately tell me the story I have to say I believe
100% without a doubt that my wife is not a prostitute. She just happened to be arrested for it and
I don’t know how, I guess I can’t prove that but she did plead guilty but she went to school for
massage therapy and she planned on doing it legitimately. And she knew this would be a hard
battle and I knew that too but if she gets denied, I knew that we could apply and have someone
else apply for the therapy license.
Mr. Hasan: Well, first, Mr. Voulgaris, let me be very clear nor am I suggesting that in
any form or fashion that your wife is a prostitute. I don’t know, I take it at your word. I believe
what you say in that regards so please let me be very clear about that one. But my point is that
the expungement process is on the record. So I’m saying knowing that’s there and knowing you
had another option to do that why put yourself through this?
Mr. Voulgaris: I believe if I’m given the license and my wife is allowed to work she
welcomes vice undercover operations, anybody, news reporters to come in and test her. She’s
not going to do anything that’s inappropriate like that. And I believe her when she says that to
me because she’s not worried about it because she’s done nothing wrong. She will not do
anything wrong. But if she gets denied we’ll just hire, we’ll have to hire somebody else.
Mr. Hasan: And the building that you are, are you purchasing or are you leasing the
building?
Mr. Voulgaris: I already purchased it.
Mr. Hasan: You purchased the building. And whose name is the building?
Mr. Voulgaris: In my name.
Mr. Hasan: It’s your name?
Mr. Voulgaris: And my money.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Harris.
38
Mr. Harris: You know we put a lot of trust and faith in the Sheriff’s Department and the
License Department and we were told at the committee meeting that you could resubmit. So I’m
really not sure why we’re even, I mean no hard feelings, but I mean I don’t understand why this
just didn’t start over in whatever process you had to do to start over. But I don’t want to see a
precedent to where we start, you know, calling the Sheriff’s Department and the License
Department down when they’re doing what they’re supposed to be doing. So I mean I’d rather
see you go through the procedure reapping which you just asked us all if you could do. And so
I’m just, you know, I can’t be in favor of it.
Mr. Voulgaris: If I reapply ---
Mr. Mayor: Through the Chair, sir.
Mr. Voulgaris: --- I’m sorry can I ask (unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: Yes.
Mr. Voulgaris: --- sorry, sir, I lost my train of thought. So if I apply next year or two
years from now I think we’ll go through the same situation to do a background check on my wife
and say she got arrested for prostitution twice I’ll still get denied no matter what. If I get
divorced which I’m not planning on it but my point is though it would still do the background
check and still deny me based on a relationship with my wife so it wouldn’t really matter when I,
we reapply we’d be under the same situation.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Hasan and then let’s try to wrap this up.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir, I’m going to wrap it up, Mr. Mayor, but I don’t, my understanding
from the conversation the other day I don’t, I mean you can correct me if I’m wrong or Mr. Elam
or Mr. Harris that’s not accurate because if you are saying that she will not be the masseuse then
that would not be an issue. That was the only way there was an issue this time as I understand
the ordinance when you was actually questioned who was going to be your massage therapist
then your wife became, that’s why your wife came into play. So if you select someone else to be
your massage therapist then that’s a nonissue. And if I’m wrong will somebody correct me here.
Mr. Harris: That would be a nonissue if his wife was not selected as the therapist. And a
little bit more background on that, her license expired 10-31-14 so she would have to reapply to
the state office and their ordinance we mirror the state ordinance.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a substitute motion that’s been made and properly seconded.
That substitute motion is to approve. If there’s no further discussion Commissioners will now
vote by the substitute sign of voting.
Mr. Mason and Mr. Williams vote Yes.
Motion Fails 2-8.
39
Mr. Mayor: We have a primary motion on the floor that’s been made and properly
seconded to deny. Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Okay, the vote now are we going to set us up for a law suit here. I want
to, the lawyer ain’t saying nothing but unless this man violates some kind of law we’re going to
open up a business and we’re going to pay him if you’re smart. But we, we’ve got no reason not
to give it to him now. If his wife is caught, then that’s something else.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioners, I already called for the vote.
Mr. Mason and Mr. Williams vote No.
Motion Passes 8-2.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, I think in the interest of time and so we don’t start losing
people can we go ahead and go with the agenda item 48, let’s go ahead and get to the budget.
I’m not sure that we’ll, Ms. Allen?
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATOR
48. Motion to approve proposed FY 2015 Budget for Augusta Georgia.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Jackson.
Ms. Jackson: Yes, in follow-up to the last work session held ya’ll held on Thursday of
last week Interim Administrator Tameka Allen I think sent out an email on Saturday
summarizing the discussion there and what staff took to be the points of agreement and
formulated an option C1 I believe. She is prepared to present that now. There’s a summary of
what was presented in that memorandum. If ya’ll could please use that as a starting point for
discussion today we’d appreciate that. Obviously we know that there still may be some
questions. If we could get those questions at least out on the table today and I’d be anxious to
see how far we can get with this discussion. We would obviously love to have a budget
approved today but if that’s not in the cards at least if we can get from you all what you’re
questions, additional questions and considerations are. Also so we can work to incorporate those
into our planning process and we can get back to you at the next available opportunity to
hopefully finalize our budget for FY 2015.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, ma’am. Ms. Allen.
Ms. Allen: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission the, make sure we have it up
there for you. There we go. The information that you received on Saturday outlines basically
what was some of the consensus that we gathered from the three budget work sessions that we’ve
40
had. And what we have as Option C1 pretty much is the revenue enhancements that were
originally discussed which is the payment in lieu of franchise fees for our Utilities Department
and our Environmental Services. The cost adjustments we looked were the Sheriff’s Office
salary increases, the Marshal’s Office salary increases keeping in mind that a certain portion of
the Marshal’s Office this is only taking care of everything outside of the airport. The airport
would have to actually support taking care of the payment for the Marshal’s Office staff that’s
out there at the airport as well and the Marshal is working with the airport on that. The
Organizational Assessment which is something that I strongly, strongly recommend I know we
have talked on numerous occasions about reduction in staff or reduction in parks or reduction in
various operations. Step one process of doing that is in Organizational Review and
Organizational Assessment. The Mayor’s office funding a portion of the request that the Mayor
had requested of $150,000 ---
Mr. Mayor: That’s the Mayor Elect.
Ms. Allen: --- Mayor Elect, sorry, the Mayor Elect. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Reduce the
amount that we normally put into contingency by $65,000, reduce the transfer to 991 to actual
2014 levels. Those revenues are looking like it could be positive for us to do that.
Compensation Organizational Adjustments of course have been removed. The Storm Water
Fees have been removed. The 25% reduction in funds to non-mandated agencies of course has
been included and, you know, as I’ve stated from the very beginning those actual debt reductions
is nothing that anybody would like to bring forth to the commission as an option but
unfortunately based on what we have to work with and the amount of revenues that we’re
actually receiving at this time it just looks as if we’ll have to keep that reduction in across the
board. Keeping in mind that this budget recommendation or budget itself is a living document
you can have all you know assessments done throughout the year and make various adjustments
to if you do decide to increase those funding levels for those various outside agencies that you
feel really feel strongly about. This is just a starting point. Personnel Tab V reduce that to
$420,400 and Program Enhancement both of those items Tab V were in the back of your budget
book and reduce that to $415,00 which gives you a balanced proposed budget which does not go
into reserves. And at this time we can address any questions.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Harris.
Mr. Harris: Ms. Allen, we talked about places to find money when we talked about the
pension earlier that may require more money. And I brought up the possibilities of trying to
figure out a way to trim back parks. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with parks, it’s in my
opinion it’s non-essential money. It’s just, you know, the world will not come to an end if we
have to close some. If you shaved off some of the parks I’m just as just for we’re asking for
these non-profits to take a 25% hit. If you took 10% for parks which would certainly alleviate
most of these headaches and then over a period of time I mean if there we able to sell off some of
that property they could recoup some of that money. I just feel like when you look up into the
part of what the original city the map they gave me the other day you and I made the joke that
you almost can’t walk without tripping over a park. I’m not talking about the real big nice ones
we have that you have huge investments in but there’s a bunch that just don’t get used. I mean
they’re nice but they’re not being used and it’s kind of silly to sit here and funneling that kind of
41
money into parks when that money could be used for something that I consider to be much more
important. So I would like for you to look into that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Davis then Commissioner Mason then Commissioner
Fennoy then Commissioner Williams.
Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Before we start talking about things we want to look
into what is our status as far as this deadline today for you’re asking for an approval according to
our schedule. So tell us if we couldn’t pass this today, what’s the next step?
Ms. Allen: According to our local ordinance and I’ll let the law department go into that
in more detail, we would actually have to resess this meeting until a budget is actually adopted.
So we can have another, you can have another commission meeting until this one has been
continued.
Ms. Davis: So you would recess this commission meeting and have another meeting
before committee meetings next Monday?
Ms. Allen: Not necessarily committee meetings but before another commission meeting.
Ms. Davis: The next commission meeting. Okay, so until this approved we have to
continue this meeting.
Ms. Allen: Yes, ma’am.
Ms. Davis: Okay, also since we are talking about you know possibly looking into
different things I understand the 25% investment on the outside agencies. And first of all Ms.
Allen, Ms. Williams and Tim thank you all so much for working so hard on this budget and
bringing to us a balanced budget. There’s a few agencies that I don’t consider just myself as
outside agencies so I wanted us to look back into those as far as if we could keep the funding
levels, that’s Project Access and the Augusta Museum and the Arts Council. I just feel like those
are, you know, important as far as economic impact on this community. So I wanted to just
throw that out there as far as for my colleagues to think about as well. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Mason, Commissioner Hasan, Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m certainly not in a position today with what’s
been presented before me to vote on this the way that it is so I don’t know how long the
meeting’s going to last or how many more meetings we’re going to have but clearly as I’m
hearing different things in terms of parks and other agencies that people feel are important.
We’ve got a number of non-profits that are in our community that do great things that have an
impact both economically and/or personally to the citizens of Augusta Richmond County which
you can’t put necessarily a monetary value on that places like Shiloh Community Center is one
of those places. We’ve got several more like that that do great things within our community.
