HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting April 18, 2017
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
APRIL 18, 2017
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., April 18, 2017, the Hon.
Mary Davis, Mayor Pro Tem, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Sias, Frantom, M. Williams, Fennoy, D. Williams, Hasan and Smith,
members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
Absent: Hons. Hardie Davis, Jr., Mayor, Jefferson and Guilfoyle, members of Augusta
Richmond County Commission.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Madam Clerk. Welcome, everyone. I do know that the Mayor’s out
of town today so I’ll be conducting today’s meeting. And Commissioner Jefferson and
Commissioner Guilfoyle are out as well, correct?
The Clerk: Yes, ma’am.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, let’s go ahead and begin please.
The Clerk: I call your attention to our invocation which will be delivered by the Reverend
Doctor Gaye Williams Ortiz, Minister, Unitarian Universalist Church of Augusta, please stand
after which we’ll have our Pledge of Allegiance led by Commissioner Sammie Sias.
The invocation was given by Reverend Doctor Gaye Williams Ortiz, Minister, Unitarian
Universalist Church of Augusta.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you, Reverend. Madam Clerk, let me begin with the
recognitions.
The Clerk:
RECOGNITION(S)
American Heart Association
A. Congratulations! Team One Augusta on exceeding its $20,000.00 goal and raising over
$23,000.00 for the American Heart Association. (Requested by the Administrator)
The Clerk: Madam Administrator.
Ms. Jackson: Yes, thank you very much. It is with great pleasure today that I acknowledge
the team of folks that worked on our American Heart Association Campaign. We started with a
goal of $20,000.00 dollars which was set by the Heart Association here locally and our team
worked so hard that they raised over $23,000.00 dollars (APPLAUSE). I want to call the names
of all of the team captains who participated and ask them to please come up as your name is called.
1
I’ll start off with Kayla Cooper who was leading our campaign citywide. She was also the leader
of #Team Water is Life from the Augusta Utilities Department. (APPLAUSE) That team raised
$6,045.00 dollars and they hate to acknowledge it but were outdone by the Tax Assessors Office
led by Keldrick Hieke. That team raised $6,743.00 dollars. (APPLAUSE). After that there’s a
really important team because it included the Commissioners and the Administrator’s Office. The
challengers led by Jessica Williford. She’s not here today but our team raised $4,183.00. Thank
you very much for your support. Heartbeat 605 was led by Sandra Robinson of our Procurement
Department $824.00. (APPLAUSE) Team City of Augusta Housing and Community
Development led by Leslie Adams $781.00. (APPLAUSE) Team Law Department lead by Rachel
Mack $737.00. (APPLAUSE) Heart and Soul led by Debra Brooks $640.00. (APPLAUSE) Board
of Elections led by Lynn Bailey $552.00. (APPLAUSE) Environmental Services led by Tammy
Herring $468.00. (APPLAUSE) Clerk of Court led by Charles Lyons $449.00. (APPLAUSE)
Augusta IT Department Shelly Good $438.00. (APPLAUSE) State Court Ernest Thomas $392.00.
(APPLAUSE) RCCI Terry Bussey $305.00. (APPLAUSE) Recreation and Parks Gary Hegner
$304.00. (APPLAUSE) Marshal’s James Sapp $259.00. (APPLAUSE) Augusta Fire Department
911 led by Dee Griffin $160.00. (APPLAUSE) and the Augusta Finance Department Virginia
Mitchell $110.00. (APPLAUSE) Those are our captains. I know we’ve given them plenty of
applause already but I just want to thank you all so much for exceeding all of our neighboring
cities and counties as well, thank you very much. (APPLAUSE)
ADDENDUM
48. Recognition of City employees’ contributions to the United Way.
Ms. Jackson: Our next recognition is for United Way. Is Ms. Rena Powell present from
United Way?
Ms. Powell: Good afternoon, I just want to briefly say thank you to the employees of
Augusta Richmond County. You all raised over $27,000.00 this past campaign and that’s
$27,000.00 given by the employees of the City of Augusta so we cannot thank you enough for all
of your efforts. To give back to this community United Way funds over 43 programs within the
CSRA and again we could not do it without you. And in fact in the past five years the employees,
and I keep saying the employees because this is very much 100% employee driven raised over
$162,000.00. So, congratulations and we applaud all of you for your efforts. (APPLAUSE)
The Clerk:
RECOGNITIONS
B. Congratulations! Mr. Robert Guy, Maintenance Division, Augusta Parks and Recreation
April 2017 Employee of the Month.
The Clerk: At this time we would like to offer and to recognize our Employee of the Month
Mr. Robert Guy with the Augusta Utilities Department, no, I’m sorry Recreation and Parks my
bad, Glenn Parker, not trying to rain on your parade just come on in. Mr. Robert Guy is a dedicated
employee, father and grandfather. He has worked with Augusta for more than 20 years. Robert
who works out of Diamond Lakes is a skilled equipment operator and regularly mentor and trains
other employees to operate a wide variety of equipment used by the department. He serves as the
2
department’s MacGyver. Robert is regularly called upon to fix and repair the diverse equipment
and facilities of the department. His skill sets includes carpentry, irrigation, plumbing and welding
and his crew recently constructed a Pitt Bull bar court at the Pendleton King Park. He also much
to delight of the children fabricated a hay wagon for use during several events this past fall. He
leads volunteer groups such as the Boy Scout Troop that worked to clear brush and debris from
one of the ponds at Diamond Lakes. Robert has several RCCI offenders under his care and
direction on a daily basis. Afterwards Robert works as an umpire in the Augusta Recreation
Softball League. We appreciate Robert’s dedication, skills and talent and we’re pleased to
recognize Mr. Robert Guy, an employee of the Augusta Recreation and Parks Department under
the guidance of Director Glenn Parker as the Employee of April 2017. (APPLAUSE)
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you so much for all of your hard work. We appreciate
everything you do for us. I know Mr. Parker probably wants to say a few words.
Mr. Parker: Sure. I would just congratulate Robert on this and I also want to thank his
supervisors for nominating him for this Daryl Bennett and Gary Hegner. Robert’s become sort of
our mentor in the department to a lot of the park staff they go to him to learn how to use our
equipment. You know simply stated I think if we had fifty Roberts in our department we would
be a much better department and I really appreciate what he does. Thank you, Robert.
(APPLAUSE)
The Clerk:
RECOGNITIONS
Richmond County Sheriff’s Department
C. Congratulations! Sheriff Richard Roundtree & the Richmond County Sheriff’s
Department on achieving “Triple Crown Status” with the National Sheriff’s Association.
(Requested by Commissioner Ben Hasan)
The Clerk: At this time we would like to offer our congratulations to Sheriff Richard
Roundtree. Sheriff, would you come forward, and the Richmond County Sheriff’s Department on
achieving the “Triple Crown Status” with the National Sheriff’s Association. In recognition of
this honor we would like to read into the record the record Sheriff Roundtree received. Dear
Sheriff Roundtree congratulation to you and your staff on achieving “Triple Crown Status” with
the National Sheriff’s Association. You are one of only 44 Sheriff’s offices in the United States
to have attained this status. Only by attaining simultaneously accreditation through the
Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement, the Commission on Accreditation for
Corrections of the American Correctional Association and the National Commission on
Correctional Healthcare does the Sheriff’s office receive this most prestigious award. The
Richmond County Sheriff’s Office will be recognized as a recipient of this award and will be
presented the Triple Crown Plaque at the Business Session at the National Sheriff’s Association’s
Annual Education and Technology Expo in Reno, Nevada on Monday afternoon June 26, 2017.
Once again on behalf of the members of the National Sheriff’s Association please accept our
congratulations on this achievement. Most sincerely, Jonathan F. Thompson, Executive Director
and CEO. Congratulations Sheriff. (APPLSUSE)
3
Mr. Hasan: No words?
Sheriff Roundtree: Thank you all so much and like I said when I was fortunate enough to
take office in 2013 I said we were going to give the office of the Sheriff back the people and that’s
what we feel like we’ve done to be a part of this community. So, everything that we’ve done,
everything that we have achieved as the Sheriff’s Office, we do as a community involvement and
partnership through various agencies within the county and within the civic and social
organizations within this county. That has made this possible. I said our goal was to be the best
law enforcement agency in the state and one of the best in the nation and now we’re well on our
way to do that so we should be proud here in Richmond County that we represent you the citizens,
thank you. (APPLAUSE)
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Madam Clerk, on to our delegations.
The Clerk:
DELEGATIONS
D. Dr. Matthew Hutcherson regarding “Men’s Saggy Clothing”
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Dr. Hutcherson, if you could mention your full name and home
address for the record please.
Dr. Hutcherson: I’m Matthew Hutcherson, 2202 Roosevelt Drive, Augusta, Georgia.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay and you have five minutes to speak please.
Dr. Hutcherson: I probably won’t need that long.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay.
Dr. Hutcherson: I come as a private citizen so I’m not to associate my place of work, Paine
College, with what I’m about to say so let’s make that part of the record. I’m happy the minister’s
here because I may need divine help after I say what I have to say and I’m glad the Sheriff’s is still
here because I might need protection. I want to congratulate Sheriff Roundtree, when I first came
to Augusta about 15 years ago I’m a veteran so I hung out at the American Legion a lot and Sheriff
Roundtree was giving back to the community. I interpreted it as that then before he even
considered running for Sheriff and just made it his business to be there to offer protection for the
veterans and just to be with the community so I see you have made real the things that you wanted
to do as the Sheriff. I know Hutcherson at Paine College is very proud of you and the community
is too, Sheriff Roundtree, so we are deserved today. I’m a dogmatic hater of these saggy clothing.
