HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Commission Meeting December 5, 2017
REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
DECEMBER 5, 2017
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., December 5, 2017, the
Hon. Hardie Davis, Jr., Mayor, presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Jefferson, Guilfoyle, Sias, Frantom, M. Williams, Davis, Fennoy, D.
Williams, Hasan and Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
Mr. Mayor: Good afternoon. We have entered into that season, holiday, merriment and
joy and we are here to do the people’s business. We’re excited to be here on this day. It’s a day
that the Lord has made and we will rejoice and be glad in. The Chair recognizes Madam Clerk.
The Clerk: I call your attention to our Invocation portion of our agenda which will be
delivered by the Reverend Vivian T. Hambrick, Pastor of the Live River Baptist Church after
which the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Invocation was given by the Reverend Vivian T. Hambrick, Pastor, Live River Baptist
Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited.
Mr. Mayor: Reverend Hambrick, if you would approach, I want to take an opportunity to
thank Reverend Hambrick for her spiritual guidance and civic leadership throughout this
community. She’s serves as a great Pastor of the Live River Baptist Church and a very dear friend.
We really appreciate the work she’s doing in the community. Would you join me in giving her a
hand for her service as our Chaplain of the Day. (APPLAUSE)
The Clerk: At this time we would like our Human Resources Director, Mr. Mike Loeser,
to please come forward to acknowledge our Years of Service employees for this month.
Mr. Lozier: Thank you. Good afternoon Mayor Davis, Commissioners, special quests,
Directors and citizens of Augusta Richmond County. My name is Mike Lozier, Human Resources
Director for Augusta Richmond County. Today is my pleasure to recognize our November Years
of Service Recipients. For the Month of November 2017 we have 26-employees celebrating 5 to
20 Years of Service with Augusta Richmond County. We have four employees over 25 years and
they’re not present today but I’d like to read their names, where they worked and their years of
service. David Seth, Utilities 25 years of services, John Pencel, Sheriff’s Office 25 years of
service, Augustine Rhoades, Augusta Regional Airport 25 years of service and Gerald Metzger,
Sheriff’s Office with 35 years of service. Thank you. (APPLAUSE)
The Clerk:
RECONITION(S)
Augusta Information Technology Award
1
A. Congratulations! Augusta Information Technology Department on receiving the 2017
MCCI Innovation Award.
The Clerk: At this time I call your attention under our Recognition portion of the agenda
where we offer congratulations to Augusta Information Technology on Receiving the 2017 MCCI
Innovation Award. Ms. Allen, you along with MCCI would you please come forward.
Mr. Speaker: Mr. Chairman and Mayor and Council, I’m especially proud to be here today.
I’m a representative of MCCI Mike (unintelligible) is my name. I’m a fellow Georgian from
Gwinnett County and really pleased to present our 2017 Excellence Award to the City of Augusta
for the work it’s done on, particularly I’ll give you a couple of quick details. Laserfiche is the
software that helps with document management and hopefully removing paper as much as possible
from processes and the City of Augusta’s done some ground-breaking work that’s been recognizes
nationally in the area of particularly forms and form workflow. So, electronic forms is a large
focus of what Mike Blanchard did and Tameka and all of the staff here with IT. And we’re so
appreciative of the city being a customer for a long time now and we’re really proud to present to
2017 Excellence Award to the City of Augusta from MCCI. (APPLAUSE)
Ms. Allen: I just want to thank Mike for of course coming down from MCCI to present us
with this award. This is an awesome award but as I always say one person doesn’t do it. I have
to recognize the people who really make it happen and those are the people that are standing to my
right. The people in the Information Technology Department never stop amazing me and making
me feel so very proud to be the one that happens to be the Director of that department. And I’d
also like to recognize Jeff who’s in our booth he is also, he played an instrumental role in making
all of this happen. I’m just so thankful and so grateful that I have members of a team that are under
the Information Technology leadership that look for things that are innovative and they think out
of the box and they make things happen for not only the customers that we support but for our
citizens. So, thank you guys for being such and awesome part of our team. (APPLAUSE)
Mr. Mayor: To Ms. Allen and your team congratulations once again for the stellar work
that you continue to do that is recognized not just in the state of Georgia but nationwide as well
and we appreciate having a partner like you guys, thank you so much. Madam Clerk, I do want to
draw everybody’s attention to the revised background information for Item number 8 in your
agenda again please pay close attention to it and govern yourselves accordingly. All right, thank
you, Madam Clerk?
DELEGATION(S)
B. Seve Adigun regarding a proposal to establish a metered parking district with
enforcement in the historic downtown Augusta.
The Clerk: Yes, sir also Item Number B under our Delegation portion has asked to be
deleted from today’s agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
DELEGATION(S)
2
C. Dr. Beverly G. Johnson regarding objection to Alcohol License at 2318 Walden Drive.
The Clerk: And I believe Item Number C is relative to Item Number 3 and 4 when we get
to that portion of the agenda ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay ---
The Clerk: --- Ms. Johnson under the Delegation.
Mr. Mayor: --- okay.
The Clerk: I call your attention to our consent agenda which consists of Items 1-24, Items
1-24. For the benefit of any objectors to any of our alcohol petitions once those petitions are read
would you please signify your objections by raising your hand. I call your attention to:
Item 3: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection
with Walden Mart located 2318 Walden Drive.
Item 4: Is a request for a retail package Liquor License to be used in connection with
Walden Liquor Store located at 2318 Walden Drive.
Item 5: Is for a retail package Liquor, Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with
JC Package Store located at 2501 Peach Orchard Road.
The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of those alcohol petitions? Could you identify,
we have a spokesperson identify your ---
Ms. Johnson: I’m Dr. Beverly Grant Johnson President of Hyland Park Neighborhood
Association so I’m representing Hyland Park (inaudible).
The Clerk: Are these objectors from the Hyland Park Neighborhood Association?
Dr. Johnson: (unintelligible).
The Clerk: Okay, can I get them to raise their hands once again so we can count them?
We need all objectors if you would please just to stand and raise your hands so we can get a count.
Andrew, do you want to count?
Mr. Mayor: All objectors please stand.
The Clerk: Okay, we have 20 objectors to Item Number 3 and 4. Our consent agenda
consists of Items 1-24. Our consent agenda consists of Items 1-24 with 20-objectors to our
Alcohol Petition Number 3 under the Public Services portion of our agenda as well as Item Number
4.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, at this time we’ll entertain items to add or remove. The Chair
th
recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
3
Mr. M. Williams: Yes, Mr. Mayor, thank you I’d like to pull Items 3 and 4 and I guess
because we’ve got someone to speak on that one other Commissioner may be in favor of pulling
it as well. But I also want to pull Item 10.
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: I was just going to do 3 and 4 because we have the applicant here.
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 8. The Chair recognizes
the Commissioner from the ---
Mr. Guilfoyle: Oh, I’m sorry, Mr. Mayor, I’d like to pull item agenda Item Number 19
and see if we could consent agenda Item 31.
Mr. Mayor: Okay so Item 31 is on the regular agenda so it can remain there. The Chair
th
recognizes the Commission from the 5.
Mr. Jefferson: I was also going to pull Items 3 and 4 from the consent agenda.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, Madam Clerk, as I gather we’ve got Items 3, 4, 10 and 19 okay
I’m coming, I’m coming. All right and now to my right the Chair recognizes the Commissioner
st
from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, Item 31, can that be added to the consent agenda?
Mr. Mayor: Well, I’m sure it can but I didn’t, is that what you want to do?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right because I was asking about pulling. All right the Commissioner
thst
from the 8 and 1 want to, okay all right we have objection ---
The Clerk: Okay to 31?
Mr. Mayor: --- we have objection to 31.
The Clerk: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, there be no other requests to add or remove from the consent
agenda I will entertain a motion.
Ms. Davis: Motion to approve.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
CONSENT AGENDA
4
PLANNING
1. ZA-R-249 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Planning Commission to approve
a petition to amend to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta Georgia by adding
to Section 3-A (Outdoor/Street Lighting) the following: 3-A-2 Applicability 1. All new
development/site plans must include information regarding installed street lights and other
outdoor lighting. All street lighting must comply with the latest edition of Augusta’s Street
and Road Design Technical Manual and be installed concurrently with other public utilities.
