HomeMy WebLinkAboutCalled Commission Meeting August 14, 2018 (Verbatim Minutes)
CALLED MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER
August 14, 2018
Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 11:00 o’clock a.m., Tuesday, August
14, 2018, the Honorable Hardie Davis, Jr., presiding.
PRESENT: Hons. Jefferson, Guilfoyle, Sias, Frantom, M. Williams, Davis, Fennoy, D.
Williams, Hasan and Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission.
Mr. Mayor: All right, good morning, everybody. The Chair recognizes Attorney
MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: Did you want to go into the closed portion first?
Mr. Mayor: I do.
1. LEGAL MEETING
A. Pending and potential litigation
B. Real estate
C. Personnel
Mr. MacKenzie: I would entertain a motion to go into an executive session to discuss
pending and potential litigation, real estate and personnel.
Mr. Fennoy: So move.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right, voting.
Ms. Davis and Mr. Smith out.
Motion carries 8-0.
\[LEGAL MEETING\]
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ll call the meeting back to order. The Chair recognizes Attorney
MacKenzie.
2. Motion to approve execution by the Mayor of the affidavit of compliance with
Georgia’s Open Meeting Act.
Mr. MacKenzie: I would entertain a motion to execute the closed meeting affidavit.
Mr. D. Williams: So move.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
1
Mr. Mayor: A motion and a second. Voting.
Mr. Fennoy out.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Madam Administrator for a recognition.
Ms. Jackson: If I could ask Jarvis Sims to stand please. Jarvis is our new Deputy
Administrator for operations, infrastructure and development. He comes to us from East Point,
Georgia where he took on key roles related to public safety, management analysis, capital projects
management and code enforcement so I thought he had some of the skill sets that we need to
advance our community and look forward to him working with us.
Mr. Mayor: Welcome aboard. Okay. The Chair recognizes the Mayor Pro Tem.
Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to make a motion to authorize the
settlement of all claims in the matter of Franklin Stewart vs. Augusta Richmond County in
the amount of $28,759.79 and authorize the Mayor to execute the settlement documents and
the Finance Department to disburse the settlement amount.
Mr. Hasan: So move.
Mr. D. Williams: Second.
Mr. Mayor: A motion and a second.
The Clerk: She made the motion, he seconded. Okay, thank you.
Mr. Mayor: Voting.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Madam Clerk, I was not in legal during this discussion so I will not vote
on this. I do not know about it.
The Clerk: All right.
Mr. Fennoy out.
Mr. Guilfoyle not voting.
Motion carries 8-0.
nd
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the commissioner from the 2.
Mr. D. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to make a motion to authorize the settlement
of all claims by Janice Hardy in the amount of $40,000 and authorizing the Mayor to execute
the settlement documents and the Finance Department to disburse the amount.
2
Ms. Davis: Second.
Mr. Mayor: I have a motion and a proper second. Voting.
The Clerk: Same for this item, sir?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes.
Mr. Guilfoyle not voting.
Motion carries 9-0.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, Ms. Bonner, we’re going to go to our special called meeting agenda
and we’re going to go to number five on that agenda.
5. Depot Project. (Requested by Commissioner Bill Fennoy)
st
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, I would like to make a motion that we move forward with the
Depot project and not request the builder to build it in one phase.
Mr. Frantom: I’d like to second it --
Mr. Mayor: A motion and a proper second.
Mr. Frantom: -- and clarify that motion.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Okay. All right, Ms. Bonner, would you restate his motion?
The Clerk: The motion was to move forward with the Depot project not requesting the
developer to build in one phase.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the commissioner from the 7.
Mr. Frantom: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Based on what this government voted on, I would
think that it would be that we need to rescind the agreement that was voted on by this Commission
and approve the resolution that was brought forth by the DDA, I guess a month ago now, the Earl
Taylor resolution.
The Clerk: What was that he –
Mr. Frantom: The Earl Taylor resolution.
The Clerk: Was that an amendment to this motion or you are doing a substitute?
3
Mr. Frantom: Well, I think we are going to have to rescind the original resolution that we
passed as a body and that’s what I’m asking for clarification –
The Clerk: Oh, you’re asking for clarification, I’m sorry.
Mr. Frantom: -- do we rescind it and then get Commissioner Fennoy to restate his motion
as the Earl Taylor resolution? I guess that’s the point of clarification.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Attorney MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: Sure. I think there were three motions that were articulated on the July
10 meeting. One of those was the Earl Taylor motion, then there was one that I had put in which
was a motion to approve the authorizing resolution as recommended by General Counsel and the
date then was July 10 and if you’d like to do it today it would be August 14 with the attached
Intergovernmental Downtown Development contract.
Mr. Mayor: All right. All right, I want to, all right this is to the commissioner from the
stth
1. Did you understand what the commissioner from the 7 reiterated?
Mr. Fennoy: I do.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Do you concur with amending your motion to do that?
Mr. Fennoy: I do.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, so we’ve got that clarified. I’m going to go in this order. The Chair
nd
recognizes the commissioner from the 2.
Mr. D. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to hear the recommendation regarding this motion
from the Administrator and staff --
Mr. Mayor: Okay.
Mr. D. Williams: -- before we vote on it.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, I understand. The Chair recognizes the commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Same sentiment, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to hear from staff a report as to
where they are. I’m in support of the motion but I want to make sure that we’ve dotted the I’s and
crossed the T’s and did everything we needed to do.
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right. The Chair recognizes the commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: Thank you. I want to insure that this motion if we’re going to do this it needs to
be clearly understood that this will be a $14 million dollar investment and we need to have clearly,
if I’m not mistaken and I’d like to hear from staff, do we need to have a financial plan in place to
4
go along with this Earl Taylor amendment or whatever it’s called, do we have to have a financial
plan? And I’d like to get that answer.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so I’m going to come back to the staff so you can address it all at
th
one time, okay, so just hold. All right, the Chair recognizes the commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Boy (inaudible) to hit this dad gum table for us to try to follow as well as
staff is trying to follow. Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, the DDA representatives, Mr. Scott and Mr.
Nixon, had met with our Administrator, our financial staff as well as the attorneys. It was a very
positive meeting and a lot of good discussion was brought out. The whole thing about were we at
a deadlock, our staff has done everything that they could to protect the City. They’re supposed to
be working hand in hand with the DDA and I think we accomplished that at that meeting. Some
of the challenges faced by BLOC Global as well as this county itself is BLOC Global cannot move
forward to find the investors without a commitment. But my concern is, as well as the concern of
staff, is to make sure that BLOC Global does their due diligence. In order to make a financial
obligation or gratuity with the partial investment supplied by the City, we have to have the
information by BLOC Global and I think the email that was written yesterday back to the
Administrator clearly defines that not in the best of terms but the sentence is loud and clear. The,
what the attorney had written up which Sean had made the motion for it brings us either now or
later for BLOC Global to do their due diligence but it still comes before this body for a final
approval. And I can understand between the cart and the horse I don’t like what kind of games
has been played as far as us putting the attorney or the Administrator on notice, etc., etc. and I just
don’t appreciate that because they have done everything in their powers to look out for this fine
city or ours and I will compliment them either in private or in public but for us to move forward,
we do have to move forward with the articles that the attorney had wrote to where whatever is
approved comes back before this Commission and that gives lead time for BLOC Global to find
their investors, to do their due diligence and for this city to move forward hand in hand with the
DDA as well as BLOC Global. We’ve got to make sure that motion that Commissioner Fennoy
made that we are protected and I want to hear that out of the Attorney to make sure that’s the
motion.
th
Mr. Mayor: I’m going to go to the commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Yes, Mr. Mayor, thank you, sir. It seems as though you’ve got a motion that
Commissioner Frantom got on the floor now, Commissioner Fennoy --
Mr. Mayor: Fennoy.
Mr. Hasan: Okay, I think you’ve got them tied together. Shouldn’t we separate those two
out?
th
Mr. Mayor: No. I think the Commissioner from the 7 in his amendment to the motion
st
from the commissioner from the 1, it simply just clarifies it.
Mr. Hasan: But you’re asking to rescind. I think you need to rescind it first and then we
come back and vote to move forward, that’s what I’m saying. That’s the separation of it. You
5
want to rescind the action we took on the tenth of July and then you come back and vote to do
whatever you’re going to do. In separate motions.
Mr. Mayor: It can be.
Mr. Hasan: But it is, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: I think his motion was to rescind and to adopt –
Mr. Hasan: That’s what I’m saying. You break it out. You need to do the recension first.
Mr. Mayor: Well, I mean, as I said, that is a way we can do it. I’m not saying I’m opposed
to it but again, his motion meets that same intent. It does the exact same thing just in a single
motion.
Mr. Hasan: Okay. Also, Mr. Mayor, okay, we’ll move on. I had a meeting also with two
of the members from the DDA and what concerns me the most, Mr. Mayor, for the record is two
things. Some of the changes that Attorney MacKenzie had made in the document that was passed
that particular day by this Commission, they were not aware of some of the language there.
