HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting April 21, 2015
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
APRIL 21, 2015
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., April 21, 2015, the Hon.
Hardie Davis, Jr., Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Guilfoyle, Sias, Frantom, M. Williams, Fennoy, D. Williams, Hasan,
Davis and Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
Absent: Hon. Lockett, member of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
The Mayor called the meeting to order.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: We’re ready for our invocation.
The Clerk: Yes, sir. We’d like to ask the Rev. Roger H. Schwartz, Pastor, Our
Redeemer Lutheran Church, to please come forward for our invocation.
Mr. Mayor: Please stand.
The invocation was given by the Rev. Roger A. Schwartz, Pastor, Our Redeemer
Lutheran Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited.
Mr. Mayor: Rev. Schwartz, if you’ll please remain.
The Clerk: We have one item to add to the agenda. It is our Recognition of the April
2015 Employee of the Month Ms. Vickie Hayes from the Augusta Utilities Department. And if
Ms. Hayes would like to come forward along with Mr. Wiedmeier and anyone, Ms. Jackson and
I’ll read the accolade.
The Clerk: The Employee Recognition Committee has selected Vickie Hayes as the
April 2015 Employee of the Month for Augusta Georgia. Ms. Hayes works with the Augusta
Utilities Department where she has been employed for nearly 9 years. She was nominated by
Vickie Adair. Vickie has been employed with Augusta Richmond County for 14 years which
includes her tenure with the Augusta Utilities Department Customer Service Division. Vickie is
responsible for many types of customer service duties relating to the needs of the customers
along with collection of right off accounts and she exemplifies excellence in customer service
when assisting customers. Her department’s supervisor Vickie Adair has received several
recognitions forms where customers have spoken highly of Vickie’s customer service skills.
Vickie is very customer service oriented and strives to resolve issues as quickly and as efficiently
1
as possible always willing to go above and beyond excepted daily duties. As an avid team player
Vickie assists her coworkers and supervisors in order to resolve and issues for customer
satisfaction. Vickie will often work through her breaks and cut her lunches short if needed to
provide the utmost quality customer care. Vickie is a very conservative employee with office
supplies finding ways to recycle items of daily use. Vickie has devised a daily spread sheet with
a grand total of $26,793.30 collection of right off payments collected by customer service clerks
at the Peach Orchard location over the last quarter. Based on this nomination and Vickie’s
outstanding service the Employee Recognition Committee would appreciate you in joining us in
recognizing her as the April 2015 Employee of the Month. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: Congratulations, Vickie, for your stellar customer service which is the
hallmark which makes this government great. We salute you for your efforts and thank you.
Ms. Hayes: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Congratulations.
Mr. Wiedmeier: I would just like to thank Vickie and all of our customer service group
for the work that they do. They represent the department well. So thank you very much, Vickie.
(APPLAUSE)
RECOGNITION(S)
Lucy C. Laney Women’s Basketball Team
A. Lucy C. Laney 2014-15 Women’s Varsity Basketball Team
RE: Congratulations! For capturing the Class AA Georgia State High School Women’s
Basketball State Championship. (Requested by Commissioner M. Williams)
The Clerk: Our first recognition the Lucy Laney Women’s Basketball team. The team is
unable to be present today but they will be rescheduled for a future date.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you now on to the consent agenda.
The Clerk: Yes, sir. Our consent agenda consists of item 1-42. And under the Planning
portion of the agenda I’ll read the Planning petitions and if anyone has an objection would you
please signify your objection by raising your hand.
Item 1: Is to approve a petition with a condition for a Special Exception in a R-1C (One-
family Residential) Zone to establish a residential subdivision on property located on the east
right-of-way line of Inman Drive.
Item 2: Is a request to approve with the conditions as listed a petition by Solvay
Advanced Polymers for a change in zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone HI (Heavy
Industry) affecting property located at 3719, 3725, 3729 and 3731 Clanton Road.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to either of these two petitions? None noted, Mr.
Mayor.
2
Mr. Mayor: None noted.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you.
The Clerk: And under the Public Services portion of the agenda I’ll read the alcohol
applications and again if anyone has an objection would you please signify your objection by
raising your hand.
Item 4: Is a request for a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine License to be used in
connection with Weyant’s Package Shop located at 2803 Washington Road.
Item 5: Is a request for a consumption on premise Beer & Wine License to be used in
connection with 3 Guys Pizza Pies located at 720 E. Robinson Avenue.
Item 6: Is a request for a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine License to be used in
connection with Portilla Enterprises dba Belair Package located at 3971 Wrightsboro Road.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of these alcohol petitions? None noted, Mr.
Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Madam Clerk. All right, the Chair will entertain any motions to
nd
add or pull from the consent agenda. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 2.
Mr. D. Williams: I’m not (inaudible).
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to add items number 46 and 47 if my
colleagues don’t have a problem with that.
Mr. Mayor: Could you repeat that, Commissioner?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Items number 46, item number 47 if my colleagues does not have a
problem with that.
Mr. Mayor: You’re adding to the consent agenda?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir.
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9 Commissioner M.
Williams.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, under item number 47 there’s a proposal. Is that
something that’s going to be presented to us? Mr. Guilfoyle or maybe someone can tell me.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Tom Wiedmeier’s in the house could answer any questions I know that.
3
Mr. Mayor: And since you’re going to speak on that Mr. Wiedmeier would you also
speak on 46. I think those two again have similar importance.
Mr. Wiedmeier: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, I didn’t hear the question.
th
Mr. Mayor: The question is, well I’ll defer to the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Tom, I just need some information to find out. I mean it says 46 and
47 two proposals for these companies but exactly what are they proposing? What, what ---
Mr. Wiedmeier: Yes, sir, these are Engineering Design Contracts to design. One is just a
th
sewer improvement project down in the vicinity of 15 Street and Wrightsboro Road. The other
is a, it has a sewer improvement task in it in the Glass Factory Basin area. It also has some
miscellaneous improvements at the Highland Avenue Filter Plant. But it’s design services.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay if I can follow up, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Continue.
Mr. M. Williams: Tom, I know we were doing some work around Wrightsboro Road and
then the sewage came down so far. Is this a change? I’m trying to figure out if this contract’s
been let and it’s all the way down why is there a change now or is this the same contract that
we’ve been doing all the time?
Mr. Wiedmeier: These are new contracts.
Mr. M. Williams: So there’s been a change it got to the point how did we get here?
That’s the bottom line.
Mr. Wiedmeier: Well this, both of the sewer projects grew out of the work we were
doing relating to our EPD Consent Order. It required an audit of the former combined sewer
basins and these are two projects that were identified in that audit to clean up the work that was
done in the last 15 years with the Sewer Separation Projects.
Mr. Mayor: I think that’s a very appropriate question. What I’d ask is if there’s further
discussion and more clarification needed maybe it might be appropriate to leave on the regular
agenda.
Mr. Guilfoyle: That’s fine.
th
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner from the 8.
Mr. M. Williams: If I can pull it make my pull, I was questioning that because it’s going
to be put on the regular agenda on the consent agenda but this is going back.
4
Mr. Mayor: I’m just, I’m suggesting that that might be the proper course of action to let
it remain on the regular agenda.
Mr. Guilfoyle: That’s fine with me, Mr. Mayor.
th,
Mr. Mayor: You, Commissioner from the 8 you concur with that, you’re fine with that?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: All right so, Madam Clerk, we’re going to remain in our posture.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: All right the Chair recognizes the Commissioner ---
Mr. M. Williams: I’m going to pull them then.
Mr. Mayor: --- we’ll come back to you.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay.
nd
Mr. Mayor: I’m going to recognize the Commissioner from the 2.
Mr. D. Harris: I’d like to add item number 43 if that’s okay.
rd
Mr. Mayor: I think you need to talk to the Commissioner from the 3. The Chair
recognizes the Clerk. Madam Clerk ---
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: --- on item 43 are there any petitioners or objectors to item 43? Would you
read the caption on 43?
The Clerk: Yes, sir, I will. Item 43 is a request for concurrence with the Planning
Commission to approve with conditions listed below a petition by Botanica Designs LLC, on
behalf of Byrom PLC for a Special Exception in an R-1 (One-family Residential) Zone to a
establish a residential subdivision with a density not to exceed 3.0 units per acre. And this
affecting property located known as 425 Berckman Road, 2703, 2705, 2707 and 2709 Margate
Drive.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Are there any objectors or petitioners to this item? All right,
would you please stand? We just want to acknowledge that. All right, thank you. So again the
th
Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9 ---
Mr. M. Williams: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor.
5
Mr. Mayor: --- items to add or pull from the consent agenda.
Mr. M. Williams: Items to pull item 28, item 34, item 38, no, not item 38, item 40.
That’s 28, 34 and 40.
Mr. Mayor: Are there any other motions to add? Okay, I recognize the Commissioner
th
from the 8.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to pull item number seven please.
Mr. Mayor: All right items 7, 28, 34 and 40. Motion to approve?
PLANNING
1. Z-15-09-SP – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning
Commission to approve with the condition listed below a petition by Lionel Prather, on
behalf of Walker Hill LLC, requested a Special Exception in a R-1C (One-family
Residential) Zone to establish a residential subdivision in accordance with Section 13 and
Section 11-2(a) of the Comprehensive Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property
located on the east right-of-way line of Inman Drive, 330 feet, more or less, northwest of
McCoys Creek Road and known as McCoys Creek Section 2, Phase 2 containing 31 lots
and approximately 8.74 acres. Part of Tax Map 078-0-021-00-0. DISTRICT 3 1. The
elevations and building footprints of the proposed dwellings must be consistent with plans
submitted by the applicant.