And so when we start just picking and choosing still all or all the other that’s going to cause
some consternation up here and probably going to probably going to be in a meeting for a while.
42
And the other thing I’m not, I’m not convinced that the Mayor or Mayor Elect should be getting
anything additional at this point. I too ran for Mayor and when I ran for Mayor I knew what the
position called for and I knew what the office called and I knew what was going to be needed to
be successful. And I wouldn’t be looking for adding three or four different assistants and other
individuals into this position creating more burden on our government by creating positions that
haven’t been there in the past. So as I look at this there’s just there’s just a number of things that
are problems. And let me say this for those that are not really looking at the storm water fee as
something that’s serious that needs to be done. Number one Columbia County does and
nobody’s complaining. North Augusta does and nobody’s complaining, okay?
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you two more.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So when you talk about a storm water fee if it’s put
in place appropriately and monies are appropriated for priority situations in our community then
it’s absolutely appropriate for us to put in a storm water fee. We are never going to get our
people off pipes that have raw sewage and regular water and that floods every time it rains down
in East Augusta if we don’t put a fund site in place to take of our citizens. That’s just the bottom
line. You do that with a designated fund site, a funding stream like a storm water fee. That’s
how that’s done and you prioritize where that money goes to and the projects and how that will
happen so that we can clearly see a path forward for getting our folks out of poverty stricken
situations that are no fault of their own. That’s how that goes. I can’t support anything that does
not have a storm water fee associated with it that we can get our people on regular in 2014 on
pipes where they can have separate sewage and separate water and not worry about being
contaminated every time they turn the faucet on or flooding every time it rains two or three
inches. Until we do that, until we think seriously about that and prioritize those funds where
they should go. And even if that causes a reduction in terms of and so this is something I want to
look at even that causes a reduction in terms of the amount of monies, Mr. Mayor, that we’re
talking about assessing but to do nothing to me is not an option. That means you don’t care.
That’s what that means to me and we’ve got through that for way too long. I think it’s about
time for us to address the issue ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Mason: --- and address it appropriately.
Mr. Mayor: Okay ---
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: --- and actually I had recognized Commissioner Fennoy then Commissioner
Williams then Commissioner Harris, then Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Fennoy: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And just as information the distinguished
th
Commissioner from the 4 ---
Mr. Mason: At least for another month.
43
Mr. Fennoy: --- we have, we have flooding on Laney Walker right in front of the Health
Department every time it rains. We have flooding on Gordon Highway right there by the Red
Lobster in front of the Farmers Market every time it rains. We have flooding off of
Milledgeville Road by Hardie Davis and a matter of fact his building got flooded out. No, no
where there used to sell chittlings and fried chicken and fried steak every time it rains. But one
of the things that concerns me, Ms. Allen, and maybe you could address this question is the do
we have an ADA Coordinator and has that position been funded in the 2015 budget?
Ms. Allen: We do not.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay. And I guess one of my concerns is that we are mandated to have an
ADA Director and to have a grievance process to handle complaints from people that have
disabilities. And if someone files a suit against the city and I think every city that has 50 or more
employees if they do not have an ADA Coordinator or grievance process set up then the city
could be sued and we could lose millions of dollars. Is that not true, Mr. Andrew?
Mr. MacKenzie: Well, it’s correct there are certain requirements that every employer of
over 50,000 employees are required to comply with including ADA. The structure whereby you
provide the required legal compliance effort does not necessarily have to be in the form of a
coordinator or director. You can do that through other methods but that’s certainly something to
consider and I think it would be an improvement to your current processes if you did have a
person who was designated to perform that work instead of trying to do it through a number of
different persons. It’s not something that you have to do but you could do.
Mr. Fennoy: Well I mean ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two.
Mr. Fennoy: --- I have the tool kit for state and local governments concerning the ADA
Coordinator and from what I understand you know we’ve got to have a coordinator. I mean it
doesn’t say we should but it says we must have a coordinator. And I think that before we move
forward with the budget we should look forward to funding an ADA Coordinator position
because I believe it will save us money on down the road.
Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Williams, Commissioner Harris, Commissioner Hasan,
Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, first of all I need to go back to the storm water fee. If we
implement a storm water fee is that going to assist the budget or is that going to assist the storm
water? I agree with Commissioner Mason that we have some flooding and some drainage
problems but until we look at everything holistically and get the budget on one hand straight the
storm water fee are different I’m looking at this list and first of all I’d like to know I know this is
a working document like Ms. Allen said but who decided that these are the working documents
we need to use? I mean your office I guess figured these were the best solutions $150,000
dollars in the Organization Assessment, $100,000 dollars all those was something that your
44
office probably thought would be the thing we wanted you to address. Okay, well that was a
wrong assumption. But I’ve got some issues when we had not talked about some real issues
when we talked about agencies being cut. I’m thinking about the Health Department roles and
the stuff that the Health Department does and how we’re talking about cutting 25%. If we’re
going to cut one we got to cut them all and it’s like your children you can’t say just to one that’s
doing good you got to say to the ones doing bad too. So if we’re going to cut them we’ve got to
cut everybody. You can’t just pick and choose that these are the ones that are not essential. It
may not be essential to you but they’re essential to somebody. So I take issue with that but we
need to talk among ourselves and with the Administrator and lay some numbers down on the
table some things that we need to do. Now if you mix the storm water fee again in this and I had
a talk with the director about it I’m not against that but if we implement the storm water fee now
for the budget what are we going to do next year? Are you going to implement a storm, another
storm water fee, another set of fees somewhere to help with the budget? We’ve got do some
things that ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two.
Mr. Williams: --- that’s going to bring economic dollars into this city. Mr. Harris, we
talked about that how we ought to be doing some things that spending some money to help
generate some money versus just doing the same thing. Every year we get to the same point and
want to cut. Now everybody’s all up in the air to have a balanced budget, the budget ain’t
balanced. It’s just a number we put out there and we’re going to go to the last we’re going to go
to the wire and do what we do every year making them hard decisions or back and readjust the
budget midyear. We have not done those progressive things that we need to do. We’re not
taking those stands we need to take so those increases have been added should never have been
added on anything right now. Now we talked in Finance this morning in a meeting about even
trying to get additional money I think, Charlie’s still here but everybody is going on about the
pensioners and we didn’t have the money to put in there to even give the pensioners a raise out
of their own money that they done retired off of. So we need to look at this thing wholeheartedly
and do it I guess the right way. But all those new things those machines and gadgets, I’m sorry
them days are not here today we can’t do that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Harris, Commissioner Hasan, Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Harris: The problem with storm if I’m correct I have everybody calling me. They
weren’t so much overly concerned about fixing the pipes. Everybody understood that but they’re
worried that part of the money was helping balance the budget. That’s what that was just that
just drove a nail into them, they hated that idea. You know we kicked around the idea of
SPLOST, you know, general obligation bond and some but everybody understands we have
some mammoth financial liabilities hanging over our head and they will have to be addressed or
we’re all going to just you know just beat to death with it. But you know and I certainly feel for
these people caught up in this flooding and stuff but and I can’t remember that’s been going on
quite some time even when I wasn’t living I was living in Athens. But the point is that’s an area
we need to attack this 100% earmarked to go after that stuff which is either the SPLOST or an
obligation bond of some sort. But again I don’t want to sound like I’m beating a dead horse but
you’ve got to find money and you know I’m probably going to make a lot of people mad. Parks
45
is one of the few places where there’s a chunk of money that is not essential money and I think
that’d be a good place to look.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Hasan then Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to first agree with Commissioner Davis
in terms of the great work that Ms. Allen and her former staff have done in terms of getting
something before us. But at the same time I’d also like to thank the Commissioners as a whole
who took initiatives this time to do what needs to be done and that’s simply you know tax
increase you know because we didn’t have to go into our fund balance and take more money out
of it especially when we spent about $14 million dollars out of it to deal with the ice storm. And
the money was constantly depleting year after year we’ve been pulling out four and five million
dollars at a time and that point in time we were at a point we had nothing we had nothing to work
with. So it took courage to do that for number one. Also in talking with Commissioner Mason
mentioned about the flooding and the fees. I’m not sure we have to do it together but we
definitely need to do something with the storm water. I was just on Lenox Drive yesterday and it
rained slightly and Butler Creek was overflowing in a young lady’s yard by the name of Ms.
Keene. And we’re talking about water going uphill as light as it was raining and three or four
yards were affected so we have to do something. And I think Mr. Ladson has to come back and
revisit and see exactly what we need to do to make these things happen and fix some of those
problems that Commissioner Fennoy mentioned in his presentation just now. It seems like he
has a rolodex of places that are flooding he done a great job with that. But concern here is that
Ms. Allen you did make mention that some of these things that you’ve got before us now is
something that from a general consensus you got the feeling that we want some of these things. I
mean I’m looking at the Marshal’s office salary increase. I’m not saying to Commissioner
Williams’ point I’m going to try to deal with that before he jump in on this. I know what be
good for the goose is good for the gander but I’m just asking the question. At what point in time
did ya’ll pick on that we were ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two.
Mr. Hasan: --- in favor of the Marshal’s office increase also the Mayor’s office increase
at what point in time did that come into play that we did, I must have missed that in saying that
we wanted those things that we wanted this to be a part of this process. And I’m not saying it
shouldn’t be but I got the impression you were saying that you, that that was a takeaway from the
Commissioners and maybe I missed that.