I don’t see how any respectable young man could walk around showing his underwear or lack
thereof, no underwear. It’s just a disgrace; it’s an embarrassment to me as a black man to see
mostly black boys doing that. When they come to my classroom if it’s your son or some of your
daughters do this. If they come to my classroom I’ve learned to have a little patience over the
years. When I first encountered this phenomenon at Morris Brown College before coming to
Augusta I was younger then and I had absolutely zero tolerance for it. I was raised that you just
4
don’t walk around showing your booty, your backsides excuse me or your buttocks or whatever
we call it. I was raised that you just don’t do that. When this thing entered our society I understand
through the prison industrial complex as a result of boys walking around advertising that they’re
ready for a sexual engagement I thought this thing would soon disappear in our open society
because I just figured we on the street outside of the jail complex know better regardless of where
you were raised. Whether you were raised in the church fortunately as I have been or whether you
were raised in our school system somewhere along the way you heard that it was not appropriate
in the United States of America to show your butt. I am totally against it. I spoke with
Commissioner Fennoy and since I’m sitting beside a gentleman who’s wearing his hat in the
building I decided to say something about that, I should’ve nudged him and said take that hat off.
There’s certain things we just don’t do in America, wear hats in buildings, gentlemen, I’m still of
the old school and if we relinquish those values as Americans we relinquish America. There’s
some things we just got to stand up for. When I heard and I think it was you, Commissioner
Williams, you know I love everything you do when I heard that you were behind this, I know I’m
getting in trouble now but I know how much Commissioner Williams stays in trouble. I think it
was you who was behind this bill, Commissioner. I was ready for it I was ready to go up and ready
to fight for it p.s. the issue. Commissioner Fennoy got me aside and said we don’t want to give
them all jail records, I’m for that so I softened over the years. We’ve got to find a way to get the
attention of our younger generation, older too that we have values that we just won’t relinquish
and stuff we just won’t tolerate such as showing your backside. There’s ways to do it. I heard
from the last meeting that the Commission decided to do research and to see what other cities have
done to squelch this problem. I think that’s a smart move. If you need my services as a researcher
I’m happy to lend my services. I think the reason I wanted to come is to relieve the police
departments, Sheriff, Marshal and people of some of the heat and Commission because I think
when citizens get behind your efforts and take some of the heat. You can come by my house if
you want if you don’t like what I’ve got to say about it. The Sheriff, they’ve got to be quiet.
Commission, you can only say so much and I can only say so much at Paine College but I’m not
speaking on behalf of Paine College today. If you don’t like the fact that you need to pull up your
pants then come see me. I can handle that. I’m not a Sheriff or a Commissioner. We can talk
about it hopefully in a peaceful way, Reverend, as I’ve attended your, oh my five minutes’ up?
So, thank you for the opportunity I just wanted to let you know the community stands behind you
we’re ready to act in ways that are productive and beneficial for this whole situation.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you for your comments and I can guarantee you that you
probably have majority of support in all of your comments so I appreciate you coming before us.
Commissioner Williams has a comment.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Hutcherson, I just want to thank you I did get a call from you and
you left me a voice mail. I’m from the old school as well. I’m not worried about a record if you,
your parents shouldn’t give you a record I think something’s got to be done. And we use those
types of excuses to stop good people from doing the right thing. We talk about what’s going to
happen or what’s going to happen if you grow up thinking that that is the right thing to be a young
adult or older adult thinking you can walk around with your rear end showing. Something’s wrong
with that picture. I wasn’t allowed to do that and I don’t have any boys. I’ve got three daughters
but I don’t have any sons but if I had a son he wouldn’t ever approach anybody with his clothes in
that fashion. I’ll share a quick story with you. When I was at KFC, a young lady had a baby with
5
a set of Pampers on and below the Pampers she had a pair of pants and she thought it was cute.
Well what’s going to happen when they get to be fifteen years old. She’s already telling him you
don’t have to wear no clothes. She may not be saying it in words but her actions and deeds are
saying it’s okay to do that. So, we as old folks now who know better or at least talk about it and
say something about it and don’t be afraid about what somebody’s else is going to say. So, if it’s
right I think this ought to be treated as right but if it’s wrong, we ought to address it. So, I thank
you for your support. I’m like you I am a Commissioner but they can come by my house too.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you, Commissioner Williams. Madam Clerk, on to the
agenda.
The Clerk: Yes, ma’am. Our consent agenda consists of Items 1-41, Items 1-41. For the
benefit of any objectors to our Planning petitions once those petitions are read would you please
signify your objections by raising your hand. I call your attention to:
Item 1: Is a request for a Special Exception affecting property known as 2349 Williams
Street.
Item 2: Is a request for a change of zoning from a Zone R-1D (One-family Residential) to
a Zone R-3C (Multiple-family Residential)
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to either of those Planning petitions? I call your
attention to the Public Services portion of our agenda. If there are any objectors to any of the
alcohol petitions would you please signify your objections once the petition is read. I call your
attention to:
Item 5: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection
with the location at 1342 Gordon Highway.
Item 6: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection
with the location at 2502 Lumpkin Road.
Item 7: Is for an alcohol Special Events License associated with the location at 3064
Washington Road.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of those alcohol petitions? Madam Mayor Pro
Tem, our consent agenda consists of Items 1-41 with no objectors to our Planning petitions nor
our alcohol petitions.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, Commission, is there anything you need to pull today? We’ll
do pull first. Commissioner Williams.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, madam Chair. I’d like to pull items 19, 20 and 21 ---
The Clerk: 19, 20 and 21, sir?
Mr. M. Williams: --- right, 19, 20 and 21 and 37. I’ve got a question that doesn’t
necessarily mean I’m not going to support it but I’ve got a question on those ones that I pulled
number 37 as well. Ms. Bonner, did you get that?
6
The Clerk: Yes, sir.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: 19, 20, 21, 37?
Mr. M. Williams: Right.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Anybody want to add to the consent, are you pulling? Okay, add to
the consent?
Mr. D. Williams: I’d like to add Item 43.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, let me get Commissioner Frantom and then Commissioner
Fennoy.
Mr. Frantom: Madam Pro Tem, I’d like to add number 47.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, Commissioner Fennoy.
Mr. Fennoy: Twenty-two.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, anything else. Can I get a motion?
Mr. Frantom: Motion to approve.
Mr. Sias: Second.
CONSENT AGENDA
PLANNING
1. Z-17-06 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve a petition by Beacon Blue LLC, on behalf of WR Investors, LLC, requesting a
Special Exception to allow Village Green Development per Section 13-15 of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta, Georgia affecting property containing 2.26
acres and known as 2349 Williams Street. Tax Map 034-4-025-00-0. DISTRICT 1
2. Z-17-15 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to
approve with the conditions below a petition by Gordon Group Development LLC
requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1D (One-family Residential) to Zone R-3C
(Multiple-family Residential) affecting property containing approximately 8.11 acres and
known as part of 1495 Goshen Road. Part of Tax Map 199-0-088-00-0 DISTRICT 8 The
private roadway will comply with the specified requirements of Augusta’s Street and Road
Technical Manual; If a 60’ right-of-way is utilized, a minimum 20 foot front setback may be
required; the lot configuration must be consistent with the concept plan submitted; Proposed
building elevations and materials must be approved by the Planning and Development
Department Director or designee.
PUBLIC SERVICES
7
3. Motion to approve the National Recreation and Parks Association’s (NRPA) grant for a
Nature Discovery Program (Wildlife Explorers) in the amount of $2,690.75. (Approved by
Public Services Committee April 11, 2017)
4. Motion to approve the Sec. 5307 Augusta Public Transit grant application between the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Augusta, Georgia. (Approved by Public Services
Committee April 11, 2017)
5. Motion to approve New Application: A.N. 17-14: request by James R. Key for a retail
package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Fast Gas 2 located at 1342
Gordon Highway. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee
April 11, 2017)
6. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 17-15: request by Hye Ja Lee for a
retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with PK Pantry located at 2502
Lumpkin rd. District 6. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee April
11, 2017)
7. Motion to approve a request by Melissa Reyes for an Alcohol Special Event License for
Mi Rancho 2, Inc located at 3064 Washington Road on May 5, 2017. (Parking Lot for Cinco
de Mayo). (Approved by Public Services Committee April 11, 2017)
8. Motion to approve contract amendment between the GDOT and Augusta, GA regarding
FTA Funding for FY 2017 in the amount of $286,655.40. (Approved by Public Services
Committee April 11, 2017)
9. Motion to approve the selection of Blanchard and Calhoun Insurance Agency, Inc. for the
Augusta Regional Airport Insurance Brokerage Services as approved by the Augusta
Aviation Commission March 30, 2017. (RFP 17-141) (Approved by Public Services
Committee April 11, 2017)
10. Motion to approve six-month probation of the Alcohol License, Dance License and
Business License for Keion S. Taylor, d/b/a Last Call Upscale Restaurant & Lounge, 1721
Gordon Highway for failure to comply with the Augusta-Richmond County Alcohol
Ordinance and Occupation Tax Ordinance and the hiring of two additional officers.
