Columbus, Georgia

MINUTES

COUNCIL OF COLUMBUS, GEORGIA

WORK SESSION

FEBRUARY 26, 2002



The regular monthly Work Session of the Council of Columbus, Georgia was

called to order at 9:04 A.M., Tuesday, February 26, 2002, in the Council

Chambers, Government Center, Columbus, Georgia. Honorable John J. Rodgers,

Mayor Pro Tem, presiding.



*** *** ***



PRESENT: Present other than Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers were Councilors R. Gary

Allen, Berry Henderson, Julius H. Hunter, Jr., Charles E. McDaniel, Jr., Robert

Poydasheff, Evelyn Turner Pugh, Richard Smith, Nathan Suber and Evelyn Woodson

(arrived at 9:07 a.m.). City Manager Carmen Cavezza, City Attorney Clifton Fay,

and Deputy Clerk of Council Sandra Davis were also present.



*** *** ***



ABSENT: Mayor Bobby Peters and Clerk of Council Tiny B. Washington were

absent.



*** *** ***



INVOCATION: Led by Pastor Tim Jones, Britt David Baptist Church.



*** *** ***



PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Led by Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers.

---------------------------------------------------------*** ***

***------------------------------------------------------



ABSENCE OF MAYOR PETERS:



Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers advised that Mayor Peters is absent today due to him

having to attend to some personal business.



-----------------------------------------------------*** ***

***------------------------------------------------------------

MINUTES: Minutes of the February 12 and February 19, 2002 meetings of the

Council of the Consolidated Government of Columbus, Georgia were submitted and

approved unanimously by those nine members present at the time, with Councilor

Woodson having not yet arrived, upon the adoption of a motion made by Councilor

Poydasheff and seconded by Councilor Allen.

------------------------------------------------------*** ***

***------------------------------------------------------------



CONSENT AGENDA:



THE FOLLOWING TWO ORDINANCES LISTED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WERE APPROVED BY

THE COUNCIL ON SECOND READING UPON A SINGLE MOTION MADE BY COUNCILOR POYDASHEFF

AND SECONDED BY COUNCILOR SMITH WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (Councilor Woodson

requested that her vote be cast in the affirmative upon her arrival):







An Ordinance (02-21) - Rezoning approximately 32 acres of property located

on portions of 6001 & 6015 Warm Springs Road from an A-1 and PUD District to an

A-O District. (3-CA-02-Woodmont Properties, LLC)



An Ordinance (02-22) - Rezoning approximately 0.17 acres of property

located at 2912 12th Avenue from a C-2 District to an R-3A District.

(4-A-02-Gregory)



*** *** ***



THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS SUBMITTED AND WAS APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL

UPON A SINGLE MOTION MADE BY COUNCILOR POYDASHEFF AND SECONDED BY COUNCILOR

SMITH WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (Councilor Woodson requested that her vote be

cast in the affirmative upon her arrival):







A Resolution (84-02) - Authorizing a request for a temporary

intergovernmental transfer of $4,000,000 from the General Fund to the Hospital

Authority of Columbus, Georgia to facilitate participating in a federal program

for government owned or operated nursing homes.



*** *** ***



NEW ZONING PETITIONS:



THE FOLLOWING TWO NEW ZONING PETITIONS WERE SUBMITTED AND AN ORDINANCE WAS

CALLED FOR ON EACH BY COUNCILOR SUBER:



Petition submitted by George Woodruff, III to rezone approximately 0.92

acres of property located at 5069 Warm Springs Road from an R-1A District to an

A-O District. (Recommended for conditional approval by both the Planning

Advisory Commission and the Planning Division.) (7-CA-02-Woodruff)



Petition submitted by The Jordan Company to rezone approximately 5.77

acres of property located at the northwest portion of 6001 River Road from an

R-4 District to an A-O District. (Recommended for conditional approval by both

the Planning Advisory Commission and the Planning Division.) (8-CA-02-The

Jordan Co.)



---------------------------------------------------------*** ***

***------------------------------------------------------



ONE COLUMBUS SUMMITT:



Councilor Turner Pugh, in commending individuals regarding the One

Columbus Summit on last week, unintentionally omitted Mr. Jim Anthony, the

CCG-TV cameraman who was present before the summit began and at the end. She

commended him for spending a lot of time there those two days that we were

present for the Summit, Banquet and wrap-up session the following day.