Ms. Allen: If I could just clarify a couple of things. One from day one based on you
know on some of the comments that have been said we gave three options, A, B and C. From
day one this group, this team had presented you a balanced proposed budget for 2015 that did not
touch reserves. Based on some of the consensus and some of the comments the storm water fee
was something that everyone, not everyone, a certain portion of you wanted to look into. So we
gave you two options with the storm water fee. Then we went out and took the storm water fee
out and gave you option C. So from the very beginning the storm water fee has been on the table
but based on the various work sessions we were in, there was no consensus to proceed with the
storm water and based on some of the comments and feedback that you received from the
46
various people that attended those work sessions. So we gave option C to remove that. At no
time have you’ve been presented with a budget that was not a balanced budget that did not go
into reserves. At no time did this group bring you anything that involved going into reserves or
did not present you a proposed balanced budget. So I kind of want to clarify that. Secondly we
brought you a tiered effect for the actual outside agencies. We looked the ones like Shiloh and
the Health and Welfare and said let’s just reduce them by 10%. There was no consensus on
doing the 10% to them and doing the 15% and the 25%. We all know we have contractual
obligations to do the mandated ones so we have to do those. So we are contractually obligated
by the Commission itself who approved those contracts. We brought that back. We have to
keep in mind as a body and as a group that we don’t have the essential revenue that we may want
to do a lot of things with unfortunately. All we have is the resources and monies that we bring to
you and that we have coming in as far as the revenues. And this team has done the very best
they could, they can to make sure they presented you with the best options that we can. Now is
any of this something that you have to do? No, sir, no, ma’am, this is nothing that we’re saying
you have to do. I’ve said from the very beginning that this is just for us to have dialogue. And
for those three work sessions that’s what we wanted to do have dialogue. Give us feedback on
what you wanted and what you didn’t want. So based on all three of those work sessions we
brought you back option C. Now do you have to do the Marshal’s office salary? No, sir, if it’s
the consensus that you don’t want to do it save that $88,600 and give it to your outside agencies.
If you don’t want to do the Organizational Assessment, take it off the table. These are things that
you as a body have to decide to do but at no means at any time that I want this body to think that
you were not presented with a proposed balanced budget because you were.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, ma’am. But that was not my question but that’s fine what you just said,
I can live with that but that was not my question.
Ms. Allen: I apologize, Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, ma’am you didn’t answer my question but that’s fine. The
Organizational Assessment tell me where you’re assuming what that would look like. What are
you suggesting there?
Ms. Allen: We have been requested to look and one of the first departments was
Recreation and Parks. And I think they came out at one of our retreats as well as some other
discussion. And I think Commissioner Harris is on it when he wants to look at reducing some of
the parks. But you, you know how do you decide which parks you get rid of or what you close
without having someone come in and actually doing an assessment. You want us to take that,
you know, are you going to or is this body going to come back with the recommendation that all
of you are going to feel equally amenable to? Of course not. I mean once we talk about parks no
disrespect to Commissioner Harris somebody else is saying what happens to the kids that don’t
have a park to go to? So we have to try to read you guys and come back with something and
then you want us to do it without having the monies to do that. Believe me it’s never easy to say
reduce anybody.
Mr. Hasan: Okay.
47
Ms. Allen: Nobody wants to do that, these departments don’t want to be reduced nor do
we want to come before you and say reduce in agencies. Every agency has a great thing that
they provide to this community.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, thank you. Mr. Mayor, I’d like to say this to my colleagues in closing
and I’d like for us to be mindful of there are agencies that appear directly to this body for
financial support and I think in many ways rightfully so. But some of those very same agencies
approached Mr. Wheeler’s office and resources some of those very same agencies are also go to
where we I don’t what term you use in terms of what we’re going with the Arts in the Heart of
Augusta. And they also appear there so they get a three tier money from the city. So we also
ought to kind of look at those to see make sure we don’t do that three times or twice across the
board. If we’re going to make a contribution or support them in some form or fashion we also
need to be mindful of that as well. But once again, Ms. Allen, thank you you’ve done a great job
and I like I said the Commission also needs to be commended because we bit the bullet and they
gave us some funds to work with. Other than that you would’ve been in reserves no fault of your
own.
Ms. Allen: (unintelligible).
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, ma’am.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It looks like we’re going to be having to recess
this budget because I don’t think ---
Mr. Hasan: I’ll second that.
Mr. Guilfoyle: --- I’m not, it’s not a motion whatsoever. I would like to thank the
Interim Administrator as well as staff that was able to compile this over the past three to four
months. It wasn’t easy, you worked on it day in and day out. I’ve gotten some emails the wee
hours in the morning both sides of that morning so I do want to say thank you. Yeah, we always
see what you have done and what you have compiled to do the necessary cuts or additions to
make a balanced budget. But we as a body have to look at a level of service. We have to protect
our firemen, our policemen and then we have to look at what services do we call on the most.
My colleague hit it right on the head, it has a lot to do with that storm fee. 95% of our calls, I’ve
talked to one of my colleagues today. He has issues with drainage right there on Walton Way, a
clay pipe collapsed. I don’t mind supporting it as long as we’re able to do it in a level of service.
My colleague said when the flooding happens down there downtown East Boundary, Laney
Walker, water sewage hits the ground charge people with water and sewage because out there in
my district we have septic tanks. If we’ve got water and sewage combined, which we have in
five neighborhoods, charge them. That’s going to benefit from it. Over these past three budget
meetings we had a lot of communication of ways of saving. Mine is not ways of one way is
increasing revenue but it’s for alternative reasons. The Arts Council the Laney Walker Museum
and the Augusta Museum I had brought up let’s increase the motel tax from 6-7%.
48
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you two more.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Six to seven percent is going to generate
$600,000 dollars. We advocated that because it’s part of tourism they will no longer be relied on
us as a city but there’ll be designated funding to where we, it’s blind to us at that moment.
Contracts specialists. If we, that’s been spoken about numerous times. Mr. Hap Harris was
talking about parks, he’s looking at which parks to cut. He’s talking about he didn’t used this
word but he’s doing regional parks. Diamond Lakes is a beautiful I mean it’s three miles down
the road from my house. It has every amenity you want in it. I wish I had it in my backyard
though. Let’s look at I brought this up let’s look at the Land Bank. When we originally, one
more minute, Mr. Mayor. When we originally ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ve got you on the clock.
Mr. Guilfoyle: --- when we originally implemented the Land Bank it was supposed to be
self-sustaining after two years. We’re still funding it out of this year’s budget for next year for
the Land Bank. Let’s put it under the URA. It’s not working. The same thing over and over is
not working and so let’s try something different. Under the URA they could generate money
they could generate where we could actually add in to our general fund to give the helpers the
workers the lower paid scale people a raise. It’s just my idea but, Mr. Mayor, I hate to tell my
colleagues I’ve got to go. Yes, sir ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Guilfoyle: --- but I do thank you for your time. Welcome aboard, Ms. Jackson.
Mr. Mason: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: And I would be remiss. I did not recognize Ms. Jackson and say welcome
aboard to start the meeting as well. Do we have any more input?
Mr. Williams: Motion to ---
Ms. Davis: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Hang on one second.
Ms. Davis: I just wanted to ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Davis.
Ms. Davis: --- follow up. I just want to be clear that I appreciate every non-profit.
That’s what I do for a living I do fund raising and so I mentioned those few to kind of see which
way we want to go as far as across the board cuts or you know like you had mentioned before on
different levels of cuts, Ms. Allen. You know I had the DDA call me and say they would have to
shut their doors. And we heard that the other day if we cut them unless they figured out a way
49
for their revenue to come in differently. So I just mention that for this case of conversation to
see which way we wanted to go and I do I appreciate every non-profit of what they do for this
community. I just don’t know like Commissioner Williams said it might be all or nothing. I
don’t know but that’s for us to decide and I just didn’t want to be misunderstood on that.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. And I want to say to Ms. Allen and your team thank you so
much and thank you as well for just all of the hard work that you put into this. Lady and
gentlemen, I think we’ve had a lot of individual input into this trying to get to that consensus. A
meeting of the minds is never easy. We do have tough choices to make. I think a motion to
receive as information?
Mr. Williams: Motion to recess this item I guess not this meeting. I mean I guess this
meeting. I don’t want to adjourn I’m trying to figure out how to recess this part.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. MacKenzie. We don’t, we can move to receive it as, well.
Mr. MacKenzie: You could move to do this at a later time and you could move on to
your remaining items on the agenda.
motion to consider this at a later time?
Mr. Mayor: Can I get a
Mr. Williams: So moved.
Mr. Mason: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly second. Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, we’ve got some folks from Hyde Park waiting patiently. I
wish we could take that item.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: We’ve got some people here from Hyde Park who have been here for
whatever time.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s take the two Hyde Park agenda items.
The Clerk: Let me publish this vote for the record.
Mr. Fennoy, Mr. Lockett, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Grady Smith out.
Motion Passes 6-0.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
45. Update from staff on the relocation of the remaining Hyde Park property owners.
(Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
50
FINANCE
46. Receive from staff to date an all-inclusive/comprehensive/detailed report of all
expenditures associated with the Hyde Park Relocation Project as requested on November
4, 2014. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think in lieu of time I know one of our
colleagues well several of them have left already but we have one more that’s going to be
leaving in a few minutes. Item 45 and 46 I understand that Commissioner Williams was trying
to get some comprehensive information as it relates to this but I don’t think just for those who
have been sitting out here they have waited I know at least 2 ½ hours. And I’m just trying to
figure out was it anything, Commissioner Williams, in particular you needed them for or you’re
just trying to.
Mr. Mayor: Through the Chair.
Mr. Johnson: I mean I’m sorry.
Mr. Mayor: And I went ahead and called 45 and 46 we’ll go in that order.
Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, thank you, sir. There’s some residents here
from Hyde Park and I know they waited patiently to be addressed. This issue with Hyde Park
has gone on too long. I asked for a comprehensive report to find out how much money we
actually spent. And to say we ran out of money and run into a stumbling block is putting it
mildly. But there’s some resident’s I think that need to have an opportunity just to speak to this
body and to say how they feel and how long it’s been in this process, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, so do you not want the report from staff or you want?
Mr. Williams: Yes, I’d like to have the report from staff but I also I don’t want these
people to come down here for nothing. I don’t want you to sit here. They came down here with
hopes of something being done today. I asked for that report and I hadn’t just asked for it, I’ve
been asking for it for months. So I don’t a rush job now when I didn’t get a rush job before
that’s my point.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: I want to give them same time to these people who took their time out to
come down here. But my comprehensive report is to know how much who got what and how
much.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Ladson.
51
Mr. Ladson: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, the two items I think the first one
is to basically just give an update. And I think in the last meeting I think in that update I think
you wanted I guess we were tasked to look at other projects possibly where we can actually pull
funds from. We did create a report on projects that we have ongoing however those projects like
I said they’re ongoing and those projects are either in a design phase or the construction phase.