2. Z-15-12 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve with the conditions listed below a petition by Solvay Advanced Polymers
requesting a change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone HI (Heavy Industry)
affecting property containing approximately 3.38 acres and is known as 3719, 3725, 3729 &
3731 Clanton Road. Tax Maps 456-0-076-00-0, 156-0-085-00-0, 156-0-086-00-0 & 15600-
086-0-0. DISTRICT 6 1. The proposed rezoning shall exclude the area of the existing
cemetery which comprises all of the tract addressed at 3725 Clanton Road, and
approximately 14 feet north and 7 feet south of the tract. 2. The existing cemetery shall be
properly maintained in good condition by the property owner(s). 3. Except fences and
walls, all structures shall be set back at least twenty (20) feet from the boundaries of the
cemetery, and fifty (50) feet from south property line, adjacent to the railroad right-of-way
and nearby residential uses. A natural buffer of mature trees shall also provide a buffer
between residential uses to the south. 4. Parking lot and security lighting must be directed
away from the residential properties located to the south of the subject property.
PUBLIC SERVICES
3. Motion to approve the Concession Agreement between Augusta Regional Airport and
Alamo National as approved by the Augusta Aviation Commission at their February 26,
2015 meeting. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 14, 2015)
4. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 15-18: request by Sona Limon for
a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Weyandt’s
Package Shop located at 2803 Washington Rd. District 7. Super District 10. (Approved by
Public Services Committee April 14, 2015)
6
5. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 15-19: request by Thomas Kenney for a
consumption on premise Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with 3 Guys Pizza
Pies located at 720 E. Robinson Ave. There will be Sunday Sales. District 3. Super District
10. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 14, 2015)
6. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 15-20: request by Alejandro
Portilla for a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with
Portilla Enterprises dba Belair Package located at 3971 Wrightsboro Rd. District 3. Super
District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 14, 2015)
8. Motion to approve renewing the Sec. 5311 Rural Transit grant application between the
Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) and Augusta, Georgia from July 2015 to
June 2016. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 14, 2015)
9. Motion to approve Avis/Payless Rent A Car Concession Agreement as approved by the
Augusta Aviation Commission at their February 26, 2015 Meeting. Bid 14-227. (Approved
by Public Services Committee April 14, 2015)
10. Motion to approve the Budget/Zipcar Concession Agreement as approved by the
Augusta Aviation Commission at their February 26, 2015 Meeting. Bid 14-227. (Approved
by Public Services Committee April 14, 2015)
11. Motion to approve Change Modification #2 with Beams Contracting Inc. for the
Augusta Regional Airport’s Southeast Development Area Access Project as approved by
the Augusta Aviation Commission at their March 26, 2015 Meeting. (Approved by Public
Services Committee April 14, 2015)
12. Motion to approve the Enterprise Concession Agreement as approved by the Augusta
Aviation Commission at their February 26, 2015 Meeting. Bid 14-227. (Approved by Public
Services Committee April 14, 2015)
13. Motion to approve the Hertz Concession Agreement as approved by the Augusta
Aviation Commission at their February 26, 2015 Meeting. Bid 14-227. (Approved by Public
Services Committee April 14, 2015)
14. Motion to approve the selection of and contract with Dalzelling Design Landscaping,
Inc. for miscellaneous landscaping projects at Augusta Regional Airport as approved by
the Augusta Aviation Commission at their February 26, 2015 meeting. Bid 14-241.
(Approved by Public Services Committee April 14, 2015)
15. Motion to approve the Thrifty Rent A Car Concession Agreement as approved by the
Augusta Commission at their February 26, 2015 Meeting. Bid 14-227. (Approved by Public
Services Committee April 14, 2015)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
16. Motion to approve the resolution supporting the Augusta Housing Authority and
Walton Communities, LLC’s application for low income housing tax credits to be named
th
15 Street Redevelopment – Phase 1. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee
April 14, 2015)
17. Motion to approve the Housing and Community Development Department’s Citizens
Advisory Committee By-Laws, as presented. (Approved by Administrative Services
Committee April 15, 2015)
18. Motion to approve the appointment of a sub-committee composed of Commissioners M.
Williams, Guilfoyle, Davis, Hasan and Sias to discuss options for economic development in
7
Augusta utilizing funding that may be currently available. (Approved by Administrative
Services April 14, 2015)
19. Motion to approve amending the 2014 Action Plan to re-program $280,000.00, and the
revision to the Scope of Work in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.
(Approved by Administrative Services Committee February 23, 2015)
PUBLIC SAFETY
20. Motion to approve directing the Fire Chief to complete a dialogue for determining a
location in Richmond County for a tractor that will be provided by the Georgia Forestry
Service. (Approved by Public Services Committee April 14, 2015)
21. Motion to approve tasking the Administrator to coordinate with Ms. Mason from the
Public Defender’s Office to find a location and develop a proposal for the relocation of this
office. (Approved by Public Safety Committee April 14, 2015)
22. Motion to approve the replacement of obsolete technology equipment (Desktops,
laptops, servers, scanners and printers, etc.) that have reached their end of life cycle and
purchase any required computer software upgrades. (Approved by Public Safety
Committee April 14, 2015)
23. Motion to approve selection of CJT, Inc. for Richmond County Probate Court Software
Solution. (Approved by Public Safety Committee April 14, 2015)
FINANCE
24. Motion to approve the purchase of one emergency response vehicle for the Richmond
County Sheriff’s Office-Bomb Squad Division using a grant from Georgia Emergency
Management Agency. (Approved by Finance Committee April 14, 2015)
25. Motion to approve the lease of two sewer vacuum trucks for the Augusta Utilities
Department-Construction and Maintenance Division. (Approved by Finance Committee
April 14, 2015)
26. Motion to approve the refund of taxes in the amount of $2,934.66 to the Augusta Boxing
Club. (Approved by Finance Committee April 14, 2015)
ENGINEERING
27. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of a portion of the property for
temporary easement (Parcel 053-0-004-01-0) 3769 Belair Road. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee April 14, 2015)
29. Motion to approve awarding Bid Item #15-136 Electrical Motor Control Center for
Hwy 56 Booster Station. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 14, 2015)
30. Motion to approve and accept an Easement Exchange Deed from Eco-Energy
Distribution – Augusta. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 14, 2015)
31. Motion to approve amendment to Georgia Power Company Governmental
Encroachment Agreement 31484. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 14,
2015)
32. Motion to approve Southern Natural Gas Pipeline Agreement. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee April 14, 2015)
33. Motion to approve receiving as information Emergency Purchase Order for BMS
Enterprises. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 14, 2015)
8
35. Motion to approve funding for final Design Consultant Services Supplemental
Agreement One to Cranston Engineering in the amount of $31,810.00 for Scotts Way Over
Rae’s Creek-Bridge Replacement as requested by the AED. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee April 14, 2015)
36. Motion to approve extension of utilities at Gordon Highway and Jimmy Dyess
Parkway. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 14, 2015)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
37. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held on
March 25, 2015 and the special called meetings held on March 30 and April 14, 2015)
APPOINTMENTS
38. Motion to approve the appointment of Mr. Nicholas W. Gladd to the Board of Zoning
Appeals due to the resignation of Mr. Nick Dickinson representing District 3. (Requested
by Commissioner Davis)
39. Motion to approve the appointment of Bishop L.A. Green, Sr. to a term on the Housing
& Community Development Advisory Board representing District 5. (Requested by
Commissioner Lockett)
41. Motion to approve the appointment of Ms. Merian Robinson representing the Stoney
Medical Society on the Richmond County Board of Health.
42. Motion to approve the reappointments of the following to the Richmond County Board
of Health for terms from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2018: Rosa Clemons, Seat #11;
Deborah Presnell, Seat #5 and Shirley LeValle-Evans, Seat #9.
Mr. Guilfoyle: So moved.
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Lots of business today, lots of business today.
Motion Passes 9-0. [Items 1-6, 8-27, 29-33, 35-39, 41, 42]
Mr. Mayor: All right.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
7. Motion to approve reverting back to the hours of operations that were in effect before
September relative to restaurants meeting 50% food sales, at the request from Alter Ego’z
Sports Bar and Grill regarding the Ordinance amending Augusta, Georgia Code Title 6,
Chapter 2, Article 1, Alcoholic Beverages, Section 6-2-1 through 6-2-145. (Approved by
Public Services Committee April 14, 2015)
Mr. Hasan: Motion to approve, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Fennoy: Second.
9
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second. Commissioner, on item number seven?
Mr. Guilfoyle: I wanted to make sure that item number seven I voted for.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second.
Mr. Guilfoyle: And that’s good.
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, the reason why I pulled this item I was not in favor of it being
on the consent. I didn’t have a vote in the committee actually. In the past I have not supported
this item because it opens up our ordinance to be grandfathered in. It just opens up doors we
don’t need to be opening up. We don’t have the support of the Sheriff’s Department to proceed
forward, we don’t have the support of our License and Inspections Department and I have some
concerns is because not only this company owes the Augusta Richmond County for unpaid taxes
it doesn’t really have anything to do but it’s still tax payers’ dollars that’s still owed. My
concern is when it comes to the health and safety of each individual citizen that goes to these
restaurants the last time that the Georgia Department of Public Heath had did an inspection was
approximately two years ago. And I have a great concern about that. On 6/13 of 2013 was their
last inspection from the Georgia Department of Public Health which they received a high score
but you still have to be in compliance to operate a restaurant and stay in the ---
Mr. Mayor: We certainly appreciate that information. We’ve got a motion and a second.
Mr. Guilfoyle: --- I’d like to make a substitute motion, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to make a
substitute motion ---
Mr. Mayor: Hold on just a moment, just a moment. All right, the Chair recognizes the
th
Commissioner from the 9 before we get to that substitute. We’ve got a motion and a proper
second and I think our posture again I’ll defer to the Parliamentarian is to dispense of that first.
th
The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9 first and then I’ll come to you, Mr.