*** *** ***

BULL CREEK GOLF COURSE:



City Manager Cavezza announced that there would be a ribbon-cutting

ceremony at Bull Creek Golf Course. He stated that this is for the next nine

holes that would began construction on, at 4:00 p.m., February 28, 2002.

---------------------------------------------------------*** ***

***---------------------------------------------------------

WORK SESSION AGENDA:



ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE:



City Manager Cavezza said we have Mr. Rick Alexander, Chairman of the

Board of the Chamber and Mr. Mike Gaymon, who is the President of the Chamber,

here today to make a presentation to the Council.

Mr. Rick Alexander came forward and briefly explained where the Chamber is

right now and what they are working on. He thanked the Council for the support

given by the City to the Chamber for economic development.



Mr. Mike Gaymon reminded everyone about the first inter-city visit to

Charlotte, North Carolina, and this was where we learned about the Carolina?s

partnership, which was a by-state economic development effort. He explained

that we patterned a program after the Carolina?s partnership a couple of years

later, which is known as the ?Valley Partnership?. He reported that the Valley

Partnership is now a six county effort. He reiterated the comments made by the

Lieutenant Governor by stating that the Valley Partnership is the best model

and largest model in the State. He briefly highlighted the regional aspects of

the Valley Partnership. (A packet of information was passed around the table,

but was not submitted to the Deputy Clerk for the record.)



Mr. Rick Alexander, made some additional comments regarding the document

that was passed around the table by stating that we got together with those

individuals involved with Valley Partnership and over the last year, there has

been an extensive study done that we call the ?Strategy For Economic

Development?; since, the Council has supported us in this effort, we want to be

able to tell the members of Council what we are doing and to advise that we do

have a plan to go forward in the future. He explained that we have supporting

documents from some of the year?s worth of work that we have done. He said

that we are providing the Council with an executive summary of that report that

talks about how we are going to go forward with economic development. He

pointed out that we studied the key issues in our communities and are listed as

follows:



? Communication

? Education and workforce

? Economy

? Infrastructure

? Quality of life

? Demographics



Mr. Gaymon briefly highlighted the target industries that have been

identified based upon the assets and liabilities for this region, that they

would be focusing their efforts on and are as follows: Aircraft Parts

Manufacturing, Military, State Government, Information Services, Health

Services and Communications.



As for closing remarks, Mr. Alexander noted that we assist with promoting

our existing industries and we help them to expand, and that is a big part of

our growth.



*** *** ***



PROPOSED TREE ORDINANCE:



City Manager Cavezza said that Mr. Milton Jones, Chairman of the Tree

Committee, is present in the audience. He reported that this committee has

been working very hard during this year and a half and Mr. Jones would like to

present to the members of Council possibly their final version or

recommendation for the Tree Ordinance.



While Mr. Jones was adjusting the overhead projector for his presentation,

Councilor Suber, after making some brief remarks, made a motion to hear

citizens that may be present and want to be heard on this issus. Seconded by

Councilor Poydasheff.



Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers offered clarification of the motion which is to

suspend the normal work sessions rule to allow discussion from the citizens on

this matter.



In response to some questions of Councilor Woodson, City Manager Cavezza

advised that he would get with Mr. Jones to make a decision as to when we would

be ready to bring this ordinance forward.



Councilor Woodson also made comments regarding the packet that was

presented by the Chamber of Commerce, at which time, City Manager Cavezza

informed the Council that Mr. Jones has not seen that information from the

Chamber, but felt that he needed to be provided with a copy of this document.



Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers called attention to the motion to allow discussion

from the citizens on this matter which carried unanimously by those ten members

present.



Mr. Milton Jones, came forward to present the recommendations of the Tree

Committee. Mr. Jones began by stating that he was not aware that the Chamber

had circulated a packet to the Councilors, but we have heard their concerns.

He said that he was present today to thoroughly explain the provisions of the

document that we have been working on for a year and a half.



He made comments on the history of the City of Columbus and the creation

of the Tree Ordinance as convened by the new municipal government at their

first meeting on January 19, 1829. He added that the present Tree Ordinance

was adopted in 1972 by the first Council of the new Consolidated Government,

which began on January 1, 1971. He pointed out that the present ordinance only

applies to trees on city property and not to trees that we are expanding our

protection to which are the ones covered by private development.