(Approved by Public Services Committee April 11, 2017)
11. Motion to approve an award of bid with Innovative Fitness Solutions for Bid Item 17-
149, weight room/exercise fitness equipment. (Approved by Public Services Committee April
11, 2017)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
12. Motion to approve subject to holding a 30-day public comment period after which the
th
item will be presented to the May 16 Commission meeting for final approval regarding the
return of Housing Opportunities for Persons with Aids (HOPWA) funding (765,176.32) from
HopeHealth, Inc. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee April 11, 2017)
PUBLIC SAFETY
13. Motion to approve the usage of fund balance in fund 212 (State Drug Fund) to increase
expense #212031310/5311110 in the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office. (Approved by Public
Safety Committee April 11, 2017)
14. Motion to approve a request by the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office to purchase a Milo
Range Theater 180, 3-Screen Immersive Firearms and Force Options Simulator for training
use at a cost of $109,880.00. (Approved by Public Safety Committee April 11, 2107)
8
FINANCE
15. Motion to approve renewal of annual POL/EPL policy with J. Smith Lanier Insurance
with annual quote. (Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2017)
16. Motion to approve a request from the Development Authority of Richmond County
under TEFRA for approval of AU Medical Center 2017 Series Bonds in a sum not to exceed
$75,000,000. (Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2017)
17. Motion to approve a request from Huntsman Pigments and Additives for an
abatement/refund of interest and penalties on Bill No. 2016304332. (Approved by Finance
Committee April 11, 2017)
18. Motion to approve the adjustment of the 2016 Probation Office budget to reflect revenue
collected and additional expenses incurred and charge to 2016 General Fund Contingency.
(Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2017)
22. Motion to approve agreement with Boys and Girls Club of the CSRA, Inc. for funding as
authorized in SPLOST Phase VI. (Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2017)
ENGINEERING SERVICES
23. Motion to delete the award of the preliminary engineering concept phase of the Design
Consultant Services Agreement to Wolverton & Associates, Inc., in the amount of
th
$491,688.00 for the 15 Street Pedestrian Improvement Project as requested by the AED.
th
RFQ 16-246 approved March 29 Commission meeting. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee April 11, 2017)
24. Motion to determine that the alley between Hogan Street and Adrian Street, as shown on
the attached plat has ceased to be used by the public to the extent that no substantial public
purpose is served by it or that its removal from the county road system is otherwise in the
best public interest, and to receive as information the results of the public hearing held
regarding the issue of abandonment pursuant to O.C.G.A. §32-7-2, with the abandoned
property to be quit-claimed to the appropriate party(ies), as provided by law and an
easement to be retained over the entire abandoned portion for existing or future utilities-as
directed by Augusta Engineering Department and Augusta Utilities Department and adopt
the attached Resolution. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2017)
25. Motion to determine that the 0.06 acres adjacent to 1507 Saint Luke Street, as shown on
the attached plat has ceased to be used by the public to the extent that no substantial public
purpose is served by it or that its removal from the county road system is otherwise in the
best public interest, and to receive as information the results of the public hearing held
regarding the issue of abandonment pursuant to O.C.G.A. §32-7-2, with the abandoned
property to be quit-claimed to the appropriate party(ies), as provided by law and an
easement to be retained over the entire abandoned portion for existing or future utilities-as
directed by Augusta Engineering Department and Augusta Utilities Department and adopt
the attached Resolution. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2017)
26. Motion to determine that a portion of Heath Street, East of Berckmans Road as shown
on the attached plat has ceased to be used by the public to the extent that no substantial
public purpose is served by it or that its removal from the county road system is otherwise
in the best public interest, pursuant to O.C.G.A. §32-7-2, with the abandoned property to be
quit-claimed to the appropriate party(ies), as provided by law and an easement to be retained
over the entire abandoned portion for existing or future utilities as directed by Augusta
9
Engineering Department and Augusta Utilities Department. (Approved by Engineering
Services Committee April 11, 1017)
27. Motion to determine that Richmond Lane, as shown on the attached plat has ceased to
be used by the public to the extent that no substantial public purpose is served by it or that
is removal from the county road system is otherwise in the best public interest, pursuant to
O.C.G.A. §32-7-2, with the abandoned property to be quit-claimed to the appropriate
party(ies), as provided by law and an easement to be retained over the entire abandoned
portion for existing or future utilities as directed by Augusta Engineering Department and
Augusta Utilities Department. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11,
2017)
28. Motion to approve and authorize implementation of Augusta Engineering Department
(AED) Reorganization as requested by AED. Funding is available in Engineering SPLOST
Admin Funds and Stormwater Utility Services Funds, and no net increase in AED authorized
FY17 General Fund budget. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2017)
29. Motion to approve award of Bid Item 17-148 Deans Bridge Road MSW Landfill Phase
III-2016 Gas Collection and Control System (GCCS) Expansion to SCS Field Services, the
lowest responsive bidder. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2017)
30. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire property in fee simple interests (Parcel 059-
2-767-00-0) – 1437 Twiggs Street. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11,
2017)
31. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire property in fee simple interests (Parcel 088-
1-033-00-0) – 155 Aragon Drive. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11,
2017)
32. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire property in fee simple interests (Parcel 088-
3-009-00-0) – 2006 Florida Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11,
2017)
33. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire property in fee simple interests (Parcel087-
4-129-00-0) – 2086 Leona Street. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11,
2017)
34. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire property in fee simple interests (Parcel 033-
2-114-00-0) – 2642 Wheeler Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11,
2017)
35. Motion to approve change order to American Hydro Corporation (formerly WEIR
America Hydro) (RFQ Item #13-193) for the Goodrich RWPS Improvements CIP Project.
(Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2017)
36. Motion to approve and authorize a contract with Cranston Engineering, the City and the
DDA in the amount of $125,680.00 for the design services for Phase II James Brown
Streetscape Project. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2107)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
38. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission held March 29,
2017 and Legal Meeting held April 11, 2017.
SUBCOMMITTEE
2017 Internal Audit
10
39. Motion to approve proposed 2017 schedule of internal audit to include Probation Services
and timeline. (Approved by Pension & Audit Committee April 11, 2017)
External Auditor
40. Motion to approve the recommendation of the selection committee to award the contract
to engage firm of Mauldin Jenkins, Certified Public Accountants as external auditors.
(Approved by the Pension & Audit Committee April 11, 2017)
Internal Auditor
41. Motion to approve the recommendation of the selection committee to award the contract
to engage firm of Serotta Maddocks Evans, Certified Public Accountants as internal
auditors. (Approved by Pension & Audit Committee April 11, 2017)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
43. Motion to approve request for New Position in the Coroner’s Office. (No
recommendation from Administrative Services by Public Services Committee April 11, 2017
APPOINTMENTS
47. Motion to appoint Daniel R. Dunlap, 911 Director, to fill the remainder of the unexpired
term of Dominick Nutter on the Region VI EMS Council. (Approved by Administrative
Services Committee April 11, 2017)
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: We have a motion and a second. Please vote.
Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Guilfoyle out.
Motion Passes 8-0. \[Items 1-18, 22-36, 38-41, 43, 47\]
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, so let’s go back to 19, Madam Clerk.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
19. Motion to approve engagement of MAXIMUS to perform indirect cost allocation study.
(RFP 17-143) (Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2017)
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Ms. Williams, would you like to speak to this?
Ms. Williams: I’d be happy to answer any questions that you might have. This item was,
there was an RFP put out through Procurement. There was a selection committee charged with
the evaluation of the firms that submitted proposals. The selection committee was comprised of
Fire Chief Chris James, Tameka Allen, IT Director, Mark Johnson from Environmental Services,
Hope Goodwin, and Tim Schroer from the Finance Committee and the Administrator’s
representative was Mr. Chester Brazzell as well as a representative from Procurement. So, it was
the high scoring proposal was MAXIMUS and the recommendation from the committee was to
engage their services.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, Commissioner Williams, you pulled this.
11
Mr. M. Williams: Yes, ma’am thank you. I asked the question in committee about this
firm that MAXIMUS that was, Ms. Williams, had they done business with us before and from this
long history from being here so long that they just came back to me that it had been quite some
time but I was told no then that they have not been. And I’m going to ask Ms. Williams again is
this the same company who done business with us before that we did have trouble out of.
Ms. Williams: No, sir, we didn’t have any trouble from this firm. This firm has done the
indirect cost allocation study. They were awarded their first RFP in 2010 ---
Mr. M. Williams: Okay ---
Ms. Williams: --- three years and two one-year renewals.
Mr. M. Williams: --- okay I asked the question in the last committee meeting whether or
not this firm had done some work in the City of Augusta and I was told no they had not so this ---
Ms. Williams: Sir, I didn’t say they had not done it. I said they had done it, they had done
the previous RFP and I would research and I’ve got this information. You might be remembering
the firm was known as DMG MAXIMUS. In 1999 there was a staffing and operations study that
was done through ACCG with this firm and until they did work for us in 2010 that was the time
we engaged their services.
Mr. M. Williams: I depend on Mr. Loeser, I depend on my Clerk a lot to help with the
records that she keeps but I try to remember as much as possible. And I did remember the, what
was the initials?
Ms. Williams: DMG, it was David M. Griffith.
Mr. M. Williams: Is that the same firm I guess I’m asking because I asked that question in
committee and I was told no that it was not but if it is, I’m not saying they’re a bad firm. We had
some problems at that time and when I saw that MAXIMUS is what caught my attention.
Ms. Williams: Right this MAXIMUS or DMG the last DMG MAXIMUS was paid for the
staffing study in 1999.
Mr. M. Williams: This is a different firm though.
Ms. Williams: Yes, I don’t know if the personnel were the same but a lot of these
professional firms merge and diverge. It’s kind of like trying to keep up with law practices and
banks but a search of all of our vendor records this is the only thing that was revealed for a search
on David M. Griffith, DMG MAXIMUS or MAXIMUS.
Mr. M. Williams: Madam Chair, can I ask my Clerk to help me out here?
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Sure, Madam Clerk?
12
Mr. M. Williams: Ms. Bonner, can you help me out with this old firm is that DMG is that
the same firm we’re thinking here now, what was the problem I guess back then?