If you pull from those projects and these projects are in basically all of the districts, if you pull
from those projects you basically you’re basically killing the projects. So you know at that I
mean and all projects are important. I mean some of them are TIA projects some of them have
SPLOST on there so you know I have this report with the projects on there that we can actually
go through and look at those projects.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Ladson may be a little bit confused because he’s got me confused.
I’m not worried about the projects, I’m worried about one project and that’s Hyde Park, where
we are how much we spent, who’s got the money, who did the land acquisition where we are
with that project. I think and I don’t want to quote the wrong figure but I think it’s either $3.7
million or $4.7 million that we spent already in Hyde Park. I’m not pulling no money from
nowhere else. I want to know what happened to the money that’s already there.
Mr. Ladson: They have a report on all the money spent.
Mr. Williams: That’s what I’ve been asking for. If somebody can explain, Mr. Mayor,
give me those details. I asked for this report ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: --- I asked for this report months and months ago and I kept getting
denied. I don’t know what it takes for an elected official to get the information he requested.
Not just this department, it’s just one of these departments. But I’m really embarrassed to have
something presented to me now when the item comes up and I asked for it so I could really look
it over and really get some information from it. But to just give it to me now and explain it I
want somebody to tell me how much money we spent on lawyers and that shouldn’t have been
hard to do. How much money ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two minutes.
Mr. Williams: --- we spent on land acquisition, how much we spent in relocating those
people. Out of $4.7 million dollars I’m hearing and then we’re out of money. And I don’t know
how many residents are left there. I know there are some left there. I don’t know what the
process is so somebody needs to tell me something.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Ladson.
Mr. Ladson: If you look at this report and what I’ll do is just look at the bottom line
number. You have on here payroll which $241,919.00 was spent. And basically for the majority
52
for moving expenses there was $83,650.00. And for relocation there’s been $419,000.00
basically $420,000.00. For appraisals it’s $138,450.00 dollars and for lawyers and new houses
that was I think $2.4 million dollars.
Mr. Williams: So, Mr. Mayor, can I interrupt?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: This young man who is trying his best to describe something he don’t
know nothing about I can tell this conversation to where he’s even trying to put this together. It
ain’t it’s not his baby so he ain’t got no business rocking it. I need to know what we paid for
lawyers, what we paid for housing, I want a comprehensive detail Mr. Mayor of what we spent.
We’re talking about 4. something million dollars.
Mr. Mayor: And there is detail in this report.
Mr. Williams: That’s right and if I had gotten it in time I could’ve acknowledged that but
you’re not going to bring me no work and give it to me on my job when I’m working. I
should’ve got this ahead of time.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Basically Abie is just kind of summing it up here
based on the information here and the $2.4 million dollars in non-attorney fees so we don’t want
people to think that’s attorney fees. That’s actually what the attorney had to cut checks to the
homeowners or the people who are doing the land acquisition. As far as the owner of the home
and the home that they were going to that money is all included in that to give them. So in other
words the transaction goes from the attorney has to do the closing so they actually have to do the
whole transaction. They have to give you whatever the check is for the property that you own
then whatever the balance of it of the home that you’re buying they have to give you that
balance. So that $2.4 million dollars is actually the sum of all of that. The attorney fees only
consist of $200.00 dollars per closing. So I don’t want you to think that that number he threw
out that that was actually all of the attorney fees because that’s not the case. That actually went
towards the whole acquisition of the property, purchasing, selling and the purchasing of the
property. So I wanted to make sure we get, get that clarified before we proceed forward. But in
lieu of just time and diligence and due diligence in this I don’t know whether you’re going to get
all of that out in this particular session because it is very convoluted, there’s a lot of information
in here. And based on, you know, the colleagues that we have left we’re probably going to lose
one more in a few minutes because she’s got to leave. So I think we need to probably figure out
a way to kind of get this summed up so we don’t be left with this meeting in limbo. But I wanted
to make sure that the people that were out there who were here from Hyde Park know that that
was not the case that it has went towards that portion of it has went towards land acquisition and
purchasing of homes for those who have been relocated and for those who were renters who have
been relocated. So he mentioned those fees as well which is the relocation fees. Mind you all of
this stuff is still being done ---
53
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you two more.
Mr. Johnson: --- thank you still being done through the Federal Relocation Act. So they
have to follow those guidelines as it can’t be done any other way. This is the only way that it can
be done. The issue here today is we only had about $4 million dollars to start the project. So
what we asked Mr. Ladson to do was to go out and look at other sources like sources that we can
pull funding from like we did two months ago from Oates Creek to continue funding the project
until SPLOST VII passed. SPLOST VII did not pass in May so of course that pushed that back
so now we’re looking at next year before that gets funded. So now we’ve got to pull from other
pots. The money was never fully this project was never fully funded. We know it’s going to
cost a total of $18 million and I think $8 million of that was going to go in relocation. The other
I think $10 million was going to go for the project. Mr. Mayor, if you can and I guess I’m
getting that too (unintelligible) what I’m saying.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Ladson.
Mr. Ladson: This project from the get go we started working on this in probably about
2009. In 2010 we actually came before this body with a fully funded, basically with something
where we could fully fund this project. We actually came where we could get a loan, a state loan
to actually full fund the relocation and everything for this project however the body didn’t
approve that. And so we only we only had $2 million dollars that was put into SPLOST VI for
this particular project. We initially asked for we initially asked for I think it was about $15 to
$16 million dollars. Well, that the whole entire list SPLOST list was wired all the way down and
of course Hyde Park only got $2 million dollars out of it. So to get the process started we took
the $2 million dollars and got the process started and we also looked at other projects and we
pulled some funds just a little over $2 million dollars off of two other projects. And just two or
three months ago we pulled about six hundred and I think it was probably about $630,000 off of
Oates Creek. So I mean we’re kind of in, I mean we don’t the SPLOST didn’t pass so we and
we did at the very beginning say that this project would be just the relocation alone would be $8
million dollars. There’s a lot that has to go into when you’re doing a relocation especially if
you’re doing it by the federal guidelines. Now we talked about and I might be going off on a
little bit of a tangent here but we talked about the storm water fee. And for projects like this you
can actually if you have a storm water fee you can bond not only for Hyde Park but for National
Hills, Forest Hills, East Augusta there’s projects, large projects in each district where you can
actually use the storm water fees to take care of these type issues. And to not promote that or not
you’re basically kind of putting these different type projects at what I would say at a risk. Like I
said there’s no funding there, there’s nothing in the general budget there’s nothing in SPLOST.
Mr. Johnson: Just to wrap up, Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to make sure that it was clear
that the relocation was $8 million dollars and that was a little more ---
Mr. Ladson: We estimated at $8 million dollars.
Mr. Johnson: --- $8 million dollars estimated and we spent almost about $3.6 million
dollars thus far, correct?
54
Mr. Ladson: I think we spent about it’s probably right at about $4 million dollars.
Mr. Johnson: Close to $4 million dollars so we lacked a little bit more than $4 million so
the bottom line of it is from my perspective is and this is not to really get into blame or anything
because I understand funding is still the source of the problem here is how do we find other
revenue streams sources. I understand the storm water fee is one but how do we find which we
actually to look into other areas to see where we can find those dollars to continue on the process
and especially until the SPLOST passes and the funding is adequate to go ahead and just
facilitate the whole need.
Mr. Ladson: We actually brought the Corp of Engineers down. It’s probably been
probably a little over a year and they actually support the project. If you look at their analysis of
that area of Hyde Park that whole area’s is basically a flood plain. And they actually stated that
they would like to help fund the project. The only thing with that is it’ll probably be ten years
before you can actually get the funds.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, federal government.
Mr. Ladson: So it’s definitely a project that’s needed we just, we really, really, really
need help from the funding standpoint.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, I’m just trying to get I hear (unintelligible) to the point that
we’re a little over $4 million dollars in terms that we spent a couple of question for me. What
was the initial amount of money, no what was the funding source? I think Mr. Schroer can help
me. What was the initial funding source where the money came from? What SPLOST was that?
Mr. Schroer: SPLOST VI had allocated funding for that and then some funding from
completed projects which was from SPLOST III.
Mr. Hasan: Okay and so the total of how much was initially given?
Mr. Schroer: I believe it was about $3.6 million dollars between those two phases.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, okay. So we also asked the other day I think it may have been where
Mr. Ladson was going early on in this so there’s no other SPLOST money anywhere that we can
continue this project at least at an even pace at this time? Because I know just right a little over
what several months ago you gave, you know we found about a $1.2 million dollars for signage.
So I’m just to figure out is there any more money that we got that we can allocate to try to keep
this process moving?
Mr. Schroer: That $1.2 million dollars came from SPLOST II which is being closed out.
We have so many open projects right now; it’s not just Hyde Park it’s all the other road projects
55
that we have open that if you don’t have reserves for the other projects you’re going to run into
the same problem as you are today with Hyde Park is we don’t have money to finish them.
Mr. Hasan: So were these projects, these projects we’re working on did they come about
by referendum, all of them?
Mr. Schroer: The SPLOST lists were approved by the voters so those are the projects
that are allowed to be done with SPLOST funds.
Mr. Hasan: So what do you recommend? Mr. Wheeler, can I ask you a question if you
don’t mind? Is there any way with the kinds of monies that your office received is there any
kind of way you could invest money or make an investment into this process to keep it moving?
Mr. Wheeler: No, sir. Our budget has been cut from $3 million dollars to $1.5 in CDBG
and our HOME budget has been cut from $1.5 to (inaudible).
Mr. Hasan: As of when?
Mr. Wheeler: Several years back. I mean for the past two years we’ve only gotten
$750,000.00 in HOME money.
Mr. Hasan: I’m talking about, I’m not talking about the HOME money I’m talking about
this project money overall. You’re talking about one, one item, one line item.
Mr. Wheeler: The only source that I have is federal money. I don’t get any other money
except through the bond funds specifically targeted for Laney Walker. I have no other
discretionary funding.
Mr. Hasan: Well, when you said federal funds you do realize that you’re using a federal
program to do that right?
Mr. Wheeler: Absolutely ---
Mr. Hasan: Okay.