Number two, it wasn’t so much about doing it all in one phase because I said to them as long as
you do it, even if you’ve done it in two phases and you’ve done it in a timely manner, that was
important. One of the members said to me in no uncertain terms he did not think that the developer
would put in as an absolute that he would do the second phase. So that concerns me because what
happens then, Mr. Mayor, if that holds true, then where the developer would be putting in possibly
$79 million dollars and we’re putting in 14 that comes to a total of about 93 and they’ve only done
one phase of that then that means they’re only putting in 36 and we’re putting in 14 so they’re
walking away from the table with less than they actually invest. So that would be my concern.
Now I don’t want to say about nobody else. Those were my questions and I was told they don’t
think the developer would be an absolute. My term was absolute that they would do the second
phase. They didn’t think we would be able to get that and that’s what concerns me. So in other
words it becomes a $50 million dollar project as opposed to a $93 million dollar project.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, I appreciate that. So here’s our posture. I’m going to recognize
Administrator Jackson and then I’m going to come back to the Attorney.
Ms. Jackson: Thank you, sir. In terms of the recommendations that we presented on July
10, our recommendations of the staff stand. I have not received any new information that would
warrant us changing that recommendation and so my recommendation is the same today as it was
on July 10. In regard to the resolutions prepared, it seems like there are two competing versions
of resolutions. There appears to be one resolution that has been prepared by the General Counsel
that I think he has circulated today that offers some protections for us. It’s a matter of which comes
first, which you request first. It does require that the developer, the development team does due
diligence and comes back to the Commission at a later date. Our recommendations made on July
10 had those in reverse order. We wanted to see the results first before we would authorize
anything. In terms of the Earl Taylor resolution based upon what I think I understood last month
when we were going over this, the General Counsel and staff and I were much more comfortable
6
with the resolution prepared by the General Counsel as compared to the one prepared by Earl
Taylor.
Mr. Mayor: All right, Attorney MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: This would be same as the recommendation that I made on July 10. This
would be a motion to rescind the resolution approved by the Commission on July 18, 2018 and to
approve the authorizing resolution as recommended by General Counsel on August 14, 2018 with
the attached Intergovernmental Downtown Development contract which is what was distributed
to ya’ll.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, so what you distributed to us was not the Earl Taylor resolution.
Mr. MacKenzie: That’s correct.
stth
Mr. Mayor: Okay. So that’s not what the commissioner from the 1 and the 7 have
requested.
Mr. MacKenzie: If they’ve requested the Earl Taylor resolution, that is not what this is.
Mr. Hasan: I’d like to make a substitute motion.
Mr. Mayor: All right, hold on a minute. And the substantial changes in here versus the
one in the Earl Taylor one.
Mr. MacKenzie: (inaudible) those at the last meeting but the most substantive changes
would include making sure that this requires approval by the Commission and some of the other
adjustments but it does not include the recommendations, all of the recommendations as articulated
by the Administrator but allows for the Commission to have that stuff brought back to them at a
later time.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, so effectively the substantial changes will come back to the
Commission every time which is okay.
Mr. MacKenzie: Substantive changes.
Mr. Mayor: Yeah. I think that’s (inaudible).
Mr. Hasan: Rescind and make that motion then?
Mr. Mayor: So why don’t you make that the substitute motion.
Mr. Hasan: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: You okay with that?
7
Mr. Hasan: Yes, but can I ask the Administrator one thing? Ms. Jackson, so are you all
comfortable with what you are just sharing? What Andrew passed out today, ya’ll are comfortable
with that?
Ms. Jackson: The resolution that Andrew prepared is one way to get there. I don’t think
it’s the best way but it does protect our interests more so than the Earl Taylor resolution.
Mr. Hasan: So the only thing here that you’re asking really, oh, I’m sorry, I apologize.
I’ve been wrong once or twice. Three while we’re at it. Slightly. But you’re comfortable with it.
Ms. Jackson: I don’t think it’s the best way to go but it’s better than the other resolution.
Mr. Hasan: And development of the project itself is it, what is it, two phases? Guaranteed
two phases?
Mr. MacKenzie: This allows for the process of due diligence to move forward where that
issue can be decided by the Commission at the time the due diligence information comes back. It
does not require two phases at this junction but it allows you to review that information and make
a decision during due diligence.
Mr. Hasan: But is it still a $93 million dollar project that we’re approving as an absolute
$93 million dollar project then?
Mr. MacKenzie: It does not do that. It allows you to proceed with due diligence process
and to evaluate that information as the due diligence is being done.
Mr. Hasan: So you’re saying at this particular time we still have an opportunity to not enter
into a contractual agreement up until we get to a place that we’re comfortable with?
Mr. Frantom: That’s right.
Mr. MacKenzie: Based on information in the due diligence process, yes.
Mr. Hasan: So I’ve got two attorneys now.
Mr. Jefferson: Actually 12.
th
Mr. Mayor: Commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, the only reason why I proceeded
forward on this, not going against our Administrator, attorneys or staff, etc. It gets us an
opportunity to look at this down the road and if it is not to our liking, it’s actually two bites
(inaudible) as well as for BLOC Global. In order for BLOC Global to do the $93 million dollars,
they have to find their investors, their backing, etc. Now if they come back three months from
now, I hope it’s three months and 15 days because I’ll be gone then, but if they come back in three
and a half months and they can’t find their investors, they can’t find their bank backing, it protects
8
us. At that moment we could go, “this is not a good deal”. But at least within two to three months,
however long it is, they’ll find their investors, their backing and hopefully they could come up
with the $93 million dollar project and do it all at one time. I’m not in favor of just that first phase,
but I am in favor of letting them able to find the financials for us to move forward as well as them
move forward. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a, recognize the commissioner from the 7.
Mr. Frantom: Thank you. Do we know if this has been shared with BLOC, DDA? Do we
know that answer?
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Attorney MacKenzie.
Mr. MacKenzie: It has been shared with them as part of the previous process. I don’t think
we have received final feedback from them regarding it, whether or not it would be something that
they would be interested in.
Mr. Frantom: So this document resolution has none of the eleven conditions from last
week?
Mr. MacKenzie: That’s correct. They are not articulated but it does allow for those things
to be reviewed as part of due diligence.
Mr. Frantom: My final question, Mr. Mayor, is either resolution that passes today the City
could still get out without any financial obligation and there are safeholds in both of them, correct?
Mr. MacKenzie: That’s correct.
Mr. Frantom: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes –
Mr. M. Williams: I hadn’t heard from my Finance Director, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: Well, I just yielded to the Administrator to respond to that.
Mr. M. Williams: She responded to that. I want to hear from the Finance Director.
Mr. Mayor: All right. The Chair recognizes Director Williams.
Ms. Williams: We do agree that the motion that is presented by Andrew will give us the
protection that we need to be able to proceed with the process but still to get the, have the due
diligence done as the Administrator said, this is not the perfect scenario, however it will move us
forward and afford us some protection. So we can concur with the substitute motion.
9
Mr. Williams: Donna, I’m in support of the project. That’s no doubt and I met with the
Development Authority but I wanted to make sure that the conversation had been had with all
parties that we are in the best place because I’m trying to make sure that the protection of this
government is first and foremost. So along with your leadership and the Administrator, ya’ll have
got to a place where you feel comfortable with this because at one point we have not got to that
place. I need to know.
Ms. Jackson: I think it’s a question of the order in which you do this. When I made my
recommendations back on July 10, I wanted to have our concerns addressed up front before we
agreed to provide our funding to the project. In this scenario I think essentially we’re agreeing to
provide the funds with the due diligence happening later and that being brought back to the
Commission. To me that’s a way to kick the can down the road and generally I try to stay away
from solutions where your approach is not to address the issues up front. That was why I made
the recommendations that I did back on July 10. So I prefer to have the information up front before
the organization commits to anything, however, what the General Counsel proposes places us in a
better position than what Mr. Taylor proposes.
Mr. M. Williams: I’m just tired of kicking the can.
Ms. Jackson: Yeah, and to me the resolution feels like it, like you’re waiting to get the
stuff later. Why don’t we get the stuff up front?
st
Mr. Mayor: Okay, here’s our posture. The commissioner from the 1 is being recognized.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to withdraw my motion.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Without objection. All right, the Chair recognizes the commissioner
th
form the 6 for a motion.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to make one comment before I do that if you
don’t mind.
Mr. Mayor: I do mind.
Mr. Hasan: Well, I’m going to have to make a comment, Mr. Mayor, so we have it for the
record. Since we’re allowing them to do it in this order and the Administrator in the previous
meeting with them, she offered them $250,000 to help them get the information and she done it
this particular time. That is no longer on the table if we’ve got to wait. We’re not giving them,
can we agree on that? We’re not making any (inaudible). We’re going to wait. We’re not giving
$250,000 to help them get the information.
Mr. Mayor: Well, let me suggest to you the developer rejected that anyway.
Mr. Hasan: I just wanted to make sure, I just wanted to make sure we got that for the
record.
10
Mr. Mayor: Yeah, the developer said we didn’t need that.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you. A motion to rescind the resolution approved by the
Commission on July 10, 2018 and to approve the authorizing resolution as recommended by
the General Counsel on August 14, 2018 with an attached Intergovernmental Downtown
Development contract.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Mr. Mayor: I’ve got a motion and a second. Voting.
