The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRegular Commission Meeting September 4, 2018 REGULAR MEETING COMMISSION CHAMBER SEPTEMBER 4, 2018 Augusta Richmond County Commission convened at 2:00 p.m., September 4, 2018, the Hon. Hardie Davis, Jr., Mayor, presiding. PRESENT: Hons. Jefferson, Guilfoyle, Sias, Frantom, M. Williams, Davis, Fennoy (participates by phone), D. Williams, Hasan and Smith, members of Augusta Richmond County Commission. Mr. Mayor: Good afternoon, everybody. We are here to do the people’s business. I call this meeting to order. The Chair recognizes Madam Clerk. The Clerk: Yes, sir, at this time we will have our invocation delivered by the Reverend Christopher J. Waters, Pastor, Historic Thankful Baptist Church after which we will ask our Planning and Development Director Mr. Rob Sherman if he would please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. The invocation was given by Reverend Christopher J. Waters, Pastor Historic Thankful Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited. The Clerk: Office of Mayor Hardie Davis, Jr., by these present be it known that the Reverend Christopher J. Waters, Pastor of the Historic Thankful Baptist Church is Chaplain of the Day. His spiritual guidance and civic leadership serves as an example for all citizens of Augusta. th Given under my hand this 4 Day of September 2018, Hardie Davis Jr., Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Pastor Waters, thank you for your service in this community. To those who are in the audience would you join me in thanking him for being our Chaplain of the Day. (APPLAUSE) The Clerk: Next, we will have our Recognition of Employees Years of Service. We will ask Dr. Gwendolyn Conner along with our Administrator Ms. Janice Jackson and the Mayor please come forward. Dr. Conner: Good afternoon, Mayor Davis, Mayor Pro Tem Davis, Commissioners, special quests, directors and our citizens of Augusta, Georgia I’m Dr. Gwendolyn Conner I’m the Director of Human Resources here for Augusta, Georgia. Today it gives me esteemed pleasure to recognize our Augusta Years of Service recipients. For the month of August we have 29 employees who are celebrating 5 to 20 years of service, however today we would like to recognize two or our employees who are also celebrating extensive years of service to include 25 years of service from both individuals so as I call your name if you will please come forward. First we would like to recognize Ms. Barbara Roberts who is with the Finance Department, Risk Management. She’s celebrating 25 years of service. Congratulations, Ms. Roberts. (APPLAUSE) Next, if you will and don’t mind please join me in recognizing Mr. Kenneth Jackson. He’s 1 celebrating 25 years of service with the Fire Department. (APPLAUSE) Once again, join me in recognizing these employees. (APPLAUSE) The Clerk: DELEGATIONS A. Ms. Chauncy L. Rogers regarding Gold Cross cost being passed to the citizens. Ms. Rogers: Good afternoon. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Ms. Rogers. I’m going to give you five minutes and if you’ll again state for the record your name and your address. Ms. Rogers: Chauncy Rogers, 2408 Buffington Drive, Hephzibah, Georgia 30815. Mr. Mayor: Thank you. Ms. Rogers: Hi, good afternoon. I’m here to speak to the Commissioners in regards to the subsidy that was given to Gold Cross but now they no longer receive. The cost to the average taxpayer without Gold Cross receiving those funds is astronomical. I’ll give you the reason I’m th here. On December 11 my husband became ill at work and had to be transported from his place of employment at 2102 Old Savannah Road to University Hospital. No sirens were needed, no blood pressure, no temperature, just transported on a stretcher not on a backboard, no neck brace but just brought 3.6 miles. That bill was $2,090.48. That equals out to be $586.00 dollars per mile. When I contacted Gold Cross, I was told that due to you all not approving the additional funds for them they had to pass those costs on to the customer which happens to be my family as the one. The only resolution we could come to at that time which I did not agree with was a 10% discount if we paid in full. Now since then our insurance company issued a check for $1,284.18 which leaves my family a balance of $806.30 to be transported 3.6 miles. So I’m here just as a citizen to let you know this is a charge for what’s considered basic life services. This is not include a charge if we had been involved in an accident where they had to use heroic measures of life saving. I could only imagine the maybe $10,000 dollars that bill might be for an average taxpayer. So I’m just here as a citizen to say I would like to if it was my way to either give Gold Cross the funds until the Commission comes up with what you all consider to be a better solution or a different company but until that time the average taxpayer that I would think that if this is basic life services, then that means the least of any bill that the citizens of Richmond County receives is $2,090.48. So I’m not sure if you all knew how much the invoices are at this point for the taxpayer but I wanted to make you aware. Mr. Mayor: Thank you, Ms. Rogers. You have some questions from the members of the th body. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 8. Mr. Guilfoyle: Ms. Rogers, thank you for coming before this body. Before we cut the subsidy, there was a warning what exactly was going to happen no different than the reason why you’re here before us. It’s called cost shifting. If the supplement doesn’t come in to help keep everybody’s ambulance bill down and the subsidy’s no longer there, it gets shifted to the end user 2 which is your husband. Fortunately he’s good, he’s safe and he’s healthy again. You know with us living out there in the rural area you live in Hephzibah that was my major concern about cutting the subsidy because time is of the essence when it comes to a stroke, heart attack or even a fallen mother or father but I do thank you for coming before us. th Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9. Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Rogers, again I thank you too for coming but I’m glad you’re here because there has been some misconceptions I guess I’ll say about whether Gold Cross or Blue Cross or whoever’s going to be transporting. We were paying a subsidy, this body for whatever reason selected not to pay, and the ambulance company whoever they may be is in business. They’re not there just to provide ambulances. Even our fire department now who’s acquired a couple of more ambulances besides the one we had they’re even going to a billing process so somebody’s going to charge us. Now I totally agree with you that the price is really astronomical. I think that something should be done. Regardless of who’s doing the transporting it costs money to buy the equipment to have the necessary equipment on the machine when they’re there and even have the manpower. I said it many times in the newspaper and I said it on TV and I said it in this chamber many, many times if the City of Augusta can’t afford the subsidy then how are we going to afford to go into the ambulance business and that’s what it looks like now. I told Commissioner Hasan that I was the longest serving Commissioner. He said he wouldn’t say that but I’ve been here a long time and I’m going to leave it just like that. And I hadn’t had a meeting yet with anybody to talk about how we can do a better job. Now you live out in the rural in Hephzibah I don’t misunderstand that but I really worried about those people Sam Davis had to deal with on the block on the street on the corner. We’ve got a lot of people that don’t have insurance, that don’t have no way of paying and because we as an elected body didn’t step to the plate and pay the subsidy until we got it straight. We threw it on the back of the taxpayers and that’s exactly what we did. And I feel bad for the taxpayers I mean I’ve been all I’ve got is my mouth I mean if I can make them do something, Ms. Rogers, trust me this city would be upside down right now. I can’t get them to do it. But I can tell them now and I told them about it so I appreciate your coming in. I think your calm, quiet spirit coming here and I think the ears might’ve opened up just this morning to understand whether you like the company or not we should’ve kept something in place to protect the people that voted for us, that pay taxes, that need the best service they can get whether they be visiting in town or live in town. They need the best service they can get but because some of us didn’t like who was the carrier, who said we was paying too much now the city ain’t paying too much now the taxpayer’s paying too much and we seem to be smiling about it. Ms. Rogers, thank you again I’m not going to hold you. I just you helped me out a lot today because what you said is more than what I’ve been saying for a long time but it’s been falling on deaf ears but thank you again. Mr. Mayor: All right, you’ve got a couple more, Ms. Rogers. All right, the Chair th recognizes the Commissioner from the 6. Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms. Rogers, I appreciate you coming down. To your question to us were we familiar with some of the bills to that magnitude we absolutely were and are familiar with those bills of that magnitude for what you say is basic services. But I will tell you it’s not our fault as much as people would like us to be and some of my colleagues feel that it 3 is but it’s not our fault. I think for the long haul let me get three minutes of your time if you don’t mind. When Gold Cross first came in here in 2005 we had a recommending body that recommended another entity. Gold Cross at that particular time I think bidded about $1.9 million dollars. There was a company that was recommended by the body that was bigger and probably just as good as Gold Cross was that wanted to do the service for $400,000 dollars. At the end of the day some kind of way it was wrestled away and it ended up the Commission gave it to Gold Cross. We ended up paying for a service that we could’ve got for $400,000 dollars. We paid $1.3 million dollars for it. Now I’m going to fast forward now to 2013 in 2013 this body here prior to us many of us getting here, Gold Cross was given a contract about $1.1 million dollars per year. At that particular time in ’14, that was a three-year contract. In 2014 Gold Cross decided to go the EMS Council as well as to the state and decided to take the zone away from the City of Augusta. They were co-business owners at that particular time for a long story short. We was paying them as business partners with a contract handed in 2013. 2014 they no longer wanted to do business with the City of Augusta. They went to the state, they got awarded the zone. Truth be told the Commission at that particular time should’ve voided the whole contract because you didn’t have no say so, we absolutely had no say so. So when this body decided to do I think in ’16 or ’17 what we ended up doing we made them an offer. We made them an offer of $380,000 dollars. Remember we have no control. The zone belongs to them, we have absolutely no control over them. Contrary to what nobody tells you we can’t tell them to do anything but we offered them $380,000 dollars and they refused it. That’s why they’re not getting the subsidy. Thank you. th Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4. Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir. Ms. Rogers, I’m glad that your husband and I’m certain he’s fine. My colleagues say he’s fine so I’m asking you is is he recovered? Ms. Rogers: Yes. Mr. Sias: Okay good. In many instances things like this can become political footballs and for me the health and welfare of our citizens and businesses of Augusta Georgia on any given day can be about 400 sometimes 450,000 people. I don’t play games with that, I don’t play political football with that. We have an EMS issue that had to be addressed. It’s as simple as that th and we’ll address it. My colleague from the 6 just stated a series of things that I totally agree with but I just I don’t want to make anyone’s tragedy or talk about anyone’s, turn anyone’s misfortune into a political football. So irregardless of the outcome the city is working very diligently and very hard for a solution to this particular issue and I thank you for coming and sharing that with us, thank you. Mr. Mayor: Ms. Rogers, thank you. Ms. Rogers: Thank you. The Clerk: I call your attention to our Consent Agenda which consists of Items 1-17, Items 1-17. For the benefit of any objectors to our alcohol petitions once those petitions are read would you please signify your objection by raising your hand. I call your attention to: 4 Item 3: Is a request for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection the Sun Food Mart located at 3995B Old Waynesboro Road. Item 4: Is a request for an on-premise consumption Beer & Wine to be used in connection the location at 758 Broad Street. The Clerk: Are there any objectors to either of those alcohol petitions? Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, our Consent Agenda consists of Items 1-17 with no objectors to any of our alcohol petitions. Mr. Mayor: All right, we’re going to consider items to add or remove from the Consent th Agenda. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 8. We’re coming this way. Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, if my colleagues doesn’t have a problem with agenda items number 24, agenda item number 27 I would like to consent both of them. Mr. Mayor: All right, repeat those please. Mr. Guilfoyle: Agenda item number 24 about the RFP for the Pension and agenda item number 27 which is a change order for out there at transit. Mr. M. Williams: I have some questions with 24, Mr. Mayor. I’m not opposed to that but I’ve got --- Mr. Mayor: All right, so there’s an objection to 24 so 27 all right without objection. All th right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4. Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir. I’d like to add to the consent agenda Item 18 and Item 22. Mr. Guilfoyle: I have a problem with agenda item number 22 but we’ve got to --- Mr. Speaker: Oh really, I’m sorry. Mr. Mayor: All right, again I think I heard Item 18. Mr. Sias: (Inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Yeah, that absolutely was. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner th from the 7. Mr. Frantom: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d like to pull agenda item number 10. th Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9. Mr. M. Williams: I’m good, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right. 5 Ms. Davis: Motion to approve, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor: Sounds good to me. Mr. Frantom: Second. CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC SERVICES 1. Motion to approve the Sec. 5307 Augusta Public Transit grant application between the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Augusta, Georgia. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 28, 2019) 2. Motion to approve authorization for Augusta to accept a grant worth $13,750 from the American Association of Retired Persons. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 28, 2018) 3. Motion to approve New Location Application: A.N. 18-28: A request by Kandis Michelle Bonner for a retail package Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Rising Sun, LLC dba Sun Food Mart located at 3995B Old Waynesboro Rd. District 6. Super District 10. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 28, 2018) 4. Motion to approve New Location Application: A.N. 18-29: request by Nash William Patton for an on premise Beer & Wine License to be used in connection with Augusta Deli dba Groucho’s Deli-Augusta located at 758 Broad Street. There will be Sunday Sales. District 1. Super District 9. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 28, 2018) 5. Motion to approve Contract Term Extension with Bateman (Compass-USA) July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 28, 2018) 6. Motion to approve the contract with JBT Aero Tech Corporation (JBT) in the amount of $1,356.469.00 for the purchase of two (2) Passenger Boarding Bridges. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 28, 2018) 7. Motion to approve Sommers Construction Company Change Order Number 3 in the amount of $7,018.00. (Approved by Public Services Committee August 28,2 018) ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 8. Motion to approve the request from the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office for the purchase of two crime scene vehicles. Bid Item #18-186. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee August 28, 2018) 9. Motion to approve a request from Central Services Department-Fleet Management Division to purchase from Bid Item #18-226: one (1) 15-Passenger Cutaway Bus and Bid #18- 229 Engineering Department requests the purchase of one (1) F-350 Pickup Truck. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee August 28, 2018) PUBLIC SAFETY 11. Motion to approve updated resolutions for 911 fee collection and prepaid wireless fees. (Approved by Public Safety Committee August 28, 2018) ENGINEERING SERVICES 6 12. Motion to approve the Environmental Services Department – Keep Augusta Beautiful Division to create ordinances to fill Article 7 Secs. 1-4-95 to Secs. 1-4-102 of the Augusta, GA Code and to receive a report at the next committee meeting on how the current deficiencies by the garbage contractors are being addressed to include throwing and leaving the cans open and how to hold the contractors accountable for leaving the streets stained. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 28, 2018) 13. Motion to approve awarding Meter Purchasing for Various Successful Low Bidders from utilities Department 2018 Meter Bid Item #18-218. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 28, 2018) 14. Motion to approve Confined Space Monitoring Services from Industrial Scientific. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 28, 2018) 15. Motion to approve the adoption of Resolution of Support of a Goal of 100% Clean Energy by 2050. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 28, 2018) 16. Motion to approve the assignment of design firms to specific Augusta Utilities CIP projects. (Approved by Engineering Services Committee August 28, 2018) PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 17. Motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Augusta Commission held August 21, 2018 and Special Called Meetings held August 23 and 28, 2018) PUBLIC SERVICES 18. Motion to accept and authorize sponsor execution of Federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Grant 3-13-0011-042-2018. The Grant Agreement will obligate $13,873,749.00 in federal grant funds to cover 90% of the costs of the following Augusta Regional Airport (AGS) Projects: 1) Rehabilitate Apron (Terminal and GA Apron Phase ii) 2) Relocate Electrical Lighting 3) Vault Security Enhancements. OTHER BUSINESS 27. Approve the Supplement Construction Contract with Reeves Construction co. in the amount of $160,330.00 to cover additional cost of Resurfacing Regency Boulevard (Gordon Hwy to Jennings Rd.) as requested by AED. Bid: 17-243 Mr. Mayor: All right, I’ve got a motion and a second, voting. Mr. Fennoy out. Motion Passes 9-0. \[Items 1-9, 11-17, 18, 27\] Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Clerk --- The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: I don’t know if he wants to be here for the whole time at least --- The Clerk: Are we going to number 10? Mr. Mayor: --- no, ma’am --- 7 The Clerk: No, okay. Mr. Mayor: --- I’m going to number 26. The Clerk: OTHER BUSINESS 26. Motion to approve an Augusta Community Center Partnership Memorandum of Understanding between Augusta, Georgia and the Augusta Department of Recreation and Parks and 30901 Community Development Corporation regarding the operations of W.T. Johnson Community Center 1610 Hunter Street, Augusta, Georgia. Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Director of Parks and Recreation. Mr. Parker: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. As some of you would know the Boys and Girls Club pulled themselves out of W.T. Johnson several months back. We were approached by the folks from Beulah Grove and the 30901 Corporation about entering into a very similar agreement that we had with Boys and Girls Club where they would help us in operating the W.T. Johnson Center and that’s what’s before you today is an MOU with the group to enter into that agreement right away. And they do have staff Ms. Wright and the Pastor and a couple of folks are here today if you have any questions for 30901. Mr. Hasan: Motion to approve. Mr. D. Williams: Second. Mr. Mayor: All right, I’ve got a motion and a second to approve. I see the lights going up. I’ve got a series of lights going up for questions and that’s great, I will get to those. I do want the representatives from 30901 Development Corporation to please stand I just want the folks in the audience to know who they are, thank you so much. We have one of our community leaders here with us and members of the church congregation doing a fantastic job in this area. All right, fantastic, thank you all. we’ve got Pastor Dr. Sam Davis I’m not sure if we’re related he’s from Barnwell I’m from Monroe County. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the th 4. Mr. Sias: Thank you very much, sir. One of the things if I may address Mr. Parker please sir. Mr. Mayor: You may. Mr. Sias: Mr. Parker, one of the things that concerns me I completely support this partnership make no mistake about that I completely support it but I have a concern about the ratio and the ratio says 1 to 10 for kids in a program. If you go and you look at Bright from the Start, the premiere organization that governs these, their ration is 1 to 20 for the same age group. And what I’m concerned about is the organization gets set up for failure if they don’t meet that criteria 8 that could be a program ongoing or a program that folks in attendance they don’t have enough folks there. So when you look at the school system that was one of my main concerns is the fact if you have a ratio of 1 to 10 and I think that’s a very, very high bar to meet on a constant basis in reference to supervising a program at all times. Mr. Parker: I absolutely agree with you. I think that’s a carryover from an older contract. You and I have had discussions about that number the 1 to 20 is fine and I’ll amend the agreement if it goes forward. I don’t have a problem with that at all. Mr. Sias: All right. Mr. Mayor: All right before you move forward Commissioner I’d like for you to go ahead and if you’re going to amend it I want to do it now --- Mr. Sias: Okay --- Mr. Mayor: --- not later. Mr. Sias: --- I will do that, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Sias: But one other thing I want to address and I saw that in here you about if there’s some kind of act committed by a member of an organization that has a partnership and I see that has been changed, it says if they’re responsible for programming an operation out there whereas some member who may have nothing to do with that particular part of the organization goes out and commits some kind of a crime it says now that the organization will lose the control of that entity and I appreciate that change being made where you said it. So with that being said I move to I make a substitute motion with the amendment to the staffing ratio everything the same except the staffing ratio is 1 to 20. That’s my substitute motion. Mr. Jefferson: Second. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, can you ask them do we understand what they’re changing? Mr. Mayor: Yeah all right, so if we can have a representative from the corporations to th come forward. Okay and all right, here’s what I want to do. The Commissioner from the 4 if you’ll take this body to the page that you’re on and the line number and that’s how we’re going to operate, okay? All right, if you’ll come forward for just, all right if you’ll hold for just a moment. Commissioner, what page? Mr. Sias: Just one second --- Mr. Mayor: All right. Mr. Sias: --- I had that already in my head Page 9 Attachment 1 Staffing Requirements. 9 Mr. Mayor: All right, everybody suspend for a moment, okay Commissioner, continue. Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir. Bottom line is it is okay where it says if we simply have a basic ration of 1 to 20 and that was my motion to have a basic ratio all of their programs 1 to 20. They don’t do daycare programs so they’re not into babies and things in this kind of business. They’re into youth and young, the young people. So a ration of 1 to 20 that’s the essence of the substitute motion is to change the ration to 1 to 20. Mr. Mayor: All right, so before you make that substitute motion let’s do it this way. All right if everyone would go to one, two, three, four it’s the fourth bullet under Staff and Requirements and if you would in this requirement striking beginning at Supervise all the way to where it says the ratio shall be one supervisor for every twenty youth, is that what you’re suggesting, sir? Mr. Sias: If you go back up to the second line prior yes sir, yes sir. Mr. Mayor: All right, so we’re going to strike in the fourth bullet item all the language up to the word ‘the’ prior to ratio shall be one supervisor for every twenty youth --- Mr. Sias: Correct. Mr. Mayor: --- are you tracking, Attorney MacKenzie? Mr. MacKenzie: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: All right, so here’s what the amendment will look like. That’s the amendment. All right, so that’s what it’ll look like. Madam Clerk. The Clerk: Okay. Mr. Sias: You didn’t strike that out (inaudible). Mr. Mayor: Oh well, Ms. Bonner has my copy. Mr. Hasan: The last line I don’t think it’ll be standing right, the last line (unintelligible). Mr. Hasan: You’re fine with that? Mr. Sias: The ratio, absolutely, that captured it. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, everyone’s tracking, you’re satisfied with that? Mr. Sias: Yes, sir. 10 Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, that’s amendment one. All right, are there any other amendments? All right so if we take this at the appropriate time we can take it as amended. You won’t have to make a substitute, you can just take it as amended, okay? Mr. Sias: If that fits the bill. Mr. Mayor: It does, you can take it as amended. All right, the Chair recognizes the th Commissioner from the 9, all right, Ms. Wright, don’t go anywhere. Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I need to address Mr. Parker as well. Mr. Mayor: Sure. Mr. M. Williams: Glenn, this is not a new contract. This happened before but I guess my question today is what part would the city play. Now looking at the background we the city’s going to pay all the utilities and all of the responsibilities as far as the cost is going to be upon this city. What part, what program that would be continuing to go on as well as a programs that the 30901 is doing because I’ve got some issues with that because in past there have not been very many programs that the city has been doing at that facility. Now are we taking this and turning it over to the 30901 and we are stepping away sort of or are we going to be working side by side because a partnership ought to be just what it says a partnership. So my question to you is what programming did you propose for the inner city for the blighted areas that needs these programs as well as the program they’re putting on? Mr. Parker: Since I’ve been here in Augusta almost three years, we as a staff have not done programming at the W.T. Johnson --- Mr. M. Williams: Don’t answer just that it’s no I don’t know what since you’ve been here. My question to you is were you implementing any other programs because this is an area that needs those programs as well. Mr. Parker: --- we are not. We have met a half dozen or more times with the folks in 30901. They have a very extensive program base they’re bringing to that center. Mr. M. Williams: And have had it for quite some time. This is no new, it’s no new program or no new process. But as an elected official I’ve got an issue when the neighborhood as well as the churches there the program that they’re doing what are we what is the City of Augusta is offering. You just stated when you got up that the Boys and Girls Club stepped away from it a few minutes back and we have not said or done anything at all just kind of left that to just dissolve by itself I guess I don’t know why but we have not stepped to the plate. So I’m hearing now to approve this and get the 30901 back into that facility again, we pay all of the costs of that from stormwater fee to utilities everything got to be associated with pay and the maintenance from what I read in the contract so we’re turning that building over to them but we don’t have anything going. Now there’s several and Reverend Davis and I had some conversation about this before there’s several neighborhood communities that meet, I think the Turpin Hills Neighborhood Associations one and two we had to have a provision put in there where they were able to use that facility 11 because if you don’t catch this on the front end you’re going to be running behind on the back end. So my question is to you and it sounds like a no that you have any programs and you’re trying to do anything that we’re doing at Warren Road or we’re doing at Bernie Ward or we’re doing at some other facility as well because I’m not against their program at all but at the same time I think we have a responsibility as a city to make sure there are some programming being done with some staffing as well. Now I don’t think we ought to do programming and give it to them and they’ll do it. We ought to be doing some programming side by side because we’re talking about a partnership. So if that’s not happening, I think we need to go back to the drawing board. We need to go back to the table and come up with something where we can work with the church but at the same time the folks who don’t go to church, the folks who don’t come to Sunday School, they need to have some programs as well ourselves in it. Mr. Parker: I don’t want to speak for Ms. Wright, I think she can address this. This is not just about the folks that go to that church --- Mr. M. Williams: No, no, no --- Mr. Parker: --- or being a part of that they’re --- Mr. M. Williams: --- Glenn, hold it, hold it, hold it. Ms. Wright, just thank you now I appreciate it, Mr. Mayor, thank you, sir. This is not about separating so don’t even try to separate. I didn’t say I wasn’t speaking of people who wasn’t attending the church. I’m talking about people who don’t attend any church. But there ought to be some programs under the city, wait a minute let me ask a question another way. You don’t believe there ought to be city programs going on at the same time? Mr. Parker: I think we could make that work. We had not talked in that vein in any of our discussions our discussions were that --- Mr. M. Williams: That means you don’t believe that, that means you don’t believe that -- - Mr. Parker: --- I didn’t say that. Mr. M. Williams: --- well that’s why I asked you a question. I mean anything, we can make a lot of things work. I asked you the question do you think it ought to be programs that the city is responsible for because that’s our, that’s the city’s recreation center in fact one of the oldest centers in this community --- Mr. Mayor: Okay --- Mr. M. Williams: --- it’s in the heart the needed community that needs some programming and I think the church’s been doing what they’re doing. I think they’re trying to do something but then we sit back and give it somebody else to run and we’re not even trying. 12 Mr. Mayor: --- okay all right those are very, very pertinent questions to the Commissioner th. from the 9 Let me interject for just a moment. Again, Madam Administrator, I want you to be on deck if I call on you here, I’m going to ask you a series of questions. All right, Director Parker, is it not true that the W.T. Johnson Center is perhaps one of our more underutilized facilities that we have right here in the inner city? Mr. Parker: Very much so. Mr. Mayor: Okay, it is also not true that pursuant to this opportunity this agreement that’s been brought forward today we have an opportunity to partner with a community stakeholder who is meeting the need of citizens in a variety of ways? Mr. Parker: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, here’s my next question. To the degree that independent of the church, independent of 30901 Development Corporation, the Johnson Center as we know it today in our Recreation and Parks Masterplan that dovetails with the destination blueprint is perhaps one of our more underutilized facilities. Mr. Parker: Very much so. Mr. Mayor: Okay and now we have an opportunity to from holistic perspective meet the needs of an ever increasing and growing community where in February of this year I believe we broke ground on the Foundry Place Apartments, is that not true? Mr. Parker: The date, that’s close. Mr. Mayor: Is it also not true that we had a grand opening for what used to be Sunset that’s now --- Ms. Jackson: Legacy on the Green at Walton Community. Mr. Mayor: --- and so we have an opportunity now through a community partnership with the stakeholder to meet the needs of that ever changing and growing community with this partnership? Mr. Parker: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. M. Williams: Can I respond, Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Well, I didn’t ask you the question, hold on, I’m going to give you the floor back --- Mr. M. Williams: Okay. 13 Mr. Mayor: --- and I’m going to let you ask a couple more questions. Mr. M. Williams: No, I think you made my case because of the things you just mentioned that’s coming there that the city ought to be a part of the same reasons you just talked about the Foundry and talked about the Walton on the Green and talked about the underutilized how they piled up a pile of dirt in front of the facility. You can’t even see the grounds and nobody cares, nobody said a word and it’s still like that. The vegetation is growing up around the building and the church. Now Reverend Davis might appreciate this around the church the vegetation has grown and we walked away from that the city had. Mr. Mayor: Okay --- Mr. M. Williams: So you made my case. That’s why the city ought to be in that because it’s been underutilized and it’s got all this growth coming. We should not just dump it on the church to do or the 30901 to do. We ought to be in a partnership and a real partnership needs each other. Mr. Mayor: --- well, I couldn’t agree with you more thus why I asked the questions. So now if I were to pose the questions to you is it also not true that the city has an opportunity today to enter into a partnership with a community stakeholder and meet the needs of an ever-changing and growing community in a way that we singularly have not been able to, that we ourselves have failed to do for many, many years. But we now have a unique opportunity where I did not hear anything today nor have I read it in this contract that negates even me from being able to go down to the Johnson Center and play basketball with the kids, hang out and just kick it and be friends with everybody. I did not hear anything that precludes us from doing that. In fact, what I’ve heard today is an opportunity for us to do exactly what you want to be done and that is for the city to partner in a way that we’ve never done before to meet the needs of a growing and ever-changing community. And I think we’ve got a motion and a proper second for the amendment (inaudible). Mr. M. Williams: And I’m glad you posed that question to me at this time where I can respond exactly why I wanted this city to be a partner and be into not just partnership and turn it over to. I don’t see in the document that I read where the city’s doing just what you said and I don’t hear anything out of Glenn saying that this is what we’re going to be doing, this is what they’re going to be doing and we’re going to be partners together. What I’m hearing is that we’re going to walk away like we did for the last 200 years and let them handle it, let them worry about it. You know the taxpayer’s dollars are going it in but we ain’t got to worry about it. Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes Ms. Wright. Can you talk to us about your holistic vision for what we intend to do here? Ms. Wright: Yes, Mayor Davis and to all of the Commissioners the conversations that we’ve had with Mr. Parker from the Rec Department have been community centered. From day one we began to talk about the community programs, those programs that will revitalize the community. And we’ve gotten into specifics which are not part of the MOU but we have gotten into specifics about the kinds of things that could happen because we do know that area is being 14 revitalized. We do know that people are moving back into the area. Some of the things that we have talked about doing which is community oriented we have a Seniors Program that we will be implementing there. We will also have, the Center will be open for walking in the morning for our seniors. We have an AA Program that will be housed there. We have a Community Recovery Breakfast that will be on Saturday mornings for those individuals in the community who are recovering. We have a youth focused activity that will be happening in the afternoon after school wherein we’re partnering with another organization that will teach athletic skills in conjunction with development skills, educational enhancements and all of these programs are open to the community. The partnership has been offered that any technical assistance that we need, also any training, CPR training and those kinds of things that our volunteer staff will be doing. Mr. Parker’s already offered the city’s partnership in training those individuals who will be volunteering there at the center. So everything that has been planned for the W.T. Johnson Center is community based, community oriented and will be open to the community. Mr. Sias: Call for the question. th Mr. Mayor: Okay, all right, the Commissioner from the 4 I want to go back to the MOU. I think there’s one additional thing I want to make sure we conclude in this document. If you go to Page 2 of 9 of the MOU I want to make sure we spell it out as opposed to it being, I know what we do from a city standpoint. Administrator Jackson clarified that for me but under again Responsibilities of 30901 Development Corporation under Item 5 I would like to add, okay all right, Attorney MacKenzie, I want to amend this. On Item 5 where 30901 Development Community Development Corporation shall have all volunteer staff, shall have a background check of all volunteer staff and execute and keep on file a Volunteer Release Form. If we’re going to be working with children that we have a nexus as a city --- Ms. Wright: And we do that with all of our volunteers at this time. Mr. Mayor: --- I figured you did but I want to make sure --- Ms. Wright: Absolutely. Mr. Mayor: --- state that in the document. Mr. Sias: Quick question. th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4. Attorney MacKenzie you’re wordsmithing that for me, thank you. Mr. Sias: Here’s the question I have --- Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. Sias: --- in a situation out there the Sandridge paid for their own background checks so I’m just asking is the 30901 will they be paying for the backgrounds and will Mr. Parker handle that? 15 Mr. Mayor: Absolutely. Mr. Sias: They’ll be paying for them? Mr. Mayor: Yeah because they’re volunteers. Mr. Sias: Okay. Mr. Mayor: I mean is that not true? Mr. Sias: That’s fine. Mr. Mayor: Okay, we’re working with you and that’s extremely important. Ms. Wright: Absolutely. Mr. Mayor: All right, Madam Administrator, you good? Ms. Jackson: Yes, sir. th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 8. Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, I would like to thank Ms. Wright and the 30901 Development Corporation as well as all the volunteers for stepping forward to look out for our youths. It’s a big change anytime you can change one mind a child’s mind it turns positive and everybody around them has the same feeling. But I wanted to thank Mr. Parker for meeting with the Development Corporation and you know I believe Ms. Wright clearly understands if there’s anything we can do to help make the outcome better let Glenn Parker know and Glenn will reach out to the Commission. But I would like to thank each and every one of you, thank you. Mr. Mayor: All right, we’re going to, okay all right so we’ve got two amendments again. The first one is in front of us here and the second one as we amend Paragraph 5 shall read, 30901’s CDC shall have all volunteer staff undergo a criminal background check and execute and keep on file a Volunteer Release Form as well as provide copies of said forms to Augusta. Those are the amendments we have before us. I want to I want to echo the same words that the Commissioner thth from the 8 just did but I also want to express the concerns that the Commissioner from the 9 has raised. The Dean of the Commission his concerns are valid from the standpoint he’s been here, he has seen what works and what does not work. In my conversations with him he is not opposed to the church the 30901 Development Corporation being in this partnership but as a voice for the broader community it’s important for him to be able to raise those issues and I respect that greatly. What I would suggest is that to those who are here the ones supportive of this and those who may still have questions, why not engage the Corporation and the Church as a growing community as a growing city, the second largest city in the State of Georgia and without question the fastest growing economy outside of Atlanta. We’re going to have more people coming into this city and as such we need partnerships like this to make us all better so that’s a city that’s works for 16 everybody not just a select few and I think those are the concerns that the Commissioner from the th 9 consistently keeps raising and again with great respect we appreciate those questions. All right, we now have an amended document we’re ready to vote. All right, we have a motion and a proper second, voting. Mr. Sias: And for the record I withdrew my substitute. st Mr. Mayor: We have the Commissioner from the 1 on the line. Mr. Fennoy: I am. The Clerk: Okay, I’ll get your vote in just a minute, and how will you be voting, sir? Mr. Fennoy: I support the (unintelligible) I vote in favor. The Clerk: Okay. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: All right, thank you. All right, that motion passes. We look forward to a strong partnership that meets the needs of the entire community, thank you so much. If ya’ll want to stay with us you can but if you want to leave I’m going to give a chance to. Ms. Davis: They must’ve read your mind. Mr. Sias: What happened to the partnership? Mr. Mayor: All right, Item 25. The Clerk: APPOINTMENTS 25. Motion to approve the appointment of two ARC members to the CSRA Unified Development Authority in accordance with the attached Resolution. (Requested by Commissioner Ben Hasan) th Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6. Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, we, before we got involved in the conversation that we was in just last week around another Authority we were getting ready as a body to appoint the two members to this Unified Development Authority. And in looking at this, Mr. Mayor, there were two names or one name was put on the table that say that was mentioned if I can remember if my colleague can correct me if I’m wrong, Mr. Mayor, and I’m directing that statement to yourself. I remember my colleague Commissioner Frantom mentioned that he was going to support Commissioner Jefferson to be there. With that being said we decided to put that off at that particular time and we did not further the discussion. About a day or so later the 17 following week I called and looked at some of the persons that we had historically put there after we got past commissions early on from 2002 moving forward. The most recent ones prior to that were a Commissioner and an Executive Director of the Development Authority which in this instance would be Mr. Cal Wray. So I called him and asked him did he have an entry that was the rd Wednesday before the 3 because we had the Special Called Meeting and he acknowledged that he would very much like to be a member of that. And so with that being said, Mr. Mayor, I think it was moving in that direction to do that and I think that’s we ought to go ahead and fulfill what our obligations are around this because there’s so many benefits of being a part of this. I think we pay about, and that’s not just be a part of this but this is an extension that we are part of that CSRA Regional, what’s the whole language there, Mr. Mayor, you’ve got the whole language. Mr. Mayor: Regional Commission. Mr. Hasan: Regional Commission and we pay about $200,000 dollars a dollar per citizen to be a part of it because all of the other amenities that comes with it whether it’s people needing loans, people needing JPTA and other programs that comes with that. And so in my mind we should stick with that and do just the order of business that we intended to do and I think, Mr. Mayor, we’ll end up in a good place, I think we ought to follow through with that. Mr. Mayor: Okay, so what you’re recommending is that the two appointees or at least the th two names that your offering are the Commissioner from the 5 and the current Executive Director. Mr. Hasan: That’s what I would recommend basically. Commissioner Jefferson’s name was the name that was out there as a Commissioner and naturally I asked last time that we were going to stay with the profile that we had done previously that the previous Commission had done that would be the Executive Director would be Mr. Cal Wray and those two persons would be members of that body. Mr. Frantom: Second. Mr. Mayor: All right, I’ve got a motion and a second but I think there’s more debate still. th All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9. Mr. M. Williams: Yeah, I thought there was going to be some more conversation from among the body as to who and I’ve got no problem with either one of the gentlemen their names been mentioned. But I hadn’t had any conversation. I didn’t get no email from Ms. Bonner or nobody else. I mean okay I understand that but this is (unintelligible). I mean I just thought there would’ve been more dialogue but I remember holding this up you know last week we decided to wait. But I mean if the body feels that’s the two Commissioner Jefferson and Cal I ain’t got no problem with that but it looked like we would’ve had some form of talking to each other besides just throwing this stuff out there. Mr. Mayor: Yeah, I understand, I do understand. I know that there are, so we’ve got Item number 25 but there’s also another agenda item that is before us and that’s Item 20. There has th been discussion about it and I think that’s what the Commissioner from the 6 has eluded to that these now have they’ve intersected in terms of the conversation. We’ve had some brief 18 conversations about Item number 20 which is the Joint Development Authority. The reality of it is one’s involving 13 counties which is the Unified Development Authority that has been on the books and is currently formerly recognized by the DCA and that’s the Department of Community Affairs and the list of eight authorities that we have in Richmond County. And so to that end I have had some brief conversations with several of you about the posture that we’re in. We th postponed taking any action on Item number 20 that the Commissioner from the 4 brought forward with no recommendation from Administrative Services. I’ve had some conversations with some of our adjacent counties. There’s still some more questions I’d like for us to postpone that th one when we get to it and then take it up on the 18 at the same time that Columbia County is. But I will say this that the previous history with the Unified Development Authority and Ms. Bonner gave a series of documents that you got in your notebooks this weekend gave you somewhat of a history of how we arrived here. The same statutory benefits that are available with the Unified Development Authority which is what we’re voting on now are the same benefits that you will get when we move forward with this other matter, the JDA, the same benefits in terms of the additional $500.00 dollar credit they’re the exact same benefits. All right, so the Chair th recognizes the Commissioner from the 4. Mr. Sias: Thank you. Since you’ve kind of for lack of a better word companioned these two items to a certain degree I support Item 25 wholeheartedly. But also I would just suggest to my colleagues and to you also, sir, that we don’t necessarily try to punish the whole area because we may have some contention with a certain body or so. I think anytime we can work together we have a, we can create a better benefit. Now I’m not against Columbia County. I see Columbia County as one of our biggest competitors also making them one of our biggest motivators. But when I look at the history of Augusta and Columbia County, Columbia County is a toddler compared to Richmond County. So yeah we had some folks that moved from Richmond County to Columbia County. That’s kind of the nature of new and old. I think it’s incumbent upon us as leaders of Augusta-Richmond County is to furnish up, shine and buff Richmond County up to compete with anybody. I just don’t think we should say okay number one well we don’t like this way so and so did business we don’t want to do anything with that or we don’t like this other county because they’ve been trying to separate themselves to a certain degree. Everybody does that. So I just think before we want to throw Item 20 out to the wind, flush it down the toilet. Let’s take a moment and consider the benefits. And I certainly think our new whizbang you know you had to get that from the Queen of Mean on Sunday. I really don’t think he’s here to short Richmond County, I really don’t think that. So I just think that before we stick our heads in the sand, let’s take a good look at the things and listen to Mr. Wray and what he’s bringing to the table. He’s brought new innovative ideas and most important a new attitude of working with this Commission and I think we should strongly consider supporting one of his first initiatives. And so I just want to say before we throw all that away, let’s take our time. If we want to reconsider this item on the 8th of September I support that as long as we can support it with a clear mind, thank you. Mr. Mayor: You know I was going to give you a nickname but I won’t because you said we were going to keep up here today. I agree with everything you just said that we need to take our time. No one at least I haven’t heard anyone suggest that we stick our head in the sand with regards to Item number 20. As I’ve said I support it. There are more questions that I want to make sure we get asked. And I’ve had some conversations with my good friend from across the highway Chairman Cross this morning that we’ve talked about this. We’ve talked about tactically what that 19 looks like for our counties. I know he was going to be the outgoing Chairman so just as he and I joked with one another every opportunity we get he wants to take my lunch and I want to take his but we also want to work together and I think we’ve done that. And he also shared with me to try to dispel this concern about the next T-SPLOST that they want to go alone. What he shared with me that is clearly not the case, that he had heard someone who was formerly with this government who’s no longer here say that Richmond County was going to go singularly. This is a case of he said she said. We’re not debating that today but at the end of the day we are partners in the community. And there’s a recognition on their part Richmond County is the lead dog and they’ve had substantial growth as well but let’s take up 25. I think there’s support; we’ve got a motion and a second and again in all fairness to the Development Authority folks we’re not sticking our head in the sand. We just want to have some more discussion and we’ll take this matter up on the th 18. All right, voting. This is on Item 25. Mr. Sias: Point of Personal Privilege? Mr. Mayor: Yes, I’ll give it to you. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from th the 4. Mr. Sias: Thank you for a Point of Personal Privilege --- Mr. Mayor: Hold on one second, Commissioner, hold on one second. The Clerk: Waiting for Mr. Williams so we can publish the vote. Mr. M. Williams votes No. Motion Passes 9-1. th Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4. Mr. Sias: --- thank you, sir. Just I think for recognizing me for a Point of Personal Privilege and it’s not my intention to put this gentleman in the line of fire but I did want to introduce him and tell you at least from my perspective why he’s here in Augusta. I had a good conversation with him earlier this morning and that is Mr. Brad Avery from Inland Services. He’s one of the executives out of Florida, can we ask him to stand? He’s just here working on a problem that we had with the trash collection reference Inland Services. They’re here to do some reorganizations so just want to say they’re attending to the issues and so forth so we’ll hear from him again. Thank you very much. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, does that mean I’m 2 and 0 since last week? Mr. Mayor: Who’s counting, who’s counting. Mr. Hasan: Me. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 20 20. Motion to consider establishing a Greater Augusta Joint Development Authority between Augusta Richmond County, Burke County and Columbia County. (No recommendation from Administrative Services Committee August 28, 2018) Mr. Mayor: Just doing the business of the people, John Clarke, just doing the business of th the people. All right, again if I can get a motion to defer Item 20 to September 18. Mr. Sias: So moved. Mr. Jefferson: Second. Mr. Mayor: All right, voting. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, excuse me, before we vote, Mr. Mayor, if you don’t mind? Mr. Mayor: I do mind. Mr. Hasan: Okay, no problem I withdraw. The Clerk: Commissioner, how are you voting on that? Mr. Fennoy: What was that now? th The Clerk: The motion was to defer Item 20 to our September 18 meeting for consideration. Mr. Fennoy: That’s fine. The Clerk: Okay, thank you. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Okay Item 10, Madam Clerk. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 10. Motion to approve designating the Lake Olmstead Stadium property as the approved site for a city Amphitheater. (Approved by Administrative Services Committee August 28, 2018) Mr. Hasan: Motion to approve. Mr. G. Smith: Second. Mr. Frantom: I don’t get to talk, I’ve got questions. 21 Mr. Mayor: I understand. Mr. Frantom: I wasn’t here last Tuesday and I --- Mr. Mayor: Okay, hold on, hold on. All right, Madam Clerk, we’ve got a motion and a th proper second, the Commissioner from the 10 seconded. That didn’t have anything to do with th Georgia Tech I want to add. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 7 Finance Committee Director. Mr. Frantom: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’ll preface by saying myself and two partners were the first ones to take being a promoter in Columbia County brought the first concerts to Columbia County Amphitheater so I have some history in this and that’s why it’s important I think I tell the facts and not just vote on a motion. I was also at the Florida/Georgia Line Nellie Concert at Lake Olmstead. It had 9,500 people. They bused people in from Summerville, traffic nightmare. And also I talked to the Green Jackets owner previously about this issue. Since 1994 that stadium was built and there’s a reason they haven’t had many events there: traffic, ingress/egress, the topography of the facility and they told me the promoters won’t go there. And now you’ve got SRP Park across the river which you’re going to see events happen there over the next now that baseball season’s over you’re going to see events I would guess between three to eight events happen over there. You’ve got Lady A in Columbia County. How are we going to entice people to go to Lake Olmstead for concerts? Also when you look at the cost involved. The Green Jackets cost $300,000 dollars a year; they have revenue coming in. Where are we going to get $300,000 dollars a year? I saw that we just got an email I think from Ms. Douse or Janice that the cost went down to $261,000 from $271 from $361, another $642,000 just to play baseball there. I don’t see where we’re going to get all the money to do this and I guess my question is today what are we approving? Are we approving we’re going to talk to experts and see their feedback before we move forward? Are we approving that we’re just going to move forward as an amphitheater without it’s just going to happen regardless of cost? And Madam Administrator sent an email and for clarification purposes I’d like to understand, she said I don’t approve and I didn’t understand whether she didn’t approve the change of the outside the $342 or the change of the $642,000. And for clarification purposes, Mayor Pro Tem, if we could get Madam Clerk to speak on that behalf? Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Madam Administrator? Mr. Frantom: Madam Administrator, I’m sorry. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Yes. Ms. Jackson: Yes, I sent a message out on Friday an email message, I think that’s what you’re referring to, with the assessment attached. That assessment was strictly related to what it would take for us to do baseball at that facility. It didn’t take into account the amphitheater issue at all. That was just based upon the conversation we had a couple of weeks ago about what would be the what we’d have to do for each one of the uses that we looked at as options. The first number the $642 was related to what’s inside the stadium. What was the $300 plus that’s now reduced to $271 was what would have to take place outside the stadium in order to make it functional that would be improving parking and things like that so that was the meaning of that message. What I 22 also said in regard to that was if we are looking at amphitheater being a long term use, I wouldn’t recommend spending over $600,000 dollars to repair the stadium just for baseball purposes if baseball was going to be a short-term thing, so does that clarify? Mr. Frantom: Yes, it does. I guess are we approving today the, are we going to get conceptual drawings I mean what are we approving today. Ms. Jackson: What my recommendation in the last paragraph of that email was that if the Commission, full Commission does proceed with the vote to designate this as an amphitheater that we secure the services of a design firm that could program that facility for us and give us a reasonable cost estimate so you would know exactly what those costs would be. Mr. Frantom: Does this rule out partnerships with Augusta University, Paine College or anybody or are we taking this on wholly to where, like where I’m trying to understand where we’re going to get $200,00 dollars for operating costs at minimal. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: I mean right now there’s no partnerships, correct? Ms. Jackson: Right now there is not. Our staff has had some conversations with those entities but neither one at this point has come forward indicating for sure that they want to lease the facility. Mr. Frantom: Okay, thank you. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Williams. Mr. M. Williams: The Super District Commissioner had his hand up first. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Oh, okay Commissioner Smith. Mr. M. Williams: I’ll yield to you, Grady. Mr. G. Smith: I’m not being in front of a Dean. I’m not that dumb. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Smith, you go ahead. Mr. Smith: Okay. I voted affirmative for it and because I thought we were going to lease. It says approve designating, we designate the area that we could look at and see if it’s viable as an arena. All right now I’m one of those we got to look at the numbers first and you know if you can afford it that’s great and if you can’t you know choose another site or bury that idea real quick. But anyway I thought we were just voting on the area. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Well, who made the motion? Was it Commissioner Jefferson? The Clerk: Commissioner Hasan –-- 23 Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: I was just wondering if we can maybe adopt that motion to include first you know securing services, the appropriate professional services to do a study or whatever what do you call it, an analysis, is that what you would recommend --- Ms. Jackson: Yeah, I was recommending, what I said --- Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: --- just so we’re clear on the motion. Ms. Jackson: --- was that if you all voted to approve this motion, we would need to get a design firm to give you the exact costs associated with it is that is what I was suggesting. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: I almost think that needs to be a part of the motion if, just so we have a good directive. Commissioner Williams. Mr. M. Williams: Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. You know and I was listening to my colleagues and I kind of agree with him but what I disagree with is when I heard about the Lady A I don’t remember them having a partnership with somebody else to have an amphitheater. I’m wondering why we’ve got to partnership with somebody in order to do something. First thing we ought to do is make up our minds to do something. That’s the first thing. The facilities already are there; we need to enhance it. If we can’t enhance it we sure can’t, we won’t build now we won’t go nowhere else. Now there’s some work that’s got to be done in order to do that but the mindset of the people first of all got to be willing to make that an amphitheater and promote that amphitheater. We just talked about the growth, Mr. Mayor, that’s coming in and out of Augusta so we’ve got to be ready for that. We talk about the traffic and traffic is a problem. They stopped riding horses when Sylvia Cooper moved to town in 1865. They stopped riding horses then so we ain’t riding horses and then we’ve got cars, automobiles, so by having automobiles it’s going to be a way to work on that. So we can’t say because of the traffic we’re not going to do it. There’s no perfect location. The Green Jackets Stadium over in North Augusta, it’s in a situation where you would think traffic would be the number one problem but they don’t seem to be worrying about that. I mean it’s down in a hole and they come out of the hole everyday every time they have a game. I mean but we look at why we can’t do something versus why we can, I think we need to build something. We need to build on to what we’ve got already, enhance that, beautify it make it a state of the art in time, I’m not saying do it overnight now. I would’ve done it yesterday but since we can’t, Mary, we’ll do it a little at a time you know just like the elephant we talked about one bite at a time. So I’m thinking we ought to go ahead and approve this and then work toward doing that and with the study that Ms. Jackson talked about I ain’t got no problem with a study but we’ve done studied so much stuff. If we took the money we paid for the studies we could’ve done built the facility half the way we wanted to go when we look at all money we done paid on studies. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: It’s not that expensive. Mr. M. Williams: I hope it’s not but we done spent a lot of money on studies. So I’m just agreeing that the location’s going to have to have some issues we’re going to deal with but it’s already there, it’s over 65 I would say 70% of the way and we go ahead and approve lighting, cut back the shrubbery. I told Mr. Mayor today I think I told you or I told somebody that on Greene 24 Street no I told George Eskola, where’s he at, on Greene Street it is so dark where the trees, the vegetation grown down ain’t only one way to vote on lights you can’t see the lights on Greene Street because the trees have grown down. We got to cut around the Lake Olmstead, trim it up, let the lights be bright, stuff that we can do. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: I think there’s probably support up here. We’ve just got to be specific as far as our directive. Commissioner Jefferson. Mr. Jefferson: Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. This is something that we put out here to designate that ballpark or that area Lake Olmstead as an amphitheater so that we won’t get tied up in any obligations or anything else to interfere with that moving forward. We talk about Lady Antebellum, we talk about North Augusta, we talk about other places but I’m talking about here in Augusta that we need a facility that will hold a substantial amount of people that will make Augusta a destination point, I keep reiterating that. We overuse the Augusta Common. We use the Augusta Common and it’s outgrown the Border Bash has actually outgrown the Augusta Common. You know hopefully I would like to see the Board Bash come to the Lake Olmstead Amphitheater or other events to make that a destination point. And to the motion I really feel like we should move forward with pursuing that location. It’s going to cost but it’s not going to cost the money that people are saying because the infrastructure is there; it’s all a part of the design. And parking was a nightmare because they wasn’t ready for that but between now and the time we get it approved our Traffic Engineers will develop a traffic plan that will get people in there and out of there and if there’s shuttles needed we would provide that. And there are several places around that has adequate parking so I still feel like we should stand on the motion originally the way it was. Thank you. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: So to be clear to Madam Clerk you don’t want to just add to the end to also just to move forward with the Administrator bringing back a what RFPs or something for us? Ms. Jackson: Yeah, we would issue an RFP to secure the services of a design firm. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Not to take away from your original (inaudible) motion. Mr. Jefferson: Yes, I mean as long as we are designating that area for the amphitheater and not doing it based upon what the cost is going to be. I’m trying to make it two separate issues. I mean we are going to have to pay the cost whatever the cost is but we will get it in a competitive bid process and that will lower the costs substantially. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay, Madam Clerk will read the motion. The Clerk: The motion is to approve designating the Lake Olmstead Stadium as the approved site for the City Amphitheater and to secure the services of a professional design firm preferably one that has designed similar facilities. Mr. Jefferson: Thank you because of the word ‘and’ that makes it doable. 25 Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Are you good with the second, Commissioner Smith? Mr. Smith: Second. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: All right, we have a motion and a second, please vote. The Clerk: Commissioner Fennoy? Mr. Fennoy: Yeah (inaudible). Mr. Smith: He’s down there having a mint julep on the beach. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, can I get a personal privilege? th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6. Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, sometimes the question becomes, what did you do for Labor Day? Well yesterday was Labor Day and I will tell you I spent mine at Lake Olmstead Stadium. I went up there yesterday walked the grounds well actually the grounds around the facility in a different area for potential parking. On Wood Street there you’ve got a whole block where the BMX Bike they’ve got a little, the Recreation Department has a park there that’s not being used, that’s a whole block there. And when you talk about the location where this facility is, there’s nothing to compete with it. When you talk about the Lake Olmstead the lake there, when you talk about the canal there, all those are amenities that you can advantage of in that particular area, I mean there’s just no comparison. I just think we just approach it with the will to do it and if we put an honest effort and at the end of the day we think it’s not the feasible thing to do than we walk away from it. But right now I think we ought to approach it we cannot continue to say we’re going to base ours on what other governments decide to do at the end of the day. We need to approach this wholeheartedly that we can do this. And I think I’m not in the minority in feeling this way. I talked to other of my colleagues as well who felt absolutely the same after looking at it and had a more comprehensive perspective than I did. I think this is a good thing I think we done the right thing in approaching this in this manner. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 10. Mr. G. Smith: I was talking with a guy who was involved --- Mr. Mayor: Would you speak into the microphone? Mr. G. Smith: --- with drawing the first stadium and everything. He knows it backwards and forwards. And I was going to say you know we could reach out to him being right here from Augusta and you know find out without probably spending too much what does he think it’s worth but because he is so familiar with it but you know line up with somebody who does this stuff. 26 th Mr. Mayor: Very well all right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 5, state your inquiry. Mr. Jefferson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just simply want to thank my colleagues for supporting this endeavor, thank you very much. Mr. Mayor: Very well. The Clerk: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 19. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE AUGUSTA, GA CODE TITLE ONE, ARTICLE FOUR, SECTION 1-7-51 RELATING TO THE ADOPTION OF PERSONNEL POLICES AND PROCEDURES OF AUGUSTA, GEORGIA; TO AMEND CHAPTER III, SECTIONS 300.001 THROUGH 300.017 AND ALL ASSOCIATED FORMS OF THE PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL REGARDING EMPLOYEE DISCIPLINE APPEALS; TO ADD SECTIONS 300.000, 300.018 AND 300.019; TO REPEAL ALL CODE SECTIONS AND ORDINANCES AND PARTS OF CODE SECTIONS AND ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; TO PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. Mr. Mayor: Okay, Madam Administrator. Ms. Jackson: Actually this item comes out of the PPPM Subcommittee. I believe the General Counsel has drafted two versions for consideration today. Mr. Mayor: All right --- Ms. Jackson: And each is substantively similar. It’s a procedural issue that’s different for each; I think Mr. MacKenzie can explain that. Mr. Mayor: --- okay let’s do this let’s get the copies passed out if there are copies for everybody first and then if we could get a general synopsis of you know again what we’re doing, okay? All right, Attorney MacKenzie, let’s go ahead and get those passed out I want to have a -- - Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: --- I’ve got you, just give me a second. Mr. Hasan: Is the ordinance part of the difference? Mr. Mayor: Okay let’s let them get passed out first and then I’m going to have the Attorney tell us what’s in front of us. Okay so this is the same copy that you have in front of you in your notebooks. All right okay, hold on a second, Commissioner. I’m coming back to you. 27 Mr. Hasan: It’s the same thing in the book --- Mr. Mayor: It’s the same thing in your notebooks. Mr. Hasan: --- is the ordinance the same thing? Mr. Mayor: Okay Attorney MacKenzie, does this include the ordinance changes or just the policy? Mr. MacKenzie: Yeah, the ordinance portion didn’t change. This is just changing Exhibit B of the ordinance but it’s the same as what’s in the book. Mr. Mayor: All right, so we’ve got two documents. We’ve got the ordinance, the proposed ordinance that you have a copy of in your notebooks under Tab 18, I’m sorry Tab 19. And then you have this document which is Exhibit B i.e. the policy changes, is that correct. Mr. MacKenzie: That’s correct. Exhibit B is the same as what’s in the book as well. th Mr. Mayor: All right, I’m going to go in this order all right the Commissioner from the 9 has a question. Mr. M. Williams: Yes, sir, go back to the H.R Director, the Attorney to make sure it’s legal or it’s worded right legally. It won’t get you in trouble but I’m listening to the H.R. Director and my question is to the H.R. Director is this document in the book the same as you approved you agree with? Mr. Mayor: All right, so what we’re going to do is we’re going to let’s just say it this way. Your question is an extremely, extremely important question that has an even better answer to it. And I am concerned that we’re, because this has been raised before, okay, and that is and the th Commissioner from the 9 raised this issue before. We’ve had this issue raised here in closed session that if we have an H.R. Director and we’re going to allow that person whoever it is to do their job we shouldn’t be (unintelligible) that in giving that responsibility to someone else. And in this case what I’ve heard Ms. Jackson is that you want the Attorney to walk us through this, okay, as opposed to the H.R. Director. Ms. Jackson: What I’m saying, sir, is that the substance of the document has been agreed upon by the subcommittee as presented by the staff so I think in terms of the substance of the item everybody’s on the same page based upon our last meeting. I think the issue one of the at least one of the issues at hand certainly we can discuss the substance of the issue we being myself or the H.R. Director can discuss the substance of the changes. I think one of the issues as I understand it is in what form does this get incorporated into our code of ordinances and that was the specific issue that I was referring to Mr. MacKenzie for. Mr. Mayor: Okay but in terms of walking through what’s in here and what its intent is the H.R. Director can communicate those things? 28 Ms. Jackson: Yeah, either of us can do that, sir. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right --- Mr. M. Williams: But I have the H.R. Director --- Mr. Mayor: --- hold on, hold on, I want to be lighthearted today, Madam Administrator. I’m going to give you your junior attorney license now, you sound like a junior attorney now. All right okay hands, lights have just gone up. Do ya’ll want to yield and let’s hear the presentation first, I think I do. I mean --- Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, we started in the wrong place that’s not the issue. It’s been approved, Mr. Mayor, that’s not the issue. The issue, Mr. Mayor, can I say something for just a minute? Mr. Mayor: --- has approved this, no you can’t, just hold on, all right. The Clerk: At our last Commission meeting and the committee meeting prior to that you approved the changes. This is now putting it in ordinance form and now you’re asked to approve it. Mr. Mayor: Okay, so I have a question. All right, what I just heard the Attorney said that there were changes made to this as late as Friday, okay, so the Commission has not approved this. The Clerk: No not the ordinance. They approved amending this ordinance with the amendment that’s within it. The subcommittee asked him to take and Ms. Jackson to take it to the Directors to have them review it and if there were any changes it could be done. From what I’m told this is just grammatical changes and wasn’t changes to the substance of the policy. Mr. Mayor: Ah, that’s not quite true. So I hear what --- Mr. M. Williams: (Inaudible). Mr. Mayor: --- hold on, everybody just hold on. I understand the process of what’s happened that subcommittee’s made. Again you just met last week I know that, I’m aware of that and you made some changes. You had department directors involved in it but prior to that what this body did was agree to amend the ordinance, I understand that okay? But what has happened since that time again as late as Friday has been changes to this policy okay that you all have not approved okay, that you all have not approved. The subcommittee may have but this body has not. Mr. M. Williams: And that’s why my question was to the H.R. Director, Mr. Mayor, to say any different --- Mr. Mayor: We’re going to get there, we’re going to get there. All right I’m going to go down the list. I’m going to have everybody’s questions heard but here’s what I know I’m going to 29 do. I’m going to hear what’s in this document and everybody else will as well. All right, the Chair th recognizes the Commissioner from the 8 --- Mr. Speaker: (Inaudible). Mr. Mayor: --- his hand went up first before yours. Mr. Guilfoyle: I’ll be happy to stand down, thank you. Mr. Mayor, can I ask the Administrator a couple of questions --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Guilfoyle: --- about some of these infractions and --- Mr. Mayor: Well --- Mr. Guilfoyle: --- the reason why I’m saying that --- Mr. Mayor: --- okay hold on a minute. Mr. Guilfoyle: --- is because there’s something I just don’t know, I can’t find the supportive document to find out. Mr. Mayor: I understand. All right, Dr. Conner, H.R. Director, if you’ll approach and if it has to do with ordinances and the legalese I’ll ask you to yield and we’ll hear from the Attorney, but I want to hear from you. Again, we’ve got Exhibit B in front of us if you’ll walk us through the substantive changes. Dr. Conner: Mayor and Commissioners, here again from a policy standpoint it is my understanding that there has not been any changes except what you all see before you all and it’s my understanding that this was preapproved. It was more so from a procedural standpoint that we made some changes per the input that we had received and if you want me to walk through it step- by-step I’ll certainly be glad to do that. If you all have the same copy that I have, those changes are pretty much self-explanatory but at the same time I do want to honor your request as to how you would like me to better proceed. Mr. Mayor: Well it sounds like we’ll just go from top to bottom and ask questions. I’m th going to go back to the Commissioner from the 8, all right? Mr. Guilfoyle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Dr. Conner, as far as underneath Infractions Page 26 of 41 it’s regarding failure to work overtime, special hours or special shifts or be on standby as directed. Does the Sheriff’s Department follow our same PPPM? Dr. Conner: It’s my understanding the Sheriff’s Department has opted out of the 3PM so they in turn would not follow. 30 Ms. Jackson: Correct, they have their own policy and procedures. Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay as far as having to be on standby and if they neglect or if they went out of town, let’s say a fireman for example, if they went out of town they would be after they just worked their shifts and went out of town with the family would they be considered insubordinate? Dr. Conner: It’s not my understanding they would be, Commissioner. This is more and correct me, Administrator Jackson, if I’m not correct here but this is more form the standpoint if a Director or a Manager gives an employee a directive and he or she fails to do that on the spot as opposed to if they’re absent or going out of town I would find it a little interesting if they at that time --- Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay. Dr. Conner: --- would be considered insubordinate. Mr. Guilfoyle: That’s no problem. I’m glad that I’m seeing this leaving assigned work area during regular work hours without permission or until relieved; there’s repercussions for doing that. And being identified at fault in an accident or collision by the Safety Review Committee while the operator of an Augusta, Georgia vehicle or a piece of equipment. Now how is the Risk Management or the Safety Review Committee to find out if there’s an accident or more than one accident by said employee? Ms. Jackson: As I understand it, we should have records of any previous accidents from an employee so we’ll know if it’s the second, third. Mr. Guilfoyle: Okay see review SRC Penalty Matrix. I do not see the SRC Matrix in what I’ve been handed out. You have the whole PPPM. Would you clarify and explain to me what the SRC Penalty Matrix is? If you want to get back to me, Madam Administrator --- Ms. Jackson: Yeah --- Mr. Guilfoyle: --- while we’re still here in open discussion because I can’t vote for something unless we know that it’s covered. Dr. Conner: And if I understand, Commissioner, that’s under the Substance Abuse Policy that Safety Review Committee, that particular matrix and Ms. Donna may be able to clear that up a little bit. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Ms. Williams. Ms. Williams: In regard to accidents there is a completely separate section in the PPPM that is under Risk Management that deals with the Safety Review Committee for vehicle accidents. And there’s a point system that is in place for the first accident, an at fault accident, no faults etc., that whereby you make sure to the best of our ability that the people that are driving our vehicles have a safe driving record. Obviously because we are self-insured we don’t want people to put us 31 at a greater risk than involved. But the whole Risk Management section is in another section of the Policy and Procedures Manual. Mr. Guilfoyle: Donna, thank you for clarifying that and thank you, Administrator, but Donna as far as the accidents if somebody doesn’t, if the Director doesn’t report it, how would you know about it? Ms. Williams: We usually know about it. There’s a process where the individual that was in the accident is first required, it’s their responsibility and then it goes on up the supervisory chain. But at some point by some means if it is not done through the proper channels, Risk is going to find out about an accident that has involved a vehicle that belongs to us either by a citizen complaint or by the vehicle showing up in the shop with damages that were not previously on that vehicle. It’s kind of going to come to light. But there is a procedure that requires the individual to notify Risk Management once they’ve been in an accident. Mr. Guilfoyle: Donna, thank you, Dr. Conner, thank you so very much as well as Madam Administrator. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: I know that Commissioner Frantom had his hand up did you first Commissioner Sias with the Mayor, go ahead and then Commissioner Frantom. Mr. Sias: Thank you, Madam Pro Tem. One thing I want to say here is and with all due deference to the subcommittee chair and the members of the subcommittee we have passed a policy on the procedures, well, what we call this thing Grievances Discipline and Appeals. And one of the things I think was added to that that we’re coming back for approval is the procedure part. Now somehow or another we’ve got to a process or a point somewhere that’s not where we want to be. The other point was about whether we would have this as a standalone ordinance or part of the 3PM. And it has been the intention when the subcommittee first convened about two, year and a half two years ago the idea was to replace the 3PM. And when the proposal came to take the new policy that had been passed and insert it into the flawed 3PM document that is where I had a real issue and a real concern. And I wanted to if it’s okay, Mayor, I want to address the Madam Administrator and Dr. Conner on this issue starting with the Administrator. Madam Administrator, were it not the position of yourself and the subcommittee when we initially started was to eliminate 3PM. Ms. Jackson: That is correct, sir. Mr. Sias: Dr. Conner, in discussing and after we passed this policy that we have here were it not and I queried you and I queried the Administrator is it that you think it’s better and I have no concern about your answer but I want to prep the question a little bit like this. When we talked about amending the appeal, the grievance appeals, grievances and whatever the discipline and appeals process, that was not anything against H.R. We felt there was a conflict of interest because H.R. is required to advise both the Director, the Administrator, the Commission and also to advise any employee who has an issue of discipline. Therefore it’s a conflict of interest if the H.R. is in the middle of the deciding process and that was the whole premise behind this adjustment of the 32 appeals process. So my question to you is, Dr. Conner, do you agree that we should have this is as a standalone ordinance and not inject it back into the 3PM? Dr. Conner: Yes, sir. Mr. Sias: So therefore where we stand today, Mr. Mayor, is that we have our Attorney and whatever the process that he was working on there’s no ill statement in that. He has prepared once hearing the concerns I believe he prepared an alternate ordinance, standalone ordinance for this and I believe that may be in the books or somewhere along there I’m not sure. But that was to create this as a standalone ordinance because it had been done and approved by the Commission with the only thing left was to approve the procedures which we had agreed on in a subcommittee process before so to me it seemed like the wheels came off during this discussion. So bottom line they made some grammatical changes in the main policy that had been approved such as Manager/Supervisor those kinds of words and they may need to be reapproved for that but technically I don’t think so. But I don’t want us to lose what we’ve done as we try to move forward here. So here’s what my contention is number one, the policy that we approved should be a standalone ordinance for Grievances, Disciplines and Appeals. Secondly, we should approve the procedure part and thirdly stand it up as an ordinance and we did it when we first passed the policy and I want to address the Clerk. We did at that time waive the second reading with unanimous consent, is that correct, Ms. Bonner? The Clerk: Yes, sir. Mr. Sias: So technically we approved it as an ordinance. Thank you, sir. th Mr. Mayor: Okay here’s what we’re going to do Commissioner from the 4 if you’ll repeat those three things that you said I want to make sure, just the three things you just mentioned. Mr. Sias: Number one this, we approved what we approved here was number one the request was to remove this from the 3PM, do not insert it back into that flawed document, a standalone ordinance for Grievances, Discipline and Appeals. Secondly, when we were talking about amending this what they added was two or three change a couple of words around we can approve it as amended I don’t feel like it’s necessary but if that’s what the legal opinion is I’m fine with that. The next thing was we needed to approve the procedural part to go with this. The procedural part was supposed to be come after the Commission approved the policy. That was when they went back to the Director in the subcommittee my understanding and got the procedural piece put together and that comes before us today. The previous Policy/Ordinance we approved and along with the procedures which we would have to approve today should be a standalone ordinance. We approved the policy as an ordinance (inaudible) that was why (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: Okay so --- th Mr. Sias: (Unintelligible) from the 10 made sure we had unanimous consent to waive the second reading. 33 Mr. Mayor: --- all right so here’s where we are. Okay, we’ve got a couple of things that are going on right here --- Mr. Sias: We can change that. Mr. Mayor: --- I’m going to come back to you. All right, so I want to make sure it probably would be appropriate for everybody to get a copy of this if you don’t have it in your notebooks. All right so there are actually three documents in your notebooks. The three documents are number one there is an ordinance okay? Number two there is on Pages 1 through 6 of 41 is the Policy, okay? There is the Policy and then on Pages 7 through 41 there is the Procedure that effectuates the Policy, okay? Three documents, one the Ordinance or Proposed Ordinance, the Policy and the of course starting on Page 7 of 41 the procedure that effectuates, implements what the policy th document. Now to the degree that the Commissioner from the 4 has raised this issue, I don’t know if the wheels came off early in the conversation but I think that the concerns that are being raised are very valid, they have merit. One of my grave concerns that I’m going to raise right now and I hear what you said as it relates to the second reading being waived and so forth, one of my grave concerns as I read the procedure, this is Hardy Davis’ concern, is that and again the th Commissioner from the 6 and I were talking trying to get to a good place of what your intent was. But as I read this my concern is whether or not we need an H.R. Director on the other side of this. That’s my concern. I know that’s a strong statement and maybe I shouldn’t ask it that way --- Ms. Speaker: (Inaudible). Mr. Mayor: --- that’s correct just based on how I read this. And I don’t want to do anything that effectively silences in practice or in principle the role of H.R. in this local government. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: For us to do that takes us back to the ten years that got us to where we are, I’m going to recognize you --- Mr. Hasan: --- okay. Mr. Mayor: --- and we cannot do that we need folks able to function and to do their job and to provide the guidance and counsel from an H.R. perspective that I’ve heard almost everyone at the dais talk about for the last four years that we’ve got to fix it. And I’m concerned that we might do more injury and effectively silence the role of H.R. in our process of having an Employee Relations Agent in this local government. That’s my concern. Mr. Sias: (Inaudible). Mr. Mayor: I’m going to give you a chance to, okay just I’m going to give you a chance to but those are my concerns if we again just take it as it’s read and amend it right now okay? All right, I’m going to go in this order I’ll go to you and then I’ll come to the (unintelligible). 34 Mr. Sias: Thank you. Let’s make one thing very clear. H.R. is a critical and I mean critical role in this. The issue was to remove the conflict of interest not the H.R., simply to remove the conflict of interest. Now if we need to put if we need to put --- Mr. Mayor: Suspend for a moment. Would you articulate the conflict of interest because I’m still trying to get there, I have not gotten there. Mr. Sias: --- the conflict of interest was this if I may and Dr. Conner can feel free to jump in. Mr. Mayor: I would ask you not to put Dr. Conner on the spot --- Mr. Sias: Okay, no problem --- Mr. Mayor: --- the conflict of interest (unintelligible). Mr. Sias: --- absolutely. The conflict of interest is this. H.R. has a defined role to ensure that number one the employee is receiving fair treatment. Number two, there’s a fine role to ensure that they advise the Director, the Administrator whoever is on the for lack of a better term disciplinary side of the issue. So if you advise the employee you also advise the Director and other folks then how can you be then say when everybody comes together you sitting at the table as the judge. That’s the conflict of interest. They are an advisor to those folks. So in other words this employee makes sure he’s getting fair treatment and makes sure that that Director who ever is on the disciplinary side has not walked over the line in what they do. H.R. is critical in that; I’ve been, no way did I say we should remove H.R. We should put H.R where they belong, in the original 3PM, H.R. was a part of the chain of command. Mr. Mayor: All right, Commissioner, I’m going to ask you a series of questions. Mr. Sias: Sure. Mr. Mayor: Number one, is it not true that H.R. is not the responsible party as it relates to hiring and firing of employees? Mr. Sias: No, they’re not they don’t make the final decision on that --- Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Sias: --- they may examine the record and advise the folks on whether or not they should hire that person. They advise. Mr. Mayor: Okay, I’m going to ask the same question again. Mr. Sias: Sure. 35 Mr. Mayor: Is it not true that if Director Wiedmeier said I wanted to hire John Smith that it is his decision? Mr. Sias: If Director Wiedmeier says we wants to hire John Smith and H.R. says to Director Wiedmeier, Director Wiedmeier, this individual has x, x, x and x of negatives. This individual also has this and this which makes him technically ineligible or a risk. They advise Director Wiedmeier as to his pending decision, that director then makes that decision. Mr. Mayor: Alright is it also not true that in the event that John Smith in the vetting process before he got to point of being brought in for an interview that there’s a series of steps that have to be taken before we even get to the point of saying John Smith is going to be interviewed as a candidate? Mr. Sias: Absolutely. John Smith has applied to be a heavy equipment operator and the job required three years of experience and John Smith has 15 days of experience he won’t make it past the 15 days. Mr. Mayor: All right, is it also not true that at the point of time that someone gets an interview that upon having an offer extended to him there is still one final check that H.R. gets involved in and at that time a determination is made as to whether or not a person is actually going to be on board. For example, if there is a criminal history at that point the negatives will still come out and that person would never even be brought into this organization. So I’m trying to bring you through leading to a place of at no point in time is the H.R. director regardless of who it is going to be the person who decides who you hire. Mr. Sias: Well, let me clearly the H.R. may not be let me tell you the two conflicts of interest. The H.R. may not be the deciding one of who they hire but I guess but may have --- Mr. Mayor: (unintelligible) fire. Mr. Sias: --- no, they will be the one that decides if they get fired. That is a conflict of interest in the 3PM --- Mr. Mayor: Okay that’s --- Mr. Sias: --- it’s in the 3PM. Mr. Mayor: --- and --- Mr. Sias: You have the expert right there, ask him --- Mr. Mayor: --- I understand --- Mr. Sias: --- ask the Administrator. 36 Mr. Mayor: --- so what’s codified as I have read this is that again if we use the same case study if Director Wiedmeier says I want John Smith to be terminated on these grounds --- Mr. Sias: Okay. Mr. Mayor: --- he makes that decision. Mr. Sias: No. Ms. Jackson: Before this the way it works is that the department director would propose that the employee be terminated. If the employee did not want to accept the termination then the employee could request an Administrative Review before the H.R. Director and the H.R. Director would make the decision as to whether that employee would stay or go. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Sias: That was the conflict of interest we removed with the policy. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Mr. Sias: And back to your Ban the Box as you didn’t give me an opportunity to respond to that but you built that to Ban the Box and we really understand what the intent of the Ban the Box ordinance or resolution was. The question is do everybody in this government understand that. I’m not getting into that. But to answer your question --- Mr. Mayor: I would tell you now --- Mr. Sias: --- you put Ban the Box in the middle of something else that really wasn’t what this addressed but that’s okay --- Mr. Mayor: --- all right. Mr. Sias: --- thank you. th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Commissioner from the 8 you asked all your questions? All th right, I’m going to the Commissioner from the 6. Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I appreciate this. Mr. Mayor, this is going to be virtually impossible but I think this is the second time and this may have some real merit here that you’re going to have to allow the staff to talk to try to see are there some concerns around the procedure so that we can address it as a body because there’s some real concerns or either you need to address it directly yourself about what concerns you hear because we want to correct it. We can’t correct it. The other day when we had the PPPM meeting I think I asked Dr. Conner a couple of times what we were discussing because she elaborated about it but she had not been that much in the discussion so we are back pretty much today with the same thing. So if there’s some things that’s what Commissioner Williams is asking the same thing if there’s some things that 37 concern her around the procedure because we know who makes you know the procedure then we need to hear that. It may make sense (unintelligible) to accept what we’ve got so if we’re going to do that we need to do it or either you need to expound yourself what concerns you just you asked Commissioner Williams questions earlier, you asked Commissioner Sias some questions earlier, so somebody needs to say if there are concerns what those concerns are. Mr. Mayor: Yeah, I agree, all right, very well. All right, the Chair recognizes the th Commissioner from the 7. Mr. Hasan: What are we going to do? Mr. Mayor: I’m going back I got (unintelligible) process in my head. Mr. Frantom: My concern is on Page 19 of 41 Number 3. After reviewing the Discipline File the Administrator may but is not required to meet with employees or department head prior to rendering a decision on appeal. I just don’t understand why the Administrator wouldn’t be required to do that. I mean the employee, the department heads need to know what’s going on and understand as well as get the feedback from them why we basically not kind of keeping the department director and the employee in the dark by not requiring that meeting to happen. Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes Administrator Jackson. Ms. Jackson: That, first off as we discussed this in the subcommittee I made it clear it’s typically my practice to meet with them. I want to hear directly from the employee if the employee’s in a situation where he’s facing, he or she’s facing a serious disciplinary action so that usually is my practice. In rare circumstances there may be a time where the documentation speaks for itself as in an employee has been, I’m trying to come up with a good example, accused of excessive unexcused absences from work. I may be able to prove that that’s the case must by reviewing the documentation that’s available. So that I think that clause is there just to give some flexibility if the Administrator were to believe that it’s really not necessary to see if the infraction has indeed taken place without having to meet, that allows that flexibility but generally it would be my practice to always meet with the employee and the department director before rendering a decision. Mr. Frantom: Okay I guess and I think if it said you know not required if documentation proved you know the situation I’d feel more comfortable about it but it just seems like it gives an out that, and again the communication, the department head knows what’s going on as well so thank you, Madam Clerk. Ms. Jackson: And, Mayor, if can also add, sir, just to make it clear under the current policy before this was written now I’m in a situation where I actually rule on terminations without the policy allowing me at all to see and the policy is written all I do is review the documentation, I was not at all comfortable with that. I want to be able to see the employee particularly if somebody’s livelihood is at stake. Mr. Frantom: Okay, thank you for saying that. 38 Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Anybody, did you have your hand up? Mr. M. Williams: Yeah, I thought we addressed this in the subcommittee that Ms. Jackson has a designee and I don’t want to confuse the two. If she couldn’t be there for whatever reason that someone else would be there to whether it be the Assistant Administrator or whoever she, and still if she’s out of town for instance and there’s a time period. But I get the Commission’s concern but I think that was there because of that factor that we allow her a little bit of flexibility in most cases since she would be the person but if there was a reason that she couldn’t be there then she could designate someone else to do and then she’d look at the paperwork or talk to that person whatever but I think that’s why. Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Okay any other discussion? Mr. Hasan: Yes, ma’am. Mr. Mayor Pro Tem: Commissioner Hasan. Mr. Hasan: Yes, ma’am, Madam Mayor Pro Tem, based on the discussion we’ve had and in speaking with the Mayor obviously he said he didn’t have a problem so I’m asking you could I ask Dr. Conner a question? Ms. Mayor Pro Tem: Yes. Mr. Hasan: Dr. Conner how you do, ma’am? Dr. Conner: Good, sir. Mr. Hasan: Yes, ma’am, Dr. Conner, as we as you hear us talking here around the procedure part of this potential ordinance here, is there anything here in the procedure that you would like to address that you think needs to be modified or further elaborated on? Mr. Mayor: You can answer that question again this is an opportunity to get it right. Dr. Conner: Commissioner, my concern would be if there was another, well let me clarify please. The concern that the Commissioners have expressed about there being a conflict of interest is as it relates to the appeals process. When H.R. was part of the appeals level process where is that an employee disagreed with the recommendation for termination or suspension for that matter, they could appeal the department’s recommendation to H.R. However the conflict comes about is that H.R. supposedly have consulted with either the Director along the way or if the employee came and inquired about the process. That was indeed a true conflict of interest knowing that H.R. would eventually have to hear or was an appeals level if they appealed to H.R. In most cases as you all well know when you are privy to too much information it behooves you to recuse yourself from the process such that there’s no perception of bias or you know any wrongdoing and so that’s where the conflict of interest came about. Now the way the policy was approved in the first in fact the second sentence under Section 300 under Policy Statement it says each party shall seek 39 guidance from the Human Resources Department. Okay, it says they shall but it’s nothing in place to ensure that that happens. That would be a concern of mine because what is does basically it leaves it up to the department director or whomever to decide whether or not they want to involve H.R --- Mr. Hasan: So if I understand --- Dr. Conner: --- that would be a concern. Mr. Hasan: --- so if I understand you’re saying it addresses in the policy and once you do the procedure there’s no room it’s not addressing it any longer, am I understanding you correctly? Dr. Conner: Yes, sir, I don’t see anything in the procedure that insures that that happens. Mr. Hasan: So if you had an ideal place to put that in what do you suggest based on hearing the dispute of the conversation based on what you’re saying where should that be at? Dr. Conner: Now exactly where that would be placed, Commissioner, I’m not sure however wherever it’s placed it just needs to make certain that it’s understood that you know the Director shall consult with H.R. along the way. Mr. Mayor: All right, I want to make a suggestion. On procedures, thank you so much, Commissioner, for your questions. I want to draw everybody’s attention to Page 7 of 41 Section 300.03 Grievance Policy Grievance Procedure Undertakings. All right, if you’ll amend that area and include it there that’s on the first page of the procedure Section 300.03 Grievance Procedure Undertakings. Again, if you would include that language in the preamble and if not there then you would include that in Section 300.06 which is Grievance Procedure General Provisions, okay those are two suggestions. All right continue, all right go ahead this is our opportunity to get it right now so if you have concerns about what I just suggested then please say so. Dr. Conner: Mayor, I would ask that you be reminded that there is a distinct difference between an employee dispute and someone actually filing a grievance. That’s a whole different process. Mr. Mayor: Okay. Dr. Conner: Administrator Jackson, do you have a suggestion as to where --- Ms. Jackson: No. Dr. Conner: --- in addition to what, if there’s a need for it to be included. Ms. Jackson: No, I would rely on your suggestion on that. Mr. Hasan: Mayor, may I ask a question based on what (unintelligible). 40 Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir, you do have the floor. Mr. Hasan: Yes, ma’am, Dr. Conner, you may have just addressed that in your statement just then on Page 8 of 41 at the bottom it says an employee filed a grievance may at any step in the procedure request the assistance from the H.R. Department or from and advisor/advocate of his or her choosing. Does that address or that’s not what you quite talking about either? Dr. Conner: Here again that applies to a grievance --- Mr. Hasan: Okay. Dr. Conner: --- if an employee would like to file one. If I may, Mayor and Commissioners, I would if I still reserve the right to suggest where we would insert it I would actually consider inserting it right under the types of disciplines and where it starts the list this type of disciplinary action is in order. Mr. Hasan: What page is that? Dr. Conner: I’m sorry, I’m referencing Page 12 of Page 41 maybe, that may be a better place. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, may I make a suggestion? If that’s Dr. Conner is that your only concern because with this, Mr. Mayor, I said we could approve it if we find an appropriate place to put it at. Dr. Conner: One of the concerns I would ask, well if there’s anything additional I would ask you all to consider is the role in which a Deputy Administrator may play and I don’t know the answer to that. Considering the workload of the Administrator I wondering if we’re putting too much on the Administrator to just totally having everything going from a department level to the Administrator if she has Deputy Administrator’s in place to assist her. Mr. Hasan: I think we had that conversation --- Dr. Conner: Yes, sir. Mr. Hasan: --- at the committee level the other day I think did we resolve that, Ms. Jackson, or did we? Ms. Jackson: I consider it resolved from the standpoint of at any point that I need to delegate something to a Deputy Administrator I’d do that. Mr. Hasan: Okay I mean because we brought it up the other day, okay. th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Commissioner from the 5. 41 Mr. Hasan: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, I’m fine. I made the changes for me I think Madam Administrator whatever is satisfied with those make sense we find an appropriate place to put it in and we approve it. Mr. Mayor: Okay, let’s make sure we get the language right okay and what this is and what we’re going to say. All right okay, you’re working on it for me? The Clerk: He says it’s in there. Mr. Mayor: Okay. It’s an important issue. Let’s keep everybody together, it’s an th important issue. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9 for a question. Mr. M. Williams: Yeah, Mr. Mayor. I guess my question would be that if the H.R. Director and the Legal Department not department the Legal Advisor for that department work through this stuff it should’ve been plain and brought to us from that perspective versus back and forth, back and forth. We have a person who had the expertise in this field and I’m wondering why aren’t they working on this versus the chief law, the chief officer in the Legal Department working back and forth. I mean it don’t make sense. Now we’re spinning our wheels so to speak all that should be put in a nutshell where once the PPM Subcommittee brings it back to the committee that person ought to be there and have all that stuff worked out so when we get to this level we wouldn’t be going back and forth, back and forth if that makes any sense. Mr. Mayor: Well, it absolutely makes sense. I’ll tell you what right now I don’t have an answer. I’m just listening right now, I’m listening. Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor, you had your hand on it. Mr. Mayor: Yeah, (unintelligible) I think I had one down there as well. Okay all right, th I’m going to come back to the Commissioner from the 4 and then we’re going to close this out th here in just a second. All right, Commissioner from the 4. Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir. I just need to ask Dr. Conner another question please. Dr. Conner, when you referenced grievances and discipline the appeal process you were separating those. So can you when we was talking about where we went into that part about shall consult with H.R. in a procedure you were actually, what was your point you was trying to separate grievances versus discipline. Can you explain that to me real quick? Dr. Conner: Yes, sir, because an employee based on interesting enough a management action that they disagree with they can file a grievance to H.R. and that doesn’t require any appeal levels, that doesn’t require any one vetoing that or endorsing that. That’s just what an employee has the right to do on certain matters. Mr. Sias: So this part about they consult with H.R. you wanted that in a discipline line, is that correct? 42 Dr. Conner: Yes, sir and that’s why I suggested that maybe it could go under the types of disciplinary actions. We do have it as I stated at the beginning of the policy and then if there was some other place as the Mayor had eluded to that would be the other place as a reminder. Okay we’re getting ready to administer an action make certain that H.R. has been consulted. Mr. Sias: And that is the point I wanted to clear up is what she was saying it was about to get left but I think if we insert it under the Types of Discipline that would be the appropriate place for it. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right and so if everybody will draw their attention to Page 11 of 41 Section 300.11, okay 300.11 and in the purple statement we’re going to suggest adding the following statement or amending the document to say the following: Each party shall seek guidance from the Human Resources Department regarding such disputes is the exact same statement that you currently have. In the Policy Statement in Section 300.0 of your Policy Summary and if we insert that last sentence there again where it reads: Each party shall seek guidance from the Human Resources Department regarding such disputes. Mr. Hasan: Can we, should it be have the right or shall? Mr. Mayor: Shall, yeah, shall. Mr. M. Williams: So why wasn’t that implemented before in the subcommittee in the PPM committee now it’s coming to the table now? Mr. Mayor: I can answer that. Mr. M. Williams: Okay, somebody answer. Mr. Mayor: You and I weren’t there. Mr. M. Williams: Oh, okay I was there, though, I was there. Mr. Mayor: Okay, I wasn’t there then, I was going out on a limb. Mr. M. Williams: Well, I mean if somebody’s making sense now I mean that’s --- Mr. Mayor: Well, you know it’s always the case you know you sleep, you take a nap, you stay at a Holiday Inn and you come up with ideas you didn’t have before and you bring them out on the floor that’s all that happened, that’s all okay somebody stayed at a Holiday Inn last night. All right --- Mr. Sias: Do we do a motion? Mr. Mayor: --- okay are we tracking with that, okay all right, very well. All right, the th Chair recognizes the Commissioner form the 4 for a motion. 43 Mr. Sias: Thank you. With the aforementioned amendments to this document and, Mr. Mayor, I’m going to need the Attorney to ensure that I have the wording right along with the Administrator/H.R. Director. Motion to amend the Employee Appeals and Dispute Resolution policy approved by the Commission on August 21, 2018 and to approve an ordinance to amend Code 1-7-51 relating to the adoption of the policies and procedures so as to strike Sections 300.001 through 300.017 in their entirety and to authorize the Administrator to implement appropriate procedures related to this policy and this shall be approved as a standalone ordinance. Mr. Mayor: Well --- Mr. Sias: Say what (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: --- I know, I know. Mr. Sias: Well, I said I would rely on him to correct the wording. I got my words in. Mr. Mayor: Well we know, all right, the Chair recognizes Attorney MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: I will first off everything except for that last little phrase because the Administrator would not have the authority amending a right --- Mr. Sias: Okay. Mr. MacKenzie: --- to do that. I just want to clarify too this is, there’s two different schools of thought how this could be done what he just articulated is a motion to just strike all of Chapter 3 in its entirety and move forward with the plan that was from the beginning which is to have a procedures manual over here the Administrator can make changes to and have your policy over here. That’s the motion he just did, that is one school of thought, that’s one way to do it. It’s perfectly legal, it’s fine and I do have a draft of a version that does that. What is, what was initially presented, what is in the book it does the same thing but what it is is until we get to that day where we totally separate and get rid of the 3PM in its entirety it was a proposal to merely amend it to include the first section or Roman Numeral One as the policy verbatim with some minor edits as Roman Numeral One and then procedures start Roman Number Two so when that day comes it will be very easy to separate the two but right now will all this be codified since we’ve not done away with 3PM. It’s just a matter of what you want to do so the motion he did is to do it the second way which is to go ahead and separate it now. What’s in the book is to do it all together but substantively it is exactly the same. Mr. Sias: And we’ve been working on this for over two years. It’s time to get some parts approved. nd Mr. Mayor: Well, since the Senator from the 22 ratted us out I can’t say the gentleman knows of what he speaks --- Mr. Hasan: Cat out of the bag, Mr. Mayor, cat out of the bag. 44 Mr. Mayor: --- I can’t do it, I need a lunch, need a lunch. So this is --- Mr. Sias: Second my motion (unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: --- this is his motion --- Mr. Sias: Second. Mr. Mayor: --- without the amendment that was just made, yes. Mr. Sias: I withdraw that last statement the Attorney referenced. Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, can Dr. Conner sit down? Mr. Mayor: Yes, she may, thank you. All right, we’re going to put it all together here I don’t even think this is even a good soup today. All right so again we just made an amendment to th the procedure Commissioner from the 4 that I want to make sure carries over to this document. And what you’ve not said is whether you want to yield and go with what the Attorney has proposed or you’re going to revert back to this document right here that was just handed to us with that amendment insertion because that’s all it is that was an insertion of that line. Mr. Sias: The answer to that is no. I absolutely detest putting a brand-new effective document into a flawed document in the 3PM. Mr. Mayor: All right, so that end all right I get that, all right. So we’re going to be voting on this matter that’s just been handed out to us with the insertion of that last statement into the procedure, is that not true? Mr. Sias: No, that was the statement the Attorney said to remove from my motion, that very last wording. Mr. Mayor: This does the same thing by just approving this, this does the same thing. (unintelligible) both of these all but what you just handed me were two policies (unintelligible) with no procedure. All right everybody, stand at ease for five minutes. Mr. Mayor: (Inaudible) back to order --- Mr. Hasan: Okay let’s go. Mr. Mayor: --- come back to order. All right, we’ve got two motions that are going to be before us. All right, the Chair recognizes Attorney MacKenzie for a motion. Mr. MacKenzie: Sure, the first motion would be a motion to amend the Employee Appeals and Dispute Resolution policy approved by the Commission on August 21, 2018 as shown in the redline version. 45 Mr. Sias: So moved. Mr. D. Williams: Second. Mr. Mayor: All right, we’ve got a motion and a second. Mr. Sias: Quick point if I may, sir. Mr. Mayor: All right, let’s vote on it first. All right, the Chair recognizes the th Commissioner from the 4. Mr. Sias: Thank you. Based on what you’ve heard discussed here and what we, Dr. Conner, as the H.R. Director do you have any additional concerns about anything? Dr. Connor: Commissioner, no, I do not. Mr. Sias: All right, thank you very much. I appreciate that, thank you, sir. Mr. Mayor: All right, we just, what we’re about to vote on is just the policy itself that’s Pages 1 through 6 --- Mr. Hasan: Six. Mr. Mayor: --- that’s correct Pages 1 through 6 --- Mr. Sias: (Unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: --- that’s correct, that’s the policy. Mr. M. Williams: We’re going to have one motion for the policy because we’ve got two motions you said. Mr. Mayor: That’s right, we’ve got two motions. Mr. M. Williams: Okay, I need to know --- Mr. Mayor: The second one is going to be for the procedure. Mr. M. Williams: --- okay, we’ve got one motion for the policy and one for the procedure then one and one, is that right? Mr. Mayor: Yes. Mr. M. Williams: Okay, I thought you had two that you said and I wanted to hear the other one so I’d know which one I was supporting because there ain’t but one. 46 Mr. Mayor: This is for the policy. Mr. M. Williams: Okay. Mr. Mayor: All right, that’s the matter that’s before us, the policy itself, that’s what we’re ththth voting on, voting. All right, the Commissioner’s from the 8, 9, 10 --- Mr. M. Williams: I’m waiting on Grady. Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor: th Mr. Mayor: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 8. Mr. Guilfoyle: For clarification this is what we had spoke about with what the H.R. said that she wanted in. Mr. Mayor: That is correct. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to make a ask a question and make a motion please. Mr. Mayor: Okay hold on, we’ve got one more matter in front of us. Mr. Hasan: Oh, I’m sorry. Mr. Mayor: All right, this next item that the Attorney’s going to read a motion for is for the procedure and that procedure is as amended striking the annotations to the 3PM, okay? Any references to the 3PM will be stricken from it and it will include that one statement that we added, okay, the one statement that we added. All right Attorney MacKenzie. Mr. MacKenzie: That motion would be motion to approve an ordinance to amend Code Section 1-7-51 relating to the adoption of personnel policies and procedures so as to strike Sections 300.001 through 300.007 in their entirety and to approve procedures relating to such policy as a separate document to include the amendments discussed and to waive the second reading. Mr. Sias: So moved. Mr. Hasan: Second. Mr. Mayor: All right, I’ve got a motion and a second, voting. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor? 47 Mr. Mayor: Hold on, is this an agenda item? Mr. Hasan: It’s related, Mr. Mayor, while we’re on that it won’t take but a minute. Mr. Mayor: I know they never do, they never do I’m trying to get to a better place right now just bear with me. All right, Item number 22. The Clerk: ENGINEERING SERVICES 22. Motion to approve an annual streetlight fee of $87.00 for each residential property and $131.00 for each commercial property. All properties that are currently recognizes by the city of Augusta as tax exempt will also remain exempt from the streetlight fee. Properties within the legal city limits of Hephzibah and Blythe will also remain exempt. Any exempt properties may voluntarily opt in to pay the fee. (Requested by Commissioner Sammie Sias) th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4. Mr. Sias: Thank you, sir. Mr. Mayor: We’ll limit debate to 20 minutes of this matter. Mr. Sias: I will just make an opening statement and I will sit back because we discussed this extensively. We discussed it in subcommittee and I just want to make one reference. In the future hopefully we can get better participation in our subcommittee meeting so that everyone can have some kind of idea where these decisions and things, what they information that led to these. So with that being said we have an issue with our streetlight fund. We all know that. A patchwork solution is not the right solution. The right solution is to number one put streetlights back into Public Safety where it’s supposed to be in the hands of the government to ensure that we have safe streets. Now presently on our present system property owners based on their frontage or their desire they can say well, I’m not going to participate with streetlights so we have a public road that the safety of that road has been delegated to the property owners along that road. That’s not exactly the way we should do business. Secondly and lastly we’ve examined this thing and I’m totally committed to that we get this done but also we exempt the folks who have been voluntarily exempt from, who’ve been exempt from our property tax roles, such as churches and other entities that are presently exempt under our legal status. So we have, we have exempt properties who volunteered to opt into the streetlight plan. That shows you just how important streetlights are. And streetlights are referenced to streets. It’s not that if I have a streetlight in front of my house but the question is my street appropriately lit for safety. Car lights or headlights are not designed to light the street. That is why you see particularly on major intersections and minor intersections but if you look at Interstate 20, 520 where does the state concentrate lights, near intersections. So bottom line and I said it as we go back and forth through our city we need proper lighting and hopefully my colleagues will see the need to do this. I consider this also a leadership issue. The staff has brought this to us and they all did everything but get on their knees and beg for us to do 48 something about it and do something right and I think it’s time for us to do that. Thank you for your attention. th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9. Mr. M. Williams: (Unintelligible). Mr. Mayor: I did. Mr. M. Williams: I’m sorry I didn’t hear you. I understand the need for streetlights and certainly appreciate the lighting that we have around the city. There’s some things we could’ve been doing and should’ve been doing prior to now but I’ve got people who are complaining and whether they’re in their rights to complain about anymore fees or anymore paying for streetlights. We’ve got streetlights now that’s not benefiting because we had not done our job as elected officials to make those light sufficient. The vegetation and trees have grown up. Even Greene Street it is so dark on Greene Street it’s almost like going down a back alley because where the lights are the vegetation has grown up and it don’t serve the lights it don’t serve any purpose. I’m not in support of passing anything at this measure. I understand from the Administrator and the Finance Director something needs to be done and I thought had been done prior to this but I just think it’s bad. What we’ve got going on we’re still pulling money out of the taxpayers versus trying to get something to pour money into this city to help with those types of things. So that’s my comment. I appreciate my colleague’s effort but I can’t support it. nd Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 2. Mr. D. Williams: I move to approve Item 22. Mr. Sias: Second. Mr. Mayor: All right, I’ve got a motion and a second for Item 22. All right, we’re going to vote on this now all right, voting. Mr. D. Williams, Mr. Sias and Mr. Fennoy vote Yes. Ms. Davis, Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Hasan, Mr. Frantom, Mr. Guilfoyle, Mr. M. Williams and Mr. Smith vote No. Motion Fails 3-7. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, Point of Personal Privilege please? th Mr. Mayor: Okay, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6. Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I do applaud as you know I have not been in support of this but I do like to ask what would be appropriate, would there be a motion to reconsider or would it be another motion on the floor around this particular issue which is to approve it now to take effect in 2019 so we could have this discussion again. I’d like to make a motion to that so do we need to make a motion to reconsider first? 