(Approved by Augusta Commission November 21, 2017-second reading)
PUBLIC SERVICES
2. Motion to approve motion to renew the Sec. 5311 Rural Transit grant application between
the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) and Augusta, Georgia for July 1, 2018
to June 30, 2019. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28, 2017)
5. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 17-41: request by Jong Won Lee
for a retail package Liquor, Beer and Wine License to be used in connection with JC Package
Store located at 2501 Peach Orchard Road. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public
Services Committee November 28, 2017)
6. Motion to approve bid award to Sommers Construction, LLC in the amount of
$514,925.00 for Augusta Regional Airport Terminal Restroom Renovations Project as
approved by the Augusta Aviation Commission on 11/27/17. (Approved by Public Services
Committee November 28, 2017)
7. Motion to approve the FY 2018 Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement with the
CSRA Regional Commission for Senior Nutrition Services for Augusta, GA> (Approved by
Public Services Committee November 28, 2017)
8. Motion to adopt a Resolution to provide matching funds in the amount of $150,000.00 to
monetarily support the Augusta Regional Airport in their application for the Federal Small
Community Air Services Development Grant. (Approved by Public Services Committee
November 28, 2017)
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
9. Motion to approve 2017 Christmas Eve and Christmas Day Holiday Schedule. (Approved
by Administrative Services Committee November 28, 2017)
PUBLIC SAFETY
11. Motion to approve the allocation of funding for the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office
(RCSO) in the amount of $100,000.00 to implement the Department of Homeland (DHS)
State Homeland Security Grant Program. (Approved by Public Safety Committee November
28, 2017)
12. Motion to approve the agreement and acceptance of grant funds in the amount of
$2250.00 from Pet Smart Charities and to approve Animal Services to secure future grants
quarterly for the next two years with the approval of the Administrator and authorize the
Mayor to execute the required documents. (Approved by Public Safety Committee
November 28,2 017)
13. Motion to approve acceptance of the award from The Georgia Emergency Management
Agency (GEMA) to the RCSO through the State Homeland Security Initiative of $44,000.00
5
to purchase a K-9 transport vehicle. (Approved by Public Safety Committee November 28,
2017)
14. Motion to approve a request from the Richmond County Sheriff's Office to purchase
uniforms for the deputies at the Charles B. Webster Detention Center from Uniforms by
John at a cost of $84,039.60. (Bid Item 17-234) (Approved by Public Safety Committee
November 28, 2017)
15.Motion to approve digital orthophotography and maintenance agreement with
Pictometry International to provide new 2017-2018 oblique imagery and related software
and product support to Augusta. (Approved by Public Safety Committee November 28,
2017)
16. Motion to provide lump sum cancer insurance for firefighters as mandated by HB 146 to
be effective January 1, 2018; to approve the funding for the lump sum cancer insurance in
the amount of $41,454; and to authorize the Mayor to sign the Georgia Interlocal Risk
Management Agency Participation Election Form, Resolution, and Agreement to provide
lump sum cancer insurance. (Approved by Public Safety Committee November 28, 2017)
ENGINEERING SERVICES
17. Motion to approve award of Construction Contract to E.R. Snell Contractor subject to
Value Engineering and not to exceed in the amount of $3,327,317.03 for Transportation
Investment Act (TIA) Project, Druid Park Improvements Project – Phase II as requested by
AED. Award is contingent upon receipt of signed contracts and proper bonds (ITB 17-244).
(Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2017)
18. Motion to approve award of Construction Contract to Blair Construction, Inc. in the
amount of $5,300.648.93 for East Augusta Roadway and Drainage Project – Marion Home
Phase, subject to receipt of signed contracts and proper bonds as requested by AED.
(Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2017)
20. Motion to approve award of Construction Contract to E.R. Snell Contractor, Inc. in the
amount of $2,972,337.64 for Wheeler Rd. at Aumond Rd and Milledgeville at North Leg Rd
roundabouts Projects, subject to receipt of signed contracts and proper bonds as requested
by AED (ITB #17-251). (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2017)
21. Motion to approve entering into an agreement with Central of Georgia Railroad
Company stating that Augusta, GA will pay for the Road Improvements (Crossing and signal
improvements) on the Marvin Griffin Road Improvements Project in accordance with the
estimate totaling $679,635.00. Also, approve the Agreement to be executed by the Augusta,
GA Legal Counsel and the Mayor as requested by Augusta Engineering Department.
(Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2017)
22. Motion to approve funding for Design Consultant Services Supplemental Agreement
Four to Wolverton & Associates, Inc. in the amount of $72,000.00 for Transportation
Investment Act (TIA) Project, North Leg Road Improvements Project – Phase II as
requested by the AED. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee November 28, 2017)
23. Motion to authorize Traffic Engineering to submit revised County Radar Permit to the
Georgia Department of Transportation for approval. (Approved by Engineering Services
Committee November 28,2017)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
6
24. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Augusta Commission held
November 21, 2017 and Special Called meetings held November 21, 2017 and November 28,
2017.
Mr. Mayor: We have a motion to approve and a proper second.
Motion Passes 10-0. \[Items 1, 2, 5-9, 11-18, 20-24\]
Mr. Mayor: All right, Madam Clerk, our posture with 3 and 4 is that we’ll have Ms.
Johnson speak at that time as well.
The Clerk: Okay, all right.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
3. Motion to deny New Location: A.N. 17-39: request by Hyung Goo Kim for a retail package
Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Walden Mart located at 2318 Walden
Drive. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28,
2017)
4. Motion to deny New Location: A.N. 17-40: request by Hyung Goo Kim for a retail package
Liquor License to be used in connection with Walden Liquor Store located at 2318 Walden
Drive. District 2. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee November 28,
2017)
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, we have the petitioner and objectors. All right, Madam Clerk,
let’s hear from the petitioner first.
The Clerk: Mr. Kim.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right and do we have a representative from Planning?
The Clerk: Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, Mr. Sherman, if you’ll come forward, hold on Mr. Kim. All
right, I want to make sure we hear from Rob as well, okay?
Mr. Kim: So actually here the two agenda items are related to me, one of them in the same
location. Agenda 3 is for selling beer and wine in the convenience store. Agenda 4 is permitting
to have liquor store. So I understand the concern of the neighborhood association for selling hard
liquor so that I agree for not actually opening. And any way I cannot open if you don’t actually
approve me so then. But agenda 3 I just request to you to have hard look. What agenda 3 agenda
3 is actually selling beer and wine in convenience store. And you might know in every
convenience store they are selling beer single cans and people are buying beer in actually
convenience store. They are buying just single cans. If it didn’t pose any risk to alcoholic behavior
in the neighborhood it if didn’t increase any crime rate by selling single beer in convenience store
7
so I understand the concern of Dr. Johnson. I respect her and also I respect the people against for
me to open liquor store. But if you think actually or frankly whether selling single can of beer in
the convenience store would pose any risk in the neighborhood please think about that and vote,
okay. So that’s my request, thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Mr. Sherman. All right, can you speak to this from a Planning
standpoint and also from the Sheriff’s Office.
Mr. Sherman: Yes, in your agenda books we provided you with a staff report and the staff
report addresses the considerations that we review that are from the Alcohol Ordinance. And as I
was telling you at the committee meeting the property is zoned Heavy Industrial. It meets the
distance requirements. That is what we call the objective criteria. This objective criteria has to do
with if this person had held an alcohol license in the past how did he manage that license. That
doesn’t apply. He has not had an alcohol license in the past. But also included in this objective
criteria is the location and the impact it will have on the neighborhoods and that’s the area that the
Sheriff’s Office and Planning and Development looked at. And based on the input we had from
the neighborhood and the fact that there’s a Child Enrichment Center next door to this property,
it’s our recommendation that this not be approved for the liquor store or the beer and wine to go
into the convenience store. Now as far as the convenience store goes itself the zoning does allow
the convenience stores just that we’re talking about the alcohol so if you deny the alcohol he can
still have a convenience store subject to him complying with the building codes and the parking
requirements.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, so ---
Mr. Sias: Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: --- I’m coming to you. Items 3 and 4 if you’ll look in your tabs the Sheriff’s
Office has denied both of these applications, okay? The Sheriff’s Office has denied both of these
th
applications. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner form the 4.
Mr. Sias: Move to disapprove Items 3 and 4.
Mr. D. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a motion and a second. The Chair recognizes the
th
Commissioner form the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Rob, I need some understanding. From what
I’m hearing is that you can’t approve the store without the sale of beer and wine, is that right?
Mr. Sherman: Well, no, sir, that’s, the applicant thinks that his business will do better if
he has I think what he was just saying beer.
Mr. M. Williams: I understand that and I heard everything. I’m just trying to be clear on
something myself. I’m think that we can deny this without any alcohol at all. The store could be
8
there but he wouldn’t have any alcohol or do we have to deny the whole thing, that’s what I’m
trying to be clear on.
Mr. Sherman: You’re only considering the alcohol portion of it ---
Mr. M. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Sherman: --- so if you deny the alcohol, no alcohol, the store is not before you.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, I want to be clear I was thinking one way. But if we deny the
alcohol and I’m in favor with the motion but I just wanted to be sure as to what the motion really
was.
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I need to clarify my motion if my second will come back
on there. Item 3 and 4 is already on our consent agenda for disapproval and so what my motion is
to disapprove the alcohol license in beer and wine in reference to Item 3 and 4. So therefore, my
simple motion is to approve the agenda items as stated, 3 and 4.
Mr. D. Williams: Second.
Mr. Sias: Did you get that, Ms. Bonner?
The Clerk: Got it.
Mr. Mayor: All right, Ms. Johnson, if you’ll approach. You don’t have to but you can if
you want to, you don’t have to.
Ms. Johnson: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ve got a motion and a proper second. Voting.
Mr. Fennoy out.
Motion Passes 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Item number 10.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
10. Motion to approve a 1-year extension of the existing fleet maintenance contract with First
Vehicle Services. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee November 28, 2017)
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
9
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I pulled this agenda item because I first wanted
to know how this item got brought to the committee. And after speaking with the Administrator
she informed me that there was a subcommittee out looking at this issue of Fleet Management and
what we’ve been paying for stuff that isn’t in compliance with some other compliances for over
$5 million-dollars a year. I’m wondering why didn’t this go back to the subcommittee versus it
going to the committee to be approved.
Mr. Mayor: You’re directing the question to the Chair?
Mr. M. Williams: No, to anybody who’s got an answer, Mr. Mayor, it don’t have to be the
Chair.
Mr. Mayor: All right, all right, the Chair recognizes Administrator Jackson.