Mr. Sias voting No.
Mr. M. Williams abstains.
Motion carries 8-1-1.
Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, we’re going to stand at ease for five minutes.
\[SHORT RECESS\]
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’re going to go back to Item 1 on our Special Called Meeting.
Item 1 from Legal. We are going to talk about a matter that we just discussed and that we
did not complete during our executive session and that’s with regards to the opening of the
EMS zone. All right, the Chair recognizes Madam Administrator.
Ms. Jackson: We have prepared a presentation related to the EMS zone process first to
inform you all about what that process is. Second to inform you about our recommendations about
how we should proceed in light of the fact that the Region VI EMS Council voted to open that
zone. There are options available to us and we want to make sure that everybody is clear now that
the zone has been opened the Council will go through a process to receive applications for
providers. We wanted to make sure you all understood what that process is and what we believe
as a staff we should be doing in response to that. At the end we’ll have a motion for your
consideration and hopefully approval today. At this point I’ll turn it over to Chief James for him
to go through a brief presentation on that. We’ll also be open to respond to any questions that we
can respond to. There are some matters that we cannot discuss publicly because of the process so
please keep in mind that we will answer as many questions as we can but we can’t perhaps answer
every question due to those restrictions.
Mr. Mayor: Let’s let them get all the handouts first. I’m going to go to the commissioner
th
from the 8 first. He had his hand up first then I’m going to come back to you. The Chair
th
recognizes the commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Guilfoyle: I think we’re going to be discussing the ambulance, or the plan about the
ambulance here as well today. Is that correct?
Mr. Mayor: That’s correct.
11
Mr. Guilfoyle: Why don’t we talk about that first before we talk about zone because there’s
no reason to make a motion or to do anything with the zone without knowing our intent as far as
the ambulance side of the business?
Mr. Mayor: Well, I think you’re going to hear all that in just a second.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Then we don’t need to make a motion on this until we hear from the
ambulance.
Mr. Mayor: I couldn’t agree with you more.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. That will be fine.
th
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My sentiment as well. I want to have full
disclosure of all the issues. We sit here talking about what the process is for obtaining the zone.
When we requested, when we went after the zone, shouldn’t we have known all of that prior to
going asking those questions now? We sound like this is brand new to us. This is not brand new
so I want to make that clear that we sit here as if this is a surprise, we didn’t know the process, we
hadn’t been a part of it and we was so it really bothers me to the fact that we talk as if it was
something strange to us today. I think everything should be put on the table at the same time and
I’ve got it on the committee, in fact, I had it on two committees, Administrative Services and
Public Safety as well, to discuss the ambulance contract.
Mr. Mayor: We’ll talk about it all in just a few minutes.
Mr. M. Williams: Well, I just want to talk about it all.
Mr. Mayor: You’ll have an opportunity to talk about it.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Fire Chief.
Chief James: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, we’ll go through this brief presentation. I
first want to do a disclaimer. This matter is currently being prepared for a confidential competitive
application process. As a result, the information presented herein is the most detailed that can be
comfortably shared in an open meeting while maintaining a competitive process. Background.
Augusta, Georgia has the oldest ambulance license in Richmond County, has had that license since
1975. Until June 30, 2014 Augusta, Georgia was zone provider for Richmond County. Augusta,
Georgia contracted this service out to private providers while utilizing its own ambulances as
support. On October 2, 2017 the Augusta Commission voted to direct staff to initiate the process
to obtain the Richmond County ambulance zone. On August 2, 2018 the Region VI EMS Council
voted to open the Richmond County EMS zone. What’s Next. The Region VI EMS Council will
accept applications for the Richmond County EMS zone in October sometime. Applications will
12
be considered by the Zoning Committee and recommendation made to the full Region VI EMS
Council. Region VI EMS Council will make a recommendation to the Department of Public
Health on November 1. What does being the zone provider mean? Pursuant to state law all 911
calls for the emergency medical service must be responded to by the ambulance provider
designated by the Department of Public Health. These services can be provided directly by the
zone provider or can be supplemented by subcontract to one or more ambulance services. Why
Augusta should be Richmond County zone provider. First and foremost, accountability. That way
Augusta can guarantee a minimum number of ambulances as needed throughout each day and
enforce response times, enforce standards for staffing and level of care and insure fair charges to
citizens. Again, why should Augusta be Richmond County zone provider? For efficiency. We
can eliminate duplications in dispatch, insure ambulances are stationed throughout Richmond
County and guarantee the closest, more responsive ambulances are being utilized. Proposed plan.
Implementing a complete EMS system that includes sub-contracted ambulance services under the
management and control of Augusta, Georgia. Emergency medical transport with Augusta Fire
Department ambulances and Augusta Fire Department first responders. Proposed plan.
Subcontract ambulances and in subcontracting these ambulances these contracts will include direct
dispatch by Augusta 911 directing all of the ambulances. Ambulances dedicated to the 911 calls
only so each of the subcontractors that participate with you would have to have ambulances that
they dedicated specifically for 911 calls not used on other contract calls. All the ambulances within
this system would have a GPS monitoring on all ambulances. We would have enforceable
response times. You could standardize the charges so if you used Augusta, Georgia being a zone
provider your contracts for services that you work with you could in those agreements standardize
the charges so one service would be charging the same as the other. In this proposal we would
propose that there would be no subsidy for the subcontractor. And briefly at the end here I just
wanted to discuss the funding as there has been a lot of talk of what this would cost us and this
type of thing. We would not be coming back asking for additional funding outside of our 2018
budget nor after we pass the 2019 budget would we coming back asking for additional funds. The
difference between just related to EMS stuff from 2018 to 2019 is around a $400,000 mark but
other than that, there will be no more additional funds requested. That’s what I have there, Mr.
Mayor.
Mr. Mayor: All right. Madam Administrator, do you want to add anything or are you –
Ms. Jackson: The only thing I would add, I believe, it would serve our application well to
have a motion from the Commission authorizing us to seek the, to apply for the zone.
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. Hasan: I’d make a motion –
Mr. Mayor: All right.
Mr. D. Williams: I’ll second.
Mr. Mayor: Well, I hadn’t recognized you yet. All right, the Chair recognizes the
th
commissioner from the 8.
13
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, this is a question for Chief James.
With the information that he had gave forth to us, do you mind if I ask some, sir?
Mr. Mayor: No, I don’t mind.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Chief James, as far as Augusta, Georgia has the oldest ambulance license
in Richmond County, had it since 1975. We used to have our own ambulances, is that correct?
We used to be an ambulance service provider.
Chief James: Yes, sir.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Why did we get out of it?
Chief James: We were in the business and had the, we still have that same license. We’ve
always subcontracted that out and in 2014 that current zone provider requested to take the entire
zone.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. What next, as far as the Council will accept applications for the
Richmond County EMS zone in October and then they’ll proceed in sending it to Atlanta, is that
correct?
Chief James: The process is in October they’ll open up the zone, they will allow a 10-day
period of any of the ambulance services that want to apply for that zone to submit their application.
Then after those ten days they have ten days to review it. Then we’ll come up on a November 1
meeting and they will make their recommendation to the full EMS Council. The full EMS Council
will vote on that recommendation and then that will be sent to the Department of Public Health in
Atlanta.
Mr. Guilfoyle: As far as the Department of Public Health, I can understand this local region
how it works and have fully seen it in motion here locally. As far as when it goes to the DPH, they
can either accept the recommendation or they can make a recommendation of their own, is that
correct?
Chief James: Correct. They can accept the recommendation, they can send it back or they
can make a different appointment themselves.
Mr. Guilfoyle: All right, we’ve come down this road going after the zone. We cut ties
with the ambulance provider we had under contract. What happens if we do not get the zone?
Chief James: Then whoever they designate to be the zone provider, if the Department of
Public Health chooses someone else to be that zone provider, then that zone provider will then be
responsible for providing EMS service to the citizens of Augusta.
14
Mr. Guilfoyle: No different than the current zone provider that we, that’s the reason we’re
going after the zone. Are you going to be satisfied if they decide to pick somebody and would not
pursue it a year down the road or whatever?
Chief James: If we pursue it years down the road, that will be the decision made by the
governing body.
Mr. Guilfoyle: They have done that before and that’s why we are going after the zone.
Chief James: The state has –
Mr. Guilfoyle: The DPH had gave the zone up, the co-zone too, is that correct? I might
be talking out of line or uninformed.
Chief James: In 2014 the current zone provider requested that instead of being co-zone
providers with the City of Augusta, they requested that they be the total zone provider by
themselves.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Who is that?
Chief James: The current zone provider?
Mr. Guilfoyle: Yes.
Chief James: Gold Cross.
Mr. Guilfoyle: And so if the DPH designates a new or current zone provider for us here
locally, are we going to pursue it no different than we’re doing right now?
Chief James: That decision would have to be directed by the Commission to tell us whether
that is what they want to do or not.