Mr. Wheeler: --- but this drainage project is not funded under federal government and we
don’t have it. If we had it we do, we really do not have the money to do it.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, so what ---
Mr. Wheeler: We provide all of the staffing out of my office to handle our part but we
don’t have it, sir.
Mr. Hasan: So what about some of the money that the penny sales tax that we’re talking
about $37.5 million dollars over whatever timeline that comes in that comes away from there. I
mean what about some of those resources.
56
Mr. Wheeler: The Commission just gave us $2.5 million maybe in July for Laney
Walker. That’s a decision by this body, it’s not what I can do. If this body tells us to pull up out
of Laney Walker and go somewhere else ---
Mr. Hasan: No, that’s not (unintelligible) pull of Laney Walker. I’m asking you about
the money that you received as a result of that hotel/motel tax. I’m asking you, you have the
liberty of using that money so if you’re saying that we can give you that liberty that’s one thing.
That has nothing to do with you pulling up out of Laney Walker.
Mr. Wheeler: No, I don’t have the liberty myself to allocate that funding to anywhere but
Laney Walker which has been authorized only by this Commission and not by any other
(inaudible).
Mr. Hasan: How much money do you currently have on hand for that project then?
Mr. Wheeler: Maybe $2 million dollars.
Mr. Hasan: I’d like to see us get a motion to move at least a million of that to keep
people moving in Hyde Park.
Mr. Mayor: And let me say, Commissioner Hasan, in all due respect and Mr. Wheeler
and Mr. MacKenzie correct me if I’m wrong but the dollar increase on the hotel/motel room fees
those monies by state law have to go to promote tourism which is the way they were used in
Laney Walker/Bethlehem was to help promote African American Heritage Tourism.
Mr. Hasan: But those are African Americans I’m looking at Hyde Park. And, Mr.
Mayor, I’m not trying to be funny I’m saying ---
Mr. Mayor: We got to go by the letter of the law on these things too.
Mr. Hasan: But I’m saying this one cent here was something that was able to say well
portion for tourism the other part was to go the $37.5 million dollars over a period of fifty years
would be going to that area to revitalize that area, the Laney Walker area. So with that being
said I’m saying that six votes can utilize some of that money in my mind to do something
different.
Mr. Mayor: Donna.
Ms. Williams: The one dollar that was designated for the Laney Walker/Bethlehem that
money has been bonded. It was bonded ---
Mr. Hasan: It was a different conversation now.
Ms. Williams: --- it’s the same conversation, it’s just a little bit more explanation.
57
Mr. Hasan: Okay.
Ms. Williams: Once you have bonded that money which you did for Laney
Walker/Bethlehem you are obligated to use that money for the purpose for which it was bonded
which was Laney Walker/Bethlehem. You cannot re-designate those funds to someplace else
once you have entered into a bond agreement.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, well what about let’s go back to Mr. Wheeler then. Mr. Wheeler,
what type of, and I’m not going to be that long Mr. Mayor for the sake of time.
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you one more minute.
Mr. Hasan: --- okay. Mr. Wheeler, you’re given and I guess I applaud you in one sense
you’re given some healthy incentives in terms of buying homes in that area. What are some of
those incentives in terms of that and what are the qualifications?
Mr. Wheeler: First of all they all come from the bond funds. For the incentive comes in
the form of a zero percent interest loan. It’s not forgivable and it’s not written out and it’s not up
to it’s up to $40,000 dollars depending on the amount of money that the homeowner can bring
from the bank. So we just don’t write them a blank check and say here’s $40,000 dollars, you
have to max out on the loan from the bank first. And based on that letter from the bank we
determine how much is given toward it in terms of a second mortgage loan. So every dollar that
we put out we get it back.
Mr. Hasan: So when you say that you’re also saying there are no financial requirements.
You’re just saying what I can bring, no financial requirements.
Mr. Wheeler: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Hasan: In other words I make half a million dollars, if I make a half a million dollars
I can come in there and you still would give me the $40,000 dollars.
Mr. Wheeler: If you made a half million dollars the bank is not going to give a letter like
that. The bank is going to tell you you’re bankable all the way up to the max.
Mr. Hasan: So what is the requirement in terms on the high end $200,000 dollars?
Mr. Wheeler: No, sir, it’s based on the bank’s requirements.
Mr. Hasan: Okay.
Mr. Wheeler: The bank will determine how much they will lend you based on the total
construction no, the sales price of the home, the appraised sales price of the home. The bank will
determine the amount they will lend you based on that home. It’s not set by us.
58
Mr. Hasan: So and my final question so you’re saying if I come in that area and buy a
home whether it’s $10,000 dollars or whether it’s $40,000 dollars you’re saying to me it’s a
second mortgage you’re not giving me anything no incentive to move other than what?
Mr. Wheeler: The only other cost that we have is closing costs and that’s it which you
can get at any other FHA. All of them collect closing costs. But we give no other incentive
other than accepting the Home Program. And the Home Program you’re 80% of low to
moderate income and you get a down payment assistance up to $7,500 dollars which again is not
a grant it’s a loan.
Mr. Hasan: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. I know that Commissioner Davis has a meeting to get to and she’s
running late for so I know that we’re about to lose our quorum. I would like to potentially go
ahead because Mr. MacKenzie says he would like it on the record to go ahead recess the meeting
but then allow this dialogue to continue if Commissioners would prefer to sit here and continue
the dialogue.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor, before we move on this part I’d like to make my comments.
I’m not going to recess a meeting or vote on anything else. These people are here now and I
don’t want to change over to anything else.
Mr. Mayor: I understand but we’re about to lose our quorum.
Mr. Williams: I understand then we’re going to lose it we’re going to do whatever’s
necessary but I think it needs to be addressed. I’m looking here at $2,444,675.46 for land
acquisition and attorneys’ fee. You can’t tell me the property at Hyde Park all of it was worth
two million four hundred and something thousand. Now I’m just looking at the numbers now I
didn’t want to look at this.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: I didn’t want to look at this. Mr. Wheeler made a statement. The reason
we get federal funds in Augusta if for low to moderate income people to be assisted. And if
these people in Hyde Park are not low to moderate income people then who is?
Mr. Mayor: And I would ---
Mr. Williams: So I’m worried about why we spent the money, I love Laney Walker, I
love the whole scenario but these people have been suffering too long going through too much
and we still hadn’t got them out. And these ain’t all of them.
Mr. Mayor: But I’m going to say, Commissioner Williams, in all due respect we have
now invested significant resources and significant staff time in Hyde Park that had never been
done before. And I think that that’s something we should acknowledge that we are investing
millions of dollars in Hyde Park.
59
Mr. Williams: I’m going to close this, Mr. Mayor. I asked for a comprehensive report
and if that ain’t clear enough I want a detailed report. I want to know how much each entity
made like this two million four forty here for the land acquisition attorney. I want to separate it
what the attorney made I want to know what the land acquisition was. I want a detail and I can
go by their office, Abie or your office or Mr. Wheeler’s office and I can show you what I want
since ya’ll don’t seem to understand. I need to have it listed so I know how much money we
done spent and who got the money.
Mr. Mayor: I think you can clarify that with them but I appreciate that. Okay, before we
lose the quorum, are you okay with voting on a recess now? People are free to speak but.
Mr. Williams: I ain’t got no resolution with Hyde Park yet. I’m ain’t, I’m not voting on
anything myself, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Williams: I can sit here all night long just send me some (unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. What we need to get clear here today and we need
to be very, very honest with you all. And that’s what I’ve been always trying to do and be with
the residents in Hyde Park. You can’t take and pull money from anywhere and put it towards
any project. It don’t work like that. And, hold on, let me finish. You can’t do that and if
anybody told you they can, they’re telling you a fib. Now you may not want to hear this but it’s
the truth because if you want to lose what you got if somebody did it and then followed the letter
of the law then you’re going to be truly upset when you get in your house and find out later on
that it was done illegal. You don’t want that to happen. So what I’m saying is what we’re trying
to find out here is and we’ve asked the staff to go and find other sources of projects ready,
projects that have been placed on hold just like we used the $2.5 million dollars that was actually
set aside for Hyde Park out of SPLOST VI to find projects like that so we can in turn move that
money to the source of Hyde Park meaning that those are dollars that has already been set aside
for projects just like that you can’t use or we have the liberty to do that because they’ve been
designated for projects like that. So the money that was questioned about Laney
Walker/Bethlehem as you know you can’t do that, that’s not legal. That’s money, you can’t
move that money so we don’t want you thinking that that’s the case. Now if ya’ll want to hear
something different then don’t listen to me you can get it from somebody else. But if you want
the truth ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Johnson: --- and you want to get the answers and what you need to know ---
Mr. Mayor: Let’s take it easy (unintelligible).
60
Mr. Johnson: --- then I can give you that.
Mr. Speaker: (inaudible).
Mr. Johnson: But, Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Sir, you can ask your one question. I’ve got to go myself and I know ---
Mr. Speaker: Why would you start it if you had no money?
Mr. Mayor: What’s that?
Mr. Speaker: Why would you start the project if you had no money?
Mr. Mayor: Well, would you rather nothing had been started?
Mr. Speaker: (unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: Would you rather have had no progress made?
Mr. Speaker: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Speaker: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: All righty. Well, sir, we have invested millions of dollars. We’re looking
for other funding resources to invest. Okay ya’ll.
Mr. Speaker: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: Ma’am, please be civil. You know we’re trying to address the issue. And
we have listened to the people in Hyde Park. As the Mayor Pro Tem said it is not a quick
process but we’ve committed, but we do have money to keep the project going. So we’re still
working on this. But this has been something that we’ve been focused on. Once again our staff
and millions of dollars has been spent. I mean that’s not an insignificant investment.
Mr. Speaker: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: No, no because this is a federal program. You’ve got to dot all your ‘I’s’
and cross all you ‘T’s’, so no.
Mr. Speaker: (Unintelligible).
61
Mr. Mayor: But, sir, I will tell you once again it’s going to take us working together up
here with cooler heads to, and it’s going to take after I’m out of office and the Mayor Pro Tem
and Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Speaker: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. But what the Mayor Pro Tem was saying is that money is bonded
legally it can’t be moved.
Mr. Speaker: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: Okay, obviously I’m not going to answer all your questions but thank ya’ll
for coming.