He said that the City Manager established a Tree Committee starting in

November 2000 with the objective to be to encourage smart growth to enhance the

quality of life in our community and increase property values. He then made

remarks about the advantages of having trees in the community.



With several members of the committee present in the audience, Mr. Jones

asked those individuals to stand to be recognized. He then read off a listing

of names of the individuals who served on the Tree Committee and they are as

follows: Susan Binns, Commissioner of Keep Columbus Beautiful; Erin

Bouthillier, Environmental Science Director, Moore Bass Consulting; Leah

Braxton, W. C. Bradley Company; Don Campbell, landscape architect with French

and Associates; Dr. Becky Champion, Director of Oxbow Meadows Environmental

Center; Bill Consolletti, registered forester with Mead; Glenn Davis, retired

professional ball player, community representative; Dave Erickson, Pinnacle

Homes; Marty Flournoy, Fournoy Calhoun Realtors; John Flournoy, Flournoy

Development Company; Phillip Ford, Executive Director of the Greater Columbus

Home Builders; Larry French, landscape architect with French Associates; Susan

Kleto, registered forester, former City Arborist and now Executive Director of

Trees Columbus; Warren Mason, civil engineer with Moon, Meeks, Mason and

Vinson; Jody Nelson, registered forester with Georgia Power; Samantha Reese,

head of the Horticultural Department of Columbus Tech; Otis Scarborough, The

Woodruff Company; Gloria Weston-Smart, Executive Director, Keep Columbus

Beautiful; Ken Spano, Spano Investments; Che Spurlin, former Chairman of the

Board of Elections and community representative; Elizabeth Thorne, homemaker

and community representative; Teresa Tomlinson, attorney with Pope McGlamery

and headed the Overlook Community Preservation Association, and himself. He

also mentioned several City employees who provided significant support.



He described the break down of the committee as a whole into drafting

committees which was accomplished by having the following representatives

choose two members for a drafting committee: Development people, Tree

Professionals and Community Representatives. He provided a listing of the

communities from which their committee chose to review their tree ordinances

and provided a chronology of events, which included public hearings on the

proposed ordinance, that lead to the recommendations that are now being

presented.



He then outlined each section of the committee?s proposal and are as

follows:



Section 1: Finding, Intent and Statement of Purpose



Section 2: Definitions



Section 3: City Arborist



Mr. Jones then made the following statement regarding the responsibility

of the City Arborist ?The City Arborist is granted the authority under this

ordinance to allow for variances of up to 20%. He explained that the reason

this was inclusive because there was a concern among some in the development

community about the makeup of the tree board.



Section 4: Tree Board



He gave a listing of the proposed representatives to serve on the new Tree

Board. He said that we are requesting seven members and the following

representatives:



- A public utility providing service within the City;



- An educator employed by Columbus State University, the Muscogee County School

District, or Columbus Technical College whose principal field of activity is

science and/or the environment;



- The Director or a commissioner of Keep Columbus Beautiful;



- A representative of the development or building community of the City working

primarily in commercial and/or industrial development;



- A representative of an environmental advocacy group headquartered in the

City; and



- A representative who is a landscape or forestry professional; and



- The City Arborist shall serve as an advisor and as an ex-officio member of

the board.



Councilor Turner Pugh raised concerns regarding the makeup of the proposed

tree board. She pointed out that there are no ordinary citizens being

recommended for the board. She recalls that on almost every city board we have

representation from the entire community and not just from individuals that are

from specific organizations. She suggested maybe three or four regular

individuals to serve on the board.



Mr. Jones responded by saying that we had been advised that the City likes

to have small boards, and we were trying to keep the numbers low, but it is

certainly the prerogative of the Council to offer amendments.



In reference to a previous comment by Mr. Jones that Councilor Smith

served on this committee, Councilor Smith informed the members of Council that

after he got into the committee meetings, he decided that it would probably be

a conflict of interest with his role on Council; therefore, whenever a vote was

taken, he did not vote and in most cases, he got up and left the meeting. He

also expressed concerns with the proposed makeup of the board.