Mr. Guilfoyle: On your next page why Augusta should be the Augusta Richmond County
zone provider. One, accountability. Guarantee minimum number of ambulances that are needed
throughout each day. Enforceable response time. Supports standards of staffing level care. Ensure
fair charges to the citizens. Efficiency. Eliminate duplication to dispatch. Ensuring ambulances
are stationed throughout Richmond County. Guarantee closest most responsive ambulances are
being utilized. Implement. Let me just stay right there. We had that control underneath the
contract that we did have. On the last contract that was written years ago, four years ago, I put in,
before I would even agree to it, six items. One, that we monitor all vehicles. They ended up
putting in a monitor in our 911. Our current 911 did not know it was there or the previous in turn.
Number two, response times, because being a rural area we had to have response times put in there.
And so that’s the reason why the current zone provider, or was, or is, had different facilities
throughout the Augusta Richmond County. They even reduced their contract over the four years.
We had control. But now we are going to proceed forward. Listen to this very carefully,
colleagues. We’re going to proceed forth with no subsidy but we’re going to put in the requirement
15
request and expectations from ambulance providers, plural, not one, plural. There’s the director
or CEO of Doctors Hospital that came from Texas. Big hospital. They use multiple ambulance
providers. It was the most confusing for these hospitals to use because each ambulance provider
has a different set of rules, guidelines, different equipment, different expectations, different
contacts holding patient files. Would it be better to stay with one that meets all your requirements
if we are the zone provider, Chief James, instead of numerous?
th
Mr. Mayor: Hold on to that. I’m going to interject here, commissioner from the 8.
Hospitals have the ability to contract with any ambulance service for those services as it relates to
transport. This is the pre-emergency that we’re talking about from a zone standpoint. Doctors,
University, AU, they have the ability as you may well know, AU has entered into a contract already
with Grady so that’s a separate issue. I just might want to encourage you to put that one in the
parking lot as it relates to –
Mr. Guilfoyle: Right with Grady as a transport from in-house from hospital to hospital but
when it comes to patients and patients’ cares and response times and when you get two or three
different companies coming in with different ways of doing business, it gets confusing for the end
use which is the hospital. I just want to make sure that everybody’s aware of that, Mr. Mayor. I’m
going to stand down and let my other colleagues talk because I’ve got one that really wants to talk.
Mr. Mayor: Yeah and I’m going to come back to you. All right. Okay, the Chair
th
recognizes the commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir. I want to say first off when you look at items that were put here
and we talk about a contract that this city has, I remember distinctly in 2014 thereabouts when
inspections were attempted and enforcement of the contract was attempted, that became a major
issue in Richmond County. 13 and 14. So no one can tell me that we had a contract that was
enforceable. I didn’t buy it then and the actions that occurred when that contract was attempted to
be enforced it didn’t happen. So you can’t tell me that one. That’s number one. Secondly, you
look at this presentation. It said about standardization and enforcing those standards in a contract.
We need a contract that we can enforce standards when they can be fair to the citizens of Richmond
County who has to pay for this service. All ambulance services don’t require subsidies. Every
ambulance service understands getting in the business of ambulance service or doing that business,
you’re going to have somebody that cannot pay or will not pay. That’s the risk of being in any
business and I’ve heard that up here before. That when you’re in business, you’re in business.
There’s no reason for us to supplement somebody’s business. Not at all. So I want to say I think
this is an excellent presentation. Also it gets rid of this thing about this $10 million, $8 million,
$7 million, all this kind of stuff. We’ve been contracting ambulance service in Richmond County
for years. So this thing about getting into the ambulance business, we’ve been in the ambulance
business whether we did it directly or whether we subcontracted it out and we did both. The major
part was subcontracted out so I want to applaud the staff for putting together a comprehensive
presentation and I certainly hope that we can do something fair for the citizens of Augusta and
reduce for the benefit of the whole entire public welfare citizen and visitors alike, that when they
come to Augusta and have need of an emergency service, that they don’t need emergency service
after the emergency service. Thank you.
16
th
Mr. Mayor: I’ll recognize the commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Chief James, that’s a good report. I’m glad to
see it. I don’t normally look at stuff people give on the dias when they present it because I think
it’s important if you’d have given it to me earlier but I like this. Thank you so much. And I’m
going backwards. I’m starting from the rear going forwards. I want to go back to funding and I
know that you had 2018 to no additional funds outside 2018 and 2019. Well, really ’18 is gone so
th
you can really scratch that. This is the 8 month so you really can’t count ’18 so if you’re talking
about 2019 there won’t be any additional, but what happens after that? You didn’t give any figures
but you said there wouldn’t be any increase. What figures would go in if we get this on, provide
ambulance service that you would like to have, what figure would go with that? Give me a number
because I think we’ve been talking about how much the subsidy was and how much we’re paying
for that so what’s the difference in the two prices? Give me those two prices. If we’re paying the
subsidy now of $500,000, $800,000, I don’t know what it is, but whatever the money is, give me
the difference so I can understand a little bit better.
Chief James: Commissioner, if I’m understanding your question correctly, from the figures
that we put together the difference between our 2018 budget and what we’re requesting in the 2019
budget, it’s approximately $400,000 that actually is attributed to directly to EMS.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay and I get that.
Chief James: And then some of that will be offset because we would have started the
billing process with what ambulance rides that we’re doing.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay so what are we going to do? We’re going to have an increase in
your budget, $400,000 plus a billing process that’s going to start, which is going to increase I guess
to get repaid or at least to try to get repaid, I’m hearing now and I heard my colleagues talking
about it being in business and in business you don’t always collect everything that you try to
collect. That’s why we pay a subsidy because we’re picking up people in this city who have not
been paying the way I understand it. I still didn’t hear the number but you say in 2019 there’s
going to be a $400,000 difference in the budget.
Chief James: Yes, sir.
Mr. M. Williams: I just need to know is that $400,000 because I’ve got another question.
Chief James: As you look at our total budget it might not reflect that way but as we look
at specifically EMS related costs –
Mr. M. Williams: Is that different from the $450,000 we just spent on the ambulances we
just bought that we don’t have, is that additional money because we just spent $450,000 on two
ambulances with no equipment, no manpower, no shelter for them, I mean we bought two
ambulances. We’ve got one that we’ve been had for a long time but we just spent an additional
$450,000 for that. That’s $850,000 in my T. W. Josey math that I’m still holding onto right now,
Mr. Mayor. Is that right or not? I’m not trying to put you in a box. I’m just trying to bring some
17
stuff out that I totally disagree with. If those numbers have been spent and that don’t count what
we’re going to pay the billing process to people we done hired to do the billing problem for us. I
don’t know what that cost will be. I guess it depends on what they collect. If they don’t collect,
then I guess we don’t pay them but if we collect, we’ve still got to pay them out of that too. So let
me move forward. Let me go a little further. Let’s talk about the zone a minute. You said if we
get the zone, whoever gets the zone, will be mandated I guess or be expected to provide ambulance
service because they got the zone, is that right?
Chief James: Yes, sir.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, that means if we get the zone, it’s our jobs, it’s our total
responsibility to provide the ambulance service because we’ve got the zone now, is that right?
Chief James: Yes, sir.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay and if we’ve got the zone, I mean we’ve got to buy some more
ambulances because the two and a half we’ve got would not be enough, wouldn’t you think?
Chief James: I’m sorry, it doesn’t mean that we have to buy more ambulances.
Mr. M. Williams: See I don’t know now. I need you to help me out. I need a yes or no
answer. You said we don’t have to buy no more. We’ve got to get some ambulances from
somewhere now. If we get the zone and it’s our responsibility to provide the services, we’re going
to have to get some ambulances either from Grady Smith or Grady Hospital, don’t make no
difference. We’ve got to get some ambulances from somewhere. Somebody got to pay for those
that we’ve got to pick those people up because we have a time restraint to pick them up to get from
downtown to Wayne Guilfoyle’s house and that’s way out there in Hephzibah. But we’re going
to have to get there some kind of way. So that’s another problem. Since we’re talking about the
zone, help me understand what co-zone mean. Help me understand what it means when you’ve
got a co-zone situation.
Chief James: It means that the two entities or the two ambulance services that are identified
as co-zone providers, both of them are responsible for providing that service to the citizens.
Mr. M. Williams: And we had that at one time, right?
Chief James: Yes.
Mr. M. Williams: And what happened to that?
Chief James: Gold Cross, the other zone provider, requested that they be the sole zone
provider and not be co-zone with us. They requested that they be the sole zone provider
themselves.
18
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, now is that because of some action this governing body has taken
or is that because they decided to say, no, we don’t want to work with them no more. We want to
take it upon ourselves and provide ambulance service.
Chief James: That was in 2014. It was because it was what they wanted to do.
Mr. M. Williams: Okay, had we had any negotiation with them as to what we wanted to
do as a governing body, since you being the Fire Chief, wouldn’t you be the EMS Director for
some time. Had we had any conversation to say how can we work this thing to be beneficial for
the people of Augusta, not necessarily the city, but for the people in the city?
Chief James: During the time, if I understand you correctly, or you mean during the time
that they requested to get the zone? In 2014 when they requested to get the zone, they wrote a
letter and made that request through to the EMS Council and to the state. I had no input on them
requesting to get the zone.