The Clerk: Well, they did a salary compensation study and that always causes confusion
and that’s maybe what you’re thinking that there was a lot of discussion regarding results of that.
In 1999 I believe that’s when we contracted with them to do that and Ms. Williams is correct in
2010 the Commission approved the contract with a four-year renewal option. So in 2010 they
were contracted I believe to do it for ’11 and in ’11 they were contracted to do the study for ’12
and in ’12 they were contracted to conduct the study maybe in ’13, is that how it worked?
Ms. Williams: Right it’s typically (unintelligible).
The Clerk: And that’s but ---
Ms. Williams: And so this is ---
The Clerk: --- we have done business with them before ---
Ms. Williams: --- right.
The Clerk: --- I guess that’s what you’re asking, yes, sir, since 1999.
Mr. Williams: I mean I got elected in 1999. That’s too long for anybody but long story
short I’m not opposed I just knew when I saw that name it just rung a bell and I wanted to find out
because I remember we did have some issues, some problem with them at that point. And it got
th
pretty heated in this Chamber on the 8 floor about what they did or did not do and we are
continuing to do business. But all of the people that want to do business with this government
who have not had an opportunity really bothers me. Madam Chair, that’s all I wanted to bring that
point out.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Do you want to make a motion?
Mr. Sias: Move to approve.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Mr. Hasan: I have a question.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Hasan: So we’ve been doing business with this particular company since 2010 and
currently we are as well, correct?
Ms. Williams: This would be an engagement to do the current indirect cost allocation.
There were three firms that responded to our RFP and the selection committee ranked all and
13
scored each one of the firms and the committee recommended the high scoring firm which was
MAXIMUS.
Mr. Hasan: So this is the service that’s been provided since 2010 is the exact same service?
Ms. Williams: It’s the indirect cost allocation study that allows us to charge back a portion
of the cost borne by the General Fund for the administrative type services to the airport, to housing
and neighborhood and to the enterprise funds like solid waste and utilities.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, Madam Chair, may I ask the Administrator a question?
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Ms. Jackson?
Mr. Hasan: Madam Administrator, I know when we go to training there are certain, and it
escapes me at this moment there’s certain skill sets of businesses that they suggest to us that we
ought to change periodically you know after three years or five years and everything. With the
cost allocation study would this fit in your mind? Would this fit in the same area of having an
entity for long term especially when you’re talking about finances and things of that nature? So is
it best practice that we continue to use this service?
Ms. Jackson: I certainly have had that conversation around accounting services especially
auditing services in particular. I have not heard as much conversation about the need to change for
internal indirect cost allocation. No, if the risks required or what should be done is you bid it out
and look for a better firm. In this instance it seems as though it has been bid out on several
occasions and unfortunately we haven’t had competitors who seemed to be as experienced or
skilled that they would warrant a change, it’s fair to say, Ms. Williams?
Ms. Williams: There were three respondents to this proposal and the scores were included
as backup for your agenda item.
Ms. Jackson: So having said that yes, it’s good to go bid occasionally every three to five
years to make sure that you’re looking for new firms but it’s hard to tell a firm that sorry, you can’t
submit just because you did it last time.
Mr. Hasan: Well, yeah, I mean I don’t think it’s up to the firm. I think it’s more to the
government issue so that we can maintain get someone who’s a little bit more neutral and not take
it for granted. And this contract will be for another three years.
Ms. Williams: The typical professional services contract is a three-year contract with two
one-year extensions per the procurement rules.
Mr. Hasan: Per procurement rules so do we, so you’re saying that we have to offer the
extensions? We don’t have to grant them for sure.
Ms. Williams: If service is unsatisfactory, you can obviously terminate.
14
Mr. Hasan: So does that mean if you chose not to use it after three years is it automatically
it goes to another ---
Ms. Williams: No sir, no sir, I would be bringing that back to you for the contractual
extension.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, I’d just like to correct my colleagues. I mean we’ve got a long term here
we’re dealing with finances you should not keep a firm in place even if you say you get but three
takers you probably need to consider sending back out again because I think we’re trained not to
continue to do business with around finances with the same entity. So that’s no reflection of the
committee, it’s just something we need to be mindful of. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you. Ms. Williams, how much is this firm charging? What’s the
cost of this going to be to this government because you’re looking at Housing and Development
and several other financial areas. So how much is this contract?
Ms. Williams: I’ve been instructed by Procurement that I cannot answer that question until
after the award of the contract.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: That makes sense.
Mr. M. Williams: Well, I mean that bothers me as an elected official now. I’ve got to vote
for it and I understand what you’re saying.
Ms. Williams: I can tell you this contract could have been awarded under the
Administrative authority without bringing it to this government.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay.
Ms. Jackson: Excuse me, let’s be clear about that ---
Mr. Hasan: How is that?
Ms. Jackson: --- for one-year but if it’s a multi-year contract that’s when it exceeded my
authority.
Ms. Williams: Correct.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, we’ve got a motion and a second.
Mr. Hasan: Hold on, I’ve got another question.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Be aware there’s a lot of Procurement issues we can’t talk about until
like they said it’s a closed ---
15
Mr. Hasan: No, but the other part ---
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: --- Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Hasan: Oh, I’m sorry, Madam Chair, I am so sorry. To say, I need some clarity and
this is a learning curve for me right here what was just said. I was under the assumption that when
it comes to monies spent up to $25,000 dollars the Administrator does not have to come to the
Commission. She can execute all day long twenty-five, twenty-five, twenty-five, twenty-five all
day long. Now we’re talking about now we don’t know the cost this could be a $3.00 dollar
contract based on what Ms. Williams just said. Ms. Williams, but if exceeding that how does
under what terms does she have the right, let me throw a number out there. If this happens to be a
$100,000 dollar contract what Procurement policy or what policy do we have that it could’ve went
to the Administrator for one year and we not even weigh in on it? We have that policy in place?
Ms. Williams: No, sir, your Administrator Ms. Jackson (inaudible)
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Ms. Jackson.
Ms. Jackson: I’ll respond to that question. As I understand it, what Ms. Williams was
alluding to in the absence of trying to give the absolute dollar amount per the instructions that she
had been provided by Procurement if this were a one-year contract certainly I could’ve done it
under my authority but it’s not a one-year contract. It is a three-year so that’s why it’s before you.
Mr. Hasan: But that’s not my question that’s not my question. My question is where is
the policy, and I’m this is a learning curve I’m not challenging, I’m asking for clarity. You’re
saying if it happened to be a one-year contract let’s just say for instance it happened to be a
$100,000 dollar contract you’re saying that you wouldn’t have had to bring it before this body?
Ms. Jackson: No, her point was it’s less than the $25,000 dollars.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, okay that’s what I said $25,000 ---
Ms. Jackson: The annual amount is less than the $25,000.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, that’s what I asked you all along the twenty-five, twenty-five she can
do that I assumed it was more than that, okay I’m fine with that then. That’s what I was asking
for because ya’ll (unintelligible) $100,000 contract.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: We have a motion and a second, please vote.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Madam, for being patient with me, Madam Chair.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you, Ms. Williams.
Ms. Williams: Thank you.
16
Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Guilfoyle out.
Motion Passes 8-0.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Item 20.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
20. Motion to approve a request from the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office to carry over
funds ($35,196.25) obtained from a 2016 sale of a surplus boat to 2017. The agency intends
to use this funding to purchase a boat for the agency. (Approved by Finance Committee April
11, 2017)
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Is this also Ms. Williams?
Ms. Williams: I’m looking for backup from the Sheriff’s Department.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams, go ahead with your question. We’ll see
who needs to address it.
Mr. M. Williams: I mean they’re pulling their guns out and ain’t nobody robbing nothing.
But my question was about the surplus boat versus the surplus equipment. The Sheriff has a lot of
surplus equipment that comes through GOVDEAL and not just discounted but all of them and
when I saw the surplus boat it just kind of triggered something. I’m asking what about the other
surplus funds because we’re specifying $35,000.
Ms. Williams: Right. This particular boat was obtained through the Federal Surplus
Program. It was a boat that the Sheriff’s Department then deemed not quite suited to the purpose
that they intended to use it for. They obtained permission from the federal authority to be able to
dispose of that boat and to purchase, use those funds to purchase a replacement boat more suitable
to their purposes. The sale of the first boat occurred in 2016. It is simply an accounting transaction.
You can’t cross the fiscal year by just carrying over that revenue. It requires this governing
authority’s approval to carry forward that revenue so that they can spend it by their replacement
boat that they intended to do.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, I’ve got no problem. I’m going to make a motion to approve.
What got my attention was the fact that it was a surplus boat and I know that there’s several other
items that goes through and I’m looking at how we pull the money for the boat versus the money
that in the surplus so it kind of threw me off but that helps me understand a little bit better.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: We’ve got a motion and a second from Commissioner Sias or
Frantom, sorry.
17
Mr. Sias: Either one it doesn’t matter.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, please vote. We had one from Commissioner Smith too. We
had three seconds.
Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Guilfoyle out.
Motion Passes 8-0.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you, Ms. Williams.
The Clerk: Item number 21 sir, Madam.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Old habits.
The Clerk: I was speaking to you but then I was getting permission from her.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, I understand.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Yes, item 21 please.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
21. Motion to approve agreement with Augusta Canal Authority for funding as authorized
in SPLOST Phase 7. (Approved by Finance Committee April 11, 2017)
Mr. M. Williams: Madam Chair, thank you for ---
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. M. Williams: --- for allowing me to address this issue. This is another one that came
up in committee. I’m in support of the Canal Authority for sure but you’re talking about SPLOST
money. I asked the question in committee about the guidelines as far as the Local Small Business
type monies I guess being used or being spent. Does the Canal Authority have the same written
guidelines to go by as the other SPLOST recipients does since this is the Canal Authority and
you’ve got to be careful with the Authorities and I know that. So my question was whether or not
the Canal Authority has to yield to the same rules and guidelines and is that written not just I mean
is there something somewhere that states that? I asked that question in committee. I didn’t get a -
--
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Madam Administrator, would you like to answer those or who’s best
to address this, I know we still have Finance here.