There were continued discussions on this matter with Mr. Jones responding

to various questions from the members of Council.



After listening to the comments from several Council members, Councilor

Woodson asked when would be the time to amend this ordinance, because the

consensus seems to be to add more people to the board, at which time, City

Manager Cavezza replied that if the committee does not make the adjustment and

if the Council desires to; then, when this ordinance comes forward on first

reading; then, that would be the opportune time to make any changes.



Councilor Woodson then asked Mr. Jones if the committee would be willing

to reconsider adding three or five at-large citizen?s positions to the tree

board, before it is brought back on first reading? Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers

reminded everyone that this is just a recommendation that is being made;

therefore, we can alter it in any fashion that we so desire, once it comes to

us on first reading. Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers continued by saying that the

Council would likely have our own work session on this ordinance in order to

develop the final product. Mr. Jones added that we are passing the committees

recommendations on to the Council now.



In response to Councilor McDaniel?s question regarding the grandfathering

in of businesses that are already there or would they have to conform to the

new ordinance, at which time, Mr. Jones replied that this ordinance does not

apply to anything except new development, with limited exceptions to that.

Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers added that it would also apply to expansions.





Section 5: Official Tree



Mr. Jones advised that the Muscogee Crape Myrtle is the official tree of

Columbus and is listed as such in the existing law; therefore, the committee

did not address this issue.



Section 6: Applicability



Mr. Jones reiterated his previous comments and also pointed out that this

new ordinance does not apply to anyone?s home, because a citizens can cut down,

plant or trim any tree that is on their property. He then gave a listing of

situations that would be applicable, which comes directly from the current

buffer ordinance and are as follows:



? Zoning changes

? Additions of over 5,000 square feet on sites less than 2 acres and 10,000

square feet on sites over 2 acres

? Planned developments

? Redevelopments that are more than 50% of the building is demolished and

rebuilt



Mr. Jones pointed out that the above list came verbatim from the existing

buffer ordinance, because the committee was told to be consistent with the

buffer ordinance. He explained that this last one was added and is listed as

follows:



? The ordinance applies to the City and all public agencies.



Mr. Jones explained that this was added, because the committee felt that

this would be essential and crucial for this ordinance, because it would be

unfair to ask the development community and the rest of the business community

to apply to rules that the City is not willing to apply to itself; therefore it

does apply to governmental agencies, but this one is not in the buffer

ordinance.



There was continued discussion on this section with several members of

Council asking various questions regarding the applicability of this proposed

ordinance. City Manager Cavezza also emphasized that for clarification

purposes, the statements on taking down trees on private property is exactly

true, except that there is some public right-of-way that people have to

recognize in that part of many front yards is public right-of-way, and the

citizens do not have the right to remove those trees.



Councilor Suber asked if it was possible to combine the buffer ordinance

with the tree ordinance, at which time, Mr. Jones agreed that the two

ordinances should be combined, and done as part of this zoning and planning

ordinance that is in the process of being revised. Councilor Suber then

expressed his concerns in that the City imposes laws and requirements on

citizens that the City of Columbus does not adhere to, and he wants to insure

that we adhere to whatever we put out there for the citizens to do, at which

time, City Manager Cavezza maintained that if the citizens have to do it; then,

the City Government has to do it. Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers reminded everyone that

this provision is in the proposed ordinance regarding anything that we do

prospectively.



Councilor Allen asked if someone has three to five acres and they want to

put a home site on there, and that home site is going to exceed the 5,000

square feet limit; then, would this proposed ordinance be applicable to them.

Mr. Jones responded by saying if this would be new construction; then, he

believes that the answer would be yes.



There was some discussion regarding the ability to obtain insurance for

developments with islands of trees in the parking lot as raised by Mayor Pro

Tem Rodgers, with Mr. Jones responding that he does not believe that someone

can not obtain insurance because of trees in the parking lot.



Continuing to use the overhead projector, Mr. Jones resumed his

presentation to the Council.



Regarding the TDU (Tree Density Units) requirement, Councilor Turner Pugh

asked if the requirement would just be for the acreage or square feet that are

being constructed as the new part or would this go back and take in the total

structure or total acreage and come up with the total TDU requirement. Mr.