Ms. Jackson: I can certainly speak a little bit to the process. I believe the Chair of the
subcommittee would also like to speak. But when we met with the subcommittee last I asked the
Central Services Director to present her estimated cost for us to do, perform those services in-
house versus the current contract arrangements. The difference between those two estimates were
roughly $100,000 dollars or less. At that point the subcommittee did not have any further meetings
and we’re now at the point where the contract would need to be renewed starting in January of
2018. So in the absence of getting any feedback, further feedback from the committee we brought
this back to the agenda for review by the full Commission.
Mr. Mayor: Okay ---
Mr. M. Williams: Can I respond, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: --- sure.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, sir. And I heard what the Administrator just stated but that
really bothers me to make it look like we hadn’t done our job. We always get up against the wall.
We always wait until the last minute, the last 30 days now we have got to do something. When
we had staff who was supposed to be working on these issues along with this body should have I
thought in my opinion should have brought this to our concern sooner rather than later. But I know
a lot of things happened, a lot of things going had the subcommittee working, I totally disagree
with the $100,000 difference myself. I don’t know how many meetings we had with someone who
analyzed and see what the cost would be. We took a trip, an all-day trip to Savannah to look at
their fleet management and how they was doing it. We had history to show where they went
outsource and went back in house and saved a million and a half dollars. We had some good
information that came from down there that we thought sure was going to be helpful to us. I know
Commissioner Hasan, Commissioner Guilfoyle and myself and several others that went down who
thought we was working towards trying to save the taxpayers’ money. But when you’re talking
about spending $5-plus million dollars on changing oil and tires on cars and using our own building
to do it we can’t do it cheaper than that? A $100,000 dollars, I beg to differ. Who negotiated that,
Mr. Mayor, because we’re using our own shop we’ve still got, it’s our shop, same facility on Broad
we’ve been using. The Fire Department left from that situation to an in-house situation where they
10
show where they saved money. And I don’t blame businesses, business is in business to make
money. They’re not in business to help the government, they’re not in business to help friends,
they’re in business to make money. Our job is to save as much money we possibly can for the
taxpayer to use it in ways that’s going to benefit the citizens of Richmond County. Now we’re
hollering, we whoop and we strain about little things but stuff like that. We act like it’s not
important, so it bothers me to wait until the last minute. Now we’ve got to do something because
we didn’t do this wasn’t brought to us prior to this point six months ago when it should’ve been
brought, or somebody should’ve at least asked the question. And now what I’m hearing is if we
don’t do something, Mr. Mayor, we’re going to out of a service. Well, I think the state, Mr.
Guilfoyle, uses Mini Lube to change oil in the state vehicles. If we have to use that I think it’ll
save us some money versus what we’re doing right now.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First I’d like to say, Mr. Mayor, I agree with my
colleagues in terms of what the capacity we’ll be able to save money a $100,000 dollars difference.
I differ with that as well. I think the contract itself about a $3.1 million-dollar contract we ended
up paying a little over $4 million-dollars so that’s about a million dollars and most of that was in
non-contract vehicles based on the age seven, eight years old. But here’s how we got here,
Commissioner, for the record. We got here because at our last meeting we did have it was that we
was going to come back and make a recommendation. But a couple of meetings prior to that we
maybe done a walkthrough through our Fleet Services site there, both of them, and with that being
said the current vendor wanted to make a presentation. I had shared with the fleet management
person about three days prior that we wouldn’t necessarily want a presentation. She called me and
asked me and I told her we don’t want a presentation. We didn’t come for that; we just want to do
a walkthrough see the site. Well, as you know the vendors were there and they wanted to make a
presentation and I refused for us entertain that. Later on Commissioner Guilfoyle within his own
right demanded that because he’s a part of that subcommittee he wanted the vendors to make a
presentation to the committee. As the Chair I chose not to do that because we may decide to look
at contracting out and I wanted to be in the open and fair process and not give anybody an undue
advantage. Well, Mr. Guilfoyle exercised his right to put it on the Commission and with that being
said he got an opportunity to make a presentation. In making the presentation when he got through,
Commissioner Jefferson made a motion that we give them another year. At that particular time it
was brought to his attention that the subcommittee was still in place. Commissioner Mary Davis
asked me, “Commissioner, when do you plan to meet again?” I said I probably plan to meet in a
couple of weeks. Commissioner Jefferson and I got together and we talked in the back and
everything he said he was not going to do that. I told him to go ahead because what was determined
at that point Commissioner there was no need for us to meet again because it seemed as though it
was the will of the body and so I respect the will of the body to go on ahead and do that and go
ahead allow that final year extension. Now with that being said we’re at a point now that next year
after going into ’19 we do need to make a, well we’re going into ’18 now so if we approve this
today they have their final year option. So I mean in ’19 we do need to make a decision about
bringing it in-house or either contracting it back out at that particular point. So, within that final
year option I support that at this point but I didn’t like how we got here either but I respect my
colleague’s decision to if they want to go ahead and do this as a year option in play and I just say
we respect that but that’s how we got here.
11
st
Mr. Mayor: Okay, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Yes, I’d like to make a motion to approve the, supporting the extension.
Mr. Hasan: Second.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a second. Voting.
Mr. M. Williams votes No.
Motion Passes 9-1.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SAFETY
19. Motion to approve award of Bid #17-238 for exterior painting for 1840 Wylds Road for
Augusta Utilities C&M Department. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee
November 28, 2017)
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I actually had brought this up two
weeks ago when it was on the regular Commission agenda and Ms. Irving was out of town and we
moved it forward to the committee. Ms. Irving was still out of town so I see that she is here now.
Just have a couple of questions about this bid process.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Irving.
Ms. Irving: Good afternoon.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Good afternoon, Ms. Irving. Ms. Irving, underneath the LSBOP Program
which you oversee the bid sheet where we have one of our local participants Georgia Drywall had
met every requirement but, they were deemed noncompliant even though they were the lowest
bidder. Can you kind of enlighten me how they’re noncompliant?
Ms. Irving: Absolutely. Georgia Drywall is not a Certified Local Small Business Program
Participant. They responded they were responsive. They submitted the necessary documentation
however they failed to list a local small business to meet the 7% goal.
Mr. Guilfoyle: A goal is just what is says, it’s a goal. It’s not something etched in stone.
This is the third time that I’ve been on this floor since you’ve actually taken over this department
which actually where I see that we’re spending over a million-dollars from the Solid Waste
Contract to the Riverwalk Contract and now I’m looking at this contract here. Wouldn’t it be
better or would it be beneficial that we utilize local people instead of having them having to
bringing them from outside the area?
12
Ms. Irving: Yes, sir, however the Commission approved a Local Small Business
Opportunity Program. That program states that where there is a contract where there a potential
opportunity for certified firms who’ve gone through a process of becoming certified by our
department they would solicit those individuals, attempt to engage them and if they are unable to
engage them, they will complete a good faith effort. And based on that we will make the
determination whether or not they either met the goal of 7% or if they in fact utilized a local small
business and attempted to use them with a good faith effort. Georgia Drywall actually listed a
firm. They listed Sherwin Williams which is a corporate owned company located in Augusta.
Mr. Guilfoyle: And they are the ones that were denied.
Ms. Irving: They were the firm that Georgia Drywall listed as a local small business firm
however Sherman Williams is, their personal net worth along with the gross receipts for Sherwin
Williams exceeds the qualifications for the Local Small Business Program.
Mr. Guilfoyle: If we revisited the policy that you follow underneath the LSBOP Program
to where it’s revised to where it’s user friendly to where we don’t get in a position where we are
sued or anything, isn’t that what you as well as the Attorney working on at this time?
Ms. Irving: General Counsel and the Compliance Department are looking at the program
and its potential appeals process.
Mr. Guilfoyle: We’ve got to be careful. I know that. All right thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. M. Williams: Question, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, I’m going down here, I’m going to decide for a minute and then I’ll
th
come back. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Irving, in the same spirit I was under the
impression around from a noncompliant when they don’t reach out to local small businesses or
something, I thought it was right at $100,000 dollars and above that you actually look for those
specifications, is that true?
Ms. Irving: That is true. When a User Department estimates their contract at over
$100,000 dollars or plus the Compliance Department will evaluate that scope of work for a small
business participation. In this particular instance, bidders came in under $100,000 dollars however
the User Department actually estimated this particular contract at in excess of $100,000 dollars.
So with that being stated at the onset of the evaluation the User Department established a 100-plus
thousand. Now there’s nothing to say that the bidder cannot bid under a $100,000 but at that point
there’s already a goal established.