MacKenzie.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to probably hear from our Attorney because he
may not need to comment if what, I mean I need to hear his ruling. I mean we’ve got one motion
on the floor ---
Mr. Mayor: That’s right.
Mr. M. Williams: --- and a second to it.
Mr. Mayor: That’s right, so the Chair recognizes Attorney MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: So the question is what?
10
Mr. Mayor: The question is which is the superior motion? We’ve got a proper motion
and a second to approve and then there’s a substitute that came after that.
Mr. MacKenzie: The substitute motion is served first and then the primary motion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. All right.
Mr. Fennoy: -- get a second.
Mr. Mayor: Well, we haven’t heard the substitute yet. We just said there is a substitute.
Mr. M. Williams: And I need to make my comment now, Mr. Mayor. And I waited to
get a ruling from the Legal Department but I need to make my comment. And I heard my
colleague’s scenario. We’re not the Board of Health up here, that’s their job. We’re not the
Sheriff’s Department and that’s their job. I know that when we allow businesses to operate and
we talked about this last week at some length to operate to make more revenue to pay us more
taxes to be able to pay the Sheriff’s Department and every other department we’ve got to pay.
So I don’t see how we can continue to do business the same way we’ve been doing business for
the last 1800 years and think when the 2015 but we’re going to do business like we did in 1815.
Businesses are thriving. We just left Savannah, had a great convention, stores we’re open people
were doing business and nobody was talking about shutting anybody down. So I heard that
about the Health Department and I don’t know anybody here with that department. I know some
Commissioner on that board. We can’t regulate what we got up here so we sure can regulate
them. I’m just trying to figure out why we are not aggressive and want to move forward and try
to help a business who’s buying a business in that area who really is tax exempt for 10 years for
purchasing in what we call and enterprise area. A lot of people don’t even know that but that
business is in a desolate area, Mr. Mayor, that we need people to buy into so we can kind of
build it back up so to speak. But those are the rules and regulations that this government and
body has put in place. And I commend them for coming in there purchasing and building up and
trying to do business like business ought to be done. But that’s my comment, sir.
Mr. Mayor: I appreciate it. All lively and good debate. The Chair will recognize the
th
Commissioner from the 8 for his substitute motion with hopes of getting a proper second.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to make a substitute motion to deny.
Ms. Davis: I’ll second that, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion a substitute motion and a proper second to deny the
petition. Madam Clerk, we’re voting. Again this is a motion substitute motion to deny. Lots of
business, plenty of time for debate.
Ms. Davis, Mr. Frantom, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Smith vote Yes.
Mr. Fennoy, Mr. D. Williams, Mr. Sias, Mr. Hasan and Mr. M. Williams vote No.
Mr. Lockett out.
11
Motion Fails 4-5.
Mr. Mayor: All right, our posture is we have the main motion before us and it’s a motion
to approve. All those in favor will be voting yes and those opposed will be voting no.
Mr. Fennoy, Mr. D. Williams, Mr. Sias, Mr. Hasan and Mr. M. Williams vote Yes.
Ms. Davis, Mr. Frantom, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Smith vote No.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Fails 5-4.
Mr. M. Williams: Point of Order, Mr. Mayor.
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, sir. Madam Clerk, would you have this put back on the
regular agenda again for the next meeting?
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, ma’am.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, can we make a motion to reconsider this today?
Mr. Mayor: You could.
Mr. Hasan: I’d like to make a motion to reconsider.
Mr. M. Williams: Second
Mr. Mayor: Hold on, hold on, hold on. Well you can, you have to take that up
immediately. You’ve done that and you could in fact move to reconsider right now. All right, so
here’s what our posture is. There’s been a motion to reconsider the Commission’s action on item
7 the main motion. That’s what’s before us now to reconsider its action. The Chair will defer to
the Parliamentarian I believe that is proper.
Mr. MacKenzie: That is correct.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so again our posture is a motion to reconsider its previous action
and the action before us was to approve which failed at the time.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, can I make a comment before we do that, before we vote?
Mr. Mayor: You may.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I’d just like to speak to my colleagues.
Surely I understand all the things that Commissioner Guilfoyle as well as Commissioner
12
Williams I think all those things are taken into account, tax issues and those things as well. We
have quite a few businesses that operate in Richmond County as well as taxpayers that owe taxes
so it’s never a good thing but I do think we do a fiduciary responsibility to consider those things
in our rulings and our opinions that we make. But also I’d like to say as a small business person
myself when you look at back in 2010 when they purchased this place to do business eventually
they found a niche. Now that still doesn’t mean when you found a niche you’re going to have
some challenges in being successful in your business. I think most of us know who have been in
business that most of the time you’re not even successful in business. Your real gauge point is
about five years within five years 85-95% of businesses fail and after about five years the one
that even exists still is not quite out of a debt even though that they’re still in a thriving manner
to some degree the mere fact that they still exist. And so I would say the mere fact that we took
away the niche in terms of what they had at the particular time and they still have the tax issue
that they have to deal with that we reconsider giving them the opportunity to continue to
function. We want to be business friendly, we’re making sacrifices. Let’s continue to do that
and let them deal with those tax issues appropriately those things are not pending from us doing
those kinds of things. There’s not been no aggression in terms of aggressiveness in terms of
moving in on those things right now. And let’s give them an opportunity to continue to do
business in Augusta Richmond County. And also in looking at the article that Susan McCord
done the other day I think it was a great article and talking the businesses and other parts of
town. And many of them just wished them well if they wanted to take that challenge on. And
it’s not so much for this particular business but for any business who fits the bill and fits the
criteria to have an opportunity to do business in Augusta Richmond County. And so I ask my
colleagues to reconsider and allow these young persons to do business in Augusta Richmond
County. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mayor: There’s a motion and a proper second to reconsider. We’re voting.
Mr. Fennoy, Mr. D. Williams, Mr. Sias, Mr. Hasan and Mr. M. Williams vote Yes.
Ms. Davis, Mr. Frantom, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Smith vote No.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Fails 5-4.
Mr. Mayor: All right, thank you, Madam Clerk. Item 18.
The Clerk: Twenty-eight?
Mr. Mayor: I’m sorry 28.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
28. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire title of the property for right of way
(Parcel 059-3-408-00-0) 1569 Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard. (Approved by
Engineering Services Committee April 14, 2015)
13
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the distinguished committee chairman Commissioner
Fennoy.
Mr. Fennoy: I think Commissioner Williams actually pulled.
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: I just needed to know this condemnation where about on MLK and
how much would that, exactly what we’re doing. I have no issue with it but I didn’t know what
I’d be voting on so I thought someone would be here to at least share with us.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Attorney Brown.
Mr. Hensley: I’m Forest Hensley, Land Acquisition Manager for Augusta Richmond
County. And that address is 1569 Martin Luther King Boulevard.
Mr. M. Williams: So what ---
Mr. Hensley: What we’re doing is the Twiggs Street traffic circle right there and we’re
getting some property so, it’s for traffic engineering and there will be a traffic circle in that area
right there.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, I really appreciate that, thank you very much. Mr. Mayor, I’ve
got no problem. I got a motion to approve but I didn’t know what that was and I needed some
explanation. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a motion and a second to approve.
Mr. Sias and Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Passes 8-0.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
34. Motion to approve notification of award of emergency sanitary sewer connections.
(Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 14, 2015)
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Wiedmeier, can you explain to me what this emergency situation
is here that we’re doing that this came upon this agenda?
Mr. Wiedmeier: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, Utilities recently
extended sanitary sewer on Pine Log Road because of failing septic tanks. There were
14
environmental hazards in our opinion and in advance of the Sanitary Sewer Connection Program
which is about to go on line I decided to proceed with an emergency contract to connect these
houses because there were, there was sanitary sewer coming to the surface and I felt it was a
hazard.
Mr. M. Williams: And that got my attention if I can follow up, Mr. Mayor. And that got
my attention when they said emergency, Tom. That’s why I addressed that because had it been a
real emergency that sanitation was coming up or coming through I didn’t think it would come to
this (unintelligible) it may have been something pushed faster than that. I guess my question is
the contract that was let. How did that, since it was an emergency situation was that done
through the normal process or was that a different process or?
Mr. Wiedmeier: It was I directed we took expedited bids on the project. I directed the
plumbers to proceed with the work under and I communicated with the Procurement Department
as per the procurement code. So we did comply with the code for an emergency situation.
Mr. M. Williams: That don’t quite answer my question, Tom. And I’m trying to figure
out how to ask it the way so I can an answer. I guess you’re saying it went through Procurement
is that what you’re saying?
Mr. Wiedmeier: Yes.
Mr. M. Williams: There’s no question about that, right?
Mr. Wiedmeier: In an emergency situation I will act to get it corrected quickly and keep
Procurement informed of everything that we’re doing. So the bids were not, Procurement knew
we were soliciting the bids but it didn’t go through regular bid procedures.
Mr. M. Williams: I got nothing else to say, Mr. Mayor.
st
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Wiedmeier, had this gone through the normal procurement process how
long would it have taken to for the people in that area to get relief?
Mr. Wiedmeier: I believe that if we had done a normal bid procedure it would’ve taken
30-45 days longer than it did.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay and the procedures that you all use is it not different than the
emergency situations that we used when we had the ice storm?
Mr. Wiedmeier: Right, it is in the procurement code for an emergency contract and we
adhere to those requirements.
15
Mr. Fennoy: Okay and I think one last question. I think last Tuesday our Procurement
Director was acknowledged by Dr. Watkins as having the best procurement procedures that he
has seen in government and private industry.
Mr. Wiedmeier: That’s correct.
