The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRegular Commission Meeting February 20, 2018 REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER FEBRUARY 20, 2018 Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., February 20, 2018 the Hon. Hardie Davis Jr., Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Jefferson, Guilfoyle, Sias, M. Williams, Davis, Fennoy, D. Williams and Hasan, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. ABSENT: Hons. Frantom and Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Mr. Mayor: All right, we’re going to call this meeting to order. Good afternoon, everyone. We are happy to be back in the saddle and looking forward to doing the people’s business. At this time the Chair recognizes Madam Clerk. The Clerk: Thank you, sir. I call your attention to the invocation portion of our agenda which will be delivered today by Reverend Jerry O’Neal, Senior Pastor of the First Southern Methodist Church, after which we will ask our Mayor Pro Tem if she would please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Would you please stand? Thank you. Mr. Mayor: Is Reverend --- The Clerk: Yes, sir. The invocation was given by Reverend Jerry O’Neal, Senior Pastor, First Southern Methodist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited. Mr. Mayor: --- okay, all right, very good. Reverend O’Neal if you’ll come forward. Again thank you for coming to serve as our Chaplain of the Day and we want to thank you for your spiritual guidance and civic leadership in this community as a distinguished pastor of First Southern Methodist Church and may your tenure continue to be long and filled with the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ. Thank you. Reverend O’Neal: (Inaudible). (APPLAUSE) Mr. Mayor: We have a number of folks who are here with us today and I see many of my th and the Commissioner from the 9’s fellow suffrages in the Gospel, members of the clergy so thank you all for coming. It’s always good to be amongst brethren and sisters in the faith; thank you all for being here today. I want to also share with everyone an announcement that the Commissioners are all tracking and aware of that on next week we want to invite those of you residents and members of the City of Augusta to the 2018 State of the City Address to be taking place at Jack Patrick Auditorium there on the campus of Augusta Technical College. That’s th Tuesday February the 27 at 6:00 p.m. Encouraging all of our citizens to come out and hear about 1 the great work that this body has done. Over the last 39 months there’s been quite a bit of success by this local government. There is no ‘I’ in team but rather we have seen this city move forward in a way that has not been done in the last two decades. Decision’s been made, work’s been done that I think everybody can be proud of and we look forward to sharing that as well as where we’re th going to go in the days ahead in this city. That’s February the 27, 6:00 p.m. Augusta Technical College’s campus at the Patrick Auditorium and so I would encourage you to please come out and join us for that. A reception will follow immediately after the event. The Chair recognizes the st Commissioner from the 1. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, I would like to, what do you call it, moments of personal favors --- Mr. Mayor: My pleasure. Mr. Fennoy: --- personal privilege. Mr. Mayor: You make us nervous with that (inaudible). Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, I think that I would like to see this body in this chamber observe a moment of silence for the people that were killed down in Florida. I would like to remind those of you in the chamber that since 2012 we have had over 300 such shootings. You’re talking about innocent children, innocent people dying only because we don’t want to violate their constitutional amendment that gives us the right to bear arms. But the question I would like to ask each and every one of you today what about the constitutional rights that the people that died, how do we protect their constitutional rights? At some point in time we’ve got to put the constitutional rights over victims, innocent victims as opposed to our right to bear arms. So each and every one of us should do something to support not only the victims in Florida but the victims in Orlando, the victims in Las Vegas. And the time has come where we can no longer allow people to have assault weapons. The only thing they are good for is mass shootings. We’ve got to put an end to it and it’s got to start somewhere. The next thing, Mr. Mayor, is as many of you all know this is Black thth History Month. This is also the 100 birthday of the NAACP. This is also the 136 birthday of Paine College and Paine College continues to need your help for Paine College is going to survive. Paine College is just like a tree that’s planted by the water. It shall not be moved. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. st Mr. Mayor: Okay, thank you to the Commissioner from the 1. I would ask that we all do stand and we’ll take a moment of silence and reflection for the 17 lives that were lost by this great tragedy at this time. Thank you. RECOGNITION(S) Employee of the Month A. Congratulations! Ms. Leadra Collins, Public Education Specialist Augusta Utilities Department, Augusta’s February 2018 Employee of the Month. The Clerk: I call your attention to the Recognition portion of our agenda. We’ll ask Mr. Mayor along with Madam Administrator to please join us here up front as we offer our 2 congratulations to Ms. Leadra Collins, Public Education Specialist Augusta Utilities Department. Leadra, Mr. Wiedmeier, is that your army with you? (APPLAUSE) Ms. Leadra, do you have some family members you would like to join you? As Ms. Leadra’s mother makes her way forward, Dear Mr. Mayor and members of the Augusta Commission. Leadra Collins has been a Public Education Specialist with the Utilities Department since January 2016. She possesses excellent project management and communication skills which are demonstrated in her commitment to the City of Augusta. She exhibits a professional and humble demeanor. She’s always willing to help others, look for ways to collaborate with other departments and with pride, care and concern, consistently fulfilling department obligations in a timely manner. Leadra is a hardworking team player who provides valuable insight and expertise to our department. This is a well-deserved honor. Not only does she understand the departmental missions and visions but also the personal role she plays in helping to achieve those goals. Through her accurate and informed assessment, Leadra streamlines day to day operations by providing high quality services at the lowest possible cost to the department for both in-house and contracted services. One of her many noteworthy skills is the ability to insure the public has accurate and accessible information. Not only is she committed to educating and informing the citizens of Augusta but is equally dedicated to achieving positive results for the programs and initiatives of the city as well. Leadra is an engaging individual she goes the extra mile without clockwatching, works with enthusiasm and performs effectively and efficiently to insure success. People are and will always be our greatest asset and Leadra’s stellar contributions are certainly one of those assets contributing to the success of our entire organization. Please join us in applauding and recognizing Leadra Collins as the February 2018 City of Augusta Employee. (APPLAUSE) Ms. Collins: First I want to give honor to God who’s the head of my life. I’m extremely humbled by this, by this award. I certainly don’t do anything that’s extraordinary but certainly working for an organization like Augusta Utilities makes it that much easier. And especially when you work with a team as amazing as the team that I have especially those that are here and the ones that aren’t but also to have a leader who makes it extremely easy to come to work every day and do what you do and enjoy what you do. So, thank you to the Mayor the Commission, Ms. Jackson the Administrator and everyone here, thank you. (APPLAUSE). Mr. Wiedmeier: I would just like to say that Leadra has done so much to improve our communication with our customers and advance the image of the department. And she’s a joy to work with and I really appreciate everything you do for us. Thank you. (APPLAUSE) Mr. Mayor: Congratulations, Leadra. I’ve had the pleasure of knowing you for a number of years now and I echo the sentiments of what Tom has said but also I’ve talked to and listened to many of your team members and you are the reason why the eleven of us do what we do in this city and why you matter to the citizens of Augusta, Georgia. And your contributions today and the days ahead will make a difference in the lives of countless other of great Augustans, thank you th so much. (APPLAUSE) The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4 for a Point of Personal Privilege. Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This body and this city we are a member of the Georgia Municipal Association and what that means is these are active cities that are part of an organization and that organization also provides our retirement plan for employees and one of our sister cities 3 has requested our help, Stockbridge. And Stockbridge is a city that’s under siege, you know in this area we have counties and cities and then we have some unincorporated areas that might be within a county. And Stockbridge, Georgia is sort of a city that’s under siege. There’s a move afoot through the Legislature the General Assembly of Georgia to de-annex part of Stockbridge and create another entity. Stockbridge is fighting this and they are asking for help from their sister cities and things within the Georgia Municipal Association and I think this body and this city should give serious consideration to their request. And the City of Stockbridge really wants to stay whole instead of creating two entities. We don’t know whether that is a syphoning off of a good section versus another section or something like that. We don’t have those full details yet but I’d like to recommend to this body that we seriously discuss and consider a Resolution of Support of Stockbridge as they’re asking. So, Mr. Mayor, I’d like to see us put this on the agenda to give some serious consideration to supporting the City of Stockbridge. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: All right, thank you. I think that’s appropriate for us to do that. There’s a move afoot across the State of Georgia to create these new cities. We know statutorily we’re limited to 159 counties and so it would be good for Augusta to stand shoulder to shoulder with Stockbridge as a municipality and making certain that those types of decisions remain as local decisions as opposed to decisions that get made in the General Assembly so thank you for that. Mr. Fennoy: Is that the motion Commissioner Sias made? Mr. Mayor: Well, I think that again he’s bringing it to our attention and we’ll follow the process and put it on the next agenda, okay? Madam Clerk. The Clerk: DELEGATIONS B. Ms. Grace Brady regarding the construction of a traffic round-a-bout on Story Mill/Fulcher and Henderson Roads. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Brady, thank you for coming to share with us you have, are you all together? Ms. Speaker: I’m here from the City of Hephzibah. Mr. Mayor: Okay, you’re with you’re --- Ms. Speaker: No, I’m here to respond to any sort of concerns that you may have about issues that she raises --- Mr. Mayor: --- okay. Ms. Speaker: --- as it relates to the business of the City of Hephzibah. 4 Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, if you’ll just pause for a moment and we’ll recognize you at the appropriate time. All right, Ms. Brady, you have five minutes if you will state for the record your name and your address. Ms. Brady: I’m Grace Brady and I live at 5013 Fulcher Road, Hephzibah, Georgia. I am the, the city had a claim jump; they just jumped my property. I did not sign to go into the city so while I’m considered in their city. But they want to put a round-a-bout at Story Mill/Fulcher and Henderson Road. We don’t have a problem out there. They built a school out there and I thing the Mayor of Hephzibah really wants to make a name for himself because there is no traffic problem out there. If you think they are you need to come and look for yourself. The first papers they gave my son it was for a waterline. It wasn’t for a waterline. The next thing they said it was for stormwater runoff. That was not so either. Later it came out that they were for the round-a- bout. In August they put out bids for a round-a-bout. We knew nothing about it and I’m asking you please look this situation over and take it into your hearts what would you do if this was your mother? They want to take a corner of my land and if it was needed it would be different but it’s not needed. I just pray that ya’ll will do whatever you can to help me because I’m an old woman, 86-years old, a widow. I have three strikes against me to start with. And for the last 30 years I’ve been running that little farm out there. I worked 18years at Kendall, 17 years of those was night shift and I came home and I farmed in the daytime and then I went to work. So I’m just asking you to please bear with me and help me if you can. I’d appreciate it and I turned it over to God, I’m a Christian woman and I believe God will intervene. Thank you. Mr. Mayor: All right, Ms. Brady, let me ask you a question. What is it you believe this body can do to help you? What is it do you believe that we can do to help you? Ms. Brady: I really don’t know what you can do. Story Mill Road is a county road. It’s not a city street. It’s a county road and I feel like you could intervene because I talked to the transportation engineers and he said we have no problem out there with traffic. So you Commissioners deal with a lot of things so there’s some way you can help. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, we’re going to go in this order. The Commissioner from the th 8 is the Commissioner of record. I do want to give him an opportunity to speak to this matter and then after that we’ll hear from the gentleman who will come and tell us who he is. Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Brady, thank you for coming before this body. Let me give a little history with Ms. Brady and her son that runs the farm. She actually still gets out there on the tractor. When they originally decided to build that school there was a lot of runoff, flooded her fields which was havoc for them because it cost a lot in feed and fertilizer as well as can’t get back into the field. Ever since the school was established, Ms. Brady had called me numerous times and I had reached out to the Hephzibah City Council in regards to responding to Ms. Brady’s request, her issues, her concerns. You know the whole thing in a nutshell is that now move fast forward with this traffic circle they got a, the City of Hephzibah got a grant and we actually had one of the corner’s come before us two months ago, Mr. Lowe, because it was in the Richmond County limits. The other three corners which belongs to Ms. Brady where the Charter School’s at in the end opposite corner, Ms. Brady’s farm falls underneath the City of Hephzibah. The only thing I could do as a Commissioner is to reach out to the other council that represents the 5 city limits of Hephzibah which I have done. I had emailed Ms. Brady. I did email last week when I found that you were going to be on the agenda as far as having representation here from the City of Hephzibah to see if they wanted to respond because Augusta Richmond County has no jurisdiction whatsoever within another municipality. It’d be the same thing as us advising Columbia County, Burke County, Jefferson County how to operate their city. We just cannot do that; it’s stepping on toes when we have no jurisdiction. Robert did respond, appreciate the update, Robert Buchwitz, the Mayor of Hephzibah, he replied to that email last week. He appreciates the update that he would not have a representative here due to there’s a lawsuit by you, Ms. Brady, against the City of Hephzibah in regards to this traffic circle. Apparently we do have a representative that legal counsel for the City of Hephzibah to respond to that. The only thing we could do as a body in order to keep good relationships with the City of Hephzibah, City of Blythe because that’s two other municipalities that resides in the Augusta Richmond County. I think it’s favorable for us as well as them that we do keep good relationships because we’ll have upcoming SPLOST, we’ll have upcoming issues to address in the near future. So, Mr. Mayor, I don’t know what to do as a body; as an individual I did everything I can, could and have done. I believe that with the council from the, represents the City of Hephzibah’s here. Can we hear from him? Mr. Mayor: Yeah, I do want to hear from him. Attorney MacKenzie, at our last if I remember correctly series of meetings ago in executive session is it not true that we not only debated this issue but I thought we had disposed of this issue from the standpoint of our engagement in this process? Mr. MacKenzie: Let me clarify that was a different property owner on the other corner that was actually within the jurisdiction of the property that is controlled by this government. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. MacKenzie: We’re now talking about a different piece of property and a different owner which is not within the geographical confines of Augusta Georgia. It’s within the City of Hephzibah city limits. Mr. Mayor: All right, that’s important. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner th from the 9. Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m here listening and I’m trying to just get th some clarity to it. And I think the Commissioner from the 8 said that we are not at liberty to do anything because it’s out of the City of Augusta’s limits as far as the consolidated government goes, is that right? Mr. Speaker: (Inaudible). Mr. M. Williams: Okay and my question is Ms. Brady owns three pieces of property is that what I’m hearing three corners or just one --- Mr. Speaker: Just one. 6 Mr. M. Williams: --- one corner. And I guess the Attorney may be able to answer whether or not she has signed off on the eminent domain or they got their property so I’d like to hear from the attorney so we can kind of help Ms. Brady understand or at least know what direction she needs to go in because if those things have been done then I think the process will have to go to a different level than this level. Can I get the attorney to address that, Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Yeah, that’s what we want to see happen. All right, if you’ll approach at this time. If you will state for the record name and who you’re representing, sir. Mr. Hawk: Yes, my name is Chase Hawk and I’m the city attorney for the City of Hephzibah. The traffic circle in question is a part of an application presented by the City of Hephzibah to the DOT back I believe in 2015 that was the result of passing of a vote to apply for that traffic circle to be put in at a local city council meeting that was noticed in the regular way that they do in the City of Hephzibah. After that the city put out bids to have the traffic circle put in and I think it’s partly to their credit that they did this before there was a problem. The city, good cities try to recognize issues before they arise and as you stated they built a school out there and it increased traffic and it increased the number of lives that we have to protect at that intersection and Georgia DOT and DOT’s all across this country have studied round-a-bouts and studied four- way stops and round-a-bouts drastically reduced the number of fatal accidents at intersections, not only fatal accidents but accidents in general. And so for that reason the project was approved by the DOT, funded by the DOT and we’ve taken serious steps to make that project come about. One of those steps was to have Ms. Brady’s land a survey done and we took as little of Ms. Brady’s land in that survey as we possibly could. The land we’re talking about in this case is about 1,500 th square feet that’s 4/100 of an acre. We had that land appraised by James Scott. We did a comparable sales of land in that area and his appraisal for that size of land, that amount of land was $280.00 dollars. We attempted to negotiate with Ms. Brady and purchase this land from Ms. Brady. We offered her over three times the fair market value of that land and then when negotiations fell apart we began condemnation proceedings and filed in Richmond County Superior Court a Declaration of Taking in November of last year. So we had a few issues with the title of that condemnation, misspelled Ms. Brady’s name. That has been amended and new notices have been sent out and we are waiting for a hearing before Judge Wright so she can air her grievances to Judge Wright and seek whatever remedies she’s entitled to under law under these condemnation proceedings. I’m happy to answer any other questions that the council may have. th Mr. Mayor: All right, I’m going to go around to the Commissioner from the 6 and then th we’ll have closing comments from the Commissioner from the 8. Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: I’m sorry, Commissioner, would you suspend? Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir. Mr. M. Williams: He can go ahead (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: Okay. 7 Mr. Hasan: Are you sure, Commissioner? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor to Ms. Brady and to the Attorney is it, Mr. Hawk? Mr. Hawk: Yes, sir. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Hawk and to my colleagues and to the audience I saw a news report on this yesterday and there’s a couple of different perspectives that came out of the news report and I know how the media is what they show us is important. But one of the things I think it might have been the gentleman from the school if I’m not mistaken it could’ve been the Mayor of the city. I don’t remember that but I know he did not want to make comments. He talked about the round-a- bout but whomever he was he refused to get into the issue of the land issue simply because he said it was in court and there was a lawsuit involved so he wouldn’t make any comments about it. So the first thing that kind of interested me that you’re here to give us the kind of details you’re giving us this morning knowing there’s a legal matter in hand at this point. And also Ms. Brady and in seeing when you were there you made comments about that you didn’t like that fact that what they offered you for your land, you was 85/86 years old, you was going to fight the good fight but you also said that your city attorney that you had at that particular time did not want to proceed but he encouraged you not to but you was going to fight anyhow. He felt that you was not in a winning position on this particular issue and then it went to the floor about us where we are right now. It’s probably little of anything that we can do as Augusta Richmond County leadership here on this issue as Commissioner Wayne Guilfoyle has pointed out. All it is for us is just information you know in terms of where it is. So I wish we could do more but in this particular case there’s nothing we can do. Even if we could do more it doesn’t mean in many ways that it would rule in your favor if the government sees fit that it needs a piece of property for whatever reason to advance the cause of the citizenry. And so that’s maybe where we are. There’s very little that we can do at all in this case because it’s out of our jurisdiction as I understand it. I’m not the attorney here but as I understand it. And I’m basing this all on the conversation I saw yesterday on the news report those are my takeaway’s as to why the attorney was here and you was going to fight the fight because it’s your land and I do understand that. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. st Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1. Ms. Brady: Is that all? Mr. Fennoy: Ms. Brady, I think you gave me a call a couple of days ago concerning this situation. Ms. Brady: Yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: You live in Richmond County? Ms. Brady: I live in Hephzibah the city they took me in and I never signed to go in. I refused to sign to go in. Mr. Fennoy: But you are in Richmond County. 8 Ms. Brady: Yes, I am. Mr. Fennoy: Okay and you pay city taxes for Hephzibah? Ms. Brady: No, they don’t charge any taxes out there. Ms. Fennoy: Okay, so you pay Richmond County taxes. Ms. Brady: Yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: And what I can’t understand, Mr. Mayor, if she’s paying county taxes why is it that we have no say so because she’s a county resident, she pays county taxes so why is it that we have and maybe the attorney can explain it to me, we have no say so over this situation. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right I’m going to recognize the Attorney and again I think that based on what we know because of jurisdiction this is out of our jurisdiction. It is also a matter that’s been litigated at this time and so we’re going to yield to the courts and allow the courts to continue to handle this matter. All right, the Chair recognizes Attorney MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, I’ll be happy to address that. The short answer is these are the way the laws are set up in the State of Georgia. Once you have a city located within a county, we’re actually a consolidated government that has cities geographically defined locations within the consolidated government. The state legislative process gives those entities authority and control to control the property within their jurisdiction even if there’s a different mechanism placed for the collection of revenues. And so the short answer is Georgia law allows for the cities to have control over their own property just like we wouldn’t want another jurisdiction trying to tell us what to do with our property even if we have some intergovernmental agreement relating to tax collections so, that’s the short answer. Ms. Brady: Well let me say this. This is, they said it was SPLOST money. They first said a grant and then they said SPLOST money. That’s are our tax money and we don’t need that runaround. And their only offer, they said my land was only worth $288 dollars but they was willing to pay five and they did up to a thousand but then they backed off of that. And the man on the opposite corner they gave him a thousand and put him in a drive. He said he couldn’t deal with them so he just goes along with them. And then Mr. Lowe met with you all and he’s getting five- thousand. He’s giving up a little more land but it’s still, I’m being discriminated against. We’re going to have a runaround out there that’s not necessary. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Brady, again we, this is well within your right to come in and present and we thank you for doing that. This matter is in the court and the courts have it at this time. Ms. Brady: Well, I --- Mr. Mayor: Thank you for coming. 9 Ms. Brady: --- (unintelligible) hearing because they served the papers with no hearing no nothing just jump in and take it and I felt like I had a right to have a say in it. Mr. Mayor: And you absolutely do, thank you so much. Ms. Brady: Thank you, thank you all. Madam Clerk? DELEGATIONS C. Mr. Michael Farrow regarding the benefits of the Richmond County Wellness Center. The Clerk: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, Mr. Farrow has made a request to be deleted from today’s agenda and rescheduled at a later date. Mr. Mayor: Okay. The Clerk: I call your attention to our consent agenda which consists of Items 1-28, Items 1-28. If there are any objectors to any of our Planning petitions would you please signify your objections by raising your hand once the petition is read. I call your attention to: Item 2: Is a request for a change of zoning from a Zone A (Agriculture) to a Zone LI (Light Industry) affecting property at 3960 Mike Padgett Highway. Item 3: Is a request for a change of zoning from a Zone R1-C (One-family Residential) to a R-3B (Multiple-family Residential) affecting property known as 2083 Heckle Street and 2026 Warren Street. Item 4: Is a request for a change of zoning from a Zone A (Agriculture) and a Zone R-MH (Manufactured Home Residential) to a Zone R-1 (One-family Residential) affecting property at 2111 Powell Road. Item 5: Is a Special Exception affecting property at 2111 Powell Road. The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of those Planning petitions? I call your attention to the Public Services portion of our agenda if there are any objectors to any of our Alcohol petitions would you please signify your objection by raising your hand once the petition is read. I call your attention to: Item 7: Is for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with the location at 3947 Harper Franklin Blvd. Item 8: Is for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with the property at 2940 Inwood Drive. Item 9: Is for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with the location at 2501 Tobacco Road. Item 10: Is for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with the location at 2803 Wrightsboro Road Suite 17. Item 11: Is for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with the location at 1503 Walton Way. Item 12: Is for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with the location at 3650 Wheeler Road. 10 The Clerk: Are there any objectors to any of those Alcohol petitions? Our consent agenda consists of Items 1-28 with no objectors to our Planning nor Alcohol petitions. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Ms. Wilson, would you approach? All right, the Chair recognizes the Mayor Pro Tem. Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m in support of Item number 3. I just wanted to get some clarification for the record on behalf of some residents, just didn’t want to, didn’t feel the need to have to actually pull it. So they were just concerned and wanted to make sure the detention pond will be underground, that’s number nine of the exceptions for this item. They just wanted some clarification and some, just of how that will be followed up with and make sure that that is the case. Ms. Wilson: The application that you have before you today is for the rezoning. This list of conditions are the conditions that have to be met when the development plan is submitted. During the discussion the Planning Commission made it very clear to the applicant that the expectation was that they would have the detention pond underground. And so when they submit the development plan which has to come to Planning and then go to Engineering we will be looking for an underground detention storage facility. Ms. Davis: Okay, thank you, Ms. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay so okay once again this is just a zoning change request. All of the other requirements we will address at the appointed time that we are moving towards the development. th Okay all right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9. Mr. M. Williams: I think Commissioner (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: All right. Mr. Fennoy: Ms. Wilson --- Ms. Wilson: Yes, sir. Mr. Fennoy: --- will the underground detention pond would our Engineering Department will take a look at that for approval before we move forward with the (unintelligible). Ms. Wilson: Absolutely, sir. One of the benefits of having the conditions as part of the zoning means that the applicant has to meet this criteria in order to move forward. When the development plan comes in, it comes to the Planning and Development Department. We send it out to Engineering, to Utilities, to the Fire Department, to everybody that’s involved in the development process. They review it and they give comments and feedback so they can’t move forward until that development plan gets approved by those entities. Mr. Fennoy: Thank you. 11 Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor? th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9. Mr. M. Williams: Ms. Wilson, I understand I just heard what you said but how do this body know that those things have been done? We send them to these different departments and I understand that but Commissioner Davis asked the question to be sure it doesn’t come back before this body so we can vote up or down or no and maybe not even having to vote. But there are a lot of things that’ve been done in this city that’s supposed to have went through the process and it don’t end up the way it was started, you know, started out. So, will that come back to this body as information or something so we’ll know that it had been done or we just give it to our department heads? Ms. Wilson: Well, one of the things that we did especially on this particular case because the community was very vocal. We met with them and they engaged and met with the developer is that we gave them the link to our plasix site. You can go on the website and look and see what the development process is. If the development, you know if there is something going on with the pond I’ll be glad to come back and share that information with you as a body, but the community will be able to see the development process as it moves forward through the approvals. So, they will have to do that. If they can’t meet that requirement then we can come back to this body and let you know. Mr. M. Williams: Well, Ms. Wilson, I’ve got some cousins who still ain’t got a computer yet and they ain’t going online. All I’m asking is that me as an elected official I understand you’re going through the process. I understand the developer wants to do it and that’s no problem but I want to be sure and very sure that it was done because there are too many things that I as an elected official sitting on this body for the last 16 years thinking that it went through the proper channels and departments but some kind of way it slipped through the cracks. So, I just want to and if you just give us a letter if you send us something back when this is done so we’ll know versus saying let me go look because the time I go look with all the phone calls I get it’s going to be well on its way to done whether it’s going to be done. But I’m just asking can you give us some --- Ms. Wilson: What I can do because the Planning Department doesn’t approve the detention pond, that’s Engineering. I will, you know, the Engineering Director is here and I will get with him and ask him to make sure that we send out a letter once the detention pond and the other environmental reviews have taken place to this body and we’ll send it to Ms. Bonner and make sure that she sends it out to all of you. Mr. M. Williams: That would help me a great deal. Ms. Wilson: Okay. Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. 12 Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, very good, thank you. Okay all right, I’ll entertain any motions to add or remove from the consent agenda at this time. Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. M. Williams: --- I’d like to pull a couple of items. I’d like to pull Item 14 and Item 21 and I’ve got a couple of questions. I’ve got a couple of questions I’d like to ask on Item 13 I don’t want to pull them but 13. I just spoke to (unintelligible) sitting there but that’s a different conversation but 13, 15 and 16 and possibly yes, those three I’ve got a couple of questions I don’t want to pull those unless you think they need to be pulled. Mr. Mayor: Yeah, I do. Let’s go ahead and just pull them. That way we just have the debate and discuss them individually at that time, okay? All right so, Madam Clerk, we’re going to pull 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 and 21, okay? I see our Chief Judge here today. Good to have you with us, Judge Watkins. I think he’s interested in Item number 29 and I don’t know if there’s any objection. I see that it was moved forward last week from Administrative Services without a recommendation but if these are cleanup changes then I would encourage us to put it on the consent agenda if that’s all they were is cleanup changes. I don’t know that to be the case. Okay, Attorney MacKenzie, can you speak to that? Were these just cleanup changes with language? Mr. MacKenzie: Not exactly. This was a modification to the experience level for the Chief Probation Officer to remain consistent with the regulations. And the Judge is here as well to provide additional information. Mr. Mayor: All right, okay all right, I’m going to go the Chair of Public Services so can you --- Mr. Jefferson: If there’s no objection from my colleagues I’d like to make a motion (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: You mean to add it to the agenda. Mr. Sias: Add it to the consent agenda. Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right. Mr. M. Williams: I do have an objection --- Mr. Mayor: That’s fine. Mr. M. Williams: --- the Attorney just stated some things that I’d like to get clear. Mr. Mayor: Absolutely, okay so it’ll remain there on the regular agenda, okay? All right, st so are there any other, all right the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1. 13 Mr. Fennoy: I would like to add 28 and 30 to the consent agenda. Mr. Mayor: They’re already there. 28 is on the consent agenda. Mr. Fennoy: Number 30. Mr. M. Williams: I’ve got some issues with 30, Mr. Mayor, I have some issues with Number 30. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, with objection. Okay all right, there’s an objection. Mr. Guilfoyle: Motion to approve. Ms. Davis: Second. CONSENT AGENDA PLANNING 1. SA-53 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to approve a petition to amend the Land Subdivision Regulations for Augusta Georgia by st amending Section 1-6 – Definitions & Section 405 – Flagpole Lots. 1 Reading. (Approved by the Commission February 6, 2018 – second reading) 2. Z-18-08 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to approve with the conditions listed below a petition by Davis A. Smith Jr. requesting a change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) to Zone LI (Light Industry) to establish an equipment storage area affecting property containing approximately 7.2 acres and located at 3960 Mike Padgett Highway. Tax Map 184-0-080-00-0 CONTINUED from January meeting. DISTRICT 1 1. The home on the property shall not be used for residential purposes. 2. Development permitting shall be contingent upon submission and approval of site plans indicating compliance with all applicable development regulations, including, but not limited to, zoning, engineering, environmental and landscaping. 3. Any buildings constructed shall be for dry storage only, and no restroom facilities may be constructed within the buildings. 4. An opaque fence 6-feet in height shall be installed around the perimeter of the storage area to screen its contents from the highway and adjoining parcels. 5. A 50-foot undisturbed buffer shall be maintained along the side of the parcel that adjoins agricultural-zoned land. 6. Landscaped buffering meeting the requirements of the Augusta Tree Ordinance shall be installed along the side of the parcel that adjoins agricultural-zoned land. 7. And future curb cuts must be approved by the Traffic Engineering Department or the Georgia Department of Transportation. 3. Z-18-10 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to approve with the conditions listed below a petition by Johnson, Laschober and Associates, on behalf of George Locke McKnight, requesting a change of zoning from Zone R-1C (One- family Residential) to Zone R-3B (Multiple-family Residential) affecting property containing 2.39 acres and known as 2083 Heckle Street and 2026 Warren Street. Tax Map 035-3-238- 00-0 and Tax Map 035-3-216-00-0. CONTINUED from January meeting. DISTRICT 3 1. The development shall not exceed 43 units (23-2 bedroom and 20-1 bedroom), and overall 14 density of 17.2 units/acre, in accordance with the submitted conceptual plan. 2. The applicant shall conduct a traffic study to determine whether road improvements will be required. 3. All required parking shall be provided off-street, an additional 0.25 spaces per unit shall be provided as quest parking. Parking shall be enclosed in a fence screened with landscaping in accordance with the requirements of the Tree Ordinance. 