Jones replied that it would be the entire tract of land, because the formula

applies to the total acreage of the site. Councilor Turner Pugh then expressed

concerns in that if there is a part of the acreage that has already been

developed, and if they decided to make some expansions to that building; then,

they would have to go back and take the entire existing acreage and make it

conform to the new laws.



Councilor Poydasheff suggested that the tree committee go back to the

table with those individuals affected in considering remarks that have been

made concerning grandfathering existing development.



There were continued discussions on this matter with Mr. Jones responding

to various questions from the members of Council. Councilor Smith asked about

the cost associated with the adoption of the new tree ordinance at which time

he presented an example that was done by one of the tree ordinance committee

members Mr. Warren Mason. Mr. Jones added that the letter was done at the

request of Mr. Dayton Preston from the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Jones

responded that this was an e-mail that was sent out by the Chamber, at which

time, he read from a letter that he prepared in order to respond to the letter.



Councilor Henderson raised questions from previous statements regarding

the expansion of development, at which time, Mr. Jones responded to those

concerns. Councilor Turner Pugh asked questions regarding how this proposed

ordinance would affect the property in the Enterprise Zone and City Manager

Cavezza addressed her concerns.





Section 7: Density Requirements



Mr. Jones briefly outlined the Site Density Requirements by explaining the

calculation procedure to be used, which is to take the number of acreage of the

development that is going to be affected and multiply it by the required number

of tree density units for that zoning classification and that gives you a

numerical factor that you meet by either saving existing trees on the site,

planting trees or a combination of the two.



He pointed out that we have a sliding scale on single-family low and medium

density residential zoning classifications and the reason for that is space for

the trees. He then went over those specified zoning classifications explaining

the TDU?s requirements for each.



Mr. Jones responded to questions from Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers regarding the

setback and the one tree in the front yard being mandated in this proposed

ordinance and reads as follows: ?Additionally, every residential lot containing

7,500 square feet area or greater shall have a minimum of two trees located

thereon, one of which must be between the front set back line and the

right-of-way.? With the assistance of the overhead projector, Mr. Jones

displayed reasons for the request and expounded on that by saying that a

terrible mistake was made around twenty or thirty years ago when oak trees were

planted under the power lines; therefore, there are no more street trees and,

the thought according to the planners and what everyone told us, was to go to

an informal type of street tree, which are the trees in the front yard. He

explained that in an R-2 zoning classification and above there is a requirement

for two trees with one of which has to be in the front yard.



Section 8: Additional Requirements



(a) Parking Areas



Mr. Jones then presented slides from various communities that have

development where trees are present versus the developments that have been

constructed in the City of Columbus, after which he reiterated remarks made by

Mr. Ed McMahon, a planner, who commented that ?every survey that has been

conducted indicated that people would prefer to shop in shopping centers that

have trees?. He maintained that they are more inviting and they not only go

there because their cars are cooler and things of that nature, but they would

stay longer and spend more money.



Mr. Jones explained that in regards to automobile sales lots that are in

existence now would not be affected; it is grandfathered in, but it could get

caught if it makes an expansion or redevelopment; but once again, the

provisions of the proposed tree ordinance would not require parking lot trees,

because all it would have to do is meet the TDU requirement. Mr. Jones pointed

out that of the sixteen ordinances that the committee reviewed, the Tree

Ordinance for Savannah, Georgia was the only one that exempts automobile lots,

boat sales lots, mobile home sales lots and things of that nature, and he would

recommend to the Council the same thing. He explained that the rationale is

that it is not really a parking lot, but an extension of their sales room. He

also cautioned about exempting some folks out, because you would be leaving

folks in that would possibly want to know why others are exempt and not them.







(b) Perimeter Plantings





Mr. Jones advised that the only things that our perimeter plantings apply

to are non-residential uses in residentially zoned areas. He said that second

area where the perimeter plantings would apply is where residential

subdivisions abut streets.



He then provided examples for display on the overhead projector to assist

with the reasoning for the requirement as listed in the proposed ordinance.



Section 9: Tree Protection and Planting Requirements



Section 10: Tree Protection During Construction Standards



Mr. Jones pointed out that there is a difference between saving a tree and

leaving a tree. He said you have to do things to protect a tree that has

development going on around it, if your plan is to save the tree. He

highlighted the provision in the proposed ordinance that gives extra credit for

trees over twenty-one (21) inches in diameter; you can get twice the TDU

credits for saving that tree. He then displayed slides of how to save trees

and those that have been left.