Mr. Fennoy: So you feel comfortable with the decision that was made by the
Procurement?
Mr. Wiedmeier: Yes, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay, thank you.
nd
Mr. Mayor: The Chair wants to recognize the Commissioner from the 2. He had his
hand up.
Mr. D. Williams: Move for approval.
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ve got a motion and second to approve. All right. I’m going to
th
need a chiropractor today. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 10 Mayor Pro
Tem Smith.
Mr. Smith: Mr. Wiedmeier, these two firms you say you recommended are they licensed
by the state and properly bonded?
Mr. Wiedmeier: Yes, sir.
Mr. Smith: Okay. Local?
Mr. Wiedmeier: Yes, sir.
Mr. Smith: All right sounds good.
Mr. M. Williams votes No.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Passes 8-1.
The Clerk:
APPOINTMENTS
40. Motion to approve the reappointments of Mr. James W. Scott (District 10, Sen. D-23),
Bernard Johnson (District 9, Sen. D-22), Robert H. O’Neal (Legislative) and Bryan Simkins
(Legislative) to the Board of Assessors for four-year terms. (Requested by the Board of
Assessors of Richmond County)
16
Mr. Guilfoyle: So moved.
Mr. Fennoy: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second.
Mr. M. Williams: No, sir, you’ve got to, I pulled this item. I don’t understand now.
Mr. Mayor: But I’m going to recognize you before they take action and vote. I’m about
the recognize you.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, well ---
Mr. Mayor: I’ll give you your due. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner
th
from the 9 to speak on this matter ---
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I pulled this item ---
Mr. Mayor: --- before we vote on it.
Mr. M. Williams: --- please before. At least hear my conversation before we take off
into flight. But the reason I had this item pulled we’re talking about a four-year appointment
here and by law or by this law this governing body you can’t bind another Commissioner by
voting an issue that’s going to affect someone else. Now no one has spoke to me about these
positions from District 9. Maybe District 10 or Super District might have had input. I’ve got no
problem but I would’ve at least liked to have the information brought to me to at least discuss.
There are several people who asked about serving on different boards. You’re going to put
someone on the board who’s been there for 10 or 12 years and then do a four-year contract
without even consulting the people who appointed them on that board. So I don’t have a
problem with it. I just think that I ought to at least have the opportunity and the Super District 10
Commissioner ought to have that opportunity to at least have a say one way or the other on that.
Mr. Mayor: I couldn’t agree with you more. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner
th
from the 10.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem Smith: I’d just like to know these gentlemen here are do they have a
real estate license, all of them? Is that one of the requirements on this board? I mean I don’t
think we would want somebody sitting on the Assessors Board that you know hadn’t had proper
instruction or does this for a living. I think these gentlemen most of them have real estate
licenses I believe, don’t they?
Mr. Mayor: I believe the gentlemen knows of that which he speaks. The Chair
st
recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
17
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem Smith: I just thought I’d ask. I might want to get on. I think it’s an
appropriate question.
Mr. Fennoy: I’d like to ---
st
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: --- I’d like to address this question to our Attorney.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Attorney MacKenzie.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. MacKenzie, since these are appointments or legislative appointments
and appointments from the Senate why are we approving their appointments?
Mr. MacKenzie: I think the best answer to that is the Consolidation Act allows for a
mechanism whereby the names will be brought to this body so that we can have a record of it
that the Clerk maintains so that we know who the official members are of each of the governing
boards and authorities.
Mr. Fennoy: And I think evidently the Legislature and the Senate have four
appointments but the Commission also have appointments to this board.
Mr. MacKenzie: That’s correct.
Mr. Fennoy: And okay, all right. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: So for the boards and authorities that are part of this local government
Legislative Delegation has a series of appointments typically two appointments on this example
which you’re seeing. And that happens generally across the board for most of the appointments
that happen.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Motion to approve.
Mr. Fennoy: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right okay so just a moment, a lot of debate about this. The Chair
th
recognizes the Commissioner from the 6 Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In reading it along the same lines of Commissioner
Fennoy’s question I want to see two of them as being Legislative appointments. I was going to
ask the question how much leeway do we have on that but it’s in a district but I thought maybe
just giving it districts. But still that means that they’re local in terms of this body Bernard
Johnson here and the other one is James Scott. Wouldn’t that be the body’s appointment here
and the other two making the distinction that Robert O’Neal is a Legislative appointment and
Bryan Simkins is a Legislative appointment. Do I read that correctly or am I misreading that?
18
Mr. Mayor: That is correct, sir.
Mr. Hasan: Okay with that being said when it says here requested by the Board of
Assessors of Richmond County, is that normal for them to make those appointments suggest it to
the body or do we make appointments to the ones that we have leeway over?
Mr. Mayor: Well, again I think as the Parliamentarian Attorney MacKenzie indicated
this is before you for concurrence. That’s why it’s here. Again when the Legislative Delegation
makes appointments and then submits those names to the Clerk’s Office and show up on the
agenda and you ratify that. Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Hasan: I’m sorry, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Are you satisfied with that, sir?
Mr. Hasan: I’m satisfied with that I just, with that being said I would like for us to have
an opportunity to weigh in on this at least. The two from the Legislative may not be in our
purview but the other two may very well be unless I misunderstood you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: So the two from the Legislative Delegation again they always come forward
in that manner. And this body has historically again ratified those because they do get those two
appointments.
Mr. Hasan: Exactly.
Mr. Mayor: So in the example of District 9 Bernard Johnson and District 10 I think that
what you’re saying. Do you want further discussion on this?
Mr. Hasan: Yeah, further discussion on those two. Legislative may be something that
may be in our purview if I’m, you know, if that’s how that goes.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so I’ve got a lot of hands going up here and I’m not sure on which
end I need to start. Are we complete on this end? All right, I’m going to go all the way to the
th
end of the table. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Is Charles Smith with the Board of Assessors in
the room by chance? Do we have anybody from the Board of Assessors? Any way I’ve got to
ask, Mr. Mayor, if Bill Lee could speak on behalf of this because I know two is appointed from
the Super Commissioners District 9, District 10.
Mr. Mayor: So, I certainly appreciate that. I have a question for this body.
Commissioner M. Williams pulled this from the consent agenda. We’re having debate about
whether or not these appointments are proper. Commissioner Williams, is that your question or
who made the appointments. Which is your question?
19
Mr. M. Williams: Well, I think my question would be for the entire time to four years. I
thought about binding another Commission that comes on in the next year or whenever the next
election is. You really can’t bind another Commission. As a District 9 Commissioner this board
can’t appoint my appointments for me. I mean that’s a part of that purview has been District 10,
District 9 or District 4 if you’ve got an appointment, you’ve got that appointment. Now I’ve got
no problem with none of that but I thought we ought to have some at least some dialogue some
conversation. Don’t just take advantage because somebody has said anything. There are people
on board now they’re that’s still there that nobody has actually moved that should be moved but
nobody had challenged that and they sit there.
Mr. Mayor: So I have a question for you, Commissioner. This appointment for District
9, did you not make that?
Mr. M. Williams: No, I did not.
Mr. Mayor: All right and so your contention is you should be able to make an
appointment. All right so here’s what happens the way I read this. The way I read this is that
you had two individuals and this is still maybe not certain but the way I read it or attempt to read
rd
it is that historically you’ve had James Scott who was in that position from the 23 Senatorial
District who’s been asked to be on it. But before you had Bob O’Neal and Bryan Simkins.
Bryan Simkins and Bob O’Neal were previously the members of the Board of Assessors. That’s
who was previously there. But the way I’m reading it is that the Legislative Delegation is now
appointing James Scott and Bernard Johnson to those positions and they just happen to be in
those commission districts as well. That’s the way I read that.
Mr. M. Williams: In Augusta what you’re reading, Mr. Mayor, that may be right. The
way I read it and the way I understand it you know it was District 9 and District 10 and the two
legislations. If that’s not true then we need some clarity so people would know.
Mr. Mayor: Here’s why I because you raise a very appropriate point. Here’s what I’d
like to ask you to do. I’m going to defer to Attorney MacKenzie but I think it’s proper for us to
move this to the foot of the calendar, foot of the agenda and then we’ll come back to this. And in
the interim if we can pull the current list of appointments from the Board of Assessors and you
can quickly determine whether or not Bryan Simkins and Bob O’Neal are currently on the Board
of Assessors to determine whether we’ve read it correctly. That is what I believe it reads that
those are the individuals who are currently in those roles. And with these new appointments
James Scott and Bernard Johnson are filling those roles. Legislative Delegation only gets two
appointments and so if we could pull that up on the website that would certainly be appropriate
and we can move on to the next order of business. Is that appropriate? They only get two
appointments, that’s correct. So again if we can move this to the foot of the calendar. Attorney
MacKenzie and then we’ll come back to this.
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I do have the provisions in the Consolidation Act that addresses
this. I certainly agree, it’s also, there is some variation with respect to different boards and
authorities as to what either a local law that might be applicable to establish as a given board as
well as any bylaws. Some boards each appointee is subject to be removed at the will of the
20
appointing authority with or without cause. There’s some language in some of the other boards
that say that an appointee can only be removed for cause and I think it would be wise for us to
make sure that we review carefully the rules applicable to this particular body then to see what
that language says before we proceed.
Mr. Mayor: All right so, this is what our posture is. We’re going to again we’re going to
come back to this item. I think I have generally what we need to know at this point based on
what’s on the website but we’re going to come back to this item. Is that proper Mr. Attorney?
Mr. MacKenzie: Consider tabling the item until the end of the meeting.
Mr. Mayor: All right.