Mr. Hasan: Okay well, let me just say this here. If you look at all of these bids here, there’s
none of them that exceeds $100,000 dollars. So I understand you have no control when the User
Department puts that on it but it seems like there needs to be another process in place that you
come in after the actual bids begin to come in to have numbers to work with because technically
13
when you say noncompliant for the $40,000 dollars, this person could’ve possibly very well got
this business because it is $40,000 dollars and not above $100,000 dollars. Probably no fault of
your own because you’ve got the one another noncompliant that’s $78,000 dollars and I’m
assuming it’s for the very same reason. And if that’s the case, we’ll probably need to revamp
where you come in at when those bids maybe come back in and you begin to see what the numbers
look like and then you begin to attach your concerns your request to it because when I look on the
front end I think this may be the second time that I can remember and I apologize that we’ve had
that’s there’s actually been less than $100,000 dollars and you deemed them noncompliant based
on what the User Department. So once again you can determine what they do, you know, and
you’re reacting to that but it looks as though you probably need to wait until the actual numbers
come in and then try to get them to reach out to the local small business person and bring them on
board because it’s putting you in a very bad predicament here because none of these are over
$100,000 dollars. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, I really don’t want to get mired in this one. Ms. Irving, I think what
I’m hearing is that it’d probably be a good opportunity to do a little workshop on how the LSBOP
Program works as what I’m hearing is maybe a lack of understanding and things are being
muddled, that’s what I just heard. You’ve got a very specific criteria but what’s being articulated
and argued is a little different than why you deemed them noncompliant. And it might be helpful
if you were able to give them the framework to say they were noncompliant because of this okay,
th
that’s what I’m hearing. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I just want to say to Ms. Irving as well different
contracts with different amounts, some over $100,000 some even up in the millions but I thought
the Law Department and your department had worked together to keep us out of trouble so to
speak from not being fair to the small and local businesses. And I’m thinking from what I’m
hearing and that’s what you had done in this case but do we need, and I guess my question needs
to go to the Attorney or maybe you can, do we need to change our policies is what I’m hearing
now, the way you come or where you come in at because I’m thinking we put a policy in place to
protect the people who had not been able to come to table before. Now I don’t know anything
about farming but when the big hogs eat they ain’t got time to look at the little ones. They ain’t
worried about them. They want to gobble up all they can so we need to make sure that this is done
right, it’s done fairly. I think that’s where your position comes in but if we need to change
something I’d like to hear from the Legal Department that something needs to be changed.
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I’d be happy to speak to that. This is an unusual instance whereby
the department initially anticipated that the contracts would come in over the $100,000-dollar
threshold. Goals were set with that anticipation however when the bids came back it was obvious
that none of them exceeded the $100,000-dollar threshold. However, as indicated by the
Compliance Director the goal had been set and the requirements were uniform for all of the people
responding to that procurement. And so there was it appears not sufficient good faith efforts made
to meet the 7% goal requirement. Now at this point it could be rebid and obviously now that we
know it’s probably not going to exceed the $100,000-dollar threshold it could be rebid as a contract
that probably wouldn’t have that. There is a good faith effort even on contracts under $100,000
dollars for the vendors to still include local small businesses even it’s not a set goal in the
procurement so that piece is there.
14
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think all’s been said is good but we can’t in my view
we can’t take the Compliance Department and tell them to set goals after a bid has come in. Maybe
the simple thing to do on these bids, it was our estimated to be $100,000 dollars and it came in
much lower we simply, I think it would be just most effective and simple if you raise that threshold
level. I think in policy discussion that should be what we should look at is raising the threshold
level and therefore we won’t be seeing bids that are small like this but we have that particular point
there. And Ms. Irving had, as a matter of fact Commissioner Jefferson and myself attended a
workshop where Ms. Irving had reached out to us various Commissioners to come in and have a
workshop. So we were fortunate enough to have a workshop with her what yesterday the day
before, yesterday. So, I think really the key for us to do is simply look at raising that threshold
level. And if you don’t mind, Mr. Mayor, I would like to ask Ms. Irving a question.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, I don’t mind at all. Let me ask you do this while you have the
microphone if you’ll give me a motion to approve this as well.
Mr. Sias: So moved.
Mr. Jefferson: Second.
Mr. Sias: Ms. Irving, in consideration of your workshop as you were reaching out to
Commissioners and the Mayor I suggested you do probably a large workshop. Once you give a
lot of thought between you and the General Counsel about raising that threshold level to either
$150,000 or $200,000 and what effect do you think that will have. Will it be negative, positive or
in respect to the small business and also in respect to the management of the program? Thank you,
Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a motion and a second. Voting. It’s a motion to approve.
Mr. Frantom and Mr. Guilfoyle vote No.
Motion Passes 8-2.
Mr. Mayor: Thank you, thank you, Ms. Irving.
The Clerk:
PUBLIC SERVICES
25. Motion to approve or reject the offer that the Coliseum Authority sent to the Augusta
Commission from Cardinal Management to build a new civic center at the old Regency Mall
property. (Requested by Commissioner Sammie Sias.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4.
15
Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This has been a very, I won’t say tough but continuous
issue as this process has been in motion. There are several things that concern me about this
process itself. First off from the time that this discussion about the arena location it’s my belief
that the Cyber Center will be built and that is a tragedy if we as a government can’t get together
and get that done. I put this on the agenda so as I did in the previous times for us to move forward
with this and make some decisions on this. So, at this present time in looking at all the dynamics
of the deal, and I expressed this to folks that listened, folks that had opinions toward what we
thought or what they thought I thought. And one thing I did not I stayed out of the media. This
was not about showcasing, this was not about grandstanding. This was about what is best for
Augusta. And we’re continuing to looking forward to development in South Augusta. And I don’t
have any political fears about doing the right thing, I don’t have an issue with that. And I also
don’t have an issue with anybody thinking they can just direct me whether it’s through the media
or whether it’s in person or whether it’s through innuendo and threats. I don’t yield to that. So,
anything that I say and do in this body is for the benefit of this city and I make that my stand as to
why I’m here. Number one, this deal that’s presently on the table is not a good deal. It’s not a
good deal for the City of Augusta. I was very excited about the opportunity about something
coming into South Augusta. I represent Augusta and I live in South Augusta and I’m a proud
Augustan therefore I move that we reject this offer because it’s unacceptable for what is being
allocated for this city and the requirement of what this city has to do. That’s my motion.
Mr. Hasan: Second.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I make a substitute motion to approve this location at
Regency Mall to build something that we can sit down and negotiate a contract for but I want to
approve this location.
Mr. Jefferson: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, the substitute motion is to approve the location, reject the deal.
All right, a substitute motion to accept the Regency location and to reject and continue negotiations
with the mall owner. All right ---
Mr. D. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I have a question.
Mr. Mayor: --- yes, sir.
Mr. D. Williams: Who will be responsible for the negotiations?
Mr. Mayor: Well, I think if we did that we could establish a subcommittee if that be the
posture of this body. That would include you as well if you’d like to be a part of that.
Mr. D. Williams: I want to know for team purposes.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, well, the Mayor would appoint a team of the Attorney, the
nd
Commissioner from the 2 ---
16
Mr. Hasan: No, sir, Mr. Mayor, I object to that.
th
Mr. Mayor: --- the Commissioner from the 5.
Mr. Hasan: I object to that, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Well, so let’s do this right here. Here’s where we are, here’s where we are.
nd
Again, we can establish a subcommittee if that’s the posture that the Commissioner from the 2
nd
wants to take. We certainly can do that and I’m open to that. Again, I mentioned the 2 because
th
he lives there since you brought it up and the 5 since you live there, and it certainly can be anyone
else for that matter. But I think the Attorney would certainly need to be a part of that discussion.
st
All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, I think it would be appropriate for maybe the Chairman and Vice-
Chair of the Coliseum Authority to also be a part of that discussion.
Mr. Mayor: Sure, that’s certainly appropriate. I don’t have a problem with that. I think
that’d be quite appropriate. I don’t think they’d have a problem with that either.
Mr. M. Williams: Approve the location, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so we’ve got a substitute motion and a second. All right, I’m coming
back down to you all right with recommendations ---
Mr. Hasan: Call for the motion, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: --- just recommendations for the subcommittee okay? All right, we’ve got the
th
Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In reference to the substitute motion and what my
nd
colleague from the 2 asked I think there should be several things in that substitute motion. It
should be a timeframe ---
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Sias: --- it should be that who will be on this committee and that should be names
posted out in this resolution if it moves forward with that and it should also I think in looking at
this it also should include how we are going to, what the funding process is going to be. And rather
that be a referendum or whether it’s going to inside URA. So basically let me just restate that.
Mr. Mayor: Sure.
Mr. Sias: The substitute motion should include a timeframe, it should by name who
is going to be on this committee and should include a funding process. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right, Attorney MacKenzie are you tracking?
17
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: All right, fantastic. All right okay the Chair recognizes the Commissioner
st
from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, would the funding source be any difference if it was at the
Regency Mall location or on Sand Bar Ferry Road?
Mr. Mayor: No, sir, I think you’ve got two options. You know it wouldn’t be any different
whether it was uptown, downtown, east town side, southside it makes no difference. I mean there
are two options that you have available to us. I think we all fully understand that that you’ve got
options in terms of how you fund this you absolutely do, I think that’s appropriate. All right so,
Attorney MacKenzie, would you restate the substitute with those elements in it that the
th
Commissioner from the 4 has indicated.
Mr. MacKenzie: Your Clerk might be the best person to do that ---
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. MacKenzie: --- I can attempt to do that. It would be a substitute motion to approve
the ---
The Clerk: Let me say he recommended that the motion that was given by Mr. Williams
and Mr. Jefferson was to approve the location and reject the, and continue the negotiation and
reject the deal and continue the negotiation. Commissioner Sias recommended that that be
included, amended to the motion. Now I didn’t hear that action being considered by the
Commission.
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner, I think that’s certainly appropriate.
Mr. Guilfoyle: I think the motion should stand (inaudible).
Mr. M. Williams: I think the motion should stand on itself too, Mr. Guilfoyle, but the
motion was to ---
The Clerk: Approve the location ---
Mr. M. Williams: --- approve the location and ---
The Clerk: --- and reject the deal and continue the negotiations.