Mr. M. Williams: You came into a legal meeting with Jody and you explained to us that
Gold Cross was about to give up the zone and I asked a question. I asked this question. I said
beware of people bearing gifts. They’re going to give it up. Something’s wrong. Why were they
giving it up? This is when we was told that we ought to be, we ought to pursue the zone. This is
what was stated in the back there. You said that they was fixing to give up the zone so we as a
body said if they’re going to give it up, then we need to go and request it. That’s how we got into
this in the beginning.
Chief James: I don’t recall saying that Gold Cross was going to give up the zone.
Mr. M. Williams: That’s what we was told that the zone was fixing to be given up and
should we pursue it and I said wait, now, if they’re fixing to give up something, they’re going to
give it to us, why is that? I said be careful of those who come bearing gifts because there’s a
reason they’re giving it up. Is it going to cost us or whatever and we was told the best thing for us
to do was to pursue it and all of the meetings at the Council up there that you’ve been there and
you spoke and this body hadn’t given any direction. Jody spoke and I even asked to be on the
agenda because I had to get with the attorney to do that. Commissioner Guilfoyle, he asked to be
put on the agenda. The Mayor been there, I guess he asked to be put on the agenda as well. And
Commissioner Sias’ been there two or three times to be on the agenda. But my point is somebody
had to request to be put there. This body never made that decision to do that until we was told that
the zone was going to be given up so I’ve got one more question. Chief, I’m really disappointed.
Mr. Mayor: Do you want to say one thing and come back?
Mr. M. Williams: I don’t want to save anything, Mr. Mayor. I’m really disappointed in
the way this thing is going because we had an ambulance service, we had a co-zone service we
were providing. We paid a subsidy because people was, because the ambulance service which is
a business was helping this city by response time, ambulance on site at different times, Mr. Mayor,
a number of ambulances at peak times and all this stuff was in place. Now we just act like it was
19
throwed up in the air and we didn’t know where it was. But all this stuff was in place and because
some smart folk want to change it, it’s how we got to where we are now. Some rocket scientists.
nd
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the commissioner from the 2.
Mr. D. Williams: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to make a motion to authorize staff to submit
an application to the Region VI EMS Council for the consolidated government of Augusta
Georgia to become the EMS zone provider for the Richmond County EMS zone.
Mr. Hasan: Second.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, well, I didn’t know you were going to do that but –
Mr. D. Williams: It’s done.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’re going to have some more discussion. I have several hands that
st
are up that wanted to ask questions. I’m going to go to the commissioner from the 1.
Mr. Fennoy: Chief –
Chief James: Yes, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: On one of your handouts you have why Augusta should be the Richmond
County zone provider. And under accountability you have guaranteed minimum number of
ambulances. Presently do we have a guaranteed number of ambulances in Richmond County?
Chief James: No, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay. You also have enforceable response time. Presently do we have an
enforceable response time?
Chief James: No, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay. And you also ensuring fair charges to citizens. Do we have, are the
citizens then charged fairly?
Chief James: We have no way as a local government to determine what they’re going to
be charged. We have input or no say in what they’re going to be charged currently.
Mr. Fennoy: So presently the present provider can charge anything that they want to for
ambulance services and we have no say so?
Chief James: Yes, sir.
20
Mr. Fennoy: Also on the next page you have guaranteed closest most responsive
ambulances are being utilized. Chief, there is an ambulance service on Wheeler, is it Wheeler
Road?
Chief James: Yes, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: If there is a, if someone at the Brigham Center is in need of an ambulance,
would that ambulance service on Wheeler Road be the first to respond?
Chief James: No, sir.
Mr. Fennoy: What would have to happen in order for that ambulance service to respond
to a call at the Brigham Center?
Chief James: The call would come to 911. Mr. Dunlap and his team would then forward
that call to the zone provider which is Gold Cross and then they would handle that call from there.
The only way that the ambulance service on Wheeler Road would be called is if the current
provider called them and said will you take that call.
Mr. Fennoy: Chief, I’m concerned about the citizens of Richmond County and the people
that ride through Richmond County that may be in need of ambulance services. And I want to do
everything I can to make sure that in case of an accident, in case of some health issues that we
have an ambulance service that’s going to provide quick response time to that incident and when
I say this, I’m not saying that Gold Cross is not doing that. But just like we talked about guaranteed
on the subject that we just got through discussing before we got into the ambulance service, I
would like to have some guarantees that this is going to happen. Once the application has been
resubmitted and say Augusta is awarded the zone, what is your plan once you’ve received the
zone?
Chief James: If Augusta is awarded the zone, we would implement a system that would
provide the appropriate number of ambulances throughout the city at all times, that there were
adequate and used mutual aid agreements with all services that are involved that in the case that
you just mentioned before that if another service that is a part of our ambulance system is there,
you would not only get a fire response with first responders but you would get the closest
ambulance that was a part of your system and the 911 Center would be able to look at the GPS and
say that this is the closest ambulance and this is the ambulance that we would send.
Mr. Fennoy: So what you’re proposing and correct me if I’m wrong, is taking a look at all
of the ambulance services that exist in Richmond County and divide the city up into sections based
on the location of the ambulance services and let those ambulances provide services for those
particular areas.
Chief James: We would look at the system as a whole and have different ambulances
stationed throughout our government from the west side all the way to the south side and then as
the ambulances move around and respond to calls throughout the day, when a call came in, then
the closest available ambulance would be sent. So you may have an ambulance in a particular
21
district that’s already gone on another call, just like we do with fire trucks. Then we’ll be able to
send the very next closest ambulance in the next area over to respond to that call and so that would
be to prevent some of the issues of having ambulances respond from across town and in some
cases we have dealt with, ambulances responding from neighboring counties to respond to calls in
our jurisdiction.
Mr. Fennoy: My last question, Chief James, why are ya’ll laugh when I say last?
Mr. Frantom: Times three.
Mr. Fennoy: Well, my final question, Chief James, is presently is there any one ambulance
service in this area that have enough ambulances to provide the type of service that you’re
proposing to your knowledge?
Chief James: And, commissioner, I want you to phrase that from the standpoint of staffed
ambulances in our zone. So you can have 50 ambulances but if nobody’s in them, nobody can
respond. So I don’t think that we’re having adequately staffed ambulances currently to respond to
the entire Richmond County. So you may have companies that have 40 or 50 ambulances and they
may be including their contract call ambulances. They may include the ambulances they’re using
in other jurisdictions. They may have an adequate number of ambulances but those ambulances
aren’t in your particular county and you don’t have adequately staff from my position so if you’re
running a day and you’re having four or five or six ambulances and it requires more than that to
provide that service in the middle of the day, then you don’t have that staffed ambulance. I have
more fire trucks than I use. I have reserve and other fire trucks that sit in stations in the spare
engine bay or like in a motor pool that we use when they get available, but when you say is there
a proper number of ambulances, the question that I would look at to assure that the citizens were
receiving a proper service would be do you have the appropriate number of staffed ambulances.
Mr. Fennoy: Okay. And my last question, Chief, is out of all of the counties that make up
this district, how many of them have their own zone?
Chief James: 11 of the 13 have their own zone. The only two counties that do not have
their own zone is Columbia County and Richmond County.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Mayor Pro Tem.
Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Chief, just throughout this community right now, there
is a fear that if we get the zone that we are going to be in the EMS service solely. And that’s the
fear of spending millions of dollars and you’ve seen it in the media and that kind of thing. I for
one wouldn’t want us to move down that road so you’re talking about if we got the zone your
system which you’re talking about as far as ambulances that would be with RFPs going out to find
the appropriate services, is that correct?
Chief James: Correct. We would be following our –
Ms. Davis: RFP process.
22
Chief James: Right, our procurement process. We would get with Ms. Sams and follow,
you know, we would ask her for guidance on how this needs to be done and we would, you know,
see whose services would provide us with the best deal that provide adequate services to our
citizens.
Ms. Davis: And all of that has to come back to this Commission for approval, to award the
RFP, just like our normal process.
Chief James: Following our normal process, Ms. Commissioner, that would depend on the
cost. In other words if the RFP, RFPs or bids for services throughout our county, if they’re below
the cost amount then the Administrator signs off on those.
Ms. Jackson: Let me address that a little bit. This would be a little bit of a unique
procurement process and we would have to do some research to determine how we would handle
something where we’re not exactly making direct payment so I think the best I can say right now
is that we will confer with the Law Department as well as Procurement to stay within whatever
the Procurement Code provides for.
Ms. Davis: So I guess what I ask is we go down this road wherever we go whovever ends
up with the zone. Can we please have constant communication with this because this is definitely
a big issue in the community and it has caused people to have misinformation and be fearful of our
finances just to be honest. Okay? Thank you.
th
Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the commissioner from the 7.
Mr. Frantom: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Chief James, first question is how EMTs do we
currently have on staff?
Chief James: Approximately 300 or so.