The Clerk:
PLANNING
43. Z-15-10-SP – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning
Commission to approve with the conditions listed below a petition by Botanica Designs
LLC, on behalf of Byrom PLC, requesting a Special Exception in an R-1 (One-family
Residential) Zone to establish a residential subdivision with a density not to exceed 3.0
units per acre per Section 8-2 (a) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta,
Georgia affecting property containing 2.5 acres and is known as 425 Berckman Road, 2703
Margate Drive, 2705 Margate Drive, 2707 Margate Drive and 2709 Margate Drive. Tax
Map 018-4-062-00-0, 018-4-060-00-0, 018-4-059-00-0, 018-4-058-00-0, 018-4-057-00-0
DISTRICT 7. 1. Proposed development must conform to the site plan submitted with the
application request. The Planning and Development Director has the authority to approve
minor changes to the submitted plan. 2. The subdivision must conform to the landscaping
provisions of Section 8-4-11 (e) (5) of the Augusta Tree Ordinance along Berckmans Road
as it pertains to major subdivision, even though the subdivision contains seven lots. 3.
Approval shall be subject to a Development Plan review, and comply with provisions in
Augusta-Richmond Stormwater Management Ordinance without variances.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so we’ve got a number of folks who are going to speak on this
matter. We’re going to recognize Rob Sherman and then at the appropriate time there’s some
objectors to this. If you will designate a spokesperson on your behalf. I believe the
th
Commissioner from the 7 has identified somebody to do that. And at this time the Chair will
recognize the petitioners for this matter. I believe we’ve got Mr. Sherman and Mr. Revell who
are here on behalf this project. I’m sorry Paul DeCamp.
Mr. DeCamp: Mr. Mayor, I’m Paul DeCamp if that’s all right. That’s all right, I’m
confused with Rob all the time. I consider it a compliment.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Paul DeCamp and Mr. Revell.
Mr. DeCamp: I’m going to give you just a, I’ll sketch the background ---
21
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. DeCamp: --- Mayor and Commission. This is a request for a Special Exception in
an R-1 Single Family Residential Zone to establish a seven lot subdivision with a density not to
exceed three units per acre. The Planning Commission at their meeting based on staff
recommendation recommended approval. I would point out that they recommended approval
with two stipulations. There are three stipulations on the agenda item but the stipulation number
three was removed because it was not included because that the issue there the stormwater
compliance with Stormwater Ordinance that will happened in the course of the development
review for any project. And so we didn’t, the Planning Commission did not think it was
necessary to adopt that particular stipulation but they did tie it to the concept plan submitted with
the application by the petitioner. And also that provisions of the Tree Ordinance be applicable to
this particular project.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Mr. Revell.
Mr. Revell: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners. My name is Harry Revell. I’m
the Attorney for the petitioner. To remind the Commission I think it was sometime last year this
came before this body in a different form. It was rejected first by the Planning Commission and
then rejected by this body. We have listened to what was told to us. We have revamped and
retooled the project to reduce from some 15 or 16 condos to 7 single family residences. I want to
make sure that the Commission understands these are not so called hospitality houses. That 3500
square feet will be used strictly for residential use. We have met with the Planning staff, have
accepted every suggestion that was presented to us, made a number of accommodations to meet
all of the requirements. All the requirements are now met. It’s my understanding the Planning
Board approved it a couple of weeks ago by a 9-1 vote. As you see in your information the staff
has recommended approval and we would ask that this body approve it as well and I’m available
to answer any questions anybody may have.
st
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, sir. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Yes, looking at this proposed changes how many acres are we talking
about?
Mr. Revell: I think the site itself is right at 2 ½ acres.
Mr. Fennoy: Two and a half. And we’re talking about three units per acre?
Mr. Revell: Yes, it meets that requirement.
Mr. Fennoy: So you’re talking about maybe six, seven?
Mr. Revell: Seven. It’s proposed to have seven units.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay.
22
Mr. Revell: Seven residences which meets the requirement.
Mr. Fennoy: And how many and I think presently on this property we have about six or
seven?
Mr. Revell: When we, when my client purchased the property there were five houses on
the site. They’ve all been demolished so the site is clear and ready for redevelopment.
Mr. Fennoy: And the units will be what did you say 3500?
Mr. Revell: Projected to be 3500 square feet single family residences.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay. All right.
Mr. Revell: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Revell. Mr. DeCamp, thank you. All right the Chair
th
recognizes the Commissioner from the 7.
Mr. Frantom: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’d like to call up Mr. Sam Spangler from
Margate Drive.
Mr. Mayor: The posture or procedure is I call him up.
Mr. Hasan: I’ve been there, Sean.
Mr. Mayor: Come on up, Mr. Spangler.
Mr. Spangler: Yes, I’m Sam Spangler. I live at 2715 Margate Drive in Jamestown.
Jamestown is a long established community of single family homes zoned R-1. And this
developer did buy the five houses and part of this latest development there was signs posted at
the site indicating the Planning Commission meeting. And it said that this was for a
development of single family residential subdivision under Section 8-2 (a) of the Zoning Code
with a density not to exceed three units per acre. There was a lack of understanding by the
residents just what this meant. This single family residence with a density with no more than
three per acre, that sounded like Jamestown but I wanted more information so I did go to the
Planning Commission meeting and unfortunately I didn’t much more information from that
meeting. So I went to the Planning Commission office to get more information to read the
project file and also research the zoning ordinance. And I was presented with a layout of the
proposed development. This is not at the building site or anything it was, I only saw this after
the Planning Commission meeting. And I saw that I had questions about it and that’s when I did
my research and I found that really development under Section 8-2 (a) Exception is really is
changing the zoning even though the sign says a Special Exception does not constitute rezoning.
What the exception allows you to do is develop under Section 13 of the Zoning Ordinance which
is for zoning R-1(e) which is the least restrictive requirements for a single family residence.
Under this development under Section 13 the builder of course wants to build seven housing
23
where there previously was five. This results in a higher density and in fact in the middle part of
the, the houses are not arranged uniformly and so in the middle part of the development the
housing density really is a 4.6 units per acre. That’s a local density. Also the houses would be
built closer to the curb with a setback of only 15 feet instead of the 30 feet setback that applies to
all of the other Jamestown residences. Also a continuous 4-foot fence would be erected in the
front of the houses isolating them from the street and from Jamestown. The houses would be all
of the same design, sort of a more suitable for a commercial development as opposed to the
varied design of the houses in Jamestown. And also the Jamestown houses are mostly brick
veneer, these would be strictly wood. To me this development ---
Mr. Mayor: Excuse me, Mr. Spangler.
Mr. Spangler: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: Two minutes.
Mr. Spangler: Okay, to me this development does not meet the requirements of Section
13-1 which says that the development should be compatible with surrounding development and
that it promote the Planning policies and objectives of the special and general areas in which it is
located. I don’t think it meets that. There’s been a misunderstanding of this because the
residents are not versed in the requirements of the zoning ordinance. They depend on the
Planning Commission to protect us from a predatory developer. And in this case they didn’t.
This developer wanted to come in and carve out part of our community. Fortunately our
representative on the Planning Commission, Mr. Sonny Pittman, did vote to protect us and today
I’m asking you to protect us from this developer by denying this petition.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you very much. The Chair will entertain any questions. The Chair
th
recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The Planning Department approved is that
what you’re saying is that it’s approved through the Planning Department. Is that right?
Mr. Revell: Well, the I guess the Planning Department made a recommendation to the
Planning Commission that they accept it.
Mr. M. Williams: The Planning Board approved it.
Mr. Revell: Yes, the Planning Commission.
Mr. M. Williams: The Planning Commission I said Board Planning Commission. What
about the, is Harry still here, Harry what and listen to this young man’s explanation and what the
Planning and Zoning does is and that is land uses and satisfy that. Are ya’ll changing the scope
of that area in there with what you’re trying to build different from what he just explained? I
mean I’m just trying to get my head around it.
24
Mr. Revell: Well, certainly the houses will be the newest houses in the subdivision. It
would change in that respect and it will be residential houses. We meet all the density
requirements, Commissioner, the setback requirements. All of the requirements are met. We
spent a considerable amount of time, energy and money fulfilling (inaudible) ourselves within
the code which we think we have. So, sure, when you take down an older house and put up a
brand new house obviously it looks newer and different but that’s true in any situation.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Revell: And all the Commission I want you in particular, Commissioner Williams,
it’s not hospitality there’s been some misunderstanding. Like the Lodge or the Double Eagle
Club or some of those on Azalea, that is not what we’re talking about.
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. M. Williams: One last question, Mr. Mayor. How many residents came down in
opposition of that?
Mr. Mayor: Yeah, I think we asked that earlier so here’s what we’d like to do. All right
if everybody would just, Mr. Revell, if you could step to the side, yeah, get out of that crowd.
All right, Madam Clerk, can we get an accounting of how many folks we’ve got?
The Clerk: Eight? Nine.
Mr. Mayor: Nine, okay, thank you. You may be seated. Okay 2, 4, 6 8, 10, 11 that’s
number 11, Ms. Morawski.
The Clerk: Eleven?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, ma’am. Thank ya’ll, thank ya’ll so much. All right the Chair
th
recognizes the Commissioner from the 7 for any additional comments. You good? All right.
We have before us a request for concurrence. Are there any additional comments or questions
from the body? You identified a speaker to speak on your behalf and that was Mr. Margate. All
th
right the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, I would like for Planning to speak to some of the
challenges that the gentleman had Mr., was it (unintelligible)---
Mr. Mayor: Spangler.
Mr. Hasan: --- Mr. Spangler had in terms of he thought the ordinance in terms as what it
was doing that it didn’t match up and I’m just asking do he concur with that?