Mr. Speaker: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: I would tell you, sir, I’m sorry sometimes you know if you, we don’t have
the answers to all the questions for Hyde Park that’s why we committed resources to it to
continue on with the process of trying to take care of the issues. And I would hope that it would
be appreciated that millions of dollars have been spent there. You know in the past people from
Hyde Park their issues were not addressed by past commissions. This commission is addressing
the issues. I know you’ve got Commissioner Williams sitting up here that he’s going to be up
here for a number of more years. He’s going to keep pushing it but all we can answer all your
questions tonight honestly no.
Mr. Johnson: Are you going to recess the meeting?
Mr. Mayor: Well, I don’t think we, can I get a motion to recess the meeting?
Mr. Hasan: I make a motion to recess the meeting/
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. MacKenzie: I would advise that it would be recessed to the next regularly scheduled
Commission meeting.
Mr. Hasan: I make a motion to recess the meeting until the next scheduled
Commission meeting.
Mr. Johnson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. Commissioners
will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Fennoy, Mr. Lockett, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Smith out.
Motion Passes 6-0.
62
Mr. Mayor: We are in recess.
[MEETING RECESSED]
[MEETING IS RECONVENED AT 1:30 P.M. ON DECEMBER 2, 2014]
Mr. Mayor: Okay, as we’ve established a quorum, Madam Clerk, you ready to go?
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
th
Mr. Mayor: I’m going to go ahead and reconvene the November 18 meeting of the
Commission. And, Ms. Jackson, I believe you have a budget presentation to make.
Ms. Jackson: Good afternoon everyone. As you all are aware I have tried to make
contact with each and every one of you over the last week to get your feedback on the key issues
as they have been presented in the budget process. Some of you I had very brief conversations
with, some of you I had long conversations with. Some of them were email exchanges but I
think I’ve managed to get a good feedback from every one of you and I did enjoy that
opportunity to speak to you all one on one to get a feel for how you see the status of the county
as it relates to this budget process. What I have compiled for you today is a compilation of all
the thoughts. I tried to be very honest and direct in terms of presenting here what you all were
very supportive of and where the support was less than it would be to assure a place in the
budget. I tried to be very direct about that. We also tried to incorporate staff’s opinions and
comments about certain things that we think are good for the organization. So what I’d like to
do is go through the slides as we prepared them then we’ll open it up for any questions that you
might have and hopefully you’ll be prepared to cast a vote at the conclusion of our presentation.
First thing I want you to remember is this is just a recommended budget and it’s a dynamic
document. I know sometimes we set a budget and we think that’s the last opportunity to set forth
funding recommendations for the year. I don’t want you all to look at this this way particularly
with my being new and particularly with my knowing that there’ll be additional information I’ll
gather over the next few months. There is room to adjust this document but I think the goal for
today is to allow for sufficient funding to address the key funding issues that have been identified
to me. First thing, Richmond County Sheriff’s Office. Prior to my coming on board you all took
a vote to identify approximately $1.6 million dollars to implement tiered funding increases for
officers and deputies in that department. The recommendation initially was that it be for the
entire year. I do know that there has been some discussion about perhaps scaling that down but
because it was presented for the entire year I felt like it was important to put that in the
recommended budget that way at this time. It appears that some promises have been made along
those lines and this recommendation is in keeping with that. Certainly you all have the authority
to make changes but that’s why I felt like I needed to present it as it was discussed earlier. That
cost would be $1.6 million dollars. Next for the Marshal’s Office to do a similar type of tiered
structure with increases the cost would be $88,600 dollars. The level of support as you can see
was lower for this particular office than it was for the Sheriff’s Department, however, because
they all are post certified officers that come into those positions with the same qualifications I
felt like it was important based upon my experience to treat them the same. I have had some
63
very candid discussion with the Marshal, Mr. Smith, about how he can work with us to identify
areas where he may be able to save us some money. We’ve talked about issues like doing bank
deposits and things like that. Right now we’re contracting some of those services out. I think
there’s some potential for the Marshal’s Office to offset some of those expenses for us by
providing some of those services. In my conversations with the Marshal I think he understands
that you all are looking for more from his office and I made that very clear with him. So we’ll
move forward with the idea in 2015 that to looking for and actively exploring ways that they can
do more for the organization. Recreation Parks and Facilities Organizational Assessment
$100,000 dollars. The level of support for this was high interest among members of you of the
board. There had been obviously some discussion about doing a certain percentage cut right
now. I do want to advise you that I think it would be important for us to take a more deliberate
and strategic approach to making those cuts. We’re all looking for money where ever we can
find it. There may very well be some money there and I want to go through a good process a
good and thorough process to identify what we could cut and what the consequences of any cuts
would be. So that would be the purpose of having a strategic analysis done. We put in a very
ball park round number there of $100,000 dollars. It may not take that much hopefully it won’t.
Hopefully we’ll be able to do Recreation and then after that pick up on some other departments.
But I really do want to do Recreation first because of the high interest in looking to see if there’s
an opportunity to make better use of the resources for that particular department. Organizational
Compensation Study. This is something that’s recommended by staff, myself and staff. I
understand the last time that we’ve done a salary study was back in 2005. That’s ten years ago.
This type of process would address the need to determine competitive salary benefits so that we
can attract and retain a quality workforce. Next item directly related to that if we do such a study
we do need to know what, we do need to fund some of the increases that we have determined
that increases are needed. We need to have some money set aside to making adjustments to
those. Obviously from what we just discussed a couple of slides ago we’re making adjustments
to our sworn personnel based upon the need to retain those employees. This would give us an
opportunity to also make some adjustments for our 1700 or so civilian employees in our
organization. Implementation of Storm Water Fee. If we were to implement this, this reduces
the general fund storm water expenditure by $1.25 million and it generates $2.2 million for storm
water system maintenance and $2.75 million dollars for infrastructure enhancements. The level
of support for this was high. I think everyone recognizes that this community has not made
sufficient investments in infrastructure over the last several years and we need to show that we
are interested in investing in our community. I’m particularly interested in this as a quality of
life sort of situation for residents of our community but also interested in it as an economic
development tool. I mean I have nightmares about the possibility of an economic development
prospect coming to our town on a rainy day and looking around and seeing all that water and
thinking, you know, these folks aren’t very interested in investing in their community. So that’s
why I think it’s very important. And based upon my discussion with you all some of you see it
as a necessary evil but still understand that we really need to do something because we have not
properly addressed storm water in our community. One of the other thoughts that came out of
the conversations that I had with several of you was you don’t want this to endanger the prospect
of us getting a SPLOST passed the next time around and that’s a very legitimate concern. Based
upon that I’m charging my staff myself and my staff to go out and do a very aggressive public
information effort between January 1 and July 1 so that before anybody pays a dime on this fee
we’ve made a sincere effort to let people know what the fee is for, how the money’s utilized,
64
how it’s going to benefit our community. I know that there’s still a level of concern among some
in the community wanting to know how this impacts them. This would be the opportunity for us
to take that six months and let them know what the impact fee is what the fee and is not and
these funds could work in conjunction with SPLOST funds to improve our overall storm
drainage system. Office of Compliance/ADA Coordination. I put in a number. Again it’s a very
round number. The level of support for doing something along these lines was moderate to high.
I and my staff will be working to put together a specific proposal for early in 2015 so that we can
figure out exactly where that fits. My suspicion is we have some issues obviously have some
issues with ADA Compliance so that’s why we need to have such a position on staff. But there’s
probably also some other areas that can be brought into this and I just need some time to give
that some thought and work out a reasonable proposal to bring back to you in a few months.
Benefits increases for 1945 Plan Retirees the retention committee met and heard from the actuary
he indicated that it would cost a little over $55,000 dollars to put this in place. The level of
support among you all varied so I put it in as moderate. This amount would put in an additional
$250.00 dollars per month per retiree in the old Richmond County retirement plan. I do present
this with word of caution however, this could set a precedent. Members of other plans you know
we’ve got the 1949 Plan which was the old city plan and we also have the current plan that it’s a
couple thousand participants in that plan. If we make changes with this plan it could create a
desire on the part of participants in the other plans to also come forward wanting increases as
well. So there is money available we could do it but I felt like I needed to warn, it’s my duty to
warn you that there could be some consequences there. Funds available there was a last line on
the document I sent you that left over $104,000 dollars. My recommendation would be to put
that into our contingency; we’ve been budgeting a relatively small amount for contingency and I
think we spent about everything every penny that we have in that in 2014 so I’d just like to add a
little bit more since there was something left. Agency requests. One of the hot button items was
funding agencies and it always is. Trust me I mean when I was in Mecklenburg County we had
about a 1.4 billion dollar budget and just like you’re sitting here now in the last days of the
budget process discussing the last few items agency request were always among those. So even
for a budget that the size that they had you know they would be sitting there tweaking a $50,000
dollar request at the last minute. So this is not unique to our community and it’s also not unique
that once we start funding agencies it’s hard to stop. It really gets difficult because you get into
equity considerations then you know how you cut one and not cut the other. So I mean
everybody’s going through the same type of thing. In light of that I would like to recommend
that we as a staff prepare for the 2016 budget year by doing some additional analysis for you in
the next months. We want to look at how do we decide to fund them, how effective are the
services. Is our government the best place for those organizations to get funding? We want to
ask questions like that over the next year or so that we can give you a little bit more information
to make better decisions for next year’s budget process. But as of right now with the funding we
have we can leave all of the agencies at the 2014 level. I just wanted to make that clear. The
Mayor-Elect made a request the level of support for that was relatively low. I think the
consideration can be given to a request at a later date was the consensus that came out of the
conversations that I had with you all. I think the idea was once, you know, he had the chance to
serve for a while he can take a look at what the office really needs and at that point could come
back with an informed request. The next couple of slides relate to some detail on new positions
and I’ll admit to you these are the ones that the staff had worked on before I came on board and I
just kept the request in. You know they had put forth a certain level of scrutiny on those requests
65
and I have no need to question that at this point so we have added this in. These are new
projects, basically service enhancements. Most of those relate to engineering or several of them
relate to engineering, engineering maintenance services, roadway, retention ponds, ditch and
right of way maintenance, guard rail program and tree maintenance. That’s the bulk of it. I
understand the first item relates to Animal Control and Disaster Preparedness for their
organization which I understand follows some federal protocols and a mutual agreement that we
have with the City of Savannah to handle that and it’s a relatively small amount. Also in
Recreation I understand that security services had been provided by the Richmond County
Sheriff’s Office and they’re no longer going to be able to do that so Recreation will have to pay
th
for their security for their special events July 4 parade et cetera, et cetera and that’s what that
amount is for. New Personnel and Personnel Upgrades. Several departments totaling $420,000
dollars that’s includes the Clerk of Commission requested additional personnel, Board of
Elections, Human Resources and the Human Resources change I understand is related to the
contract arrangements with ADP in particular determination of that contract. Tax Assessor
wanted some additional benefits his folks are his folks attain certain certifications. State Court
reclassifying a couple of deputies, those are actually Sheriff’s deputies but they’re assigned to
State Court that’s funding for those. Pay adjustments for RCCI similar to the other sworn
officers that we discussed in the Marshal’s and Sheriff’s offices and 911 Emergency telephone
call takers. So those are the additional positions and/or upgrades that we’re recommending for
the upcoming year. And again I followed the recommendation that staff had presented prior to
my coming on board. These last couple of sheets just summarize the entire budget for all funds
and our grand total is $786,401,000 dollars. Any questions?