Mr. Frantom: Okay. If we were to get the zone one of my concerns is the fact that a lot of
these employees work for Gold Cross on the side. They work 24, 48. My question is would we
have to hire “x” amount of employees to cover because I’ve read that we’re going to be more in
the transport business so how would we handle the aspect of hiring these individuals and how
many are we looking at?
Chief James: If I understand your question correctly, as far as how does this affect them
being able to work part-time?
Mr. Frantom: If they’re working part-time for Gold Cross and we become the zone
provider and they do transports let’s just say when they’re off, they’re still an Augusta Richmond
County employee which means they would be in overtime so how is that going to work from a
cost standpoint for employees?
23
Chief James: So the other ambulance services whether it’s Gold Cross or Priority Care or
South Star or these other services that are still operating their businesses, then those firefighters
would still work part-time for those businesses. As far as what we’re doing they won’t be working
directly for the City of Augusta on their part-time jobs. So when they get off in the morning and
they go to another service, we won’t be hiring firefighters to come back and ride the particular
ambulances that we have. They will still do their part-time jobs with another agency completely.
Mr. Frantom: Okay. Thank you. What rate of percentage do you think of transports you’ll
be doing if we were to get the zone?
Chief James: The percentage of transports at this point would be hard to determine
specifically the percentage of transports we would do. I could tell you that 60% of all of our fire
calls, 60% of them are first responder calls. So the use of our ambulances in a lot of ways are
going to save us by responding. Some of these ambulances that we just purchased on first
responder calls is going us money from sending the big fire truck on each and every one of those
calls.
Mr. Frantom: You mentioned the last presentation slide you said the funding - $400,000
increase and it wouldn’t change moving forward. Does that affect the fire tax in any way?
Chief James: To my knowledge this year we are not increasing the fire tax.
Ms. Jackson: That’s correct. We’re not increasing this year.
Mr. Frantom: Okay. But we’re not sure we wouldn’t have to increase it in 2019?
Chief James: We’re basing the budget now so we’re not requesting it now to be increased
because we’re doing the 2019 budget now.
Mr. Frantom: Okay. Two questions left here. Could we see a budget of all the breakdowns
of the expenditures if we were to get the zone?
Chief James: In other words if we get the zone everything that would be used to be spent
toward EMS then yes, we would be able to put those numbers.
Mr. Frantom: Okay, because I mean there are so many costs that we’re not even talking
about that the liability costs, different things to outfit the ambulances, you know, I guess you have
four ambulances that you haven’t really said whether we’re going to have any more or not and I
understand that maybe you can’t answer that right now but I’m just very concerned that we’re
taking a vote today when we don’t even have the total picture of what it’s going to look like. We
were told that we have until mid-October or November 1 and I just don’t see the need to rush this.
This is a very serious issue and I think that we need to continue to dive deep and understand
everything before we just go and approve going after the zone moving forward. So thank you, sir.
Thank you, Mayor.
24
Mr. Mayor: All right. I’ve had a number of, in fact, almost everyone has spoken except
thth
for the commissioner from the 10, the commissioner from the 5 and everyone else has spoken
th
and the commissioner from the 6. This has been good discussion; it’s been necessary and long
th
overdue. What I’m going to do is I am going to the commissioner from the 6.
Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think what Chief James has provided for us, even
though we’re looking at the document, in many ways I think we’re ignoring what’s on this
document he has presented to us because for number one, he was saying what we seem to be
concerned about we was doing this up until 2014, up until the point that we was no longer co-zone
providers. Prior to that we were zone providers, then we went to co-zone providers then kicked
out of the loop, so we’ve been here before just four years ago. So it’s nothing new to us that we’re
not familiar with. I think the concern that I’m hearing but once again the document tells us very
plainly that we’re not trying to be the absolute person who provides the ambulance service. We
want control over that because ultimately we’re responsible for the 200,000 citizens in Augusta
Richmond County and if we don’t have some say so about the zone then the community (inaudible)
of whoever the zone provider is. At least we have a say so of who we contract with, a subcontract
with (inaudible) and I think that’s important. So it’s not so much, I think its misinformation and
misunderstanding that people say we are doing some things. Obviously I do see we’ve purchased
a couple of ambulances, obviously it seems we are going to be participating at some level but at
the end of the day Chief James is letting it be known for the most part that we intend to possibly
be involved with other vendors helping provide the service. So we’ve been here before. This is
not totally brand new for us. We’ve done this and so I think we have to be very mindful of that.
We have absolutely no control over what is going on right now because I think to my colleague’s
concern early on or point about some of the things that were (inaudible), those things that were
outlined, those things (inaudible) but I think he’s done a phenomenal job in putting those things in
that contract. But guess what? That was prior to them becoming the zone provider. So in many
ways that possibly went out the window because after that you didn’t have a contract any more if
the truth be told. So we have to realize that we’re responsible for the citizens of Augusta Richmond
County and we need to be mindful of where we’re headed and this gives us an opportunity to have
some say so about who we do business with and how we do business and I think at the end of the
day given some sense of accountability, it gives us some sense of what’s important to the citizens
of Augusta Richmond County. I think Chief James has proven himself when they’re talking about
the leadership he has shown around the Fire Department. At the same time he’s no different from
the rest of us. He’s not perfect, he’s going to have some hiccups and I (inaudible). So that’s to be
expected and they’re called growing pains. You know we don’t go through things, we grow
through things so what we’re doing now is attempting to get the zone back rightfully and to put it
back on the market per se and do business with other folks as we move forward and better the
service that we provide to the citizens of Augusta Richmond County. And if we’re able to and I
really like the idea if we’re able to get people to come to the table with no subsidy, that’s ideal for
us. That’s ideal for us. We won’t know until we get there. So if we’re able to do this or obviously
know something that we don’t know, I think we just need to be fair. The document say we move
from (inaudible). I think we’re doing more in many ways and I say honestly. I don’t think we’re
being mean spirited, I don’t think we’re doing it maliciously, but I think we’re doing more to cloud
this particular process and not be honest with what’s on the document. Now if he do something
other than what’s here, then we’ve got something to be concerned about. But what he has here I
think makes good sense for the taxpayers of Augusta Richmond County. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
25
Mr. Mayor: All right, thank you.
Mr. M. Williams: I can close out, Mr. Mayor. The last, you told me to save. I saved it.
Mr. Mayor: All right, so here’s what I’m going to do because it’s been a long, yeah, scout’s
honor, it’s been a long time coming. That’s why we’ve had a lengthy debate. It’s been necessary.
thth
Commissioner from the 5, any comment? All right, thank you, sir. Commissioner from the 10,
any comment? Thank you, sir. We’ve given everybody ample opportunity. All right, I’m going
th
to close out in this order. Commissioner from the 8, you’ve got one minute. Commissioner from
th
the 9, you’ve got one minute.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Chief James, as far as your proposed plan, have you spoken with any other
ambulance provider? Any other ambulance company? Simple yes or no.
Chief James: Yes.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. So in order to be on your proposed plan as far as subcontracted
ambulance service in order for them to be required to GPS, standardized charges, no subsidy for
contractors, in order for you to put this in you had discussed this with different entities, be cautious
of one thing because it’s still got to go through our procurement process and I think that’s
(inaudible). I think Bill Fennoy was dead on track when he’s concerned about the welfare and
safety of our citizens and the cost to each taxpayer us pursuing this route. So you’ve already
discussed this with other ambulance companies, we know that, in order for you to write this doc.
Chief James: No, sir, not to write that documentation.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay.
th
Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right. Commissioner from the 9.
Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I need to know from the Chief how can we ask
someone to do a, be provider or do the subsidy work for us with no cost. I mean they are going to
pick up people in Augusta but we’re saying we can provide ambulance service with no subsidy at
all? They can do that now. I think Gold Cross or Blue Cross would stand back and say ya’ll pick
them up then if it ain’t going to be no cost. There’s got to be a cost associated with that. The other
thing is we had all of those guidelines, response time, mutual aids, all of those things was in place
and when the contract ran out, this body did not negotiate to put those things back in place. We
kind of stood back and took our hands off, listened to the direction of the Legal Department and
the Fire Department. We stood back instead of negotiating and saying this is what we need to do
to continue that and what’s it going to cost us. We said we’re paying too much money and we
didn’t even negotiate at all. Been here long enough, Mr. Mayor, that I remember when they came
to the table and they were willing to give up picking up every year and reduce their fees and their
services until we got into the business. But we rejected that.
26
th
Mr. Mayor: Your time is up. I’m going to give the commissioner from the 4 that same
one minute and we’ll go from there.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir. I think it’s a grave misrepresentation to the public when we talk
about how valuable and enforceable that last contract was. Maybe I’m getting old and I don’t
remember but I sure saw a document that said Chief James needs to be fired when he started out
looking into enforcing that contract. And I’m sure not blind and I read that document in 2014. If
all I had to do was enforcing that contract and at that time the contract administrator was the Fire
Chief but he was relieved of that duty and the City Administrator was made the contract
administrator simply because the folks with the contract didn’t like it. So I just say how can we
say we had an enforceable contract when the individual responsible for enforcing the contract went
out there and about lost his job. I think that’s a gross misrepresentation. I’m through.