Mr. M. Williams: --- and continue the negotiations.
Mr. M. Williams: We can decide who’s going to negotiate. I mean I don’t understand why
this has got to be all inclusive when we need to first of all get the location out of the way. The
18
Coliseum Authority done decided on it. I think we need to decide on it then we’ll work on the rest
of it. It’s buying a car, Jimmy. You don’t go buy the first car on the lot, you negotiate. Sometimes
you don’t even buy from that lot but you negotiate and that’s what negotiating is and that’s
something this body ain’t learned how to do yet. So if we can negotiate we’ll come up with who
needs to be there, who’s going serve and not but let’s go ahead and vote on this motion, Mr. Mayor,
and get that done and then we’ll set a body up. And everybody can help, I don’t need to be on
that. I ain’t worried about that. You can meet all you want to.
Mr. Mayor: All right so, Commissioner, the Chairman of Administrative Services, let me
th
offer the following then. I think that what the Commissioner from the 4 has indicated it’s
certainly appropriate. I understand your reservations about that but I do think it’s appropriate and
it adds a level of certainty when you talk about the ability to negotiate in kind of moving forward.
What I would ask you to do is consider that in amending your substitute motion.
Mr. M. Williams: I amend my substitute motion to include the ---
The Clerk: Timeline, the names of the subcommittee and to identify a funding source.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, Commissioner from the 4 a period of 45 days. We’re in the
holidays so ---
Mr. Sias: 45 calendar days.
th
Mr. Mayor: --- yeah. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 5 and
rd
then I’m coming back to the Commissioner from the 3.
Mr. Jefferson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Commissioner Williams took the words right out
of my mouth. I was going to, I had my hand raised to make the same identical motion because
what we have is two issues: one issue is the location, the second issue is the deal. And I have no
problem putting a timeframe on it so it won’t rock on forever. If that would secure support from
my colleagues, I would be willing to embrace a timeframe so that we would know exactly from
the very beginning what our parameters are. And but most of all I just wanted to get the point on
the floor that we have two issues and to deal with that accordingly. Thank you.
rd
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 3.
Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, just a comment. I know that this there’s been so much
emotion and passion within the conversation about this entire community since this first process
began and so I just wanted to as the whole community’s looking to see where we’re going to move
today. And I know we’ve gone back to the table not we as the Commission but negotiations have.
Personally, I don’t have faith that the negotiations will move in a positive way for the city as it
pertains to the arena. That’s my personal opinion from what I’ve seen and heard and read. So I
just want us to as we take this vote take the emotion out of it and make sure that we’re voting
because we really think this is what’s best for the city to look at that area for the arena specifically.
I think the good thing out of all of this the discussions have opened back up for Regency Mall.
We all want something to be developed in a positive fashion there. Personally, I just don’t believe
19
that that’s taken the arena from one place and putting it in that location. So I just want us as we
take this vote again remembers we’re saying that this is really where we want to see the arena in
the future. Let’s take the emotion out of it though when we take this vote please. Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, so all right so we’re going to add those elements that the
th
Commissioner from the 4 has indicated and then we’ll get a committee or conference to work on
this if this vote moves forward and get back within 45 days. Okay, I think that’s appropriate it
makes sense okay. All right, I think I heard the Commissioner, okay all right, we’re going to just
vote straight up and down. We’ve got a substitute motion with a proper second. We’re voting, all
right, voting.
Mr. Sias: Can we get that motion, that substitute motion, read for the record?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, you sure can, Attorney Mackenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I’d be happy to try to do that. The substitute motion would be to
approve the location, reject the deal on the table and continue negotiations within a 45-day
timeframe and in that timeframe to set a subcommittee and funding source, identify ---
Mr. M. Williams: 45 calendar days.
Mr. MacKenzie: 45 calendar days, that’s correct.
Mr. Mayor: All right, voting.
Mr. Fennoy, Mr. Sias, Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Hasan and Mr. M. Williams vote Yes.
Mr. D. Williams, Ms. Davis, Mr. Frantom, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. G. Smith vote No.
Motion ties 5-5.
Mr. Hasan: It’s on you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Do I get a shot at it, Ms. Bonner?
The Clerk: Yes sir, give it your best shot.
The Mayor votes Yes.
Motion carries 6-5.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve still got a lot of business in front of us. All right, Madam Clerk, Item
number 26.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
20
26. Motion to approve the following individuals to serve ad-hoc Monitoring/Oversight
Committee for the Commercial and Retail Project established with the Augusta Economic
Development Authority. This oversight and monitoring shall include employee hiring, firing,
compensation, strategic direction, and evaluation. This committee shall serve as the
Commission’s ability to directly input the needs of the Augusta constituency.
Monitoring/oversight described herein is reserved for the Project only and is not intended to
be interpreted as applying to the Development Authority normal operations. Effective day
of appointment is January 1, 2018. The term of each member shall be three years unless
reappointed, extended or removed.
Mayor Pro Tem Mary Davis
Commissioner Ben Hasan
Commissioner Sammie Sias
The Mayor shall serve as an ex-officio member of this ad-hoc committee. (Requested by
Commissioner Sammie Sias)
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is a combination of what we’ve been working on
for two and a half, I’m sorry, since 2008. And basically what we have before us now is a committee
that will be serving in conjunction with the Development Authority to bring input from the
Commission, the citizens as to what is needed in our underserved areas such as South Augusta,
East Augusta, areas on Dyess Parkway and all these areas that are underserved. And this group
their mission is to bring that information and coordinate with the Development Authority as to we
get these areas served. So with that being said move to approve.
Mr. Mayor: Ms. Bonner, I’m going to come back to you, Commissioner, who is the
commission appointee to the Economic Authority, the commission appointee.
The Clerk: There’s not an ex-officio member ---
Mr. Mayor: There’s not?
The Clerk: --- on the Augusta Economic Development, well it’s the Development
Authority of Richmond County doing business as August Economic Development Authority
there’s not an ex-officio member from the Commission on that Authority.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. Hasan: Is there a place for it?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, that’s what I was wondering. Is there a place for it?
21
The Clerk: The state law allows the governing authority to appoint up to nine members.
It does not state that an ex-officio member can be appointed. That may be something that Legal
Counsel can research for you but it’s not in the existing legislation.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right that’s what I was curious about. All right, the Chair recognizes
thst
the Commissioner from the 9 and then I’m going to the 1.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First of all my question is who come up with
these names to serve? The Mayor is an ex-officio member of every committee anyway. I mean
that’s by election. I mean, Ms. Bonner, and the Clerk, the Attorney may have to get me straight
on that one but from my understanding being here you’re already or he or she or whoever the
Mayor is an ex-officio member. But Commissioner Hasan and Commissioner Sias’ name and the
Mayor Pro Tem name so who decided to have those names? Now I don’t know whether I want to
serve. I’m tired of serving, Mr. Mayor, but it looked like at least somebody would have considered
asking somebody else before they put their names down. So, I take issue with that but can
somebody tell me who made that decision?
th
Mr. Mayor: I’m going to defer to the Commissioner from the 4 but I think what you have
in front of you is a recommendation. These are recommendations. I think it’s still well within this
body as it is, that’s the term I keep hearing the body can decide who those individuals are I think
he brought forward a series of recommendations.
Mr. M. Williams: But, Mr. Mayor, if I could respond ---
Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir.
Mr. M. Williams: --- if you’ve got a recommendation then it should be voted up or down
one by one. Now I don’t know how many twins in here and I don’t know how many folks who
think they’re twins but if you’ve got a recommendation it ought to be brought and let the body
decide yea or nay. Now I don’t want nobody to talk to me about the process that’s what bothers
me is the process.
Mr. Mayor: I understand.
Mr. M. Williams: When if you do it then let’s do it right. Let’s don’t, we’re being watched
closely.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, I’m going to the Commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. As we have meetings on this whole process here there
was always an item in there about this committee to be in our MOU. Now if I’m not mistaken, if
I’m not mistaken, we talk about procedures and we’re being watched. When we left out of that
committee, I was still the Chair of the committee and I simply made a recommendation. Did I
stick something down anybody’s throat? No. I made a recommendation. It’s a simple as that.
Thank you.
22
Mr. Mayor: Well, when I echoed that, Commissioner, that this was a recommendation.
st
The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, when this when this agency was first suggested or brought to the
table it was brought to the table as something that’s going to primarily benefit South Augusta. But
then I ride through District 1 and I ride through District 2 and I see some of the, two of the most
undeveloped districts not only in the City of Augusta but in the State of Georgia. I have real
serious problems when the two people, two of the three people that’s recommended represent
South Augusta. I have problems with a three-year term being recommended. I think that if
anything it should be a four-year term and it should be staggered. You know you have you know
you have some people that’s going to serve a two-year term but they come off and then people that
have a four-year term and when the two-year people come off you have another new representation
on this. But to exclude representation from District 1, District 2 and the Super District
Commissioner that represents these two districts would be a miscarriage of justice for lack of a
better term.
Mr. Mayor: All right, duly noted.
Mr. Fennoy: And, Mr. Mayor, I would like to make, refer this back to committee so
that we could have some real discussion about this and how many people should be on it or
the whole nine yards.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, can I speak?
Mr. Mayor: Okay, hold on one second. All right so, Commissioner Fennoy, do you yield?