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Guilfoyle then Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Ms. Jackson, thank you for presenting this to us. I think I received it a
little bit over an hour ago through the email, couldn’t see it on my IPhone. But just going
through some of the items you had brought up the Marshal’s, the increase of $88,600 dollars and
they’re going to start implementing new creative ways to be efficient to help the departments
making deposits.
Ms. Jackson: That’s what I requested of them. Of course we’ll have to look into the
details of that to make sure but I made it very clear to Mr. Smith that the Commission needed to
feel like they were getting their money’s worth out of that office.
Mr. Guilfoyle: As far as the storm water fee. I know that Abie and myself have been
discussing and, you know, I sit here and listen to my colleagues so I understand the need for it in
this city. As a matter of fact right there on Walton Way traffic has basically come to a stop. But
I’ve always said since day one do it from the level of service. I here that Columbia County,
Grovetown, Aiken, North Augusta and surrounding counties beyond that had implemented the
storm fee but they fail to recognize is that the rural areas which includes Mr. Hasan he has
McDade Road, Liberty Church Road, Brown Road as well as Mr. Lockett. I know I’ve been
beating on a dead horse right now but you have to take into consideration Columbia County does
not charge the rural area; they focus of the area of needs, the concentration. It actually is cheaper
to maintain dirt and put in the storm pipes and then maintain the storm pipes. But you’ve still
got to maintain the ground above it. I wish there’d be a consideration on that for District 8. As
66
far as the benefit increases for the 1945 Plan you had a warning on our page but it surprises me
that it would be in here.
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, the $55,800 dollars. With the 1945 Plan we
might want to slide that into the contingency fund because we actually got a December tentative
th
December 16 date for the Pension Committee for further discussion. If this passes here then
under the 1949 Plan we’re going to have an increase because people are already calling on the
1949 Plan for an increase in their benefits as well as to the tune of $680,000 which will make it
very difficult for you to stand here next year trying to find the funding. So we might want to be
very careful in that aspect. That point that’s basically all I have to say on this one for right now.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Mason.
Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First and foremost just an observation having sat
here for seven years and heard various budget talk I would say. First and foremost this is a great
presentation for a very short period of time. You addressed a lot of things that we otherwise
would’ve had questions for that would normally not be presented so I want to say for your first
budget presentation I think it was an excellent job. And if this is an indication of the type of
work that you’re going to bring to Augusta Richmond County and I’m very proud to have been a
part of having to bring you on board first and foremost. I do not 100% agree with everything in
the budget and I think you certainly know that most councilmen, commissioners and so forth
with not agree with every single thing but by and large because you’ve addressed some of the
things in terms of what your staff will do moving forward it gives me a level of comfortability
that I can support this budget that you brought here today and just as a point of note that you
know I have not voted for a single budget that’s been presented to me in seven years. I feel
pretty good about this budget that’s being presented today and all things being equal I think I can
support it. So I’m very, very happy with the direction that you’re moving this city in and I want
to say thank you in front of God and country and I think you’ve done an outstanding job in
addressing these particular issues and the needs. And so for the most part I certainly support this
budget that you presented here today. Thank you so much.
Mr. Mayor: I would love to see you make a motion to approve the budget.
Mr. Mason: I’ll make that motion to approve this budget.
Mr. Fennoy: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded.
Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’ve got a couple of questions for Ms. Jackson
and like Mr. Mason this is my twelfth one it’s not my seventh it’s my twelfth budget that I sit in
on. But a couple of things I think you talked about the 911 workers. Next year looking at the
911 workers is that what you said, Ms. Jackson?
67
Ms. Jackson: No, 911, Emergency telephone. Are you referring to the slide where it says
Augusta Georgia 2015 New Personnel and Upgrades, that last line item there?
Mr. Williams: You (unintelligible).
Ms. Jackson: That is for this year Administrative recommends four positions for this
year.
Mr. Williams: Okay, but was that for an increase for their because you were talking
about the Sheriff’s Department and Marshal’s Department and the 911 ---
Ms. Jackson: Okay.
Mr. Williams: --- and I guess my question is do that certify as a 911 Director of
Personnel as the same as the Marshal and Sheriff? Is that what you mean?
Ms. Jackson: Sir, I’m doing some research on that issue because frankly I’ve gotten
conflicting information. At one point I was told that they were not sworn and then I was told
they were sworn so I’ve got to figure out what they really are. If it is that they are sworn
personnel through POST like the others we referenced they should get the same increases that
the rest of them get.
Mr. Williams: Okay and in my thinking and listening to Hap Harris telling me directing
me over here and he’s telling me there wasn’t sworn they was, you know, they were qualified
people so I’m listening to my advisor over here on my left. But nevertheless I wanted to bring
that point out. The other thing I wanted to mention about we talked about cuts with the agencies
that’s coming. What would this budget do exactly percentage wise to those agencies that have
been asking for, those cuts what would that level of cut be?
Ms. Jackson: The nonprofit agencies?
Mr. Williams: Right.
Ms. Jackson: No, they will all be funded at 2014 levels so I’m not cutting anybody right
now. When I start thinking of further analysis, that would be for the 2016 budget year.
Mr. Williams: Okay, I’m just trying to be clear. One other thing I had, okay we talked
about the Organizational Compensation Study. It said we had not done anything in ten years. Is
that what your understanding was?
Ms. Jackson: That’s the information I received from staff.
Mr. Williams: Well, that’s misinformation. Let me tell you that from a Commissioner.
We have done something, maybe not for everybody but I’m telling you there’s some things were
68
done and I’m still having heartburn. I wasn’t here when it happened about some increases that
some folks got but not the line force people.
Ms. Jackson: What I’m talking about is a Comprehensive Compensation Study that will
look at every position in the organization to determine if we are paying our folks a market rate
for their services.
Mr. Williams: I understand that. I got that much but there’s some of those folks that
have gotten an increase and I think from what I heard was we had ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two.
Mr. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, we hadn’t done anything in ten years or we hadn’t
had the study in ten years.
Ms. Jackson: Have not done a Comprehensive Compensation Study.
Mr. Williams: Study, okay. Now I’m just trying to be clear. I don’t go out of here
thinking I did something I didn’t do. But that was my question, Mr. Mayor, I think that’s it. I
had one more but I turn to Mr. Harris if I can if I need an answer for that.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Harris then Commissioner Fennoy.
Mr. Harris: The only, the problems I have is I still think there’s a lot of stuff in here that
could be chopped. And I know that Ms. Williams probably has money squirreled around in
different holes you know when we need it you’ll be able to find it and I understand that. But you
know we talked about looking into possibly the hotel/motel tax increase. Well if it, somebody
came up with the $877,000 dollars I mean I’m assuming that’s give or take a round number. If
you took out the two museums, Greater Arts, Ezekiel and the Downtown Authority as outside
agencies which these are directly related to bringing people into town I mean it takes $546,000
dollars off the budget, more than enough to fund them with money left over. I mean I don’t
know how ya’ll split it all up but and then there’s just a lot of places in there they make sense
when somebody explains them to me. But I see budgeted items that I just don’t understand
them. I mean I just, I mean I don’t even know why we’re giving the Patch a lot of money.
Somebody said that was some kind of management deal and I thought well we leased it to them
and we’re giving them a half million dollars. So I just think there’s places in there that could still
be trimmed. I think the water tax, storm water tax I think is not going to sit well with a lot of
people because they’re going to see it, I don’t think they have a problem with having to fix what
obviously has to be fixed. I mean I think they’ll understand especially with what’s going on
Walton Way but I think they’re going to have a problem when we say well we’re also going to
shave some of it off to help balance the budget when they would say there is stuff in there you
could shave off the budget to make up that million two five. I mean I just, it’s my thoughts.
Ms. Jackson: And I think you and I are in the same position where we’re both coming in
new and don’t know everything we’re looking at right now. I would what I intend to say what I
have said and what I will say more is that, yes, we’re looking for every opportunity to cut. And
69
as we go through a more deliberate review of the organizations I hope to come back to you next
year with an awful lot of things that can be trimmed so the organization can move forward. But
unfortunately standing here today I’m just not in a position to be able to say that to you.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Fennoy.
Mr. Fennoy: Yes, Ms. Jackson, I guess one of my concerns is the storm water fee. Could
you put that slide back up there for me please? Okay, the money that will be generated from the
storm water fee this year will be roughly two, four, five, say six million dollars?
Ms. Jackson: Yes.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay but in 2016 if the storm water fee is still in place it will be?
Ms. Jackson: We’re looking at about $10 million.
Mr. Fennoy: About $10 million.
Ms. Jackson: Uh-huh.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay and I kind of disagree with one of my colleagues when he made the
comment about it seems that there was dirt under the concrete because you know down in my
area you know when it rains the way it does and we’ve got dirt down there just creates a big
mess. One of the things that I would like to see done if possible if we could issue some bonds to
not only to take care of the flooding situation in downtown Augusta but to take care of the
flooding situation in all of Augusta and use the monies from the storm water fee to finance those
bonds. Is that a possibility?