4. The developer shall coordinate with Traffic Engineering to explore the feasibility of a designated multi-use path along Heckle Street extending to the Walton Way commercial corridor. 5. Facades of existing warehouse buildings shall be preserved to maintain aesthetic cohesion. New building facades shall be designed in a manner that is complementary to the existing architectural style. 6. Sidewalks shall be installed on the subject parcel. 7. A lighting plan shall be included with the development plans. All exterior lighting shall be downcast and/or directed away from adjoining residences. 8. A development Plan meeting all applicable state and local codes and ordinances in effect at the time of plan submission must be submitted and approved prior to permit issuance. 9. Detention pond shall be underground. 4. Z-18-11 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to approve with the conditions listed below a petition by COEL Development Co. Inc, requesting a rezoning requesting a change of zoning from Zone A (Agriculture) and Zone R- MH (Manufactured Home Residential) to Zone R-1 (One-family Residential) affecting property containing 89.46 acres and known as 2111 Powell Road. Tax Map 064-0-154-00-0 DISTRICT 3 1. A 20-foot buffer of double evergreen trees and a 6-foot solid board fence must be installed on the rear property line of lots 84 through 106; adjacent to Tax Parcel 064-0-004-01-0. The tree buffer shall be maintained by each property owner. A Development Plan meeting all applicable state and local codes and ordinances in effect at the time of plan submission must be submitted and approved prior to permit issuance. 4. The development plan shall not exceed 2.75 lots/acre density indicated on the conceptual site plan dated September 12, 2017. 5. Development shall not be permitted in wetlands or flood plains. 6. Sidewalks shall be provided throughout the development. 5. Z-18-12 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to approve with the conditions listed below a petition by COEL Development Co. Inc. requested a Special Exception to allow detached dwellings developed in accordance with Section 13 provided that the density does not exceed three (3) unites per acre per Section 8-2 (a) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta-Richmond County affecting property containing 89.46 acres and known as 2111 Powell Road. Tax Map 064-0-154-00-0 DISTRICT 3 1. A 20-foot buffer of double evergreen trees and a 6-foot solid board fence must be installed on the rear property line of lots 84 through 106; adjacent to Tax Parcel 064-0-004- 01-0. The tree buffer shall be maintained by the Homeowners Association for Haynes Station. The fence shall be maintained by each property owner. The Concept Plan reviewed is considered for illustrative purposed of the present zoning action only and does not meet development plan submission criteria. 3. A development Plan meeting all applicable state and local codes and ordinances in effect at the time of plan submission must be submitted and approved prior to permit issuance. 4. The development plan shall not exceed 2.75 lots/acre density indicated on the conceptual site plan dated September 12, 2017. 5. Development shall not be permitted in wetlands or flood plains. 6. Sidewalks shall be provided throughout the development. 6. ZA-r-250 – A request for concurrence with the Augusta Georgia Planning Commission to approve a petition to amend the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for Augusta Georgia by 15 amending Section 2 (Definitions), Section 7 (A-Agriculture) and Section 14 (R-MH- Manufactured Home Residential) by adding flagpole lots a permitted uses and to prohibit st flagpole lots in all other residential zoning classifications. 1 Reading. (Approved by the Commission Februar6 6, 2018 – second reading) PUBLIC SERVICES 7. Motion to approve New Location: A.N. 18-03: request by James Edward Miller for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Circle K Store #203271 located at 3947 Harper Franklin Blvd. District 3, Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2018) 8. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 18-04: request by Sumit K. Patel for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with VK Foodmart, LLC located at 2940 Inwood Drive. (District 5 – Super District 9) Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2018) 9. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 18-05: request by Amelia D. Legutki for a retail package Beer & Wine License for Walgreen d/b/a Riteaid #11831 located at 22501 Tobacco Rd. District 4, Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2018) 10. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 18-06: request by Amelia D. Legutki for a retail package Beer & Wine License for Walgreen d/b/a Riteaid #11834 located at 2803 Wrightsboro Rd. Suite 17. District 3, Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2018) 11. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 18-07: request by Amelia D. Legutki for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Walgreen d/b/a Riteaid #11832 located at 1503 Walton Way. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2018) 12. Motion to approve New Ownership Application: A.N. 18-08: request by Amelia D. Legutki for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be use din connection with Walgreen d/b/a Riteaid #11836 located at 3650 Wheeler Rd. District 3. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2018) ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 18. Motion to adopt the 2018 Augusta, Georgia Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Policy Statement and Program for USDOT Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funded projects. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee February 13, 2018) 19. Motion to approve merging two part-time positions to create one full-time Communication Specialist Position. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee February 13, 2018) 20. Motion to approve HCD to publishing the advertisement for a 15-day Public Comment per the Citizen Participation Plan and submit the 2017 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) report to HUD thereafter once comments are received with no return to Commission. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee February 13, 2018) FINANCE 16 22. Motion to approve Augusta Commercial Property Insurance coverage for 2018 offered through Affiliated FM, current carrier, for a premium of $399,565 for full blanket coverage and limited flood coverage in flood prone areas. (Approved by Finance Committee February 13, 2018) ENGINEERING SERVICES 23. Motion to accept proposal from Johnson, Laschober & Associates, P.C. to provide engineering services for the Utilities Department’s Fort Gordon Cyber CoE Campus Utilities. RFQ 13-124 (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 13, 2018) 24. Motion to accept proposal from Johnson, Laschober & Associates, P.C. to provide engineering services for the Utilities Department’s Fort Gordon Block 10 Irrigation System project. RFQ 13-124 (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 13, 2018) 25. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire property in fee simple interests (Parcel 088- 1-042-00-0) – 1928 Florida Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 13, 2018) 26. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire property in fee simple interests (Parcel 088- 1-043-00-0) – 1926 Florida Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 13, 2018) 27. Motion to authorize condemnation to acquire property in fee simple interests (Parcel 088- 1-044-00-0) – 1922 Florida Road. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee February 13,2018) PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 28. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Augusta Commission held February 6, 2018 and Special Called meeting held February 13, 2018. th Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion from the Commissioner from the 8 and a second from - -- The Clerk: Second. Mr. Mayor: --- yes. All right, voting. Mr. Frantom and Mr. Smith out. Motion Passes 8-0. \[Items 1-12, 18-20, 22-28\] Mr. Mayor: Judge, if you’ll come on up we’re going to get you first. Madam Clerk, we’ll go, we’ll go 29 first and then we’ll go top to bottom. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 29. Motion to approve amendment to Probation Services Order to adjust the experience categories for the Chief Probation Office. (No recommendation from Administrative Services Committee February 13, 2018; and provide additional information relative to the amendment 17 Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, we’ve got a series of questions. Judge, what we’ll do is let you explain to us the substantive changes first and then we’ll take questions if you don’t mind. Judge Watkins: And thank you for calling me. Members of this panel, maybe the best way to approach it is to I’ll give you the thought process that went into this change. The Probation Office is a servant that answers to many masters from a vertical standpoint from the state, the Department of Community Supervision, the Misdemeanor Probation Office Unit and the Commissioners. And I’ve decided some time ago that probably the best way to deal with those dizzying requirements and sometimes repeating interests is to try to be as clear as I can, to try to be as compliant as we can and to try to be as transparent. So, there was a, the way an order’s written up that deals with the requirements of the Chief Probation Officer one of those requirements is Corrections and it appears that were that notion itself is so pregnant with meaning that it can interpreted either broadly or narrowly. After discussion with the Advisory Board, we just thought it would be best instead of interpreting corrections to mean so broadly that it includes Law Enforcement or to interpret it so narrowly that it might not. To try to be clear, to try to act in good faith, to try to be compliant with what I think is what the Commission wants which is to always instead of assuming, ask. We decided that why don’t we just go back in front of the Board. If nothing else it’ll just show them the due respect and ask them to either interpret or to and really the approach to us to put in the language Law Enforcement to remove any ambiguity to keep us from assuming to just ask that that language be put in their for clarification. In essence, it was my approach, it was my desire to act in good faith and therefore instead of assuming just to come in and ask and that was just really the whole meaning behind it. Mr. Mayor: All right, Judge, thank you. All right I want to draw everybody’s attention to Tab 29 the substantive changes really the addition of about four words and that is where we’re taking the language and the requirement that was inherently Chief Probation Officer have a minimum of 5 years of experience in Corrections, Parole or Probation Services. The change is with the addition of adding or other appropriate experience as approved by DCS Misdemeanor Probation Unit, that is the substantive nature of the change that we’re making. Judge Watkins: If I may add that is language that we are trying to track from the --- Mr. Mayor: From the Legislature. Judge Watkins: --- from the Department of Community Supervision, the Probation Misdemeanor Unit because again that’s the language that they have so we were just trying to track that --- Mr. Mayor: All right, very good. Judge Watkins: --- that’s the essence of it. Mr. Mayor: All right, that’s the change so I think again it’s certainly appropriate. All right, th the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9. 