Mr. Fennoy: Yes, I’m through.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right I’m going to here then I’ll come back and I want to hear from
th
the Commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, the way it’s currently structured you can have three from the
Commission and three from the Coliseum, I mean I’m sorry the Economic Development Authority
can have three and three. But I would like you know for sake of you trying to get this done I
withdraw my name and somebody whoever the body feels can add their name to this to get it done.
I’d like to withdraw my name and put a name in there that the body can agree upon so they can go
ahead and move forward with this. This is too important for it to get politicized and go ahead and
do it we made a heavy lifting just a few minutes ago let’s go ahead and make a decision about this,
I withdraw my name, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: All right thank you, we’ll come back to that in just a moment. The Chair
th
recognizes the Commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, this does need to go back to the committee for discussion
because of this oversite of monitoring shall include a hiring and firing, compensations, strategic
direction, evaluation. That’s the reason why we have a board in place. We don’t need another
23
board on top of that board. It’s governmental red tape. I think it should be sent back to committee.
I think my colleague made a motion and did he get a second, I second it.
Mr. Hasan: Well, let that motion be to take my name off of it to be included in the motion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right I think that okay, I’m going to give you that opportunity. All
right, so we’ve got a motion and a second to refer it back to committee. That’ll give you the
opportunity to make some other changes to it if that be the will of the body. All right, the Chair
th
recognizes the Commissioner from the 4.
th
Mr. Sias: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to address this to my colleague from the 8. This has
already been approved. You can’t, as far as the duties of this ad-hoc committee has already been
approved by this body so we can drag our feet, we’ve been working on this since 2008 formerly
and we can keep on dragging. But I can tell you this. Drag it on. I’m not withdrawing my motion.
Commissioner Hasan said he wanted to withdraw his name. There’s not a replacement. That’s
fine but I’m not withdrawing my motion. We need to get this done.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right so we’ll do it this way. We’ve got a motion and a second to
refer it to committee. Let’s vote on that first and then we’ll see where we end up at. Voting.
Mr. D. Williams, Mr. Sias and Mr. Hasan vote No.
Motion Passes 7-3.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right Item ---
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
27. Update from Fleet Services Subcommittee. (Requested by Commissioner Marion
Williams)
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Hasan gave me a briefing already.
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. M. Williams: I’ll let that stand. I know where he’s coming from and I don’t need
anymore.
Mr. Mayor: All right, very good.
Mr. Sias: What was the tally on the previous vote?
Mr. Mayor: 7-3.
24
Mr. Sias: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk?
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
28. Motion to approve the Personnel, Policy & Procedure Manual (PPPM) (Requested by
Commissioner Marion Williams)
Mr. Mayor: The Fleet item, Commissioner, was already addressed.
The Clerk: You were out, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Yes, that’s right. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the
th
9.
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I added this to the agenda to go ahead and approve the
PPPM. We just approved the contract without following up with the subcommittee. I feel like
we’re at a pass now where we need to go ahead and approve what we’ve got or disapprove it and
get back to work on it. But I put it on the agenda to approve and that’s my motion.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, that motion fails without a proper second.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
29. Motion to adopt Resolution of Appreciation. (Requested by Commissioners Sammie Sias
and Ben Hasan)
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6. Commissioner?
Mr. Hasan: I’m sorry well, Mr. Mayor, okay all right I apologize. I didn’t expect to speak
on this. Well, Mr. Mayor, as you realize that last ---
Mr. Sias: (Unintelligible).
Mr. Hasan: --- oh okay, my bad. Mr. Mayor, did you want me to speak?
Mr. Mayor: I was messing with you.
Mr. Hasan: Okay well ---
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4.
25
Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor I guess you’re feeling pretty good today. All right so,
Mr. Mayor, this is a Resolution of Support for Governor Deal. And but first I want to say
Commissioner Hasan brought this idea forth and he approached me with it and asked me to do part
of the leg work and he did the other part of the leg work called and talking to our colleagues talking
to yourself about this. And basically we want to thank the Governor, we feel it’s appropriate that
we thank the Governor and his team for what they’ve done in Augusta, Georgia with bringing
Cyber here the folks there that is now a total of $105 million-dollar investment that we have in the
Cyber community and that’s going to set Augusta forward. And we had that Resolution and I
would love to hear with your consent, Mr. Mayor, to have our Clerk read that Resolution.
The Clerk: I’ll read it into the record. City of Augusta a Resolution of Appreciation
Governor Nathan Deal State of Georgia. Whereas your visionary leadership and wisdom is truly
on display in our City of Augusta, Georgia. Your creation of the Hull McKnight Georgia Cyber
Innovation and Training Center will make Georgia and the City of Augusta the cyber hub of the
Southeast. With the Cyber Community Building off of your vision and foresight we expect
Georgia and Augusta to challenge for the Cyber Capital of the United States of America very soon.
And whereas you made the future of cyber dominance in Georgia Augusta even more possible by
your recent announcement of a $35 million-dollar expansion of the Training Center. This new
expansion adds to the present $58 million-dollar investment of the Cyber Innovation and Training
Center. And whereas this project now represents a capital investment of $105 million-dollars
which includes Augusta’s $12 million for the parking deck. We are truly humbled, very proud
and extremely appreciative that you and your team had the confidence in Augusta to pursue this
dynamic and future cyber game changer in our city. Now therefore it be resolved that the Augusta-
Richmond County Commission does hereby express its thanks again to you for your wisdom and
vision in giving our city this fantastic opportunity to step up to the plate in support of a great cyber
concept for the State of Georgia, the City of Augusta and the United States. And be it further
resolved that the Resolution of Appreciation be spread upon the official minutes of the Augusta-
th
Richmond County Commission and a copy thereof given to Governor Deal. This 5 Day of
December 2017.
Mr. Sias: Mr. Mayor, if I’m still on from requesting the Clerk to read it I move that
we approve it.
Mr. Hasan: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay all right okay, I’ve got a motion and a second. Voting.
Motion Passes 10-0.
The Clerk: And a little direction, I’m going to circulate two copies of this and we’ll have
a copy circulated from that end and then you’ll bring it back forward (inaudible).
Mr. Mayor: Item number 30. Again it’s been read and certainly entered into our record
but I think Augusta has been the beneficiary of the state’s willingness to take a step forward. We
have a number of innovation centers across the State of Georgia and for Augusta to be stood up as
the Innovation and Technology Center for the State of Georgia positions us in a very significant
26
place as a community. And so this resolution is proper. I’d like for it look for it being transmitted
immediately to the Governor’s Office so that he knows full well that we appreciate his commitment
and willingness to the City of Augusta and to where we are. Thank you, Commissioners, for
putting this together. I appreciate that. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the
st
1.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, once we have the Resolution signed who’s going to give it to the
---
Mr. Mayor: We’ll transmit it to the Governor’s Office.
The Clerk:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
30. Update/status report from the General Counsel regarding pay differentials between staff
attorneys assigned to certain city departments and related documents requested by the
commission. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams)
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I asked for this to be put on the agenda to try to
get some clarity to what is being talked about. And I don’t know what’s really taking place with
the Attorney hiring or placing different attorneys in different positions. I thought we had a Law
Department who handled the law in whatever facet. I guess my question to Andrew is has this
been officially done already and approved by this body I guess is my first question.
Mr. MacKenzie: When you say this are you referring to the departments that have attorneys
that perform primary duties for just a single department?
Mr. M. Williams: Right.
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, there’s one of our attorneys who works for the Utilities Department
and then one of our attorneys is now working with the Fire Department. And there’s a transition
process in place for the attorney that’s going to be working with the Fire Department so they’re
not working solely on the Fire Department at this time, but there’s a transition process.
Mr. M. Williams: When you say transition, what are you saying?
Mr. MacKenzie: There’s a period of time of approximately 90 days where that person will
be transitioning so that they’ll be providing primary duties for just the Fire Department because
they’re paying for the salary for that position.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay and their location they’ll be housed I guessed to do work in the
Law Department or in the Fire Department.
27
Mr. MacKenzie: They’ll probably be spending some time in both departments primarily
the location will be in the department where they’re working.
Mr. M. Williams: That doesn’t answer my question. My question is will they be located
in the Law Department Office or will they be located in the Fire Department unit somewhere
wherever the Fire Department may choose to place them. I’m trying to establish whether or not
they’re actually working for and from what you just said they are so I’m trying to find out where
they’re going to be housed at.
Mr. MacKenzie: Let me answer it this way. They will report to the Law Department.
They are Law Department employees but the physical location where most of the work is
performed is within the departments that they’re doing the work for.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, can I ask a question?
Mr. M. Williams: Go ahead while I sign this I’ve got a couple more questions, Mr. Mayor,
so I want to reserve the right to come back but let Mr. Hasan go ahead.
st
Mr. Mayor: All right, I’m going to go to the Commissioner from the 1 and then I’ll come
to you okay?
Mr. Fennoy: Andrew ---
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: --- you mentioned that we had an attorney that’s working for the Utilities
Department and her primary responsibility will be towards the Utilities Department?
Mr. MacKenzie: That’s correct.
Mr. Fennoy: And she will be paid out of the Utility Department’s budget?
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, that’s already in place, yes.
Mr. Fennoy: Now will you replace that employee?
Mr. MacKenzie: I’ve already replaced that employee.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay and as you mentioned the Fire Department getting you will replace that
person also?
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, that’s correct, yes.
Mr. Fennoy: So as attorneys that are presently working in the Law Department, if they go
to a different department once that’s been done then you will hire somebody to replace them?