Mr. Sias: Finance.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Ms. Williams.
18
Ms. Jackson: Finance Department is here as well. Do we have a representative of the
Canal Authority as well?
Ms. Williams: I do seem to remember that Mr. Sherrouse did provide an answer to that
during the committee and maybe someone else that was here can help me as well that they did
have policies and procedures in place related to small business, and they were required because
they used federal dollars to have to meet certain criteria and certain percentages in the contracts
that they award.
Mr. M. Williams: I remember that as well but what I don’t remember and what I didn’t
hear was that the same guidelines as the other SPLOST recipients here because David Sherrouse
mentioned the federal level and how they had to do. But I want to know was it written the same
as any other SPLOST recipient the same way for the Canal Authority? The Canal Authority’s got
federal guidelines they go by. I don’t know what they are, I don’t look at those but I was asking
my question. Was it written?
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams, let’s see if I think Mr. MacKenzie might
have something in front of him.
Ms. Jackson: Or I can read, I call your attention to Section 2.7 of the Agreement on Page
4. It says the Authority shall utilize a Procurement/Purchasing Policy reasonably acceptable to
Augusta or comply with the purchasing policies of Augusta Richmond County regarding the
advertising for bids, the securing of bids and payment, performance bonds and contracting
payments to any subcontractor employed by the Authority shall be made directly by the Authority
subject to the county’s audit and approval.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: So basically, they go through what any other organization does
through our process.
Ms. Jackson: They use our policies or any policies that we would deem acceptable to us.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay and those are?
Ms. Jackson: Those policies for our organization are dictated by our Procurement Code.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: So if something wasn’t according to our Procurement, it would raise
a red flag when they went through Procurement.
Mr. Sias: They don’t go through Procurement. They don’t go through our Procurement.
Mr. M. Williams: Well and that’s my point, Commissioner Sias.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: I’m just saying it would raise a red flag if there’s something different
from what we usually use.
19
Mr. Sias: Nor do they ---
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Sias, hold on one second. Commissioner Williams,
do you want to follow up?
Mr. M. Williams: If they don’t have matching funds and they don’t go through our
Procurement, how do we even know what process they went through or did they go through a
process?
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Ms. Williams.
Ms. Williams: This is the, this contract that you have in front of you for the Canal Authority
is the very same contract that are used for all of our SPLOST recipients. The Mini Theater, the
Imperial Theater, the Miller or the Boys and the Girls Club the one which was approved and was
left on consent. So it is a cookie cutter contract that has the exact same language in it that all the
other contracts have if that helps.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Sias.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to clarify something, Ms. Williams. I
appreciate that clarity, Ms. Williams, but I think one thing is a little bit off there. The other
organizations you just mentioned have to do a certain amount of matching funds, am I correct?
Ms. Williams: They are required ---
Mr. Sias: And the Augusta Canal does a matching fund? I asked that question in committee
as well and I was told no.
Ms. Williams: --- the Canal Authority because they are a component unit of this
government is not required to raise the 25% match.
Mr. Sias: So then it wouldn’t if I may, Madam, then it’s not exactly the same as the other
one. I’m not trying to split hairs but you know it’s important over here. So technically it’s not
really the same contract because they don’t have to do the matching funds.
Ms. Williams: Except for that portion, you’re correct.
Mr. Sias: Okay so I just wanted to be straight on because they raise plenty of money on
their own too and they don’t offer us any so, but I’m not mad at them but I just wanted to be clear
about the contract.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, ma’am, even when it mentioned on line 27 where it says the Authority
shall utilize the Procurement/Purchase Policy it doesn’t say reasonably acceptable so it’s not using
ours it’s using something that may we may be at peace with. Ma’am?
20
Ms. Jackson: Reasonably acceptable or comply with our policy ---
Mr. Hasan: Yeah or, or ---
Ms. Jackson: --- or comply with.
Mr. Hasan: --- but all that implies options, only implies options. The next thing that I
would like to know is in reading the information the background information it also said about
grants, how they were going to be utilizing the money for grants. Normally I would think when
we release the SPLOST money that they would have the grant in hand. Are they pursuing the
grants or do they have the grants in hand?
Ms. Williams: I cannot answer that question. That would need to be directed to Mr.
Sherrouse.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, all right thank you, thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. M. Williams: I’m just I mean we’re talking about checks and balances and when you
deal with so much you have to make sure you dot your ‘I’s’ and cross your ‘T’s’ but if they don’t
go through the Procurement process and they don’t have to use that, then I’m really confused
because they can use something similar or they can use something close but they don’t go through
Procurement process like the other agencies have to do. And I’ve got no way of knowing, I’m not
distrusting but I’m just saying if you’re going manage a situation you’ve got to dot the ‘I’s’ and
cross the ‘T’s’. So I think we need to look at that and not hold this up. I’m going to support it.
I’m going to vote but I think when you’re talking about SPLOST dollars sales tax money. There
are rules and regulations that goes with that that’s why it takes us so long up here that’s why we
have to go through what we go through because it’s a lot of money, lot of different pots a lot of
different hands. And if you don’t do that then you end up (inaudible).
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: I understand. Ms. Williams, what are the guidelines which show
any kind of red flags if someone like an Authority is not following a process that Richmond County
wouldn’t be in approval of.
Ms. Williams: They have an informational audit done each year and the results of that is
turned into us and is filed with us. In addition, their Procurement guidelines meet their
requirements for expenditures of federal funds. So in that test it certainly stands up to the federal
requirements for expenditures using any grants from federal money.
Mr. Sias: Move to approve.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
21
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Ms. Williams, if you had a problem you would know and bring it --
-
Ms. Williams: Yes sir, yes, ma’am, so far so good.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: --- all right, we have a motion and a second please vote.
Mr. Hasan votes No.
Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Guilfoyle out.
Motion Passes 7-1.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Thank you again, Ms. Williams, 37.
The Clerk:
ENGINEERING SERVICES
37. Motion to approve the installation of six Streetlights on Tripps Court at a cost of $134.36
per month. This is also to approve a new lighting tax district for the 13 lots associated with
the above road. Funding is available in the Street Lighting budget account
#2760416105312310. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee April 11, 2017)
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams, was this your pull? Commissioner
Williams ---
Mr. M. Williams: Yes, I was ---
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: --- okay.
Mr. M. Williams: --- yes, ma’am, I was trying to figure out how do we get the $134.36 per
month is what.
Mr. Ussery: Good afternoon, my name is John Ussery. I’m the new Assistant Director of
Traffic so I’ll be happy to answer your question. The $134.36 came about by the cost of the
materials to the poles and the lights. Some of the light fixtures need to be installed also the cost
of the power that’s going to be you know powering the lights and so they came up with that
number.
Mr. M. Williams: So that $134.00, Madam Chair, the $134.36 per month will be from
what time from now on is that what this is?
Mr. Ussery: It’s a year, it’s an annual cost.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, so moved.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
22
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: We have a motion and a second. Please vote.
Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Guilfoyle out.
Motion Passes 8-0.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Madam Clerk, let’s just go from 42 on please.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
42. Discuss Animal Services Department. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
44. Discuss Augusta Law Department. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
45. Discuss Central Service (FLEET) Department. (Requested by Commissioner Marion
Williams)
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay Commissioner Williams, this is your item.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, ma’am. I asked for this item to be addressed a while back,
Madam Chair, we weren’t able to get it in Legal or get it on the floor and talk about it. But I need
to get some information in fact I requested some information about an incident that happened. I
don’t want to mention the employee’s name or anything of that nature but there’s some issues that
happened there with an automobile and I asked the Legal Department and I hadn’t talked to Animal
Services but I did talk to Fleet. And I talked to I think Ms. Douse was the first person I talked to,
no, I’m sorry, Ron Crowden was the first person I talked to. I was over to the Fleet Services and
I saw a vehicle that was totaled. It had been in a serious, serious accident and I inquired about that
and I wanted to get some information and Ms. Douse came back and said that the Attorney said I
could not get that. I think that got changed some kind of way (unintelligible) that got changed but
they decided I could get it and let me look at it a little bit. And I got some information here an
email and was disturbed really disturbed about what I saw in this email. When I asked about the
procedure and what had happened I guess the Legal Department it was on the agenda too, Ms.
Madam Chair, my way of bringing that all into play.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams, so is this also is this 42, 44 and 45.
Mr. M. Williams: Yeah, I would think all three of these need ought to be combined.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Companion items?
Mr. M. Williams: Companion items.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, I should’ve asked you that earlier. I’m sorry.
Mr. M. Williams: That’s all right. I just think it would be easier to try to find out exactly
where we are with that. But what disturbed me about this more than anything was when I requested
the information and finally I did get it, it was stated that they should maybe hold this information
or sit on this information without passing this information on and it really bothered me as to three
23
departments Fleet, the Law Department and Central Services not being able to share what had
happened. Had I not been by the facility and saw the vehicle that was totaled and I think you’ve
got some pictures in your package when someone ran a red light and distracted another vehicle
that injured some people. I don’t know the extent of that and I don’t want to get to that part but
I’m a little bit worried about how a situation that serious happened and we don’t get it or we don’t
have any knowledge of it unless somebody stumbled across it. That bothers me. All the equipment
all of the furniture and stuff that we furnish for people to work with and how dangerous it is but
when someone can run a red light and injure someone else it could’ve endangered themselves in
fact it could’ve been a fatal situation. I thank God that it wasn’t but I hadn’t heard much response
from it so I’m really disappointed, I’m really disheartened about how we pay people to pick and
choose what they want to tell us. So can, I need somebody to answer first of all how this email
came about that I had the Clerk request and got an email back showing that it was a incident but
versus giving it to the I guess the proper authority or proper people they wanted to know if it was
okay for them to respond or sit on it for now.
Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Madam Administrator, can you maybe give some insight or Mr.
MacKenzie as far as the process that you all go through when something like this happens, a wreck
or some other kind of thing you’re going through the process. Is it typical for a Director to maybe
not be able to hand over information, I’m just trying to see. I think Commissioner Williams’
concern here is the process that was happening and when he wanted information, he didn’t feel
like it was being given forthright. Mr. MacKenzie, may be who’s ---
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure. I’ll be happy to address this. I think there was some initial
misunderstanding about the disclosure of information because of the interplay between the Georgia
Open Records Act and what might be subject to public disclosure versus what might be subject to
Commissioner, I think that was cleared up early on I think that clarification was made. Just to be
clear any information a Commissioner needs to get we try to make sure they get it in a timely
manner and typically work with the departments to that so. So, to the extent there was a
miscommunication regarding that and I’ll apologize on behalf of our department as well as the
other department. It was certainly not intended.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you. I think that got cleared up but it was disheartening to have
to go through the process I had to go through to get it cleared up. When an elected official asks
for some information and they need to get it. But I even asked for the report of the what have
you’ve got you’ve got three different avenues when someone is going through a preliminary
hearing situation what do you call it the ---
Ms. Jackson: Safety Review Committee?
Mr. M. Williams: --- you’ve got two review boards I ---
Mr. Hasan: Risk Management.
24
Mr. M. Williams: --- you’ve got Risk Management, personnel and Safety Review. If
Safety Review is looking at it then what other board then looks at it too? Don’t we have
appointments on the Personnel Board, okay the Personnel Board looks at those situations as well?
The Clerk: No, sir, they just go through personnel (inaudible).
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, where do the Safety Review come in at?
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. MacKenzie, could you go through the whole process for us for
different cases like this?
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I can attempt to do that. Probably the best department to do that
would be Risk Management as it’s their board and I can give you a broad overview. Typically it’s
a mainly a peer review board that looks into accidents and makes a determination of whether or
not the accident was one that the employee should have some responsibility for. If that board finds
there is something then the department will review whether or not to issue discipline. Depending
on what discipline’s issued and they would have the same appeal rights they would have under the
Personnel Board if it was, for example, a termination. They would have those rights to go through
that process.
Mr. M. Williams: So I heard what the Attorney just stated but when you’re talking about
a and Ms. Jackson answered but I don’t know remember what she just said, I’m sorry. But when
someone has an accident whether it be an automobile or something as serious as this, who decides
on what board they go through or who decides what disciplinary action not disciplinary action --
Ms. Jackson: The disciplinary action is actually enacted by the Department Director. The
Safety Committee I believe reviews every single accident.
Ms. Williams: It is stated in the Cause and Procedures Manual of Section 1000 that the
body is creating a Review Committee and under its duties and purposes reviews all vehicle
accidents involving Augusta, Georgia vehicles determine (inaudible).
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. MacKenzie, will you read that on the mike please ---
Ms. Williams: (Inaudible).
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: --- that’s okay.
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I’ll be happy to do this. Section 1000.402 which is the purpose of
the Safety Review Committee A: Is to review all vehicle accidents involving Augusta, Georgia
vehicle to determine cause. B: To review all property damage or incidents resulting in loss,
damage or destruction to Augusta, Georgia property in excess of $1,000.00 dollars. C: To review
all incidents resulting in claims, torts or loss by liability to Augusta, Georgia as it applies to
property damage, loss or destruction of property and/or resulting in bodily injury to an employee
due to legal and expected operations of subordinate departments of Augusta, Georgia. D: To
25
review all reported injuries to employees during the course of their employment under the
provisions of Workers Comp.
Mr. M. Williams: Can I ask Andrew a question, Madam Chair?
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. M. Williams: Andrew, you mentioned $1,000 dollars. I heard that one time. Maybe I
couldn’t quite understand everything you said but what’s the threshold or what’s the limit when
you’re talking about a Safety Review. If you back into a fence I mean there ought to be a safety
review but if you have a total loss on a new vehicle with the airbags deployed I mean is that the
same thing? I mean there’s no difference you treat it the same as if you back into a fence a total
loss?
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: To answer your question the policy clarifies that it’s for all vehicle
accidents regardless of the dollar amount and then all property damage incidents resulting in loss
that exceed $1,000 so it’s all vehicle accidents.
Mr. M. Williams: Al vehicle accidents.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: All of them.
Mr. M. Williams: Does that go to a situation or source where this body would know about
those accidents, not that we need to get every one but if they go to the Administrative Services,
Public Services, do we, had we not found this out would we have had any knowledge of this?
Mr. MacKenzie: You possibly could and the reason I say it that way is if a lot of damage
is not caused like injury or harm to any persons or a lot a property damage is not caused then you
know very small value claims often get resolved by either Risk Management and if they are within
certain thresholds they can be resolved there. If it’s above Risk Management’s authority then
there’s a little more authority within the Law Department. It’s the larger based claims though that
will always come to you in the context of resolving claims. It’s just sometimes it takes a minute
for that process to make its way through.
Mr. M. Williams: And I’m glad you said that and I don’t think we need every one but
when you’ve got a vehicle that’s a total loss when you injure two other people when you total loss
of another car and then nobody have even brought it to anybody’s attention that I know of. Now
like you say you know it depends on the severity of the accident and I understand that but when
something of this magnitude should have been addressed over a month ago. When I talked to Ms.
Douse about it, she called me back and said that you know she couldn’t get the information. And
then I think that got some kind of way straightened out but it’s unnerving to see a situation that
happened and it happens every day, I see Ms. Douse just stepped up so maybe she can enlighten
me a little bit.
26
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Let me go real quick to Commissioner Sias and then we’ll come
back to your question.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question or comment is to the Attorney, okay?
Mr. MacKenzie, there are times when you say particularly when we’re in Executive Session you
say this is something that we just inform you all of. As elected officials when these issues come
to us from the outside, it’s always beneficial to us to have some kind of idea of so what folks are
talking about. So I think it would be very prudent if some kind of information, informational
purposes is passed to us reference these kinds of incidents. And one of the points I think
Commissioner Williams has made clear that this was not a very minor incident. Now we don’t
know what the future of this incident or the final resolution is but it happened a little while back
so I think it would be very prudent either for this body to adopt some kind of threshold or
informational level that ya’ll provide something to us even in Executive Session if it’s not
permissible in open session. But we need to know that some of these incidents have occurred and
as I say the standard has been set when you give us information to say this may be coming up or
this coming down a possible litigation, a possible this, a possible that. So I think it would be
prudent if we can receive some kind of information reference these kinds of cases. So I would ask
you, if we have to go through a resolution that’s fine but I would ask you to consider some kind of
threshold informing, some kind of threshold to inform us of these kinds of incidents. I think that
would be very prudent. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Sias maybe this is a good committee agenda item for
you to add for us to discuss and come to a directive if that’s the will of the Commission.
Mr. Sias: I’ll do the agenda item and we’ll see what the will is.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. M. Williams: Yes, I wanted to hear because I asked have been asking for this for quite
some time. Safety Review met the other week and I’ve got some information just on this particular
case but the other stuff that I never received the information on, it kind of bothered me. But what
I’m looking at here now is an email. Well, it’s too late to try and look at this now, Ms. Bonner, to
cifer through this and continue to do what I want to do. I would appreciate it had I had it in time
so I can speak a little bit of understanding with it. But I’ve got an email here from Mr. Crowden.
th
I think it came on March the 20 to address this issue and it says that there’s no name but it says a
young lady ran a red light. Well, I don’t know what a red light is. I know what a, I mean running
a stop light but I don’t know what red light is. I know what a stop light is but it says and she was
being placed on administrative leave. Well, I guess that’s the normal process to place somebody
on administrative leave and when I got the information back from the Safety Review Board and
the Safety Review Board put her on administrative leave. So when you’ve got something to this
magnitude that I mean no other disciplinary action will be taken when you, I just asking the
question.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: I don’t know if we can discuss all the ins and outs of a personnel
discipline issue on the floor, Commissioner Williams, but I understand your concern. All right,
what was your question? I know you had a specific question for Ms. Douse or Ms. Williams.
27
Mr. M. Williams: Ms. Douse. I was going to ask Ms. Douse to if she recalls the
conversation me and her had when this thing first came up. I don’t think she was informed she
knew anything about it until I had called and asked her about it. And that’s when you was informed
and I said to her then I thought your department was supposed to handle this kind of stuff if I
remember.
Ms. Douse: Yes, sir, you were asking me about some details concerning the Animal truck
that was totaled lost. At that particular time, I did not have the details you were interested in. I
told you that I would make a couple of phone calls to see what information I could uncover.
Normally anytime there’s an accident of an asset of any type we either, tractor or excavator or
whatever the case may be of any type we work closely with the Risk Management Department to
assist in determining the course of action for the vehicle and the personnel matter is handled by
the department. And so I made a couple of calls and because this particular issue at that time was
a personnel matter that was under review there was not much information I could provide to you
and that’s the information that I gave to you verbally.
Mr. M. Williams: And that would be the lawyer who told you they didn’t have that
information I couldn’t get the information at that point?