18 Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate Judge Watkins coming but as you know and most of us know we had a lot of conversation about the Post-Certified and who would be the Chief Probation Officer, whether it be Post-Certified in Law Enforcement or a non-law enforcement. In fact, DCS has commented and said some things to us and I’m in support but I want to make sure that because of this body had been drawn into that as a part of that that I know what I’m voting on and what to expect out of this. Now at one point, you know, it wasn’t even Post-Certified and it came back that we had to have the Department Director had to be Post- Certified which includes a lot of different skills and knowledge that the Director had to have. And so now I’m just listening, I’m just trying to make sure that we ain’t swapping flies here, we’re doing what we need to do and make sure that we put somebody in that position because once you change these, this criteria, it’s going to change the effect of somebody going into that position that the DCS and even the Legislature had wanted us to make sure that it was a position of being Post- Certified. So, will that change anything, Judge, I guess my question will, what will this change from being Post-Certified if we do this or we won’t need that anymore? Judge Watkins: Well, we’re not changing, maybe the best way to answer it, we’re not changing the Post-Certified requirement because most law enforcement officers everything I know many times they’ve been sworn in the court a standard question is are you post-certified and all of them have said yes so anecdotally all of them are post-certified. But in this case it won’t change it what it was designed to do. Really it is to clarify it because we have someone who has law enforcement experience and they’re post-certified. And, Commissioner, I will admit it’s been again especially with the latest legislation it seems that it’s not becoming clearer but it’s becoming murkier so your question and the point which you’re asking is well taken because if you’re walking through a fog you’ve got to make sure you’re putting one step in front of the other carefully so I understand your position. With that being said, no, sir, it will not change the post-certification requirement. It just brings clarification because we’re just trying to make sure you know what we’re asking and in my judgement that’s the best way to keep not only good faith existing in a relationship but keep the communications open. Mr. M. Williams: But Judge, if I can respond, Mr. Mayor? You know I didn’t ask for this class but I took a crash course in this post-certification and what law enforcement does. And the conversation I remember that we didn’t want a police officer doing probation work because the same fellow that arrests you and that’s the same fellow you have to look at when you go pay your fine brings about a change for a lot of people who see a uniform and run from it. Now a lot of folks, and you know this better than I do probably, that you have a lot of folks that run from the police instead of to the police so when you’ve got a police, when you say when you change that and you have a police officer who’s doing the same thing to collect the monies from these people that only that we’re trying to get off they’re afraid of those. Now I ain’t always had the authority to speak and to say what I say when the police come up I normally shut up and just let him say what he’s going to say because I learned that’s the best way. And most people, Judge, that deal with officers now when you’re looking at probation and if that’s not changing anything where we’re going to have a police office handling folks who come in trying to pay a fine to get off probation to run and to stay away from that, because I took this course, I didn’t want to take it but ya’ll taught me something. Mr. Mayor: Judge, if I may? 19 Judge Watkins: Yes, sir, I’m sorry. Mr. Mayor: If I may, to the Commissioner from the 9th so the substantive change once again is clarifying language so DCS has added clarifying language for experience purposes that this person is not a law enforcement officer, they still have to be post-certified. In the event that they lose their post-certification, the probation order that this body has adopted still will continue to apply. So the substantive changes just the addition of those words it does not structurally change the requirements for being the Chief Probation Officer at all. With the Department of Community Supervision’s rulemaking authority, they’ve simply added this clarifying language and yeah it gets a little murky but for their purposes or other appropriate experience so I think it’s appropriate if we call for the question. Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I agree with you but the Judge had said himself when you’re walking through the clouds you know when it’s foggy and you can’t see I mean I don’t want, we’ve done had too much conversation with this thing here now. This ain’t just something that came up a week or two ago. This has been something ongoing. And I’m very careful about it. I mean I’m not opposed but I want to make sure because see once the horse is out of the barn it’s too late you can’t ride him then. Mr. Mayor: Well, I’ve got another horse and I guarantee you we can catch him if he gets away from us. Mr. M. Williams: All right. Mr. Mayor: So again if we can let if we can, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from th the 4. Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate the conversation but what we said about the law enforcement officer we was talking about the basic probation officer and this change does not apply to them. We’re talking about only the Chief Probation Officer so move to approve. Ms. Davis: Second. Mr. Mayor: We’ve got a motion and a proper second. Voting. Mr. M. Williams abstains. Mr. Guilfoyle, Mr. Frantom and Mr. Smith out. Motion Passes 6-1. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Judge. Judge Watkins: Thank you for your time. Mr. Mayor: All right, Madam Clerk, we’re going to go top to bottom. The Commissioner th from the 9 is on deck. 20 The Clerk: Are we going to take these as companion or individually? Mr. Mayor: Well --- Mr. M. Williams: I think that --- Mr. Mayor: --- we’ve got 13, 14 --- Mr. M. Williams: -- no 14 is just a little bit different, Mr. Mayor. The Clerk: Than all the others, okay. Mr. M. Williams: I think the others as companion items so if you just read the topic of one of them and I can ask my questions for 13 --- The Clerk: Oh okay all right, 13, 15, 16 and 17? Mr. M. Williams: Uh-hum. The Clerk: PUBLIC SERVICES 13. Motion to approve award of RFP 17-278, Dyess Park Improvement Design Services to POND & Co. for engineering and design professional services for $69,650. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2108) 15. Motion to approve award of RFP 17-276, Jamestown Park Improvement Design Services, to W.K. Dickson & Co. for engineering and design professional services for $42,000. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2018) 16. Motion to approve award of RFP 17-279, Lake Olmstead Park Improvement Design Services, to 2 KM Architects, Inc. for engineering and design professional services for $145,000. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2018) 17. Motion to approve award of RFP 17-298, Lombard Mill Pond Preserve Trail Improvement Design Services to POND & Co. for engineering and design professional services for $45,580. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2018) Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, Commissioner Williams. Mr. M. Williams: Thank you. My question is about the design. Who’s going to sign off I guess is a good word, Ms. Jackson, on the design? Would somebody bring us something that they done designed and will we have the opportunity to look and say we’d like to go in this direction or that direction? How will that work because we’ve got four of them here I think but who’s going to sign off on that? 21 Ms. Jackson: Actually I think it’s five of them all total from 13 through 17 and, yes, we can have the firms present their designs to the Commission when they’re complete so that you all can see those before they go out for bid for construction. Mr. M. Williams: Okay, okay and that was my question on those to make sure we have an opportunity to look rather than somebody just giving us something that we think, they think they’re going in there but we ought to have some input I think to say well we agree or disagree but when you let other people design stuff for you. My good friend used to sit in this seat Commissioner Mays who said you plan with people you don’t plan for people so I’d like to be a part of that. If that’s coming back through committee, I hope that we would be able to get those back. I make a motion to approve those 13, 15, 16 and 17, Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Hasan: Second. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay --- Mr. M. Williams: --- Mayor Pro Tem. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: We’ve got a motion and a second. Please vote. Mr. Fennoy: Which one are we voting on? The Clerk: 13, 15, 16 and 17. Mr. Fennoy: Four of them, five of them? The Clerk: No, sir, 13, 15, 16 and 17 that’s what we’re voting on now. 14 is out for now. That will be addressed after this vote. Mr. Sias, Mr. Frantom, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Smith out. Motion Passes 6-0. The Clerk: PUBLIC SERVICES 14. Motion to approve award of RFP 17-277, Fleming Park Improvement Design Services, to Johnson, Laschober & Associates, P.C. for engineering and design professional services for $98,040. (Approved by Public Services Committee February 13, 2018) th Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9. Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I asked for this to be pulled because of the situation with Fleming over here with Bernie Ward and with all of the deficiencies I’ll say that I saw myself along with my colleagues and I think Commissioner Hasan came by that day and also Commissioner Jefferson. But I’m wondering how is this playing into, this is talking about a 22 SPLOST as far as improvement but what are we doing for Fleming and the rest for Bernie Ward before I mean before this happened, Ms. Jackson, can you address that for me? Ms. Jackson: I think your question responds to some of the basic maintenance items that would not necessarily be addressed in a SPLOST package like this. Is that what your question is, sir? Ms. M. Williams: That too but you know I’m hearing, I’m talking about improvement but I’m adding to this the trip hazard that I saw along with the other things that I saw at Bernie Ward and Fleming’s that hadn’t been addressed yet and I’m thinking what are we doing or how are we going to address that. And I know about the improvements and we’re talking about SPLOST money but improvements are one thing but what are we doing? We just took a bus tour in fact we took an old bus, I drove my truck but ya’ll took a bus over there and my point is I saw the trip hazard, I saw the necessary repairs, that was embarrassing. I don’t know any of these other Commissioners. They can speak for themselves but we went to Bernie Ward and we went to Warren Road. Warren Road had some issues; they had a few places where water had seeped in through some of the tile but in comparison it was night and day difference in my mind. The playground equipment over there at Bernie Ward is the original swing that came when they built the building but you go to Warren Road and they had brand new fiberglass, I won’t call it fiberglass plastic type equipment and stuff. There was new stuff that was built for the children to play on, the tennis courts and all that was done. So my question is what are going to do to address those issues? We talk about improvements but we hadn’t maintained what we got there now. Ms. Jackson: That certainly is a fair issue. I think from our Recreation Master Plan that was completed back in 2016 what they told us was we need to spend more resources on improving our existing facilities. I think that was a fair assessment. For all of those items that were identified as safety issues that Risk Management identified in their review on Wednesday of last week at both facilities it’s my intent to repair all of the safety issues as quickly as possible. I also would like to look at, Mr. Parker and I really haven’t had a chance to talk through this, but in terms of our maintenance basic maintenance issues, we’ve got to put a plan in place sufficient resources in place to address the basic cleaning, you know, we saw the sweeping, mopping. Basic activities like that were not taking place the way that they should. So, I know Mr. Parker is interviewing; he has four vacancies I think for maintenance positions has interviews, has advertised those positions already and I think interviews are lined up for those so that is in the process. That’ll address Bernie Ward as several as well as several other facilities and we also as I said want to address all of the safety issues that need to be addressed immediately. Beyond that, I’ll just have to look at the budget and see what’s available to handle some of the rest of those items. Mr. M. Williams: Ms. Jackson, I’m disappointed in our response to what we’ve got because the first thing I saw was where there was a large plant that had been removed and been removed for several years where you could trip and fall for some senior. I’m in that category now so I really take issue with that. That should’ve been the first thing that somebody saw when they went over there but that’s been like that for three or four years. The equipment Mr. Parker shared with us that they got the same budget Warren Road and Fleming and Bernie Ward I guess however you want to look at it but they’ve got the same budget. But they don’t have a fulltime maintenance 23 person and have not had a fulltime maintenance person with the same budget. It don’t make good sense to me. Ms. Jackson: I think there is a vacant position; it’s just not filled. That’s why I was making reference to those four positions throughout the department where he’s looking for four maintenance people right now. Mr. M. Williams: So how long has that position been vacant? Ms. Jackson: The positions have been advertised, I’ll let him speak from there. Mr. Parker: Interviews were actually held last --- Mr. M. Williams: No, I need to know how long it’s been vacant not the interviews. I know we’re looking for somebody now. I want to know long has it been vacant without having somebody there. Mr. Parker: I would say without having that right in front of me several months. Mr. M. Williams: Several months. Mr. Parker: We have hired a temporary staffing company to assist us over there but we did interview last Tuesday and the paperwork has been done to replace those positions. Mr. M. Williams: I’m still disappointed. I just, I went over there and you know we had all the time in the world we walked through the facility and it’s a night and day difference compared to the other facilities. Now what I’m going to do on my own I’m going to look at all of the facilities. I’m not just going to look at those two. I want to see what else it’s like because this has been, and I’ve got the emails that I asked Mr. Brown to send me the requests to have those things done and how long he’s been requesting those things. I asked the Clerk to send out to my colleagues so they’d have the information too, Ms. Bonner, were you able to do that because when I saw that I was really disappointed. Going through the chain of command and asking for those things we, you know we ought to be stewards of the taxpayer’s money. It’s our job to make sure that we dot our ‘I’s and cross the ‘T’s and that hasn’t happened. And I’m really disappointed in the way Bernie Ward looks from the exterior just when the exterior the vegetation looks like somebody took a hatchet and went by and cut the shrubbery with it versus what Warren Road’s looks like. It was maintenance with the same maintenance crews. Now if the crews are not doing the job, I think the warden out there would probably change crews or change the director or somebody but I’m sure, Mr. Parker, you had to see that for yourself because when I drove into the driveway of Warren Road I thought I left Augusta. I thought I was in a whole different part of the city which I was, I understand that. But then going to Warren Road there’s a school next to both places both facilities and don’t even have a school program going over there. We talked about the equipment, we talked about the cameras. Mr. Brown did an outstanding job but somebody ain’t doing their job now. If he was negligent and we allowed him to stay there and be negligent like that then somebody above him needs to answer. And he stayed there and did he job and did it right and somebody above him didn’t do nothing about it then somebody stills needs to answer. 