28
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, that is correct.
Mr. Fennoy: All right, thank you.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. MacKenzie, you did mention about a transition
period. What does that mean?
Mr. MacKenzie: Any time we have an employee you know that’s performing services for
say several different departments and they’re going to be moving to a different location where
they’re not going to be working for those departments to increase the efficiency of transitioning
that work to different attorneys, we have a period of time where they don’t just one day drop
everything and say okay I don’t do that anymore. We have a transition period so that there can be
a seamless transition of the work load to the other attorneys that will be performing the work if
there’s a change in duties that associated with working for one department versus working for
several departments.
Mr. Hasan: So you’re saying Ms. Smitherman, let’s talk specific to the Fire Department
so you’re saying she would not sever her ties with the Law Department she would still be, she still
would work for you technically but even though she’s doing the work she’s in the ---
Mr. MacKenzie: That’s correct.
Mr. Hasan: --- is that how you understand it, Ms. Jackson?
Ms. Jackson: That’s correct.
Mr. Hasan: So it would be the same relationship in terms of Utilities and the same
relationship in terms of that ---
Mr. MacKenzie: That’s correct.
Mr. Hasan: --- but will be tied to the Law Department still.
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes.
Mr. Hasan: Okay.
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I got off a little bit but I need to get back to the
salary difference. And I understand Ms. Irving, Kelly Irving has requested an attorney for her
department which I very much think she needs one. So how does the department go about getting
an attorney because it looks like we’ve fixing to hire a bunch of them. I mean if I was a department
head and I needed an attorney if your budget can assume or approve how does this work because
29
I don’t remember the Commission approving any of this and I’m hearing that you said you already
rehired people in their spot already. I guess we didn’t approve. I’m hoping we didn’t approve that
so we’re really adding, we’re building the Law Department without knowing we’re building it.
So, Ms. Irving in her expertise needed an attorney. How does that work?
Mr. MacKenzie: So, to answer your question the process is if a department feels they have
a higher need for legal services than what’s currently being provided then they make a request.
First, they need the budgeting resources to do that and the Law Department don’t have sufficient
budgeting resources to do that so they could come to the Commission to request an increase in
their budget line item for their salary item to be able to get enough money if they don’t already
have enough. If they do already have enough, then they would approach myself as the Director
for the Law Department as well as the Administrator and they would submit a plan to justify why
they feel that they need to have a higher level of legal services and then there’s a, document’s put
together that’s in agreement that outlines the duties and responsibilities of what they’re going to
be doing within that department. And the Administrator reviews that, we look at it and make a
determination as to whether or not there’s a need to have that higher level of services for that
department and whether or not there’s sufficient funding to do that.
Mr. M. Williams: So I guess I need to direct my question to the Administrator because
Purchasing who requested an attorney who wasn’t granted that who had the budget who had the
funds to pay but they were not allowed to do that. So, I’m trying to figure out the difference
because you know when you talk about fairness and we talk about keeping everything across the
board but Purchasing who requested, what was his name Ken was the guy who just ---
Ms. Jackson: Bray?
Mr. M. Williams: --- Kenneth Bray who was in line and who had went through the process
to do that. Ms. Jackson, can you help me out because the lawyer done got me all off track here
now. How does that not happen when they had the budget, they had the request, they had the
needs but that didn’t happen?
Ms. Jackson: I can speak to that request, I think it’s a little bit different. As I recall in that
situation his services were not being requested specifically as an attorney but as a manager within
that department. They had a manager position available but that manager position’s salary was
not enough to make it worthwhile for Mr. Bray to come over there and therefore the conversation
ended at that point.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, I don’t see anybody here from Purchasing who can address that
because that’s not my understanding. I’m not saying that’s not true. I’m just saying that’s not what
I understand so I would love to have somebody from Purchasing to help me clarify that. The other
question I’ve got, Mr. Mayor, is the salaries. Now Mr. Andrew gave me a copy not a copy but
gave me a piece of paper with some of the salary zones. The Utilities Department has got a lot
more legal services that’s needed than the Fire Department but the pay is different. Why is that?
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, there’s a difference in pay if there’s a different position. For
example we have a Deputy General Counsel position and we have a Senior Staff Attorney position
30
and then we have Staff Attorney positions. The salary differentials are different for different
positions so if a department has a Senior Staff Attorney position then the salary range and grade
for that position is different than for Staff Attorney positions.
Mr. M. Williams: But when you move folks now and you’re moving people when you
move folks you leave that other there. You leave the staff and the senior staff. You’re going into
an attorney position. You ain’t senior staff no more, you ain’t junior staff. You’re leaving that
department going into a different and both of them going in to the same field doing the same type
work and one even doing more work making less pay so my question is how can that be?
Mr. MacKenzie: Well, I would respectfully disagree with the characterization of the way
that process works. If a position is funded by the department that’s taking on the new responsibility
of paying for that position, then the part of the justification in the request that they make is what
kind of attorney they’re requesting they need, which position. In this instance the Fire Department
requested a Senior Staff Attorney position which they’re willing to pay for and so they’re getting
a different position than just the Staff Attorney position. And the mere transition from the pay
being paid under the Law Department budget versus working for the Fire Department doesn’t
affect the pay of the position. The position’s just being paid for by a different department. It also
doesn’t affect the level of responsibility for that position either. The person if they have a Senior
Staff Attorney position fully doing the duties, responsibilities and functions of a Senior Staff
Attorney position they’re not, they’re duties aren’t reduced as a result of that. They’re just
performing those functions for one department versus working within the Law Department where
they may be supporting more than one department.
Mr. M. Williams: It boils down to requests, it boils down to whether you’ve got the
resources, whether you’ve got the budget like Utilities does have the budget and the person is
working at the request senior status or not senior status in order to get the pay. I’m trying to
prevent and you mentioned something last week there wasn’t no lawsuit filed and I’m trying to
prevent a lawsuit being filed by being fair with people doing the same work in different areas. I
mean we had that happen in this government before where we had people doing work and ended
up getting into a lawsuit situation so I’m trying to make sure that that doesn’t happen.
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure and I have some idea. I had an opportunity to speak with the
Director for the Utilities Department and I think one of the issues that’s made this difficult for us
to keep uniform with salaries, and it’s probably not unique to the Law Department but we have
more SES employees in the Law Department than probably any other department is the fact that
there’s not been a consistent COLA allocated over the number of years. And the sheet of paper
that I showed you the last column that’s highlighted in green shows if there was a 3% COLA for
each employee added per year since the date of hire of that employee it shows what their salaries
would be. And if you’ve been here a number of years and the government doesn’t consistently
provide cost of living increases then what happens is we hire a new position in and the rest of the
market keeps going up as the cost of living goes up so we have to kind of recruit what the market
bears and then we have that person come in at that salary but somebody who’s been here the whole
time it can create some anomalies with respect to the pay structure because they haven’t even really
been kept level when you compare that to the market rate.
31
Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Andrew, I’m going to cut you off there but I agree with you what
you just said. That’s why going to these departments and getting out of the Law Department,
going to another department doing work for them we need to streamline. There’s no reason for
one employee to make $25 to $30,000 dollars more than another one doing the same job. That
just don’t make sense. And if you were in the Law Department and you said there was no increases
not the 2% or anything else had been given now they’re going to a department which has the funds
and one making $25 to $30,000 dollars more than the other one doing more work to me is going
to create a lawsuit for this government. But, Mr. Mayor, that’s the point I wanted to bring out.
That’s the point I wanted to make.
Mr. MacKenzie: If I can just quickly respond, I did brainstorm with Mr. Wiedmeier about
a potential solution to help with this anomaly and I think we could use some of the career ladder
provisions within our existing code and we can bring a proposal back to the Commission that
would include possibly utilizing career ladders which would allow for a long-term employee to
get back where they should be since they weren’t getting the COLAs they weren’t given to
anybody during that time.
Mr. M. Williams: That’s an enterprise, Mr. Andrew. Since that’s an enterprise they’re
totally different, they’re autonomous. They’re all bodies themselves. They have the funds. They
have the funds to do that and if that transition’s going to happen I would suggest that everybody
be made level, made whole and be done accordingly because you can’t use the same scenario when
they’re in an enterprise because their money is there. There are other people that should be paid
there that’s not being paid as well for whatever reason but when you’re making this transition I’m
going to follow this up to make sure that is done. I plan to have a talk with Mr. Wiedmeier as well
to make sure that this doesn’t fall through the cracks like a lot of stuff do. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ll just receive that as information. Madam Clerk, Item number
31, our last item on the agenda.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, I have a ---
Mr. Mayor: Item number 31.
The Clerk:
FINANCE
31. Motion to approve Annual Leave Buy Back in the Amount of 24 Hours to be paid on the
January 5, 2018 pay check.
Mr. Mayor: All right, Madam Administrator.
Mr. Hasan: Motion to approve.
Ms. Jackson: Yes, just briefly this is a popular program with our employees we haven’t
done it a couple of years. Our Directors did ask if we could implement it this year. I asked the
32
Finance Department to check to see if we had appropriate resources within our budget this year to
be able to do it and the answer is yes so we added it to the agenda.
Mr. Mayor: All we have a motion. Do we have a motion?
Mr. Hasan: So moved.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Second.
Ms. Davis: I was just going to ask to pull it for a couple of questions.
The Clerk: Is that Mr. Hasan and Mr. Guilfoyle?