Ms. Jackson: I believe it is a possibility. Again I haven’t explored the details of that but
I believe it is a possibility that I’d like to discuss with the Finance Director and the Attorney’s
office.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay and I think in the previous Director, Department Heads action.
Deputy Administrator, Acting Interim Administrator have done an excellent job in presenting us
with a balanced budget. I think that you have done an excellent job in putting all the pieces
together. And I would like to see this budget passed. My last concern ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you another two for his last concern.
Mr. Fennoy: --- my first last concern is the warning about the ’45 Plan or what can we
expect from the ’49 Plan and the other retirement plan. I believe that all of our especially our
retired employees deserve everything that the city can offer them. But I think that we at some
point in time need to be aware of where making moves like this might lead us. I know it came
with a warning but you sort of support this?
70
Ms. Jackson: To be perfectly honest with you, sir, I have some mixed emotions. The
specific request that was made to us was to just fund I think ten people, ten retirees who were not
eligible for the enhanced plan that was offered at the time consolidation took place. And these
numbers are based upon doing everybody in that group a total of 22 folks including retirees and
spouses. If you look at the amounts of money that those retirees currently draw some of the
amounts are pretty significant. You know it’s a huge range enforcement some of them are in the
teens, you know, under $20,000 dollars particularly for spouses. And some of them are, you
know, up way above what the average employee current active employee makes. I wish there
were a way for us to do this so that we focus on those at the lower end of the scale but I’m just
not sure legally that it’s possible to do that. So I mean that really is my concern is who gets it
and how we determine who gets it if it has to be everybody. You know you’re looking at some
folks who honestly who are drawing a pretty significant amount right now. So it’s a tough
question. I also look at the ages of some of the folks who are drawing the lesser amounts. Some
of those people are 80, 90. I think the oldest was 94 years old so they’re all over the spectrum
which makes it a tough call. So I mean it’s a real tough question to answer.
Mr. Fennoy: You’re not running for office. All right, thank you, Ms. Jackson.
Mr. Mayor: And before I recognize Commissioner Hasan I just want to say regarding the
storm water utility fee I met with Alan Barnes former State EPD Director this morning on
another matter. And he strongly recommends that cities throughout Georgia go that route. He
said he doesn’t see really any other way that you can grow economically unless, you know,
manage your storm water. Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Jackson, I’m trying to figure out the name I
know Allen so. Ms. Jackson is this, one of the concerns that I’ve had I won’t repeat it right now
because Commissioner Mason’s dealing with it currently which I think is a good thing. My
other concern here is a question here about the Recreation Department security services special
events. I could be wrong on this and historically I was assuming say for instance I rented one of
our facilities I would rent that facility I would also pay the employee from the city who would be
there to help govern us. I’d also pay the security that was provided. So has that process changed
or am I misunderstanding something here?
Ms. Jackson: I’m going to tell you what I know and I’ll ask if there’s somebody else that
can enlighten you further on this. But what I understand these are security services for big things
th
like the Christmas parade, the 4 of July celebration, things of that nature.
Mr. Hasan: Events that we our personal events as a government.
Ms. Jackson: Yes.
Mr. Hasan: Okay. Okay.
Ms. Jackson: Yes, from what I understand.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, thank you, ma’am.
71
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Mason. Commissioner Lockett then Commission Mason.
Mr. Lockett: Well, I might as well get on the band wagon. I wanted to say that I think
you, Ms. Allen, Finance and all the others that were involved in this budgetary process have
done an outstanding job. And I hoping that we’re going to pass it today because the budget is a
living thing and we can tweak it and change it wherever there’s a need to do so. Because I really
hope we’re not going to get bogged down in this and taking it to next year when there’s so many
other things we need to do. So there again, thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay Commissioner Mason then Commissioner Davis.
Mr. Mason
: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Having made a motion to pass the budget the way
that it is I tried to get a feel from my colleagues to figure out where we’re going with this
because we don’t want to get bogged down. I’m getting the consensus that with that item being
moved out and perhaps looked at in a different way being a contingency or something else at a
later time frame that this budget may in fact move forward. And the item that I’m referencing is
that pension. So and given your comments on that and just feeling the vibes of the Commission
amend my motion to approve this budget minus the pension at this
here, Mr. Mayor, I would
time.
Mr. Lockett: I second that, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mayor: Is the seconder of the motion okay with that the amendment of the motion?
Mr. Fennoy: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Okay, is there any, oh Commissioner Davis.
Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Jackson, thank you for the presentation and Ms.
Allen and the Finance Department and department heads for all their work in this past six months
to a year probably longer. But okay I just had a couple of things to mention and I don’t know if I
can get any agreement with this but when we raise the millage rate we made it clear that we were
not actually able to provide anymore services. Correct? So when I look at the Organizational
Assessment and the organization Compensation Study I’m not comfortable with that $200,000
dollars right now. I know that it might be needed in the future but I feel like this everyone in our
county is looking for increased services. I just feel like in my mind that $200,000 dollars would
be better served for maintenance or for infrastructure that type of thing since that’s what’s on all
of our minds. So I just wanted to make that that doesn’t make me comfortable those two items.
Mr. Jackson: The first item, ma’am, being the Recreation Parks and Facilities
Organizational Assessment?
Ms. Davis: Yes and the Organizational Compensation Study.
Ms. Jackson: Okay.
72
Ms. Davis: I know Human Resources did a study I believe it was last year and I think
that we were just being told it was done at the upper level department heads. I’m not sure, Ms.
Williams, if you can help refresh my memory on that study.
Ms. Jackson: In terms of the Organization Compensation Study, ma’am, there was
$100,000 dollars in the current year’s budget that was not spent so it wasn’t done so that’s why I
put that in. This is just basically you know taking ---
Ms. Davis: For the Recreation, right?
Ms. Jackson: --- no, that’s the one for the Compensation Study actually the second one.
So we’re just you know moving it from this year to next year essentially. The Recreation Parks
and Facilities analysis I mean I felt like we needed to put that in response to the concerns that
we’re just there’s concerns that that budget is bloated for lack of a better term so this was a way
for us to make some deliberate and strategic attempt for us to figure out what can be taken out of
there. And I’m hoping it doesn’t cost $100,000 dollars. I’m hoping that it doesn’t cost that
much to study it but I felt like I needed to have something in as a place holder. So that was just
my logic for doing that.
Ms. Davis: Would it be possible to do that kind of study in-house?
Ms. Jackson: There needs to be objective eyes looking at it and that’s my concern.
Ms. Davis: Okay and lastly storm water. If we do pass this budget today the way it’s
presented we, that does not mean we voted in the storm water fee, correct?
Ms. Jackson: I think what, yeah, I think it means what the board wants it to mean. I
think that’s the answer to your question.
Ms. Davis: But I mean as far as the fees and all of that that’s been presented. I mean that
means we’re okaying everything that’s been shown to us as far as the numbers and fees.
Ms. Jackson: I don’t think that that does not mean, this means you’re making provisions
for it but we’ll still need to come back at a later time with the specifics of the plan and exactly
how it would be implemented, how the charges would be determined, implementation plan
etcetera.
Ms. Davis: There can be further reviews and tweaks to the plan as far as fees ---
Ms. Jackson: Yes.
Ms. Davis: --- and concerns like Commissioner Guilfoyle has.
Ms. Jackson: Yes.
73
Ms. Davis: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded. If there’s
no further discussion Commissioners will now vote by the usual sign.
Mr. Harris, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Smith vote No.
Motion Passes 7-3.
Mr. Mayor: And, Madam Clerk, you brought to my attention that there were several
more agenda items that were needed to be disposed of on this agenda.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
44. Motion to approve recommendation #2 of the Interim Administrator relative to the
Disparity Study to consult with Attorney Colette Holt to help implement the goals to make
program successful subject to costs associated with the consultation be presented to the
Commission and the remainder recommendation referred back to committee. (Approved
by Administrative Services Committee October 27, 2014) (Referred from November 4
Commission meeting and November 10 Administrative Services Committee)
45. Update from staff on the relocation of the remaining Hyde Park property owners.
(Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
FINANCE
46. Receive from staff to date an all-inclusive/comprehensive/detailed report of all
expenditures associated with the Hyde Park Relocation Project as requested on November
4, 2014) (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
47. Receive from the Finance Director a report on fees paid to Public Financial
Management relative to the Water & Sewer Bonds-Series 2014 Issuance as requested on
October 3, 2014. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
The Clerk: Yes, sir, item 44 which dealt with the Disparity Study, item 45 was a request
relative to the remaining property owners at Hyde Park, 46 was to receive a staff report and 47
regarding the Water and Sewer Bond Series 2014 requested by Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Williams: --- Mr. Mayor, I ask that these three items that I had be put over on
th
the next Commission agenda on December 16.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Commissioner Lockett.
Mr. Lockett: Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Williams said that three items, I want the fourth
item but I don’t know what three he’s talking about.
74
Mr. Mayor: 45, 46 and 47.
Mr. Lockett: Okay, well then I’d also like to, agenda item number 44 next Commission
meeting also.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, let’s, could you specify the date on that because the next Commission
meeting starts here just in a few minutes.
th
Mr. Mayor: December 16 Commission meeting.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, would you like to put that in the form of a motion to move?
The Clerk: We have a motion. We need a second on that.
Mr. Harris: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. We have a motion that’s been made and properly seconded.
Commissioner Guilfoyle.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir, I don’t since we’re going to be pushing stuff to the next
th
commission meeting on December 16 I didn’t know if we could on the regular agenda item add
item number 21 and 22 with that motion if the maker of the motion don’t mind.
Mr. Lockett: No (unintelligible).
Mr. Guilfoyle: Never mind.
Mr. Mayor: We haven’t called the next meeting to order yet.
Mr. Guilfoyle: All right, my bad.
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. Johnson: Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
Mr. Johnson: Don’t worry we’ll deal with it later. Don’t worry about that.
Motion Passes 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: If there’s no further business to come before the body we stand adjourned.
75
[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
November 18, 2014.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
76