Mr. DeCamp: Well, let me first of all say it does not, this particular petition does not
change the basic zoning of the property from R-1 to any other classification. But under our R-1,
R-1 zoning regulations they do allow by Special Exception detached housing at a density not
25
exceeding three units per acre. As far as the setbacks go, he’s correct in the sense that in what he
said with regard to the setbacks being slightly being different from what normally applies in an
R-1 Zone. The purpose of, the general purpose of having the Special Exception is to allow infill
housing, it’s okay at a density comparable to the surrounding houses.
Mr. Hasan: I need a follow up, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. DeCamp: Does that answer your question?
Mr. Hasan: Yes, that part does. I have a secondary question here and that is he also
made mention that he attended the Planning and Zoning meeting and he got very little
information. I would think at the end of the day that the meetings would be more in depth to get
into the details in talking about that. Maybe or may not have been on the agenda so I’m
assuming based on his comments that it was on the agenda and he didn’t get any additional
information. And so that would be troubling to me if he didn’t get any additional information
even in the Planning and Zoning meeting.
Mr. DeCamp: Well, I believe, I’m pretty certain in what I’m about to say and that is
there was a Power Point presentation covering each of the zoning cases and I believe that the
diagram, the concept plan that he held up was a part of that, a part of that presentation. Those
meetings are held in this room. The same information available to the Planning Commissioners
is available on the screen to anyone who is in attendance at the meeting.
Mr. Hasan: Citizen participation as well?
Mr. DeCamp: Right, correct, he was afforded an opportunity to speak.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: All right, all right and again to all of the petitioners or in this case the
objectors we’ve designated a speaker to speak on your behalf. I know a number of you raised
your hands and again with all due respect we want to try to hear as much debate as possible.
And we’re now based on all of the data we’ve heard we’re going to take action. All right, thank
ya’ll. All right we have before us a request for concurrence. All right so we’re prepared to vote.
Voting.
The Clerk: We need a motion, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: We need a motion, okay we pulled it. All right the Chair will entertain a
motion.
Mr. D. Williams: I motion for approval.
Mr. Fennoy: Second.
26
st
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second from the Commissioner from the 1. In a
lighthearted moment I believe today is Ms. Gentry’s birthday. She’s 21 today.
Mr. Fennoy, Mr. D. Williams, Ms. Davis, Mr. Sias, Mr. Frantom, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr.
Smith vote Yes.
Mr. Hasan and Mr. M. Williams vote No.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Passes 7-2.
Mr. Mayor: And before we move on to the next order of business I’d also like to
st
recognize today April the 21 as Commissioner Fennoy’s birthday.
Mr. Fennoy: Forty-seven.
Mr. Mayor: Happy birthday to both of them. I’m not a singer so don’t ask. All right.
The Clerk: Item 44?
Mr. Mayor: No, ma’am we’re going to go back to item number 40. All right, we’ll give
just a moment, Madam Clerk ---
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: --- if you’ll give us just a moment. All right everyone we’re going to go
back to item 40 if you’ll just give us just a moment. Okay, hold on just a moment, Ms.
Morawski.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
APPOINTMENTS
40. Motion to approve the reappointments of Mr. James W. Scott (District 10, Sen. D-23,
Bernard Johnson (District 9, Sen. D-22), Robert H. O’Neal (Legislative) and Bryan Simkins
(Legislative) to the Board of Assessors for four-year terms. (Requested by the Board of
Assessors of Richmond County)
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we table item 40.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Fennoy: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a motion and a second to table item number 40. All
right, without objection, all right. Again the motion is to table. All right, very good, the motion
is to table.
27
The Clerk: No vote?
Mr. Mayor: That’s right, that’s right. All right, so here’s our posture. Item 46 and 47.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
46. Consider proposal from ZEL Engineering to provide professional services for various
plant improvements at the Highland Avenue Water Treatment Plant and Glass Factory
Low Pressure Sewer.
Mr. Hasan: I make a motion to approve, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Voting.
Mr. M. Williams votes No.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Passes 8-1.
Mr. Mayor: Item 47.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
th
47. Consider proposal from W.K. Dickson to provide professional services for the 15
Street/Wrightsboro Road Sewer Project.
Mr. Hasan: Motion to approve Mr. Mayor.
Mr. G. Smith: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion and a second to approve. Voting.
Mr. M. Williams vote No.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Passes 8-1.
Mr. Mayor: All right, Ms. Morawski. Madam Clerk, item number 44.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
44. Reinstate the EEO Director. (Requested by Commissioner M. Williams)
28
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had this item put on the agenda because of
lack of participation in committee, wasn’t even getting my colleagues to at least share with me
the reason for this dismissal. But after getting the minutes of the meeting that I was absent from
I was able to read and understand some of my colleagues’ opinions which I still disagree with. I
think this person had done a good job and I think we will be able to save the city a lot of money
by reinstating this position or this person back to that position in order to save us from several
law suits. We have been engaged before with law suits that the department brought to us that we
did not acknowledge that we turned our backs to or we did not listen to. And in our opinion
there are several, I can name at least five off the top of my head that we had to pay out that was
brought to us in Legal that the Attorney told us we didn’t need to address or we didn’t touch
those unless they went to Atlanta. But there are several at least five that I can think of that went
to Atlanta and we came back and had to end up paying out for. So that’s why I had this put on
this agenda today and I might need to put it back on again another day but I just think that we
will be able to save this city, save face. We made a mistake; we all have done that in the past. I
mean that’s something that people do every day make mistakes but we ought to be men and
women enough to acknowledge if we made a mistake. And I think it was one that we shouldn’t
have made. So my motion is to reinstate Ms. Jacqueline Humphries back as our EEO Director
for the City of Augusta.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Williams, I appreciate your
leadership on that. All right again we appreciate all of the debate and at the appropriate time ---
Mr. M. Williams: Point of order, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: You’re recognized.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, sir. Since I don’t have a second and I probably won’t get
one but, Madam Clerk, if you will put this back on the next agenda that we’ll eat this elephant
one bite at a time either today or the next meeting or the next meeting or even the next one after
that. But we will face it one day sooner or later.
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Commissioner. All right, item number 45.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
45. Update of the Fleet Management Towing Bid. (Requested by Commissioner M.
Williams)
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
29
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We had a situation where the Fleet
Management subcontractor had approved and gave out a contract to a vendor who had not met
the guidelines along with the competition had not met the guidelines but we ended up giving it to
that particular vendor. So I need to know where we are with that. How can anybody have that
contract if both were out of the guidelines? Last committee meeting our expert department in
Purchasing vanished. There was no one here to even address this so I’m hoping that there’s
someone here now to be able to tell me how we can approve the contract one or the other one if
they was both out of compliance? So I’m waiting to hear.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Administrator Jackson.
Ms. Jackson: Yes, our representatives from Procurement are here and they can discuss
their role in this process. I think we understand that the bid was actually met by our
subcontractor with Fleet Vehicle Services, however, Procurement has looked into that and they
can give you a briefing relative to what they know about that process.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Ms. Geri Sams. Ms. Sams, as you’re making your
th
way to the podium this question is for the Commissioner from the 9. Commissioner Williams,
this matter that’s before us update on Fleet Management you just wanted a complete overview or
just an update in terms of the disposition of this. I do remember this on a previous agenda that
we had addressed this matter on the information that’s before us.
Mr. M. Williams: Well, no, the information was supposed to have been brought back.
I’m hearing that our subcontractor did something that we didn’t do and we have no issue in it. If
that’s the case than why is it that we met our department met with the subcontractor and the two
vendors and supposed to have worked out something if we had nothing to do with it. Now I’m
hearing two different stories now but if our subcontractor violated our own rules it’s up to this
body to supersede that subcontractor and put a halt or put a stop to it versus saying, well, okay,
you made a mistake and you gave it to somebody who was out of compliance. But both parties
was out of compliance so I can understand if we rebidded it but you can’t sit here and say well
we’ve got nothing to do with it. This is taxpayers’ money that our Fleet Manager and our
subcontract should have known when they went out for a subcontractor to come in and to work
up under them. And if they done violated our own rules, we can’t sit here and say well we’ve
got nothing to do with it. It’s our position now to step in. This is where, if they made a mistake
and we do that every day but you just can’t give it to one. We’re talking about taxpayers’ money
and millions of dollars have been spent with a company who was not in compliance but the other
company wasn’t in compliance either. So how do we pick one?
Mr. Mayor: So with this update are you asking for an update on the contractual process
or should I say the procurement process or an update on who the subcontractors are?
Mr. M. Williams: I want an update on who the subcontractors and how did they get
there. That’s my first two questions who was the subcontractor and how did they get there if
they was out of compliance.
30
Mr. Mayor: All right, I’m going to ask you another question. Is it not true that this
contract has already been let?
Mr. M. Williams: I think so, yes, it has.
Mr. Mayor: Is it also not true that both of the contractors have been before this body on
multiple occasions?
Mr. M. Williams: That is true as well.
Mr. Mayor: Is it also not true that we dispensed of this matter at the point of time and the
contractor of record and the subcontractor indicated that they had reached an agreement and we
concur with that. Is that not true?
Mr. M. Williams: That is true.
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: I’d like to revisit two of the questions, Mr. Mayor, that you posed to
Commissioner Williams and that’s number one. My first part would’ve been I would’ve hoped
the two parties would’ve come to an agreement. I don’t think we ever reached an agreement.