24 So I take issue with that. I won’t let this go today. I’m going to bring this back next on committee I’m going to other facilities myself and just take some pictures to bring back to see what the comparison is. We pay too much money now. We’re talking about SPLOST money to do improvements but if we can maintain why are we going to improve? That don’t make good sense. Ms. Bonner, I’d like to put this back on the committee for next week please, ma’am, and I’d like to have Ms. Jackson to give me a report as to what’s been done. The safety issues that can trip and fall. There’s a large tree that’s been moved and the sand and sidewalk. You step off the sidewalk into the sand. Anybody could trip over that and it’s right in doorway almost not directly but almost indirectly into the doorway and I thought that should’ve been the first thing somebody would address. And we had a safety team to go out and look and nobody reported, nobody said anything. It don’t make good sense, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: All right, hold on. I want to, I’m going to come back and I’m going to direct a series of questions to you, Commissioner. My first question, I’m going to go back to the Administrator, listening to this I understand that there’s a people resource shortfall for people. My question to you, Ms. Jackson, is this is similar work whether it’s Warren Road or Fleming, Bernie Ward but maintenance is maintenance is maintenance. Are we not able to pool our Central Services resources and get some of this work done? Ms. Jackson: They’re shorthanded as well. One of the things Mr. Parker and I had talked about was hopefully with the upgrade in pay we’ll be able to hold on to folks longer in those maintenance positions. But that’s one of the reasons we believe that we’re short, having such a hard time filling in and keeping those positions filled. Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor --- Ms. Jackson: I spoke to Ms. Douse this morning about some other issues. She’s got vacancies with groundskeepers as well as custodial type folks that she just has not been able to fill based upon we believe based upon the low compensation. Now that that’s being upgraded hopefully we’ll have a better track record with holding on to folks. Mr. Mayor: All right, so as I understand it there’s a fulltime maintenance person at Warren Road and is that fulltime person actively working on fulltime work at Warren Road, okay. Mr. M. Williams: I didn’t hear him, what’d he say? Mr. Mayor: He agreed in the affirmative that they are. Mr. M. Williams: Okay well, if I can respond, Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: All right, I’m going to come to you. I’ve got some questions for you first. Mr. M. Williams: Okay. 25 th, Mr. Mayor: All right, my question to you, Commissioner from the 9 is that you’ve asked Ms. Bonner to put this back on the agenda. Are you taking Item 14 and saying you want to table this or are you saying you want to move forward with approving it? I want clarification on that. Mr. M. Williams: I’ve got no problem approving it. I mean it’s something that’s going to come back to this body. I’m not trying to hold the system up. Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. M. Williams: If I can respond again? Mr. Mayor: Okay, but you are not holding, you want to move forward with Item 14. Mr. M. Williams: That’s right, I want to move forward. Mr. Mayor: All right very good, go ahead. State your inquiry. Mr. M. Williams: My inquiry is that if there’s a fulltime person at Warren Road and the pay hadn’t been the issue there, why is the pay an issue at Bernie Ward because if pay were the issue we wouldn’t have nobody at Warren Road so that don’t add up to me. Mr. Mayor: I understand. Mr. M. Williams: So somebody needs to, I mean we pay good money to people to do this job man. I ain’t talking about the maintenance people; we’ve got people that’s supposed to oversee people that are doing this work. Mr. Mayor: I understand. Mr. M. Williams: We have a Central Services we done put in place now. Mr. Mayor: All right, Madam Administrator? Ms. Jackson: We all know what some of our positions, for instance if you take any of our jobs Public Safety of course they talked about their compensation, you’ve got some people that are going to stay their vested with the organization they’re going to stay 10, 15 20-years. Some of them come in; they work six months. They find something with higher pay, they leave so I mean that’s how we wind up in the position where we’ve got those four vacancies in Recreation now. Hopefully again that changes soon. Mr. Mayor: With regards to the Commissioner’s question is it not true that that if they are in similar positions unless there’s a tenure or time of service issue they would effectively be being paid the same thing? Ms. Jackson: It’s the same pay scale, correct. I mean some people choose to stay. Some people don’t. I mean that’s just the answer. 26 Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, if I can respond. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, state your inquiry. Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I have people asking me every day about a job. There’s always somebody willing to work. Now what I hearing is now we can’t get nobody or we wasn’t paying them enough but the other facilities are looking like it’s brand new and they’re the same age maybe a year apart both facilities were built around the same time. It’s a night and day difference, now that bothers me now. When I sit here and act like I don’t have the good knowledge to see with my own eyes how a building’s looking ought to be maintained. Now you can be poor but you ain’t got to be nasty. Now Mr. Brown explained that he, and I asked the question why was the facility, there’s a water cooler that was really filthy. It shouldn’t have been in anybody’s building and I asked him why didn’t he clean it he said that’s not his job. Well, when I got to the other facility the director don’t do the maintenance work and I don’t blame Mr. Brown for not doing the maintenance work. We got to be the janitor and run the facility too? Now somebody ain’t being honest about this thing now. Mr. Mayor: All right, so here’s what I want to do. I’m going to come back to you. All right, we’ve got a series of other questions or inquiries. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner st from the 1. Mr. Fennoy: Motion to approve. Ms. Davis: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, we’ve got a motion to approve and a second. All right, there’s th more debate the Chair recognizes the Commissioner form the 6. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, the motion to approve I mean I think Commissioner Williams has agreed on that but we are talking about two separate issues here --- Mr. Mayor: I understand. Mr. Hasan: --- and so let’s be clear about that. I think I knew you understood it. But in the series of emails that we’ve gotten from Mr. Brown over a year timeframe those are the issues that we see need to be addressed and many of those has nothing to do with the SPLOST improvements to the facilities --- Mr. Mayor: Right. Mr. Hasan: --- such as on April 20, 2017 Safety Officer that Safety Officer doing their work and everything and his supervisor responds to him about he hasn’t sent in his monthly safety report and everything and his response is he’s not the Safety Officer. You have a Safety Officer who comes out and inspects facilities and it’s their responsibility to forward those kinds of things, that’s one part of it. The other part of it he’s talking about he’s understaffed not so much just the 27 maintenance person just the day to day operations. Some of these emails as well is that it seems to be at some point in time it was standard policy that takes two persons to open and two persons to close but he was under-staffed and he was saying he could not make that happen and there’s the policy change. So I’m not taking one side. I’m just asking these question because these are questions that pertain to these series of emails that was back and forth. Number one whether the Safety Officer was doing his job or doing their job and asking him to do something that was not his job. And also he put in here what was the Safety Officer’s responsibility, let him know that was not his responsibility to do those kind of things. They thought (unintelligible) would come around and do his job. Also when you talk about the maintenance even though Mr. Parker and Ms. Jackson mentioned it at this particular time there’s four person’s that are being interviewed potentially to be maintenance persons. In the course of this conversation right now around the four persons, there seems to be an understanding from Mr. Brown and a couple of other managers that they were not going to be able to have a fulltime maintenance person that they were going to be sharing one of those persons and things for 50 percentile and stuff like that. Well once again other facilities have a fulltime maintenance person that belongs absolutely to that facility. So the question, so the simple question here is do these maintenance persons each one of these facilities each maintenance staff will be assigned to a facility in and of itself. Has that conversation changed? Mr. Parker: There will be a full time person at Bernie Ward. That is incorrect about sharing. Mr. Hasan: So you have several directors saying the same thing, okay, because they were saying in the course of the interview process one of your directors made a comment about they’re going to take one with him and they can share the other three. Mr. Parker: We have talked internally for a while about the possibility of pooling some of these custodial positions and taking them to different centers instead of one person being assigned to a center having them rotate around to different centers, do their work, move to another center, do the work, go to another center. We have not implemented that. And I think that’s the confusion. Some of the folks in the interview panel have thought that we were implementing that and we’re not at this time. Mr. Hasan: So let me ask you this. If I understand what you just said correctly if I work at May Park and my colleague here works at Bernie Ward and another one works at Dyess Park then the day they that move around in the pool that one that particular day one of us is going to be two persons at one facility and one person one place is not going to have a person. Mr. Parker: Not at all. They would, someone would be at each center each day. We just feel like if we pool some of those resources we could go to different centers and be more productive with a couple of people going in there doing some things rather than just the one person at a time trying to do that if that makes sense. Mr. Hasan: Let me just ask this, Ms. Jackson in terms and Mr. Parker, in terms of the immediate needs at Bernie Ward in terms of those floors and things like that and some of the 28 maintenance, Ms. Jackson, I heard you say if you can find the money to do those things so those things are going to go lacking up until SPLOST comes through --- Ms. Jackson: What I’m saying --- Mr. Hasan: --- (unintelligible) nothing with general maintenance. Ms. Jackson: --- yeah what I’m saying is we haven’t inventoried the total cost of the safety improvements to see if there’s sufficient resources available to do them. I just can’t, I’m above saying, I don’t want to stand here and guarantee today that each one of them is going to finished by next week when I haven’t checked to see what it’s going to cost to do all that. Mr. Mayor: All right, let me interject. Okay, I’m going to come to the Commissioner from th the 5 in just a moment let me calibrate us again. We have a motion and a proper second to address the underlying issue. My question to you, Ms. Jackson, is while these are “SPLOST” related fixes and these are SPLOST VII things that were agreed upon? Ms. Jackson: Yes. Mr. Mayor: The list that I’m hearing about that continues to be discussed would those items not qualify for this work right here? Ms. Jackson: Some of them will not. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Ms. Jackson: Specifically, those things were identified for safety improvements I’d like to have those done as soon as possible. This is going to be a four to six-month design process easily four to six-month design process then bid out for construction so we’re looking at sometime before this $980,000 dollars at Fleming Park Complex would be completed. In terms of those things that were identified last week with the safety inspections I know staff has begun working on some of them but I cannot say without absolute certainty today that we have budgets to take care of everything that was identified in the safety inspection last week. I need to get an inventory on all of those items, what the cost is and then I’ll be able to tell you specifically whether they can all be done immediately. th Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, I’m going to go to the Commissioner from the 5 and then I want to dispose of this matter. Mr. Jefferson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I can appreciate this motion, I can appreciate us passing it but what is hard to appreciate is the fact that we talked about safety items, we talked about maintenance but what we are neglecting to talk about as parents the floors hadn’t been swept in a long time, we’re talking about filth. So if the floors hadn’t been swept in a long time you know they hadn’t been mopped or disinfected. And with the different skin rashes and diseases that we’ve had over the past few years that’s been prevalent in gymnasiums, pools and showers you know it seems like instead of talking about what we don’t have we should have pooled a team 29 of people in HAZMAT getup to sweep, disinfect and clean these facilities. That I couldn’t go any further after I saw the filth let alone the neglect on safety. I understand that we talked about this a while and unfortunately I was behind two long-winded colleagues with good points so I’m going to take my time to get my point across. And the fact that you know whether it’s a lack of communication, a lack of effort like I told everyone when we were on that tour I remember when both facilities were built along with the May Park facilities. As a matter of fact two to three years in age the Bernie Ward facility is much newer than the Warren Road facility. And true it was as different as night and day where you had nice green grass, you had patches of dirt and roots and I’m pretty sure we used the same landscape people as well as the fact that the washing machine that they wash the basketball uniforms, the drain hadn’t been working in God knows when. They have a mop bucket right there with about two inches of crud and that should’ve been addressed 24-hours before we got there. Now we all saw where they had replaced bulbs, replaced ballasts the night before or the morning prior to us getting there because we announced our visit but you know I whispered to a couple of my colleagues I said if they were smart last Tuesday we talked about it Wednesday morning they would’ve had people out there not the morning of our visit because Ms. Jackson and Mr. Parker could vouch for this there were about a dozen fluorescent bulbs sitting in the corner where they had just changed bulbs. One of my colleagues pointed out to me there was a ballast in trash can where they had just replaced the ballast and some of the things he talked about were lights that were not burning. There were ceiling tiles that were just replaced which needed to be replaced but with the ceiling tiles being replaced it's hard to detect where the roof is leaking. It looks good when you first walk in. To say that your kids are going to perform and we all have at one time I don’t know if you still do it but there’s a fee that you pay if you’re going to participate in basketball, soccer or whatever and I’m pretty sure the fee is consistent throughout the county. It was like a $15.00 or $20.00 dollar fee, correct me if I’m wrong, but that should be going to more than just a uniform. As a parent not just as a Commissioner it’s embarrassing to say that facility was in Richmond County you know because, you know, it was just grungy. And it wasn’t a matter of a part-time or full-time person. Well if it's a part-time, full-time regardless if you give them a playlist of what they’ve got to do to meet health standards that should be done on a daily basis not because a couple of Commissioners get on a soapbox and start raising heck about it. We shouldn’t even have to talk about this the money has been put there for that purpose. It’s neglect on somebody’s part. I don’t know whether it’s the director, I don’t know whether it’s the director of the department, I don’t know if it’s the Administrator, I don’t know if it’s Commission. But in other words the ball has been dropped on these facilities and we can’t play footsie and just say oh well we’ll make it better. It’s pitiful because if this hadn’t come up last week or today the situation will still be the same. And the kids that participate in recreation when they have these tournaments where they have countywide tournaments where the best from East Augusta, the best from South Augusta, the best from West Augusta decide to have a countywide tournament, how do you think they feel going in a facility and wow you got this, we got that. It’s the same thing that happened in the school system that’s why you see every school system with identical gyms and identical football and baseball facilities, it's called parody. And so what we have to do we’re representing eight parts of the county with two at large and everybody pays the same percentage of taxes and we expect the same quality of service. You know what bugs me we get off the bus, everybody smiles and yes sir, Mr. Jefferson, yes sir, Mr. Williams, soon as we leave those clowns are out here, business as usual. You may not say that exactly but that’s the way I feel when I leave a lot of times. 30 Mr. M. Williams: I know what you’re saying now. Mr. Jefferson: So I’m saying this to say that you know January of 2020 that’s when my term expires but until then I’m going to be a thorn to make sure my tax dollars are spent where they should be. And I apologize to my colleagues if you felt that I took up too much of your time but like I said my colleagues before me was long-winded but I was going to say what I had to say. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk, here’s what I want you to do for us. Madam th,th Administrator, today being Tuesday February the 20 on Tuesday February the 27 I’d like to have an agenda item on Public Services and the agenda item is an update from Administrator Jackson on the priority item list of safety things that must be addressed and a preliminary cost of what those things are. Ms. Jackson: I can do that. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: Yes sir, go ahead. Mr. Fennoy: --- along those lines I would also like to see a maintenance plan for all of our recreational and parks facilities to make sure that what we are experiencing now won’t happen again. Mr. Mayor: Yeah, I think that’s appropriate. I think I’d like to see us attack that differently. What I’ve consistently heard and we’ve been talking about it for 39 months, Commissioner from th, the 4 is that we have a lot of work being done and we have people doing similar work but then we find ourselves out of place of where we “don’t have people” to do the same types of work and we need to do a better job of resourcing from an organizational standpoint. It’s one thing to hire a bunch of people but if I’ve got folks in Central Services who do maintenance, I’ve got folks in Engineering who do maintenance, then you know we need to do a better job of looking at how we manage those people resources when there is similar work that can be done across this organization as opposed to just saying we need to hire more people and I don’t think we’re doing a good job of that. Madam Clerk, do you have that? The Clerk: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right we have a motion and a second for the underlying item --- Mr. Speaker: (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: --- all right, I’m going to come to you we have a motion and a second for the nd underlined item. All right, the Chair’s going to recognize the Commissioner from the 2 and then we’re going to vote. 31 Mr. D. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Last week I was over at Bernie Ward two days prior to the inspection. There has always been some issues with the Bernie Ward regarding maintenance issues. In last Tuesday’s meeting they said the floor was slippery, folks were slipping and sliding and flying through the air. I was over there on Valentine’s Day it was more than 100 people over there with a party in the gym. Nobody was slipping and sliding and flying through the air. That facility every time I’ve been in it has been very clean except the two locker rooms that’s not being used back there in the corner. Yes, there were a couple of safety violations where there was a, what do you call that thing table tennis table folded up in the hallway by the door. That’s a safety violation in any facility and it’s up to whoever’s running that facility or the employees of that facility to make sure that those doorways are clear so the safety engineers don’t have to come down and move that table from that door to get rid of that safety violation. Now Bernie Ward it’s in bad shape. It’s old, a lot of the maintenance issues are routine maintenance issues. Now I’ve never seen the place filthy; never seen it filthy. They could do with what’s that, landscaping over there to improve the appearance but I don’t want us to leave this room thinking that the employees over there aren’t doing anything to keep the place presentable for the public. Now like I’ve said, I’ve never seen it dirty. Now it could be I have a different level of cleanliness than some but the place has never been filthy that I’ve seen. Thank you, Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Mr. D. Williams: --- we’ll vote. Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Mayor, we --- Mr. Mayor: Hold on, hold on --- Mr. M. Williams: --- we can’t vote yet. Mr. Mayor: --- hold on, we have a motion and a proper second and that’s my third time nd saying it. And the Commissioner from the 2 was almost the last person so state your inquiry. Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I don’t know what his level of cleanliness is but the three of us I know Commissioners had went out there and I think we agreed just a few minutes ago about the level of cleanliness. So I don’t know what the commission in District 2 feels like it’s clean but our citizens shouldn’t have to deal with what we saw. And I think that it’s important for us to go ahead and address those especially safety issues, the trip and fall issues that we can address right away and I’ll go ahead and vote now and leave it like that. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, voting. Mr. M. Williams: I’m going to let you kick me under the table. Mr. Frantom, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Smith out. Motion Passes 7-0. The Clerk: I believe we’re at Item number 30, 21? 32 Mr. Mayor: Twenty-one. The Clerk: Twenty-one --- Mr. Mayor: Let’s go ahead and take Item number 30. The Clerk: --- thirty, okay. The Clerk: ENGINEERING SERVICES 30. Motion to award contract to CH2M Hill for RFP #17-207 Strategic Asset Management Planning. (No recommendation from Engineering Services Committee February 13, 2018) st Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1. Mr. Fennoy: (Unintelligible) th Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9. Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This was brought to us in committee and it left committee with no recommendation. This company and Mr. Wiedmeier said that this is the same name but a different company. I’ve got some serious issues with voting and allowing this company and I think Ms. Sams was here to address that they did pass or they did do whatever they asked them to do. But this body this government here in the City of Augusta had some serious issues to happen with this same company many, many years ago, in fact could’ve had somebody in prison. And I take issue when we come back now and say that we’re going to support and vote to allow this company to come back in this facility and to have a process to go back to work for this facility now. You all mean to put it out there I can do that too but I can’t support it and I hope my colleagues at least have enough initiative to look and see or to do some investigation on this company to see what we’re dealing with here. Commissioner Lee Beard’s dead and gone but if he could speak now he’d have an earful for you. Mr. Mayor: All right, so Commissioner do you have a substitute motion you’d like to make or are you --- Mr. M. Williams: Yeah, my substitute motion is to deny for the previous issues that we had with this company before. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, that substitute motion has failed without a proper second. th Okay, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4. Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Now so many times we talk about having a certain level of trust and these director’s and folks that work for this city and work for this body. We heard this during committee I think our Procurement Director basically states that this was a 33 different process and a different part of whatever this company used to be from a long time ago and I wasn’t a Commissioner at the time but I paid attention to those issues. Also I have a great deal of faith in Mr. Wiedmeier and their judgement about bringing this particular agenda item to us and I think that puts us probably in a bit of an advantage because we can know well if you do come back from parole or you come back from probation you know you’ve got to be twice as good as you was before you went. So, I have faith in our Directors who made this recommendation to th us and with that being said not be long-winded as my colleague from the 5 mentioned I move for approval. Mr. Fennoy: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, I’ve got a motion and a proper second. The Chair recognizes the st, Commissioner from the 1 Engineering Services Chairman. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, I kind of agree with Commissioner Sias in that we have a Procurement Department that has been tested in the State Court, Federal Court and always come out on top. The couple of months back the City of Augusta adopted a Ban the Box Program so if we’re going to Ban the Box for people with backgrounds that may have done something wrong then we’ve got to look at our vendors differently. I think a couple of years back there were a couple of vendors that were put on probation and they probably know why they were put on probation and when it comes their probation is over with and they try to get a contract with the city, I’m just hoping that we give them the same consideration that we give everybody else. So, I think that we need to move forward and if we have any concerns about the quality of service of what’s been done in the past we need to get beyond that. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, so I’ve got a motion and a proper second, voting. st Commissioner from the 1 I’m going to ask you when you say you kind of sort of agree with him does that mean like 30%, 20%, 50%? Mr. Fennoy: Well, it’ll depend on what side you’re on. Mr. M. Williams votes No. Mr. Guilfoyle, Mr. Frantom and Mr. Smith out. Motion Passes 6-1. Mr. Mayor: One more item? The Clerk: Item 21. Mr. Mayor: One more again? The Clerk: One more again. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 21. Motion to approve tasking the Administrator with reviewing the criteria for the career ladders that the General Counsel presented and bring back a recommendation whether that 34 criteria needs to be adjusted). (Approved by Administrative Services Committee February 13, 2018) stth Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 1, I’m sorry the 9. Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Here again this is an issue that’s supposed to be in our PPPM book. The General Counsel said we know the issue about the two Attorney’s and the difference in the pay scale. Now we’re saying we’re going to look at the career ladder and move forward when we moved one attorney to the from the Law Department to the Fire Department and one to Utilities. Utilities agreed to pay the same salary; we’re talking about $25 to $30,000 dollars difference between the two lawyers and we move one. Now we’re asking the Administrator to look at the career ladder that the General Counsel is presenting but if it’s in our PPPM book why are we just looking at that now? I mean I’m a little bit confused as to why if it’s in the PPPM book and it’s a process we’re supposed to use, did we use that every time? Now you know I’ve been talking about this for quite some time this ain’t nothing new. We’re talking about moving one female, white female to the Fire Department, a black female to the Utilities and Utilities got twice as much work to be done but we’re paying $25 to $30,000 dollars difference. That’s a big difference, Mr. Mayor. So if Utilities is willing to pay and have the money to pay because that’s what we were told before that the department had the money and they could pay, we make that decision here not the Attorney. We tell him what he can or cannot do. He advises us on what we should or should not do but he don’t tell us now. So we need to correct this now or correct it later I think we’re going to end up paying the day or pay some lawyer on the other side that represents somebody that’s going to end up in a lawsuit for us and we act like we don’t see this now. th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6. Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I have a question for Ms. Jackson if you don’t mind, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Proceed. Mr. Hasan: Ms. Jackson, from looking at the career ladders in terms of the one that Attorney MacKenzie has put before us to make a, that’s he’s going to use in his office to make decisions about, what is those timelines for a person to be evaluated before they can move to the next level? Ms. Jackson: Uh --- Mr. Hasan: I’m sorry, go ahead. Ms. Jackson: --- yeah, the way it was drafted initially drafted and approved was that the individual would have to be in the position for three years as a staff attorney, one to three years. Mr. Hasan: Okay. 35 Ms. Jackson: And then if they met all other criteria they could move to Staff Attorney II and would also need to stay there for three years. Mr. Hasan: Okay so okay, and help me with this. When we were discussing this the other day we came to the point that uh, Attorney MacKenzie you can help me with this I’m just trying to get some clarity so I won’t have to say the same thing twice. Was saying that you know this the current personnel that we was in question about making the advancement and potentially being compensated within that first three-year cycle right I mean we’re talking about a particular person here. With that being said what if they’ve been here seven years so are they in the third tier because they’re beyond the three years and my point is because he was saying it didn’t impact them they automatically qualify. So if they’re automatically qualified the decision we were making the other day it did not bother me in any form or fashion that means they automatically qualified. So you just gave me two three-year cycles which is a total of six years and the person has been here seven years so what tier are they in then? Mr. MacKenzie: I’ll be happy to address that. The way the career ladder’s format works is you have to meet the time requirement to advance to the next level and you have to be have spent so much time in the level that you’re in. So if you’re a Staff Attorney I which is what everybody would start out as, if you’ve been in that role for at least three years then you’re eligible to be considered if you meet the other criteria to go to Staff Level II. But you wouldn’t be eligible to go automatically to three because you have to be in the two slot for a minimum amount of time before you can be considered for the three slot. You have to go through the steps in the ladder; you can’t skip steps. Mr. Hasan: So if you’re just not implementing the staff implementing the ladder and if you say they automatically qualify then does that mean you’re counting their years of service that’s my, you’re counting their years of service already then. Mr. MacKenzie: Well, that’s because the first step in the ladder is the Step 1 which they already have been in for a number of years. Mr. Hasan: I understand that, Andrew, Attorney MacKenzie, I’m sorry Attorney MacKenzie, but if you’re going to award their years of service you need to award their years of service you know if you’re going to do that. You can’t just give them the three and take four away from them. And that seven may not be a number but I’m just saying I’m wondering if a person’s been there beyond the six years then that gives them the potential to be in the next unless there’s some extenuating circumstances that prevents them from going to the next. That means you’re taking, you’re not acknowledging four years of service. Mr. MacKenzie: You can acknowledge all the service but they have to have the next level of years of experience in that level before they can go to the third level. Mr. Hasan: I mean I understand that, I understand that, but you’re acknowledging one, okay. Mr. M. Williams: Ms. Mayor Pro Tem, are you in charge? 36 Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: All right, Commissioner Williams. Mr. M. Williams: Thank you. I’ve got a couple of questions. You know we’re talking about two individuals let me go back from basics. We moved, well the General Counsel moved two lawyers to two different departments one went to the Fire Department as their lawyer working for the Law Department and one went to the Utilities Department working for that department. They both were hired within 30 days of each other, is that right, Andrew? Close and it ain’t got to be exact I don’t want him to say but close proximity to each other, right? Mr. MacKenzie: I would have to confirm the exact date. Mr. M. Williams: Okay, we don’t need an exact date. I’m just saying close even a lawyer knows close, don’t you? Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, sir. Mr. M. Williams: Okay they are close then they’re not like years apart. How do one get to be a Staff Attorney in the same amount of time and the other one don’t get to be a Staff Attorney if you’re talking about the career ladder in the three years? But if the one just got here and they have to get in that slot and stay there for three years I can understand that but if they’re within close proximity of each other, then that means that they are been here the same length of time in that one position, is that right? Mr. MacKenzie: No, it’s actually not how we would really describe it. The differences between these were even before there were any departments that decided they wanted to have a higher level of legal services, these two positions existed before that and the salary differences were there before that as well because they’re in two different positions and the salary difference is based on the experience level of the person who’s been licensed longer and has longer experience had a different position and a higher salary. Mr. M. Williams: I’m glad you said licensed longer because that’s right down the road I want to go. When you’ve got one that was already licensed when they hired into this job and the other one was not licensed until later gave them time to get their license so one was licensed before the other one if you’re going by license now. So if you’re going to use that, I ain’t got no problem with it but one was licensed further then it went to the department that says they have the funds to pay. They don’t mind paying the staff attorney pay because they’re getting a higher quality of lawyer’s work out of those people so the Utilities Department said they don’t mind paying but the Law Department seems to have a problem and it’s not coming out of your budget, it’s coming out of somebody else’s budget. So, I’m a little bit confused as to how that works because you said it depends on the license now so if that’s the case I’m trying to keep us out of court for a discrimination case. That’s what I’m really trying to do. And I think it’s unfair to have two females one the opposite race going to one department and one to another one and we act like we don’t see the difference. 37 Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, I want everybody to suspend for five minutes, suspend for five th minutes. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4. th Mr. Sias: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I keep remembering what my colleague from the 5 said so let me be a short as possible. On the issue that’s being discussed the General Counsel had came to a conclusion how to address this issue but with further review there’s some based on SES level employees and other employees the process selected although good intended will work you can’t apply it to this situation. So, to move that process forward I’m going to propose a motion that will get us there as simple as possible and immediately. So, with that being said I move that this Commission approve a 12% raise for the Attorney applied to or should I, I need to use a name, don’t I, Mr. MacKenzie? Mr. MacKenzie: Yes (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Yes, that’d be proper. Mr. Sias: Let me back up my motion. At this point I move that we authorize a 12% raise for Ms. Kayla Cooper assigned as the attorney with the Utilities Department and that be effective immediately. Mr. Jefferson: Second. Mr. Mayor: Okay, I’ve got a motion and a proper second. All those in favor will vote yea and all those opposed will vote no, voting. Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, is it too late to ask a question? Will you allow me to ask a question after we vote? Mr. Mayor: Maybe. Mr. D. Williams abstains. Mr. Frantom, Mr. Guilfoyle and Mr. Smith out. Motion Passes 6-0-1. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, Ms. Bonner, is there any other business before us? The Clerk: No, sir, that’s it. \[MEETING ADJOURNED\] Lena Bonner Clerk of Commission 38 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 February 20, 2018. ______________________________ Clerk of Commission 39