49 Mr. Mayor: Well, I’ve got another agenda item that addresses the same issue. I’d like to dispose of both of them in whatever manner this body sees fit. And then you know if something happens then we’ll come right back. Mr. Hasan: I can respect that Mr. Mayor, thank you. Mr. Mayor: All right. All right, the Chair recognizes, I’m sorry we’ll go to the next agenda item, Madam Clerk. All right, are there any other supporting documents with Item 22, are there any other documents? ENGINEERING SERVICES 23. Discuss and adopt funding proposal for comprehensive street light program. (Requested by Commissioner Wayne Guilfoyle) Mr. Guilfoyle: Only what’s in the back of the book. Mr. Mayor: All right, we’re going to limit debate to 20 minutes. Mr. Guilfoyle: Mr. Mayor, I have the floor? Mr. Mayor: Yes, you do. Mr. Guilfoyle: I would like my colleagues to have an understanding. What you have here is actually, Commissioner Hasan, Dade Road, part of your area and if you look we always, we’re always looking at what surrounding us close next to us what are neighbors are paying but we are we have other people besides our neighbors. We have commercial properties that I have a picture but I’m not going to do it but this gives a telltale sign. Thirty-years ago we actually the traffic or lighting people actually came up with the linear footage for a charge for every parcel which made it very difficult for them, made it difficult for our Tax Commissioner, made it difficult for our Finance Department in order to come up with a fair, equitable way as well as when somebody builds a house. You see this property right here it’s $423.00 dollars, $355.00 dollars, $201.00 dollars. Out of them three only one parcel has a house on it. Just for a vacant lot the guy’s paying $355.00 dollars. That’s $23.00 dollars more than what we’re paying for trash service and he don’t have trash. But if you look at the opposite side of the road you’ve got people paying $90.00, $60.00, $48.60, $120.00. There’s no fair solution but if we could come up with a simple principal methodology on how to charge for streetlights the, whatever I proposed, the $85.00, $107.36 it makes it simple from this moment on because as far as the Finance, Steven Kendrick’s tax, every time there’s a commercial property being built, it’s $107.36. For a residential it’s $85.00 dollars. We’re hoping to expand which will help offset our cost as well. You know people say that streetlights it’s pretty expensive for residential. My mother-in-law next door pays $20.00 a month to have Jefferson Electric put a light in her yard. That’s $240.00 a year for one single light for one fraction of here property. I applaud the subcommittee for taking the lead on this streetlight issue and basically they came up with the principal of charging per parcel but the urban area which is going to have to, I tried to do it back in 2013. We had started nibbling away three years ago when we actually put in a garbage fee and lowered the millage rate, I hope we did, Donna, to help offset. 50 So you start snapping away at the urban to where all of Augusta could have one set millage rate across the board but the urban, we still having to pay, we still pay the Fire Department out of it, we’re still paying Pension money out of it, until we figure out a way we’re not going to get that part resolved. Hephzibah and Blythe we always say is exempt. Hephzibah and Blythe is its own municipality. They pay for their own streetlights. It’s not they’re getting it for free. Somebody’s actually paying for it and it’s the council out there in both areas. You know we have an actual expense of $5.6 million dollars, we’ve got a deficit of $1.2. We didn’t get there overnight and we shouldn’t have to pay it back in overnight because if you get a strong payback which you’re going to do the second year, third year, or fourth year. You’re accumulating all this revenue and you can’t spend it fast enough but it’s put on the back of the burden of the taxpayer. I’m concerned about that. Some of the benefits not changing charging the urban area twice because they paid their light bill through the property tax, not charging neighborhoods that pays for streetlights through their HOA fees. That’s a big concern. Equalize the charge for both residential and commercial pays back the deficit over seven years. After seven years and hopefully we’ll increase our population versus the 1,700 people in the past 20 years we will increase to help offset and we know that power companies are going to do an increase so when the power company does the increase you’re going have that $172,000 dollars to utilize that for the maintenance. I think the traffic light last year spent $55,000. They’re asking for $120,000 on their budget this coming year; hopefully we can accommodate him. But it’s a simpler plan, simpler to apply and I’ll make a motion to approve the residential of $85.00, commercial $107.36. Mr. Frantom: Second. th Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, will the Commissioner from the 8please restate his motion? Mr. Guilfoyle: Motion to approve the streetlights based at $85.00 for residential, $107.36 for the commercial and out of that $172,000 goes to pay back the deficit for seven- years. th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 7. Mr. Frantom: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Does that, Commissioner Guilfoyle, does that exempt those exempt properties will now be paying? Mr. Guilfoyle: It includes exempt properties, sir, at the base pf $85.00 dollars that’s less than, that’s about $7.15 a month so it’s quick and easy to do the math of what my mother-in-law’s paying. It’s less than 3 ½ months charge that you get a years’ worth of service and everybody that has per se streetlights will paying in this but it’s not charging HOAs and the urban areas secondary. Mr. Frantom: So Hephzibah and Blythe remain exempt? Mr. Guilfoyle: Hephzibah and Blythe pays their own power bill so they’re not per se exempt from the Georgia Power. They’re just exempt from Augusta-Richmond County because they pay their own utility bills. Mr. Frantom: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. 51 th Mr. Chair: The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6. Mr. Hasan: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to ask my colleague if you don’t mind when he said probably the currently exempt how many of those properties are residential and how many, and it may very well be in here so I apologize I’m just asking that is residential how many of them are commercial? th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 8 please respond. Mr. Guilfoyle: The exempt properties that you speak of, Commissioner Hasan, is considered the same rate as the residential properties it’s not considered commercial --- Mr. Hasan: Well, I’m sorry --- Mr. Guilfoyle: --- so actually they getting a little relief on their payment per year. Mr. Hasan: --- yes, sir, I apologize, Mr. Mayor, maybe my question was not clear I was asking how many parcels are those commercial and how many are residential? Mr. Guilfoyle: Sir, none of the information that’s been given us to from Finance differentiates residential from commercial. They always had it considered residential to lower the rate. Mr. Hasan: Well can anybody give me, how many numbers just 182? Mr. Frantom: 2,982. Mr. Guilfoyle: That’s total exempt that including the per se churches that everybody wants to reflect, it includes Augusta-Richmond County properties, it includes 5013 properties as well. Mr. Hasan: So, give me that number again, please? Mr. Guilfoyle: 2,982. Mr. Sias: That was the number of properties that are presently exempt, correct? Mr. Mayor: I would think that that’s correct, 2,982 properties that are exempt currently. It’s in your notebooks Tab 23, Tab 23. Mr. Hasan: It didn’t get in to us. th Mr. Mayor: Okay? All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 10. Mr. G. Smith: (Unintelligible). No, that’s what I was going to ask is who all does that include who will pay based on your suggestion? 52 Mr. Guilfoyle: Can I respond, Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor: Please. Mr. Guilfoyle: Commissioner Smith, the, everybody’s that responded is the end users of the streetlights, sir. Whoever’s receiving the service will end up. But what it is is a fair equitable way about billing. It’s no longer two doors down from me at my office it’s $281.00 dollars where I’m paying $40.00 dollars. I know in my heart it’s wrong for me to pay almost five times or less than five times than my neighbor so I’m willing to pay more to make it fair and equitable. Mr. G. Smith: How did they figure for around here paying for water bills for residents? Depends on where you live or how much you’ve got? Mine last was $120.00 from the water and then right at $785.00 for my power. I’ve got a leak somewhere, don’t I? Mr. Mayor: I’ve got a motion and a second that’s before us. I’ve got one more, I’ve got a th motion and a second. All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 4. Mr. Sias: I just have one question I want to ask. We were talking about the number of properties that were exempt. Now we’re talking about that should not be exempt now we want to exempt the folks who have HOAs that pay I guess (unintelligible) they don’t use the other streets. So how many properties would that encurtail I’d like to ask my colleagues rather than the HOAs? Mr. Guilfoyle: Can I respond? Mr. Mayor: Please do. Mr. Guilfoyle: As Commissioner Sias is sitting as the subcommittee Chairman that question has never been brought up to differentiate what subdivisions actually pay. The only thing that the Finance Department as well as the Tax Commissioner could do is go from the existing billings. The HOAs neighborhoods that pays through their HOAs does not have a bill, has not had a bill in the past so that number’s not calculated within my numbers. Now the numbers that Commissioner Sias had where it showed, let me grab my paperwork right quick, I have those numbers written down, as far as not of the people who’s paying fees from last year, five, ten years about that includes the HOAs the people doesn’t have any kind of service whatsoever it’s $20,262.00. Now within your urban area that people’s that already paying for the streetlights currently under their tax that we didn’t address a month ago when we passed the millage is $16,900 so you’re talking 36,000 right at 37,000 people that was going to be charged that either currently already paying through their tax or paying through an HOA or not having any service at all. But to ask me a question what how many HOAs that’s I don’t even think Finance could tell us that. I think Mr. Steven Kendrick would have to have some research done on that. It can’t be done at the drop of a dime. Mr. Sias: Well, the reason I asked that question that was part of your proposal so that’s why I asked the question. Secondly, I want to go back to one thing, Mr. Mayor, and I want to ask Ms. Donna Williams to address it or even the Administrator. But if I’m not mistaken when we 53 said with this simplified plan $131.00 and $87.00 anybody in the urban area that was paying the streetlight fee per as a tax that would be removed, am I correct? Ms. Jackson: That was certainly the intention however now that we’ve already approved the millage rate I don’t think we can make that effective for this year. Mr. Sias: Okay, fine we just didn’t get it done in time right --- Ms. Jackson: Correct. Mr. Sias: --- okay I’m good, thank you. Mr. Mayor: I’ve got a motion and a second, let’s vote on this measure. The Clerk: Commissioner Fennoy, how are you voting? This is on Commissioner Guilfoyle’s proposal for streetlights at $85.00 residential and $107.36 for commercial. Mr. Fennoy: (Inaudible). Mr. Sias: (Unintelligible) include the churches. The Clerk: That includes churches --- Mr. Sias: And all exempt. The Clerk: --- it does not include exempt properties. Mr. Fennoy: Okay. The Clerk: So how are you voting? Mr. Sias: It does include exempt. Mr. Hasan: It does include exempt, Ms. Bonner. The Clerk: It does --- Ms. Jackson: Including those owned by Augusta. The Clerk: --- okay you’re voting yes, right? You have the understanding, sir --- Mr. Fennoy: Yes. The Clerk: --- okay. Mr. Sias, Mr. Hasan and Mr. M. Williams vote No. 54 Motion Passes 7-3. Mr. Mayor: Okay --- The Clerk: We have two, we have 21 and 24. Mr. Mayor: --- 24. The Clerk: SUBCOMMITTEE Pension Subcommittee 24. Motion to approve soliciting and RFP for the services of a pension investment advisor for the 1945 and 1949 Pension Plans. The RFP will be submitted through the normal procurement process. (Approved by Pension Committee August 28, 2018) Mr. Hasan: Motion to approve. Mr. G. Smith: Second. th Mr. Mayor: All right, Commissioner from the 9 has a question. Mr. M. Williams: Mr. Mayor --- Mr. Mayor: Yes, sir. Mr. M. Williams: --- in talking with Purchasing and I’m trying to remember what was stated about being able to go out to solicit that, was that procedure done? And I ain’t got no problem with them doing it but I’m hearing that the procedure that we’ve been trying to do is not any guidelines I guess is the best way to put it is there anyone from Purchasing here can address that? Mr. Mayor: No, I can address it --- Mr. M. Williams: Okay. Mr. Mayor: --- I’ll clarify it. There was a question raised during the Pension Committee meeting about the members of the committee being able to provide input into what the RFP should include. The Procurement Director sent out an email in response to that and that matter was resolved and at this point is no longer a concern. Mr. M. Williams: Like I said I’ve got no problem. Mr. Mayor: All right, we have a motion and a second, voting. The Clerk: Commissioner Fennoy? 55 Mr. Fennoy: I’m voting no on that. The Clerk: No, okay. Mr. Fennoy votes No. Motion Passes 9-1. The Clerk: Item 21, sir? Mr. Mayor: Yes. The Clerk: PUBLIC SAFETY 21. Discuss the matter of closing fire stations due to a lack of fire personnel available to operate fire equipment and requiring off-duty firemen to work and be paid overtime. (Requested by Commissioner Marion Williams) th Mr. Mayor: All right, the Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 9. Mr. M. Williams: Yeah I was hoping the Fire Chief would be here to answer my question, Mr. Mayor, I wanted to relay this to him or Ms. Jackson I guess. Mr. Mayor: All right, Ms. Jackson has indicated that he’s on vacation. Madam Administrator, do you want to try and answer the question? All right, he’s got a series of questions (inaudible). Mr. M. Williams: Unless the Fire Department has changed, Ms. Jackson, I’m sure there’s got to be at least two Assistant Chiefs on the department, I’m not even counting the Battalion status. So I thought someone would be respectful enough to be here to address whatever issue this body not me but this body may have but to be on vacation and not assign somebody tells me that I’m on the right page with where I am. Now I asked this question and I phrased it differently the last time but I’m going to put this on Public Safety again, Ms. Bonner, for next week but I want to talk to the Fire Chief or his designee, don’t make no difference. So if you don’t mind just scratch this. I want to put it back on the agenda for Public Safety please, ma’am. Mr. Mayor: All right --- Mr. M. Williams: To not have somebody show up tells me that this body don’t have no respect out of that department. Mr. Mayor: --- okay all right I understand that. All right, the Chair’s going to recognize I told as I said probably about 20 minutes ago now that I would come back to the Commissioner th. from the 6 He was attempting to make a motion and I asked him to yield so we could go to Item th number 22 on the agenda. The Chair recognizes the Commissioner from the 6. 56 Mr. Hasan: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My question was germane to what we were discussing about the Personnel, Policy and Procedure Manual. And one of the things we kind of got a whiff of last time is about the disconnect from our H.R and other issues that were being discussed so we wanted to kind of rectify that officially, Mr. Mayor. On the committee currently is Commissioner Grady Smith, Commissioner Marion Williams, Commissioner Jefferson and myself and we talked about possibly just looking at this from a perspective. I don’t know if we need to make a motion to do this or put the Commission on notice. And that is I’d like to ask Mr. MacKenzie first, Mr. MacKenzie, if you don’t mind, Mr. Mayor, who is your attorney of record that works with H.R.? Mr. MacKenzie: Right now it’s Jenise Smith. Mr. Hasan: Yes so, Mr. Mayor, we’d like to just let it be known that we would appreciate if the Administrator or her designee, the HR and the attorney designated to work with HR be a part of the PPPM discussion directly at all times and that’s who we’ll deal with moving forward and we try to clear up some of the confusion that we witnessed today. Mr. Mayor: Yeah --- Mr. Hasan: And as well as the subcommittee because obviously there was concerns there as well and so to put that directly that the attorneys represent that as moving forward. So doesn’t there need to be a motion or just put the Commission on notice? Mr. Mayor: --- no, we’ll take a motion, that’ll be fine. Mr. Hasan: Okay, so I’d like to make a motion in that regard, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Jefferson: Second. Mr. Mayor: All right, okay and just for clarification that again the motion is to insure that all that Attorney Jenise Smith be actively engaged in all HR matters. The Clerk: And working with the subcommittee. Mr. Hasan: And working with the subcommittee. Mr. Mayor: Okay all right, very good. All right, voting. The Clerk: Commissioner, how are you --- Mr. Fennoy: Which one are we voting on now? The Clerk: --- I beg your pardon, sir? Mr. Fennoy: Which one are we voting on now? 57 The Clerk: We’re voting on allowing attorney, Chief Staff Attorney with the Law Department Jenise Smith to work with the HR Department and the subcommittee regarding going forward with the 3PM. Mr. Fennoy: Okay (inaudible). The Clerk: Okay. Motion Passes 10-0. Mr. Mayor: Madam Clerk, is there any other business before us? The Clerk: No, sir. Mr. Mayor: All right, this meeting is adjourned. \[MEETING ADJOURNED\] Lena Bonner Clerk of Commission CERTIFICATION: I, Lena J. Bonner, Clerk of Commission, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of The Augusta Richmond County Commission held on September 4, 2018. ______________________________ Clerk of Commission 58