The second part of that is I don’t think the contract has been let. I think the contract may be out
for bid again, that’s what they told us last time. The last time it was here it was saying it was
going to take six months to do that. Now if something happened in between that time then
maybe I missed something. And it was going to leave it in the meantime I think the vendor who
had it from the previous year who was going to leave it with that person why they redo the
contract. Now if it’s been letted at this point, we’re talking about a span of about 30-40 days
now which is not bad, I’m not criticizing that. But when it was here it said it was going to be six,
about six months because if you remember to my point I suggested that by the mere fact that an
agreement that would allow each one of them since the contract was in suspense. To your point,
Mr. Mayor, allow each one to have it three months apiece as opposed to leaving it with the
current vendor because their contract had expired and not leave it with them. So there was some
challenges. So it may be let out since that particular time but the last time we addressed this
issue and we’ve addressed it twice. One time we addressed it pretty much with Procurement
weighing in on the conversation letting it be known that they had very little to do with it. The
second time Procurement became like a primary or stating what their position was on it. So it
could be let out again but the last time it was here they said it was going to take about six months
to do that and that’s why I suggested take about three months. So if it’s been let since then, then
that’s news to me.
Mr. Mayor: Mr. Hasan, I pose this question to you. At our most recent commission
meeting at which point in time the contractor and subcontractor showed up. The two of record,
Chancey’s and Verne’s Towing, is it not true that at that meeting that this action that we’re
referring to was in fact taken where there was an agreement reached where they made a decision,
we were going to move forward with the contract. Is that not true?
31
Mr. Hasan: Well, Mr. Mayor, obviously I don’t feel that was the case. Now if it is
somebody can provide evidence and personally I don’t have no problem sitting here saying to the
all the audience and probably we’re on the internet, right? So we’re telling everybody around
the world I’ve made a mistake. So if you can get some clarity on that, sir, I’ll apologize.
Mr. Mayor: I’m just trying to help us get to a place of understanding. From a contractual
standpoint obviously our role is not to be Procurement but we’ve debated this measure no less
than two times and in our most recent session this matter was dispensed of. There were a variety
of actions that were taken in the course of that meeting which brings us here. The Chair
th
recognizes the Commissioner from the 10.
Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You know now and I’m like you I understood that
the two parties was going to get together and see because I thought one of the main issues was
the type of equipment that would be needed to perform the proper service. And one gentleman
had a smaller pieces of equipment that would handle a smaller vehicles, trucks, and cars. And
then one of the other firms had a larger equipment for like tractor trailers and larger pieces of
equipment if they had to go pull them or tow them. So I thought they had gotten together and
worked out a system from what I understood. Maybe our Procurement Director could, Ms. Sams
knows how they ended up working it out. I was led to believe they had worked out a situation.
Mr. Mayor: Well, you know, again the Mayor Pro Tem speaks with some wisdom here.
This matter was brought before us and all of those things were debated on this floor at our most
recent full commission meeting. The Chair recognizes the distinguished Procurement Director
who’s been recognized across the state of Georgia.
Ms. Sams: Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: The question that’s before us is if you will just update us about where the
contract status is.
Ms. Sams: Currently our contract we’ve asked both vendors to come together and come
up with a remedy. And we are waiting for the insurance coverage from Verne’s. As soon as he
submits the proper paperwork then the Fleet Department and the prime contractor will begin the
process of sharing that bid until the specification documents have been received by the
Procurement Department of which they have been written, their attorneys are looking at it and
then they’re going to submit it to us.
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Dean of the Commission Commissioner
Marion Williams.
Mr. M. Williams: If I was a Dean there’s a lot of folks be having their head down
walking out here today but regardless of that, Mr. Mayor, we’ve been told and I’m very
passionate about how we have been discriminating against businesses and trying to move things
forward when people are doing everything they possibly can to meet the guidelines and for
whatever reason we’re told something and we’ve been told everything. You asked me we was
told that they was working together and they was going to be worked out and it hadn’t been.
32
And I’m not going to sit here and act like that things are fine when people’s livelihoods depends
on it when people who will get in business either with a change order or whatever reason stay in
business and those who are outside can’t never get in the door. And so I’m very disappointed,
I’m very upset because I feel like the disrespect for this body as a Commissioner not just me but
all of us don’t carry much weight around here because people can do sometimes what they think,
what they want, when they want, and how they want to. But I think it’s really crazy for us to sit
here and talk about how a sub, a contractor who do business with us can let a contract out and
then we say it’s out of our hands. Now I was told no proof that I was told they were going to
work things out and we’re going to be able to work this thing together. I was told by my
colleagues let one keep it this year and next year the other man can bid. I don’t know a bid that
works like that. If it’s a rule it ought to be a rule for everybody and the rule ought to be fair and
that has not happened around here in a long, long time. So I’m still upset about it, I still need to
put it back on the agenda I still hadn’t heard nothing to make feel like that this process has been
treated fairly. And it is disappointing it is really, really bad when you can sit on a board like this
and we can’t even get a simple towing contract put in place for folks to follow. And if both
parties are wrong then neither one, there’s other people ought to be able to apply. Favoritism is
all I see, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: I understand, Commissioner, I understand. All right here’s what our posture
is. Commissioner Williams has placed this on the agenda for an update. We’ve received the
information. What I would suggest again it’s certainly a very important issue and it continues to
be an important issue is that there’s a lot of important work going on. Perhaps what we can do is
convene a subcommittee to work with Ms. Sams and the Administrator and making certain that
the actions of the contractor of record Fleet Services works with the prime and the sub to remedy
this matter within the next 30 days. We keep talking about it but let’s put a timeline associated
to this and that we help them bring closure to it within the next 30 days before we bring this
st
matter back before this body. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Ms. Sams. May I?
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Ms. Sams.
Mr. Fennoy: Did I understand you to say that what’s holding up the agreement between
the two subs is the fact that all the information from one of the subs has not been received?
Ms. Sams: Yes, sir, the missing piece is insurance.
Mr. Fennoy: And when was this information requested?
Ms. Sams: About two weeks ago.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay. And until you get that piece of information nothing can be done?
Ms. Sams: Nothing can be done until we receive what the specifications ask for which
are the insurance, your equipment, et cetera. Now the, one of the persons did not give us the
33
insurance that was discussed at an earlier meeting and we have since approached that vendor to
supply that insurance. And he said that he had it but we still haven’t received it.
Mr. Fennoy: During the bid process was this information requested?
Ms. Sams: During the bid process ---
Mr. Fennoy: Okay, when you ---
Ms. Sams: --- and I want you to understand the process was handled by our prime
contractor but, yes, that information was requested.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay and how long ago has that been?
st
Ms. Sams: The contract went into effect the 1 of the year so it’s been (unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Mayor Pro Tem. Lots of business still left to take
care of.
Mr. Smith: Ms. Sams, I was just going to ask if you know I knew when my company
used to do business with ya’ll most of the time when we bid a bid on a contract and it’s pretty
standard in most of our procedures in your office to have insurance proven, a certificate of
insurance along with your bid. And because so many of these contractors, subcontractors, are,
you know, who you deal with that’s also a bond that they can perform. And that’s to protect us a
county if damage is done or whatever. So you know when do you usually, usually that starts
when you put our bids in January that’s pretty standard, isn’t it?
Ms. Sams: For Augusta, Georgia that’s standard operating procedures in that we ask for
liability, insurances and bonds depending on what they (inaudible).
Mr. G. Smith: Yeah, I mean that was done different from the years in the past when I’ve
done business with ya’ll and ya’ll require a bond. That’s pretty SOP, isn’t it?
Ms. Sams: Yes, sir.
Mr. G. Smith: Okay, well I mean in other words we hadn’t done anything different in
this case, did we?
Ms. Sams: No, sir.
Mr. G. Smith: Okay well, that’s I’m wondering but we’ve allowed you know the folks to
get together and if they can work out that particular contract. I mean we’re dealing with you
know people’s lives and equipment and everything out there and you get somebody a contract
that can’t perform with a minor piece of equipment on a big, trying to tow a big piece of
equipment and an accident happens and somebody gets killed, you know, they’re kind of going
to be looking at us, aren’t they?
34
Ms. Sams: Well, the contract doesn’t belong to Augusta it belongs to ---
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to make a motion to receive as information
please.
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a motion and a second to receive as information. I think
that’s certainly proper at this time, very proper, very proper. All right, the Chair recognizes the
th
Commissioner from the 6 for a point of information.
Mr. Hasan: I appreciate that, Mr. Mayor. Well, I’ll just say for the record I think I was
right it has not been let. Also a couple of things I’d to know, Mr. Mayor, or Ms. Sams sit down I
don’t worry about it but it would just be interesting if the gentleman provided insurance what
does that do at this point? Does that put those two parties in a negotiating process or are we just
talking about for them to participate as you begin to move forward and let this contract and let
the contract be let?
Ms. Sams: In our past conversation with the contractor the city’s contractor that was his
handout to that particular vendor to get that information to him and he was going to trap out parts
of his contract and share it with that vendor in accordance to what his equipment would allow
him to tow and his insurance would permit him to be liable for.
Mr. Hasan: And this is, and we’re talking about now a two weeks ago conversation in
terms in what you’re sharing with us at this moment?
Ms. Sams: Yes, sir, I’ve been out about a week and a half so I say about a two week.
Mr. Hasan: All right thank you, ma’am.
Mr. Mayor: So we’re voting on receiving this as information, information that the
contract has been let to the prime and the prime through your Commission has been very
gracious enough to say that has a gentleman’s agreement we will try to work this out.
Mr. Hasan: Now if we done let it, Mr. Mayor, we’ve been misled.
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. M. Williams votes No.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Passes 8-1.
Mr. Mayor: All right, okay, all right, Madam Clerk, so at this point we’ve got one more
item from our additions to the agenda and then we’re going to take up two items immediately
after that in Legal.
35
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: The item that’s before us number two on your addendum.
The Clerk: Yes, sir, this is an item that I mistakenly left off the agenda when I was
preparing it. It should’ve been placed on the regular agenda because there was a no action vote.