Ms. Douse: Well, I did not speak with the lawyer I did speak with a representative of, I
spoke with my Fleet Manager who stated that the information could not be obtained from the
department.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Because of it being a personnel issue.
Ms. Douse: Correct.
Ms. Douse: And I would like for you to know that we have approximately, we have over
100 vehicles per year that are involved in an accident of some type some of which are totaled so
we don’t run that information up the chain even to the Administrator’s office unless there’s bodily
harm done.
Mr. M. Williams: Well, I think in this case, if I can Madam Chair, in this case there was
bodily harm done and I’m not talking about just the accident. There’s some severe stuff and there’s
some regular incidents, things happen.
Ms. Douse: And that’s what the department would’ve been managing.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams, where do you want to go with this so we
can we get to a resolution?
Mr. M. Williams: Commissioner Hasan wants to say something.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Hasan.
28
Mr. Hasan: Yes thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Douse, in your initial response to
Commissioner Williams’ question you made two different distinctions. You made one that was
might have been a personnel and one might have been vehicle. At that time did you have even the
vehicle information that you could provide to him or you had no details on that either?
Ms. Douse: Well, I received from my Fleet Manager a listing of vehicles that have been
wrecked or had been in an accident not necessarily the particulars. So when Commissioner
Williams called about this specific asset number I did not have the details for the accident that he
was requesting at that time. I think the day in which he called the accident happened a day or two
prior.
Mr. Hasan: I don’t think so, no, ma’am ---
th
Ms. Douse: The accident happened on March 12 ---
thth
Mr. Hasan: --- no, ma’am. March 12 you’ve got emails that he has that back on the 20
and things like that so that’s an eight-day window there so it didn’t happen the day prior. The
report was back in the very next day. All the reports was back in. Now that does not mean the
th
resolution and the employee status but the report was in on the 13, everybody had a report on the
th
13 ---
Ms. Douse: Okay ---
Mr. Hasan: --- the very next day.
Ms. Douse: --- well I stand corrected, sir.
Mr. Hasan: So my question was at that point you didn’t have that basic information
because I mean you know you should’ve had that basic information about the vehicles about two
vehicles one that belongs to us and the vehicle that had been involved in the accident.
Ms. Douse: Well, my only concern at that time was that the vehicle was currently under
review with Risk Management and it still is sitting on the lot waiting Risk Management’s direction.
Mr. Hasan: But do you realize there was an ongoing conversation that was taking place
because eventually Commissioner Williams retained a lot of emails. And there was a lot of back
and forth banter around should he be provided with the information from the Law Department,
from Risk Management and what have you about should he provide. One went so far to say well
should we give him the information or should we sit on it and another attorney said well, let’s just
wait and see what he’s asking for. So all down the food chain as a Commissioner which would be
an impact on all of us and the emails will verify what I’m saying. I’m not hoping that you’ll I’m
talking a broad conversation now but all in those emails should we give it to him, should we not
give it to him, should I sit on it. And the attorney said to another attorney well, let’s just see what
he asks for. He already made the request. So I’m just talking he just happens to be at the mike so
my concern also along with that and this is to the Attorney if we have a Safety Review Board and
29
there’s a recommendation from the department head about what they feel the guidelines should be
and the person, let me ask this first, Madam Chair. Ms. Williams, may I ask Ms. Williams?
Ms. Williams: Yes, sir.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, ma’am, what capacity does Mr. Crozier have in Risk Management?
Ms. Williams: He’s the Interim Risk Manager at the present time.
Mr. Hasan: I’m sorry.
Ms. Williams: He’s the Interim Risk Manager at the present time.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, so this is to my Attorney, to our Attorney.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: All right, ya’ll, let’s see where we’re going with this.
Mr. Hasan: Okay my question is if we have, I’m trying to compartmentalize this. If we
have Risk Management being involved with a conversation about what the potential penalty should
be per personnel and that Risk Management person also is the Chairman of the Safety Review
Board. If the employee does not like the ruling at the Safety Review Board then it goes to the Risk
Management Board where the very same employee is a non-voting co-chair of that board. My
question is should Risk Management, that particular person, should they weigh in on the centers
that early on when the petitioner comes before the Safety Board which they chairs and they are a
voting member?
Mr. MacKenzie: Just to clarify are you saying that there’s a person who’s on both boards
or are you saying they were just involved in the discussion (inaudible).
Mr. Hasan: They chair the Safety Review Board, they’re the co-chair of the Risk
Management Board that will review the Safety Review Board concerns if an employee wants to
challenge that and but they’re a non-voting member but they are the co-chair or the vice-chair.
And but at the same time they’re in the conversation early on about what the penalty should be
and want to uphold the recommendation of the department head when it has not yet even came to
the Safety Review Board. Is that appropriate?
Mr. MacKenzie: I’d have to look at all the specific facts of each case but if it’s a non-
voting member on the Safety Review Board (inaudible).
Mr. Hasan: They’re a voting member. They are the chair, a non-voting member at the
Risk Management what would go beyond the Safety Review Board.
Mr. MacKenzie: I’d have to look at that. What it sounds like you’re saying a potential
conflict of interest if you’re involved at the lower level and you’re also involved in the appeals. Is
that appropriate is that the question you’re asking?
30
Mr. Hasan: Say that again now.
Mr. MacKenzie: I think the question you’re asking is there a potential conflict on interest
---
Mr. Hasan: Absolutely.
Mr. MacKenzie: --- involved at the lower level and then you’re also part of the review.
Mr. Hasan: Right.
Mr. MacKenzie: It sounds like there’s a potential but I’d have to look at the specific facts
and analyze it.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, well, I’m just saying I’m going to get out of it but I definitely I think it
takes offense to all of us a governing body when employees and staff acts should we release it and
it bounces back and forth about releasing information, that’s very disturbing and very
disheartening about very basic information that is going around for everybody and a Commissioner
asks for it and can’t seem to get it clearly without going through the Supreme Court to get it. Thank
you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: But we also do have to realize personnel issues they have to be
private about certain information. I’m not saying all of it with what you’re referring to but we do
need to be aware of that. Commissioner Fennoy.
Mr. Fennoy: Andrew ---
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: --- is there a policy by which Commissioners can request information that we
should go through or do we just go through the various department heads and expect to get the
information we’re requesting?
Mr. MacKenzie: I don’t think there’s a formal written policy. A lot of Commissioners
utilize the Clerk’s Office who does a great job of coordinating with the various departments to get
information and sometimes Commissioners go directly to the departments to get information.
Sometimes depending on what it is we’re also able to help.
Mr. Fennoy: I mean I think that it might be a good idea if we developed a policy where
we would go, there is one, Ms. Bonner?
The Clerk: Yes, sir, there’s an ordinance I think the title would be ‘Delineation of
Responsibility’ that it authorizes the Commission to go directly to the Department Director or the
Deputy Director to receive information in pursuit of an investigation or to gather information.
However, they can’t go below that. They would have to address that with the Administrator but
31
the ordinance gives the Commission the authority to seek information for investigative purposes
to the Director and the Assistant Director.
Mr. Fennoy: And I guess one of my concerns is whether we need to take a look at that
policy and see whether that policy works as far as getting information from the department head.
I think that if we had if we requested information through Ms. Bonner from a department head
then we could find out whether that information should be released to the Commissioners at this
particular time. You know as far as, you know, accidents are concerned I don’t think that what
happened to the person that works for Animal Control this is a, I mean this is not something that’s
new to Augusta. I mean we’ve had accidents ever since we’ve had vehicles and there are policies
in place that addresses that. We have department heads like Risk Management, the Law
Department, Fleet Management that goes through a I hope a process and then once they do what
they do if it’s necessary for us to be notified we’ll be notified. Does the, you mentioned the
accidents, a hundred, does that include the ones that involve the Sheriff’s Department and the
Marshal’s Department?
Ms. Douse: Yes, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay all right and me personally I don’t think it’s necessary that we be
contacted every time one of our vehicles are involved in accidents. I think that when it reaches a
point that there’s possible litigation involved I think that in the past our attorneys have brought it
to our attention in Legal. I don’t think that disciplinary action of an employee that’s involved in
an accident should be a concern of this Commission. We have departments, we have an
Administrator that’s been addressing these instances for years so why all of a sudden is this
something that we should be talking about.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: (Inaudible).
Mr. Fennoy: That we receive this as information.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Commissioner Williams,
you’ll finish us out.
Mr. M. Williams: Yes, ma’am, I hope I can. First of all, we know accidents are going to
happen. That’s life. Accidents are going to happen. That’s what we’re here for. It’s not about
the accident but there’s no time that an elected cannot be able to see anything that’s dealing with
this governing body. But there’s been several cases or several conversations about how things are
being done in Risk Management whether it was doing another thing right or wrong. It’s not at the
table today. But I was really concerned about, I guess I’ll wait til that side meeting is over and I
can go over to this other meeting (unintelligible).
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: They’re done.
Mr. M. Williams: Well, I can go back to my meeting but ---
32
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: It was a good meeting down here though.
Mr. M. Williams: --- that’s a good meeting. But my point is had not this been stumbled
across when would we have heard about it? I mean when you give time to cover up and to change
and to move and if you ain’t covering up nothing don’t worry about it. If you have then there’s a
problem. But if you’re doing what you’re supposed to do there shouldn’t be a problem with it.
But when you’ve got something as serious as this accident happened then it’s too late to wait until
way down the line and say oh we should’ve known about it. I don’t want to know about every
little incident. I don’t want to know about somebody backing into another car but when you’re
talking about a car that deployed three airbags, a total loss, and if you all, if we don’t get
information about what’s sold. When you look at the cars and stuff that we sell we come out being
accountable for this government and holding people accountable and making sure that we’re
dotting our ‘I’s’ and crossing our ‘T’s’ that’s a lot of money being wasted.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams, I think typically we just hear about it if
there is a potential lawsuit. Is that correct, Mr. MacKenzie?