Councilor Turner Pugh asked questions regarding the effect of the proposed

ordinance on small lots that are 2,500 and 5,000 square feet. Mr. Jones then

responded by saying that the arborist could grant a variance on one tree.

Councilor Turner Pugh pointed out that if there is development that is not only

going to affect the Lawyers Lane Area, but also some impact on the lots in the

Beallwood area, because a lot of these lots are not normal size lots anymore.

She then requested that when City Manager Cavezza brings the ordinance back to

the Council, there needs to be something in the ordinance that takes care of

the existing lots that are 2,500 square feet without having to go through the

variance process.



Ms. Susan Kleto, came forward to make comments regarding tree planting on

small lots. She said that she believes that there is still room for trees to

be planted on smaller lots.



Section 11: Tree Planting Standards



Section 12: Alternative Compliance



Mr. Jones said that if there is a lot where it is physically impossible to

get the trees on the lot; then, there are two provisions that are granted and

are listed as follows:



? The developer or builder would get with the arborist and they would agree on

a site on City property where the tree could be planted and the developer would

get credit for it.



Or



? Make a $220.00 contribution to the Tree Replacement Fund.





Section 13: Inspections



Mr. Jones explained that inspections are performed by the arborist or his

or her designee.





Section 14: Variances



Section 15: Nuisances, Disease, Infection, and Emergencies



Section 16: Enforcement and Administration



Mr. Jones recalled that the City Arborist is in charge of enforcing the

present Tree ordinance; therefore, this remains in the proposed ordinance.



Mr. Jones continued by saying that we incorporated several recommendations

from the Chamber, which includes cooperating with the fast tract projects,

large economic development projects, etc.



Section 17: Injunctive Relief



Section 18: Miscellaneous



? Trenching within the Critical Root Zone (CRZ) on City Property.

? Damage by City Trees

? Required Permits

? Public Utility Standards

? House Moving Permits

? Land clearing, timber harvesting, speculative grading, etc.

? Cooperation with other departments

? Non-Liability of City





Councilor Henderson called forward Ms. Rachelle Buice, who was seated in

the audience, to ask her opinion of the responsibilities of the City Arborist

as listed in the proposed tree ordinance.



Ms, Rachelle Buice, approached the podium and confirmed that it is going

to be hard, but this is something that she feels is worth it for the

community. She said that one person could help to move it forward, and if we

had resources from other areas and departments to get trained on proper tree

care.



When Councilor Henderson asked about some additional personnel for Ms.

Buice, she suggested maybe a starting point of two additional people. In

response to Councilor Turner Pugh regarding the cross-training of employees and

if this has been happening; then, why are we not using them now? City Manager

Cavezza replied that if we are looking at pulling highway maintenance under Ms.

Buice as well, then that would give her the added resources that she needs.



Mr. Jones read from his prepared concluding remarks. He then directed his

remarks towards the question of why do we need the ordinance and are as

follows:



- Increase smart growth

- Enhance quality of life

- Increase property value



After more than two hours of discussion on this matter, Mr. Jones

displayed several more slides showing areas in the City of Columbus that

possess trees as part of their development, and immediately upon conclusion,

offered to respond to further questions of the Council. Councilor Smith then

asked questions regarding Section 18(g) (Land clearing, timber harvesting,

speculative grading, etc.), at which time, Mr. Jones addressed those questions.



*** *** ***



With there being no other business to come before the Council, this

meeting was adjourned, upon the adoption of a motion made by Councilor

Poydasheff. Seconded by Councilor Suber, at which time, Councilor Suber

reminded everyone that we did vote to hear any citizens that were present.

Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers recalled that there was a vote taken to hear anyone else

that had something to offer at this point, that they would be heard. He then

asked if there was anyone present who wanted to be heard or had questions

regarding this matter, but no one came forward.



Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers then called attention to the motion to adjourn

which carried unanimously by those eight members of Council present for with

Councilors Allen and Henderson being absent for this vote, with the time being

12:02 p.m.



*** *** ***







Sandra T. Davis

Deputy Clerk of Council

The Council of Columbus, Georgia