It was to:
ADDENDUM
49. Amend the Public Safety Ordinance to make it illegal to place a basketball goal in the
streets/cul-de-sac(s) or on the right-of-way whereas the players are in the streets. (No action
vote by Public Safety Committee April 14, 2015)
th
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias
: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to move to table this item. It is still a very important
item to the neighborhoods. It’s a very important item to public safety, however at this time
we’re going to table it and this issue or agenda item will be addressed sometime in the future.
Motion to table.
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second from Commissioner Davis. Voting.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Passes 9-0.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4.
ADDENDUM
50. Motion to approve the hiring of Patrick Stephens as Transit Director at an annual
salary of $95,000, effective May 11, 2015.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Motion to hire Patrick Stephens as Transit
Director at an annual salary of 95,000, effective May 11, 2015.
Mr. D. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a proper second. Voting.
Mr. Guilfoyle votes No.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Passes 8-1.
st
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
36
ADDENDUM
51. Motion to approve appointing Catherine Plaster as Interim 911 Director, effective
immediately, and to authorize the Administrator to start the recruiting process for the 911
Director position.
Mr. Fennoy: Yes, I’d like to make a motion to appoint Catherine Plaster as Interim
911 Director and to authorize the Administrator to begin the recruiting process for the 911
Director position.
Mr. Hasan: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Effective immediately.
Mr. Fennoy: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a proper second to hire Catherine Plaster as Interim
911 Director. Voting.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: All right, just hold for just one moment, hold for one moment. All right,
here’s our posture to stand at ease for just a minute. We may go back to item number 40 to try to
get some clarification on item number 40. Stand at ease just for a moment. The Chair
st
recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: While we’re getting clarification on item number 40, could I have a Point of
Personal Privilege?
st
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Yeah, you know I received an email from the Fire Department and it had
pictures of our fireman helping out communities that had been impacted by the storm that took
place in Augusta Sunday. And I think a lot of times when we think of firemen we think about
them putting out fires but they do a lot more for our community. And a lot of times they go
above and beyond the call of duty to improve the quality of life and to help out various
communities in Richmond County during their time of need. And I would just like to thank
Chief James and to thank the firemen for the outstanding job that they do in this community and
ask them to encourage them to keep up the good work. (APPLAUSE)
APPOINTMENTS
40. Motion to approve the reappointments of Mr. James W. Scott (District 10, Sen. D-23),
Bernard Johnson (District 9, Sen. D-22), Robert H. O’Neal (Legislative) and Bryan Simkins
(Legislative) to the Board of Assessors for four-year terms. (Requested by the Board of
Assessors of Richmond County)
37
Mr. Mayor: Let me, all right, Madam Clerk, the Board of Assessor is an eight member
board. Three members appointed by each of the Commission Super Districts. Three are
th
appointed by the Commissioner from the 9, three are appointed by the Commissioner from the
th
10. Two appointments are made by the Legislative Delegation. All members serve statutorily
for four years. They are certified to serve in that post by the Department of Revenue. In this
case we have some appointments that have been brought forward. The concern raised by the
thth
Commissioner from the 9 is that the Commissioner from the 9 was not involved in any of
th
these reappointment actions. As such the Commissioner from the 9 asked to either table this or
th
have an opportunity to make appointments. That is where we are. As of the 24 of this month
these appointments for the four that are listed here expire. As I understand it the tradition of this
body is to reappoint so that there’s continuity, continuity so that the certification provided by
DOR remains in place. In the event that these individuals are not reappointed and new
individuals are reappointed, there’s a 40-hour course that they have to attend to be certified.
Mr. Hasan: Two, Mr. Mayor, two 40-hour courses.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, two 40-hour courses. As such we have a matter before us, it had been
tabled. The posture of the Commission can do this. You can reconsider your actions and I
believe that would be proper. The Commission can move to reconsider its actions and to take
this matter up and move forward with the appointments that are listed here.
Mr. Guilfoyle: I make a motion to reconsider our actions.
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second to reconsider its actions. The Chair
recognizes the Parliamentarian. Is that proper?
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes.
Mr. Mayor: All right. So the fact, Attorney MacKenzie, I think the proper motion would
be to remove it from the table as opposed to reconsidering its actions.
Mr. MacKenzie: Well, actually the rule provides if the motion to reconsider is passed
then it eliminates any previous action that was taken with respect to the item was like it first
came up.
Mr. Mayor: But when we table an item for a time uncertain, would it be proper for us to
again remove from the table and take it up?
Mr. MacKenzie: That’s also a proper way to do it.
Mr. Mayor: All right, that’s what I would encourage us to do remove from the table then
st
immediately take action on this. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: I’d like to address Mr. MacKenzie.
38
Mr. Mayor: All right, Attorney MacKenzie.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. MacKenzie according to the letter we have from Charles Smith, Chair
of the Board of Assessors, it says if these persons cannot continue to serve past the term
th
expiration date unless reappointed. And the term expiration date April the 24 2015. So what
does that do to the Tax Assessors Board if they only have four members on the board as opposed
to eight? What impact does that have?
Mr. MacKenzie: If I may, I would suggest there’s actually a member of the board who’s
here who could probably better explain in detail the impact of that.
Mr. Mayor: I think we’ve got not only a member of the board, we also have the board
attorney. The Chair recognizes the Board Attorney to speak to this matter who has actually got
two questions. If the attorney would just, would you state your name for the record.
Mr. Hamilton: Yes, my name is Dan Hamilton. I work with Jim Plunkett who represents
the Board of Assessors. I’ve been asked to pinch hit so to speak for Mr. Plunkett in his absence
from Augusta today. My understanding in response to the question presented what the impact
th
would be if there’s a lack of certification effective on the 25 of this month because these folks
aren’t reappointed. And it’s my understanding that the impact would be that the board would be,
would not be able to act until it’s properly organized.
Mr. Mayor: Follow up question from the Chair. Mr. Hamilton, what constitutes a
quorum for this body?
Mr. Hamilton: I’m not in a position to advise on that at this time not being the designated
legal representative.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, I’ll defer to Mr. Lee. What constitutes a quorum?
Mr. Lee: I understand it to be five but I might not be right.
st
Mr. Mayor: Okay, and the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: And I guess just to follow up. If we do not approve these appointments,
then whoever we appoint will have to take two 40-hour classes and is it before they are certified?
th
I mean on the 25 we have four people that we appoint to the board if they’re not certified would
they be able to (inaudible).
Mr. Lee: No, sir, not until they’ve been certified by the Department of Revenue.
Mr. Fennoy: And are the classes, the two 40-hour classes, are they ongoing?
Mr. Lee: They are scheduled throughout the year so I don’t know when the next one’s
going to be.
39
Mr. Fennoy: So there’s a possibility where this board could be ---
Mr. Lee: Determined.
Mr. Fennoy: --- functioning (unintelligible) for a year.
Mr. Lee: I wouldn’t think a year but we’re getting the tax digest out right now so we
need to be functioning. You want us to be functioning.
Mr. Fennoy: One of my last questions. What would be the financial impact on this
county if we don’t, I mean ---
Mr. Lee: If we don’t get a tax digest out, ya’ll can’t levy taxes.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right. The Commissioner from the 8 is about to make a motion to
remove from the table.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to make a motion to remove the
tabled agenda item and proceed forward please.
Mr. G. Smith: Second.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, after this vote I’d like to make another motion please?
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ll remove it from the table.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Passes 9-0.
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 8 to make another
motion.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to make a motion to approve these gentlemen.
Mr. G. Smith: Second.
Mr. M. Williams: Point of Order, Mr. Mayor.
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, sir. Dan, I guess you’ll be the legal mind standing there
today. With those appointments and District 9 or 10 decides to change or to make those changes
those positions still got to be they got to be educated. I mean they got to go to whatever classes.
Now I’m hearing people up here acting like, well, we’re up against the wall. All these rocket
scientists we’ve got working for this government somebody should’ve been able to see down the
40
road before we got to this point because we always get up against the wall, Dan, and then you
know we got to run. So I change those appointments regardless what this body does I’ve got a
right as the District 9 Commissioner to appoint three people in that position. So those positions
if I’m not mistaken, have expired. Is that right?
Mr. Hamilton: There about, they apparently are about to expire.
Mr. M. Williams: About to expire.
Mr. Hamilton: I would agree with your assessment.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay so that, I don’t need to say nothing else. They can vote whatever
way they want to vote but they still don’t supersede the fact that District 10 or 9 has those
appointments and makes those appointments because you’re going to get up against the wall or
we got to go ahead on. That’s the craziest thing I’ve heard in my life.
Mr. Hamilton: I understand the bylaws would remain in effect, yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a motion and a second. Voting.
Mr. M. Williams votes No.
Mr. Lockett out.
Motion Passes 8-1.
st
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: The members of the Tax Assessors Board I encourage you to let us know at
least six to nine months when the terms of the board members are scheduled to expire in order to
give the Commissioners time to make their appointments, approve the appointments and have the
people that they appointed to the board get the necessary training that they need in order to be
certified so that this process will be a smooth transition as opposed to doing something that’s
rushed through.
th
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 10.
Mr. G. Smith: Yeah, I’d just like to go along with Commissioner Fennoy on the other
boards too. I’ve got, I get calls all the time we’ve got an opening here and opening there and you
try to appoint people who are going to be dedicated to do what they’re supposed to do, not just
be on there in name only. And I will have to say these four gentlemen that are listed here on the
Assessors Board they’ve been those type of individuals that the kind you need to sit on boards.
But we need to do the whole thing with the other boards too to see whose terms are up and all
that and make changes when necessary but anyway that’s just my opinion which will get you a
cup of coffee at the Waffle House.
Mr. Mayor: There being no further business to come before this body, this meeting’s
adjourned.
41
[MEETING ADJOURNED]
Nancy W. Morawski
Deputy Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy
of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of The Augusta Richmond County Commission held on
April 21, 2015.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
42
43