Mr. Mayor: (inaudible) we do. I think I can handle this pretty good. Okay, I’m going to
close it out. It has been necessary for us to have this conversation. It’s gone on too long and it’s
important for us to not only be able to one, allow the questions to come forward which they’ve
done today and I’m sure there are still others that you may have in your mind. Today was an
opportunity to begin that process of communicating to the governing body not only what your
intentions are but to do that in a manner that everyone could understand. In 2014 the Region VI
EMS Council adopted a zoning plan and in that plan as I’ve shared before, it specifically said that
the purpose of the plan was to ensure proper distribution of emergency calls amongst ambulance
providers for the pre-hospital emergency care system within Region VI. That is what this
conversation is about. That is the intent behind this conversation. And then to establish, coordinate
and revise the designated EMS territories and the principles behind that or the criteria for that are
to make sure that there is economy of service, efficiency and a benefit to the public welfare. I said
this at the EMS Council meeting and I’ll say it again. I can’t speak to what happened before I
arrived but I can since I’m here. And I care about the 202,000 citizens that make up Augusta and
the number of citizens who come into this community ballooning to almost 400,000 on any given
day during the work week. We have a due and a just responsibility to provide for the health, the
welfare and the safety of all of our citizens and we will do that. We will do it well and we will do
it above board and we will do it in a way that allows us to be pro-business which is important.
We’re not here to shut businesses down. I heard that comment the other day. I am a pro-business
person and we will provide opportunity for businesses to thrive in this community and provide for
their employees and their families. And so again that is why we’re here today to have this
conversation in a non-threatening way and I’m pleased with what I’ve heard thus far. Now there’s
a motion before us and that motion is to authorize staff to submit an application to the Region VI
EMS Council for the consolidated government of Augusta Georgia to become the zone provider
for Richmond County. You’ve heard and those of you in the audience have seen and for those of
you who will come back and look at it later it is available in video on demand but this government
has again through our Fire Chief said here’s what our intentions are. Now the intentions need to
have corresponding actions to go along with that. Nothing happens unless the body approves it.
Okay? And the only thing being done on the other side of this presentation is a request to submit
an application. It is the right thing to do. It is the proper thing to do. It does not simply by way
of submitting it guarantee that we will be victorious in gaining the zone but in the event that we
are what you’ve heard today is how we will respond to it in a manner that was consistent with what
was being done in this government prior to 2014. That is what we will do. We will ensure that
27
we’re providing for the health, the welfare and the safety of all of our citizens. We have a motion
and a proper second. Voting. If we ever get that meeting management system that has the lights
where you can say he pushed the button, she pushed the button, you know who to call on. In the
legislature we had something called lock the machine and if time expired and you hadn’t voted, it
just didn’t happen. Lock the machine.
Mr. Hasan: I think the gentleman knows of what he speaks.
th
Mr. Mayor: The commissioner from the 9, he knows, he knows, he knows.
Mr. Fennoy: Can we add that to your budget, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Frantom, Mr. Guilfoyle, Mr. M. Williams and Mr. Smith vote No.
Motion carries 6-4.
Mr. Mayor: All right. I think there’s a song called Lovely Day, Lovely Day.
Mr. Hasan: Bill Withers.
Mr. Mayor: Yes. All right, Madam Clerk, we’re going to go to Item 4. We should move
pretty quickly.
3. Consider/discuss Administrator’s recommendation regarding funding for street
lighting. (Deferred from the August 7, 2018 Commission meeting)
Mr. Mayor: The Chair will entertain a motion.
Mr. Hasan: That’s three. I thought you said four.
The Clerk: Four, I’m sorry. You want to do four?
Mr. Mayor: The Chair will entertain a motion.
Mr. Speaker: So move.
Mr. Speaker: Second.
Mr. Hasan: Which one are we voting on now? Okay, four.
Mr. Mayor: Item number 4 on your special called meeting agenda and that is to consider
the adoption of a resolution establishing the tax millage rate for calendar year 2018.
Mr. Fennoy: So move.
Mr. Mayor: That’s a rollback.
28
The Clerk: I call your attention to item number three. Consider/discuss Administrator’s
recommendation regarding funding for street lighting.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes Madam Administrator and Finance Director Williams.
Ms. Jackson: Tim is handing out the presentation that is up on the screen. I will speed
through the first couple of slides in the interest of time. Basically there are three different ways
that we came up with to address street lights. One of them is a flat rate. That rate will be paid by
everybody who pays the bill. The other route would be a base rate plus an increment as in the base
rate would be approximately $30 and then the increment would apply to those taxpayers that
currently pay a fee for street lights so it’s the base plus a fee for those who currently have lights in
their area. The third route that we have added since the last time we made a presentation last week
was what we’re calling a patch method. The patch does not fix the system so much as it does find
a way to try to stop the bleeding in 2018. We would still be left with the issue of determining a
desired methodology and a revenue stream for a new billing structure in 2019 with the patch. In
terms of the revenue, last week we talked about generating a total of $6.5 million dollars in
revenue. Ideally that’s the target amount if we generate 6.5. $5.8 million dollars would be
allocated to the operating cost. $400,000 per year for the first three years would go toward
reduction of our current $1.2 million dollar deficit in the special revenue fund. We have $300,000
per year for maintenance and upgrades of the current system. After year three and into year four
and beyond we could put the entire $400,000 plus the 300 for a total of $700,000 toward
maintenance and upgrades. A reduced approach would be $6 million dollars in revenue that would
cover $5.8 million dollars in operating costs and $200,000 in total reduction of the deficit which
would mean if we did not get funding from any other source it would take us six years to wipe out
the current deficit. Comparison of fees. This is where I want to focus our attention today. The
first three scenarios, excuse me, first two scenarios generate the $6.5 million dollars in revenue in
two different ways. One with a $30 increment. If I could call your attention to the columns, the
last three columns that say total fee at the top. I think that’s the best way to understand this. What
that means in the line in the blue is that if you don’t get a bill currently you would pay $30. If you
do get a bill currently, a residential customer would pay $98 dollars, a commercial customer would
pay $132. Note at the very bottom in terms of assumptions this takes out Hephzibah, Blythe and
current tax-exempt parcels not being billed. Most of those tax-exempt parcels are either owned by
us, the school system or other governmental entities. It also assumes that the commercial rate is
50% higher than the residential rate. If you look at the next line highlighted in yellow also
generating $6.5 million dollars which is our target amount of revenue, those currently don’t receive
a bill would get, residential customers would receive a bill of $87, commercial customers a bill for
$131 and those, that would apply to anybody who is a property owner in the county. That’s the
alternative that we discussed last week. We put that back on the street and she then laid it out so
you can see exactly how it affects different individuals depending upon their status in the
community. Below that the next three are $6 million dollar alternatives and with the same strategy
the $30 increment. Basically, if you’re not getting a bill now, you would get a $30 bill. If you
are, you’d get a $90 bill as a residential customer. As a commercial, you’d get $120. And those
numbers would come down and the next scenario with the $6 million dollar goal, flat rate scenario,
residential customers pay $80, commercial $120. What we added after our conversations with you
all, you all asked that Donna and myself try to contact everybody and ask for you all’s feedback.
29
We came up with this patch methodology, the primary goal of which is just to make sure that we
don’t continue to run up deficits in 2018. For residential customers we add $23 to every residential
customer. If you’re not paying anything now you pay $23. For those of us like myself, I’m paying
$24, I’d add 23 to my bill. For commercial customers you’d add $35. That does not address the
fundamental structural problems we have in our fund. It doesn’t put us in a position where we
could do additional maintenance. All it does is stop the bleeding with the debt but it is a lower
amount. Some of you had some interest in what could we do that would stop the debt and require
a lower payment. That’s the best that we could come up with for that as alternatives.
Mr. Mayor: I’m going to recognize the Mayor Pro Tem for a question.
Ms. Davis: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. On the bottom line what is that, so is that in addition
to any contingency, possibly?
Ms. Jackson: This would assume again you would either, your choices there in regard to
contingency, you would either take the $200,000 that you get from this and it would take you six
years to wipe out the deficit for the fund or you could also add $100,000 or $200,000 from
contingency, whatever is your choice every year to try to make up the difference. I will say that it
is a little risky for us to go in adding, with a plan to add from contingency just because we don’t
know what unforeseen circumstances we’re going to face in any given fiscal year but that would
be an option in order to accelerate the process of reducing the deficit in the fund.
Ms. Davis: But if we use the contingency that we have currently is that possible to use in
next year’s budget to roll over?
Ms. Jackson: Right now in contingency we have about $450,000 available in contingency
right now so that would leave you, if we took $200,000 out, it would leave you 250 to try to get
through the rest of the year. Again that works if we don’t have any unforeseen circumstances.
Ms. Davis: And then that would be something we’d visit every year in budget.
Ms. Jackson: We’d have to revisit that every year.
Ms. Davis: Okay, thank you.
th
Mr. Mayor: I’d recognize the commissioner from the 4.
Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir. You know when we look at this bottom thing about the $23 plus,
that sounds good if you’re one of those folks that are not receiving a bill. But what about folks
that are already paying $300, $400, $150 or $200? Are we going to add $23 to their? That’s why
I think the second line in the highlighted yellow, which was the plan recommended, I think it’s
still the best situation where you pay the $87 for residential and the $131 for commercial because
as we have made known in our presentations there we have a totally uneven scale of payments and
now we’re talking about adding $23 to all the other ones who are already paying. For me that’s a
non-starter because it just makes the problem worse. It may look good but it makes the problem
worse. If we go and simplify our rate structure using the column, the yellow slide, the yellow
second one, last two columns on the right, 87 and 131, we’ve now simplified this system. You
can account for it, you can do it and we can get the street lights out in the streets. We are still on
that very last one we’re still going under the premise what got us in trouble is that do I have my
30
own street light. Street lights are for the street; it’s a safety issue but we can’t seem to get past that
mentality of that’s my individual street light. The streets are a public facility, that’s public roads
and we need to do our absolute best to have all of our streets as safe and well lit as possible so for
me I can’t support the $23 plus. I think it looks good but it just makes a bad problem worse. Thank
you, sir.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the commissioner from the first.
Mr. Fennoy: Mr. Mayor, I like the $87 residential and $131 commercial. The $87 equates
to about $7.25 a month for a residential customer. We have a whole lot going on here in Augusta.
We have a lot of growth that’s taking place and if Augusta is to continue to grow then we have got
to make our communities, our streets safe for the people that think about coming to Augusta. I
don’t think that $7.25 a month is going to cause any harm to the residents of Richmond County so
I’m asking my colleagues to give some serious consideration to that proposal and do what you feel
is in the best interest of Augusta.
Mr. Mayor: All right, here’s what we are going to do. We’re going to let each and every
one determine for themselves in just a second. I’m going to recognize the commissioner from the
th
5 and then I’ll entertain a motion.
Mr. Jefferson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’m looking at this $87 which equates to $7.25 but
it’s not a lot of money but I have a problem with the one size fit all. If you look at the street lights,
not saying everyone has their own street light at their property on the street directly in front of their
house but the street lights aren’t really balanced. You’ve got more street lights in some areas than
you have in others and in the rural areas some of the people don’t even have street lights and one
of my colleagues said before if you ride down the street and the street is lit, you are still paying for
that as a taxpayer. But my thoughts and I shared it with Commissioner Hasan a couple of times,
in this Municipal Building if I drink from a water fountain that don’t mean I’m contributing to that
water bill. So I feel that the lower approach and spread out over a period of time is the better
approach and even though the $23 will take more time to accomplish, you’re putting less of a
burden and you’re showing good faith because we just saw recently people were complaining
about some thoroughfares having more street lights than other streets. Or if you could take street
lights from this area and put it on another part of town that would equalize it so I just feel like the
one size fit all approach is appropriate in this so I can’t support the $87 for all. People who don’t
have street lights in their community had nothing to do with the deficit so I just feel that they
shouldn’t have to be burdened with paying for it. Thank you.
th
Mr. Mayor: Thank you. The Chair recognizes the commissioner from the 8. Thank you,
Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, a lot of discussion has been put
towards the street lights. The Finance team had come up with different scenarios. Commissioner
Sias headed over the street light committee and I appreciate him taking his time out of his day to
do that. You know we’ve got 61,398 parcels that we currently bill for street lights at this time,
residential and commercial. Commercial property, which I own a couple of them, are millage or
kilowatt for Georgia Power it’s less than my residential where I live. But as a government because
other cities do it, we should do it as well, charge commercial property more for the same thing
31
residential is. But we’re running a $6.5 million dollars what it cost us. And that’s put in $400,000
back into the kitty to replace the money that was used in years past, putting money aside for
upkeep, maintenance in the future installation of street lights. You know I’ve got residents in my
district that pays $500 a year for street lights. I said it before and you recognized the name, Bill
Beasley. I have Mayor’s father’s neighborhood. A man lives in a corner lot, not his father, a man,
resident there that pays $220 a year for a street light just because he’s on a corner and gets charged
for it. Well, where my office is at I pay $47 a year which is fine. I like it. But now we’re facing
this music that we have to look at so out of the 61,398 we owe about $6.5 million dollars a year.
If we equalize that out for every paying parcel it’s $105.86. To simplify things in life whether you
have residential, commercial, it benefits some, it goes up such as me but I see the benefit in it. It
gets the City out of the hole because we’re going to have, either we’re going to face it right now
or in two months when the budget session comes up and we know how budgets are in Augusta
Richmond County. It’s not as nice and cordial as it should be or nice in ways of being efficient
and trying to save money. It’s about displacing money and the end user is the taxpayer who gets
hit. This might be a hit towards the taxpayer but it’s the fair and equitable way I’m looking at it.
Everybody pays the same thing. It would to be easier on the financing in the future when my
colleague decides to put in neighborhoods of street lights every resident gets hit with the same
$105.86. I just wanted to throw that out there and wanted to hear a little feedback from my
colleagues. But that’s the existing people that’s paying for street lights right now.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, here’s what we’re going to do. Again, we’re going to let everybody
determine for themselves. Do I have a motion? All right, the Chair recognizes the commissioner
th
from the 4 for a motion.
Mr. Sais? I’d like to make a motion. Based on all the information that we’ve seen,
all the discussion that we’ve heard, and I appreciate all of the discussion with all of my
colleagues, I recommend that we adopt within our ordinance the highlighted one of $87 for
residential and $131 for commercial properties. That motion also includes that clearly
outline in our motion the benefits and things of why this street light process is important and
that it’s about public safety versus just a fee. So I might need to restate that but I think hopefully
the Clerk got most of that.
Mr. D. Williams: I’ll second it.
Mr. Mayor: All right, I’ve got a motion and a second. All right, let’s go ahead and vote
on this.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Can I do a substitute motion?
Mr. Mayor: Well, if you want to do a substitute, I’ll entertain that. The Chair recognizes
th
commissioner from the 8.
Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, this is the $6.5 million dollars, $105.86 for every parcel that’s
currently being billed for residential, exempt commercial, it’s $105.86 flat rate fee throughout the
county. I’m sorry, apparently I made an error, Donna’s up here.
32
Mr. Mayor: Okay. Everybody just hold on, everybody just hold on. That substitute fails,
did not have a proper second.
Mr. Guilfoyle: We’ve been waiting on the Finance Director.
Mr. Mayor: Okay, well, again, that substitute fails.
Mr. Guilfoyle: It’s no problem, sir.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’re back to the underlined motion. The commissioner from the
thnd
4 with a second from the 2.
Mr. Sias: Mr. Mayor, may I make one clarification?
Mr. Mayor: Well, I thought it was pretty clear.
Mr. Sias: Yeah, I know. I just want to make sure that within that that was the one where
Hephzibah and Blythe were not included and exempt properties were not included.
Mr. Mayor: I think that was understood.
Mr. Sias: Okay.
thth
Mr. Mayor: Okay, the commissioner from the 4, the commissioner from the 6 needs his
queue cleared out. I’m not sure what that means but – would you please just clear them all out.
All right, we’re back to the main motion. Voting.
Ms. Davis, Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Hasan, Mr. M. Williams and Mr. Frantom vote No.
Motion fails 5-5.
The Mayor votes No.
Motion fails 5-6.
Mr. Mayor: All right, we’re going to go to item #4.
4. Consider the adoption of a Resolution establishing the tax millage rate for calendar
year 2018. (Requested by the Administrator)
Ms. Jackson: We have a brief couple of slides on that.
Ms. Williams: The notice was published as required by the newspaper actually on
August 3. These were the rates which were proposed which were the computed roll back rates for
each taxing district. The effect on a $100,000 house is approximately $2.07 decrease. We are
.647 mills below the tax cap in the countywide district. The resolution that has been given to the
Clerk for the passage of this is in front of you that states that we’re adopting the attached millage
rate for each taxing district. Once again here are those rates, the roll back rates for each taxing
33
district with the exception of the Urban Service District went down. The Urban Service District
actually went up just a little bit. The action that we’re requesting is a motion to approve the
resolution to adopt the 2018 mill rates for each taxing district shown on Schedule A. Schedule A
is the same as you saw the roll back rates. Once that is done the Board of Education passes their
millage rate tonight. All those rates are compiled on a schedule that is given to the Mayor to
certify. That schedule is then given to the Tax Commissioner’s Office. The Tax Assessor takes
the digest to the Department of Revenue for approval and that enables the Tax Commissioner to
mail the bills.
Mr. Mayor: The Chair will entertain a motion.
Ms. Davis: Move to approve.
Mr. Frantom: Second.
Mr. Mayor: All right. We’ve got a motion to approve with a proper second. Voting.
Motion carries 10-0.
Mr. Mayor: Okay. I think that covers the items that we had on our Special Called Meeting.
Madam Clerk, Attorney MacKenzie, if there be no further business before us, we’ve got the
committee meetings.
\[MEETING ADJOURNED\]
Lena J. Bonner
Clerk of Commission
CERTIFICATION:
I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy
of the Minutes of the Called Meeting of the Augusta Richmond County Commission held on
August 14, 2018.
________________________
Clerk of Commission
34