Mr. MacKenzie: That’s typically the case. I think what could be an improvement here is
maybe some threshold dollar amount for property damages only caused to Augusta property if you
want to know about those otherwise our current process wouldn’t include any notification on ones
that only did damage to our property.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: And Commissioner Sias is going to put an agenda item to discuss
that if we need to hear of something in a different case than what we usually hear about. Okay,
let’s ya’ll have another meeting still? Yeah let’s, we have a motion and a second. Please vote.
Mr. M. Williams: Commissioner Sias is going to put this back on the agenda for
committee?
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Committee.
Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Guilfoyle out.
Motion Passes 8-0.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Madam Clerk 46 please.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
46. Motion to approve the request for space from the Secretary of State, Brian Kemp, to
establish a local regional office within the Municipal Building on the second floor near the
Mayor’s suite. (No recommendation from Administrative Services Committee April 11,
2017)
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Madam Administrator, who’s best to address this?
33
Ms. Jackson: Ms. Douse is here. I’ll just briefly give an overview I think of where we are
and she can chime in as necessary. We received a verbal request from a representative of the
Secretary of State’s Office some time ago, a couple of months ago, asking for some small amount
of space in this building wherein they would provide all funds associated with doing any upfit that
might be necessary. At that time it was expressed that their strategy was to open a series of regional
offices throughout the state. I understand that they have already opened two of those offices ---
Ms. Douse: That’s correct.
Ms. Jackson: --- two already have been opened, this would’ve been the third one. I also
understand that at least one of those offices is located in the Municipal Building of the cities that
are involved and if you need those cities specifically I think they’re in your packet. We have not
developed any contract agreements or tried to draft anything. We’ve only done looking for some
space. We found a space in on the second floor. There’s what had been constructed as a lactation
room that has been underutilized that we thought might be a reasonable space since they indicated
they only needed a very small amount of space. The idea was to come before the Commission and
ask if you were interested in pursuing that idea and then at that point we would work with the
Secretary of State’s Office to identify particulars of the arrangement, give them costs, discuss the
length of the contract etc. etc. so that is how the request is before you. We certainly don’t have
any preference. If you all would like to move forward with this we will. If you don’t certainly we
can move on.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay Commissioner Frantom and then Commissioner Williams.
Mr. Frantom: Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. I just have to say I’m a little disappointed in
that this agenda item would come before us with no contract, no services that they’re offering, how
long they’re going to maintain it, this man’s running for Governor. Why now? I did get the email
from you earlier that stated Savannah also has an office opening up in the Municipal Building there
and what is the need? I think this could be a great asset in the community if we understand what
they’re really going to do. My motion is we send it back to the committee level and let’s get more
information because this is basically this is on the agenda because of a phone call and I just think
we ought to be doing business like that.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams.
Mr. M. Williams: Yeah, I can support the office space but I would like to know what office
that space will be providing and what are we (unintelligible) of. The other thing is I don’t think
we can specify on the second floor next to the Mayor’s office. If there’s a space in this building
somewhere I mean wherever that space is suitable it’s good but I don’t think we can specify that.
I’m told that the buildout whatever monies needed to renovate or get it prepared will be fine. I
don’t think there should be any cost. I hadn’t heard anything about any cost for rent or anything
like that. I think this body, this governing body’s open five days a week and normal hours and
anybody coming in will have to operate with under them. But I would like to know what services
will be provided and will they be willing to just have an office in this building not specify on
34
whatever floor. The Mayor Pro Tem had an office in this building and on this floor but he don’t
have it anymore, I mean she don’t have it anymore. I’m sorry.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: That’s okay, old habits are hard to break.
Mr. M. Williams: But she don’t have it any more so I just think we need to be careful
about designating a spot or area. I think if it’s a building here ---
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Let’s ask Ms. Douse. Have you all, when you tried to find a space
for this so you could bring it to us did you look at the entire building and tell us how you came
about the second floor please.
Ms. Douse: Sure and just to be clear Andrew Turnage who is the director with the Secretary
of State he did not specify where he wanted the office to be located. He specifically asked a blanket
statement could the City of Augusta house a regional office for the Secretary of State. And that’s
when I began the hunt to take a look at our existing footprint, look at all the office space we have
available, see where did we have opportunities to convert say a conference room into any office
space and that’s when the space out on the second floor which from a visual standpoint appears to
be wasted space in which we could build out and that was the plan that we drew and that we’re
proposing to you today. So they never specified exactly where they wanted the space to be located
and the real estate division is simply just offering a suggestion. At the same time, and what was
the other question?
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: That’s, well, I know that Commissioner Williams asked to or maybe
Commissioner Frantom what exactly will be happening? What services will they offer? Do we
have outlined as far as what they really plan to use these, the space for and what would their
services be?
Ms. Douse: This office will provide the same services that the main office in Atlanta
provides. There just will be a local presence and a representative here that will be able to aid the
citizens in the event that they come to the site versus having to call and wait on hold or even drive
to Atlanta to get things such as licenses taken care of.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, we’ve got Commissioner, thank you, Commission Fennoy
then Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Sias.
Mr. Fennoy: Yes, I’d like to make a substitute motion to deny.
Mr. Hasan: Second.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Well, let me just real quick. We didn’t have a second on
Commissioner Frantom’s so you would be the first motion.
Mr. Fennoy: I’d like to make a motion to deny.
Mr. Hasan: Second.
35
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: We have a motion and a second, Commissioner Smith.
Mr. Smith: I was contacted by Mr. Turnage up there from the state’s office and I suggested
we bring him down and let him explain exactly what’s (inaudible) people that might not understand
what it’s about. And I think with Augusta being one of the largest cities in Georgia and moving
forward with what’s coming this way, I think it would behoove us to listen to Mr. Turnage who’s
with the Secretary of State’s Office on what their plans are and if he can show us cut some of our
citizens and some of the things that’ll be coming in this direction, I believe it would be helpful and
frugal for us to try to work with him. For some reason they’re already in two other locations and
I don’t know I don’t see the big damage of what they might do here but he’d be one that could put
it on the table and let you know. Just to bury your head in the sand and say no without a good
reason just doesn’t make good business sense to me. And especially the size of this county and
what’s coming in here we need to look at what’s good for the people of Richmond County.
Mr. M. Williams: I’ll second that. That was a motion wasn’t it, Grady?
Mr. Smith: Yeah.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: What was your motion?
Mr. Smith: The motion is to I propose we bring Mr. Turnage in to answer any
questions we may have and let’s clarify it with us being the size city in Augusta and what’s
coming for the future let’s be involved. Anything we can do up there with the state can only
benefit this county.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Smith, would you just it’s kind of what Commissioner
Frantom was saying move it to committee at a further date when you can arrange for the
representative to be here?
Mr. Smith: Sure. Well you know when the man when I was called from Atlanta I told him
real quick let me put you in with our County Administrator and see what you want how much you
want and all this. He didn’t even know. So I told him the best thing I could do was turn him over
to our County Administrator and then he get with her on what they need or whatever. So after that
I stepped aside because I didn’t want to make a comment on anything that could be misinterpreted
or screwed around with.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, so we’ve got a ---
Mr. Smith: The dean of Commission down there, Commissioner Williams, I think he wants
to see this county move forward and whatever way we can stay in touch up there with our state
capital that would be a plus.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Make sure the office hours go past midnight, right? Commissioner
Sias and then Commissioner Hasan.
36
Mr. Sias: I’m good, Madam Chair.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay Commissioner Hasan.
Mr. Hasan: Well, you know, Madam Chair, you know my even though I seconded that
which I think my colleague here put a lot of pressure on it to revisit that but I think we’re really
done this a disservice is the motion that was to approve the request for space for the Secretary of
State Brian Kemp to establish a local regional office within the Municipal Building on the second
floor near the Mayor’s suite. So it gave the impression that that was asked for specifically ---
Mr. M. Williams: Right.
Mr. Hasan: --- as opposed to putting it up he asked for some space in the footprint of
property that we owned, you know what I’m saying? So it’s not so much that I mean if we want
to take that off to where this request is going and let us allow to look I think it would do us a
service in our citizens in Augusta Richmond County which we represent to the tune of 200,000.
But I think the way this motion was and what we’d be approving as of right now to build out space
and I really don’t like the fact that we’re going to invoice them back. You know that this could be
three or four months down the tube and at that point Secretary Kemp I don’t know how that goes
when you decide to run for Governor does he step down or what I don’t know he may decide to
continue to serve. But we don’t want to, we don’t want to get in the middle of that either so we
have other property to build another floor or it could be in the 600 building which we have leased
out for a dollar you know but two employees there, there are other things we can do to make this
happen. I think if we want to revisit it and remove this off of what’s before us as far as location
we may can, I think we can support for this.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, so the motion substitute motion right now is to move this to
committee when we can arrange for time for the representative to come down and present to us
and that’ll be worked out with the Administrator. We have a motion and a second for that so please
vote.
Mr. Fennoy votes No.
Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Guilfoyle out.
Motion Passes 7-1.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Hasan, I agree with you there’s so many times the
wording of these motions get us so off track ---
Mr. Hasan: Yeah.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: --- before we even get into the discussions. Madam Clerk, anything
else.
The Clerk: No, ma’am, that’s it.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: All right, thank you, Commission.
37
\[MEETING ADJOURNED\]
Lena Bonner
Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy
of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of The Augusta Richmond County Commission held on
April 18, 2017.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
38