Mr. Mayor: All right, so the Mayor Pro Tem has a few questions.
Ms. Davis: Yes, Madam Administrator, I just wanted to make sure. So this is something
we do annually with our employees?
Ms. Jackson: We have not done it every single year. We did not do it last year. I think we
did it the year prior.
Ms. Davis: So is it basically just depending on budget as part of what’s available per
department?
Ms. Jackson: It really does depend upon budget normally dictated by what’s available in
the General Fund. We felt comfortable that the General Fund had enough resources in our
Enterprise Funds too as well so we brought it up.
Ms. Davis: So employees are aware though that this is just not a typical offering and that
they know it’s on a case by case ---
Ms. Jackson: Year by year ---
Ms. Davis: --- year by year.
Ms. Jackson: --- year by year basis, that’s correct.
Ms. Davis: All right, thank you, Madam Administrator. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a vote, we’ve got a motion and a second. Voting.
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to reconsider Item 25. I’d like to make a motion,
reconsideration.
Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion on the floor. We’re taking action on something. You’re
out of order.
33
Mr. Frantom: We had our hands up.
Mr. Mayor: We’re voting on a matter that’s before us right now.
Mr. Fennoy out.
Motion Passes 9-0.
Mr. Hasan: Motion to reconsider Item number 25, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Mr. Mayor: This meeting is adjourned.
Mr. Frantom: You’re going to do that ---
Mr. Hasan: We’ve got the Mayor Pro Tem ---
Mr. Frantom: I’ve had my hand up ---
Mr. Hasan: We’ve got the Mayor Pro Tem ---
Mr. Frantom: --- the citizens deserve better.
Mr. Hasan: I’d like to make a motion to reconsider Item number 25.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Mr. Mayor: There’s no additional business before us, this meeting is adjourned.
Mr. Frantom: Mr. Mayor, you can’t conduct this meeting if you’re leaving now
(unintelligible).
Mr. Frantom: You can stay here. We had our hand up before the meeting was even over.
I mean you’re, the citizens deserve better. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem, I guess we can stay here the ones
that want to do the right thing.
Mr. Hasan: Madam Mayor Pro Tem, I’d like to make a motion to reconsider Item number
25.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Mr. MacKenzie, can you give us a ruling?
34
Mr. MacKenzie: If there’s not unanimous consent to approve the adjournment then there
is the ability to overrule the Chair if you’d like to do it by majority vote.
Ms. Davis: Say that again, Mr. MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: If there’s not a unanimous consent to adjourn then you can overrule the
ruling of the Chair by a majority vote.
Ms. Davis: Okay, so.
Mr. Hasan: Motion to continue doing the business of the people. Is that an appropriate
motion?
Mr. MacKenzie: I would suggest that you do a motion to overrule the ruling of the Chair
to adjourn the meeting.
Mr. Hasan: I make a motion to overrule the Chair to adjourn the meeting.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Ms. Davis: Okay, we have a motion and a second, please vote.
Mr. Mayor: Attorney MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: Suspend.
Mr. Speaker: Attorney MacKenzie (inaudible).
Mr. Mayor: That may be true but there’s one Chair, all right, everybody suspend. All
right, I need you to, I want you to resay that.
Mr. MacKenzie: The motion pending is to overrule the Chair’s Recognition of
Adjournment.
Mr. Mayor: All right, that’s what you’re voting on. All right continue, voting.
Mr. Fennoy and Mr. M. Williams out.
Mr. Jefferson votes No.
Motion Passes 7-1.
Mr. Hasan: I’d like to make a motion, Mr. Mayor, to reconsider Item number 25.
Mr. Frantom: Second. Can you explain why?
35
Mr. Hasan: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I’d like to explain because I did not realize until about fifteen
minutes ago that I actually voted to for that motion I did not support it and I’m voting yes.
Mr. Frantom: Say that again.
Mr. Hasan: I meant to vote no on the substitute motion so I’d like to make a motion to
reconsider Item number 25. That’s an appropriate motion, Mr. Chair, I mean Mr. Attorney?
Mr. Mayor: Yes, okay. Okay, so it doesn’t really matter why you want to do it ---
Mr. Hasan: No, it doesn’t.
Mr. Mayor: --- the question before us is whether or not this body wants to reconsider the
action ---
Mr. Hasan: Exactly, exactly.
Mr. Mayor: --- Item number 25 ---
Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir ---
Mr. Mayor: --- is before us ---
Mr. Hasan: --- exactly right, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: --- that’s all that matters.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: All right and so this body took action and voted, again, Madam Clerk, do you
have the motion?
The Clerk: On ---
Mr. Mayor: --- Item 25.
The Clerk: --- the one that was previously approved or now?
Mr. Mayor: So the question, right, the question ---
The Clerk: The question now is to reconsider Item 25 regarding approving or rejecting the
offer that the Coliseum Authority sent to the Augusta Commission for Cardinal Management to
build the new civic center at the old Regency Mall property.
Mr. Hasan: The substitute, I’m sorry, Mr. Mayor, can I weigh in on that?
36
The Clerk: The substitute motion is that what you were ---
Mr. Hasan: Yes, ma’am ---
The Clerk: --- wanting read?
Mr. Hasan: --- because that’s what I’m reconsidering ---
The Clerk: Oh, okay.
Mr. Hasan: --- the substitute motion.
The Clerk: The substitute motion was to approve the location, reject the deal and continue
negotiation which is to include a 45-day calendar timeline, establish a subcommittee to be named
and identify a funding source.
Mr. Hasan: I’d like a motion to reconsider Item number 25.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’ve got a motion to reconsider. Attorney MacKenzie ---
Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, sir.
Mr. Mayor: --- all right if you’ll, everybody just suspend. Here’s our posture. This is
simply a motion to reconsider the action that was taken on Item 25. Madam Clerk, would you read
what was approved once more? I want to make sure everybody understands what was approved
before.
The Clerk: The action was to approve the location, the Regency Mall arena, to reject the
deal to continue negotiation which to include a 46-day calendar timeline, to establish a
subcommittee to be named and to identify a funding source.
Mr. Mayor: All right, that’s what was approved. All right, so what we’re doing right now
is voting to reconsider our action, okay? All right, voting. This is a motion to reconsider.
Mr. Hasan: Motion to reconsider.
The Clerk: Item number 25.
Mr. Mayor: This is a superior motion that you adopted.
Mr. Jefferson votes No.
Mr. Fennoy out.
Mr. M. Williams not voting.
Motion Passes 7-1.
37
Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to make a motion, I think Mr. Attorney if I’m correct, I
make a motion to deny the motion that we made to approve the mall, the substitute motion, is that
correct or make another motion?
Mr. Mayor: So the underlined motion that you had on the agenda was simply to reject the
offer, reject the offer or approve the offer.
Mr. MacKenzie: If I can ---
Mr. Hasan: No, no, no but the substitute motion passed.
Mr. MacKenzie: --- procedurally it is if you had not voted on anything at all ---
Mr. Hasan: Oh, okay, thank you (inaudible).
Mr. MacKenzie: --- you’re doing over. If you want to make a motion it would probably
be a motion to reject the offer or approve the item as it reads.
Mr. Hasan: I’d like to make a motion to approve Item 25 as it reads.
Mr. Frantom: Reject.
The Clerk: Which one? It says to approve or reject.
Mr. Hasan: To reject. I’m sorry, you’ve got me confused today. It is not a good day for
me.
Mr. Frantom: I second the reject.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a motion and a second.
Mr. Hasan: No, no, Commissioner, you can’t push it. No, Commissioner Williams, you
can’t do that.
Mr. Mayor: Hold on, hold on.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Why don’t we do a roll call vote, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Mayor: Hold on, voting.
Mr. Hasan: No, sir, Mr. Mayor ---
Mr. Mayor: Voting.
Mr. Hasan: --- no, sir, Mr. Mayor, no, sir, Mr. Mayor, we’re not voting.
38
Mr. Frantom: Roll call.
Mr. Hasan: No, we’re not voting. He can’t push Grady’s, we’re not voting. You don’t
see Commissioner Williams saying nothing so you know he ain’t lying.
Mr. Frantom: Come on, guys.
Mr. Mayor: Voting.
Mr. Hasan: No, we’re not voting like that, Mr. Mayor. He already pushed Grady’s thing.
Mr. Frantom: Can we do a roll call vote?
The Clerk: Did you clear it out, did Mr. ---
Mr. Frantom: Clear it out, please.
The Clerk: --- do you want us to clear that out?
Mr. Hasan: Clear it out, clear it out.
The Clerk: Mr. Smith, do you want that cleared out?
Mr. G. Smith: Yes, please clear it out. I don’t want anybody upset.
Mr. Mayor: All right, voting.
Mr. Fennoy out.
Mr. M. Williams not voting.
Mr. Jefferson votes No.
Motion Passes 7-1.
Mr. Frantom: Motion to approve adjourning the meeting.
Mr. G. Smith: Second.
Mr. Frantom: We’ve got a motion.
The Clerk: Okay, we need to vote on it. They made a motion to do it. Okay, yeah ---
Mr. Frantom: We do?
The Clerk: --- yeah, if you make a motion to adjourn you have to –--
Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: We have a motion and a second, please vote.
39
Mr. Fennoy and Mr. M. Williams out.
Motion Passes 8-0.
\[MEETING ADJOURNED\]
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
December 5, 2017.
______________________________
Clerk of Commission
40