MINUTES
COUNCIL OF COLUMBUS, GEORGIA
WORK SESSION
JANUARY 24, 2006
The regular monthly Work Session of the Council of Columbus, Georgia was
called to order at 9:04 A.M., Tuesday, January 24, 2006, on the Plaza Level of
the Government Center, Columbus, Georgia. Honorable Robert S. Poydasheff,
Mayor, and Honorable John J. Rodgers, Mayor Pro Tem, presiding.
*** *** ***
PRESENT: Present other than Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers were Councilors R. Gary
Allen, Wayne Anthony, Glenn Davis, Berry H. Henderson, Julius H. Hunter, Jr.,
Charles E. McDaniel, Jr., Nathan Suber and Evelyn Woodson. City Manager Isaiah
Hugley, City Attorney Clifton Fay, Assistant City Attorney Jamie Deloach, Clerk
of Council Tiny B. Washington and Deputy Clerk of Council Sandra Davis were
also present.
-----------------------------*** *** ***-----------------------------
ABSENT: Councilor Evelyn Turner Pugh was absent, but was officially excused
upon the adoption of Resolution Number 27-06.
-----------------------------*** *** ***-----------------------------
INVOCATION: Offered by Councilor Wayne Anthony.
-----------------------------*** ***
***-----------------------------
MINUTES OF LAST MEETING: Minutes of the January 17, 2006 Meeting of the
Council of the Consolidated Government of Columbus, Georgia were submitted and
approved upon the adoption of a motion made by Councilor Allen and seconded by
Councilor Suber, which carried unanimously by those nine members of Council
present for this meeting. .
-----------------------------*** *** ***-----------------------------
THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS SUBMITTED BY CITY ATTORNEY FAY AND READ IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY COUNCILOR HUNTER AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL:
______________________
A Resolution (25-06) - Commending and congratulating Mack
Strong and the Seattle Seahawks. Councilor Hunter moved the adoption of the
resolution. Seconded by Councilor McDaniel and carried unanimously by those
nine members of Council present for this meeting.
-----------------------------*** *** ***-----------------------------
INCOME TAX PREPARTION:
At the request of Mayor Poydasheff, Mr. Edwin Basilio, representing the
Columbus Coalition, who does the Volunteer Income Tax Preparation Program for
the City of Columbus, said he came before the Council on last year before they
started the Income tax season. He said on last year, they processed over 300
income tax returns, which was over $686,000 and saved the citizens of Columbus
over $50,000.00 in income tax preparation fees.
Mr. Basilio said this year the partnership is being done with the United
Way, City of Columbus, Family Connection and numerous other organizations in
the City, who have come together to help citizens of the community, low to
moderate age workers to save on income tax preparation fees. He said most
importantly, to ensure that every single citizen that qualifies for the earned
income credit takes advantage of it.
He said they found out last year from the City of Columbus that there was
$4 million that went unclaimed. He said after the IRS did a check on all the
returns, there was $4 million that people qualified for, but just didn?t get
claimed. He said they believe this year that they will be able to help reduce
that amount.
Mr. Basilio said today is the official kick-off for this year?s campaign
and they will be starting here at the Government Center in the East Wing on
today and tomorrow, January 25, 2006 they will be at the Public Safety
Building.
He said they would like to also ask the Council members to get the word
out to their constituents to ensure that they take advantage of this
opportunity. He said if there is anyone who wants to get more information about
this program, they could call 211 or 311 and they will be provided with the
different sites that they have available.
Councilor Woodson asked City Manager Hugley if we could get the dates and
location and scroll it on CCG-TV. City Manager Hugley said we are already
scrolling that information.
Also, present with Mr. Basilio were Ms. Yvonne Davis,
Ms. Joanne Butler, Ms. Linda Hyles, Ms. Carol Hendricks, Mr. Joe Riddle, Ms.
Jennifer St. John, Ms. Sally Sinclair, and Mr. Dave Ramirez.
-----------------------------*** *** ***-----------------------------
CONSENT AGENDA:
THE FOLLOWING TWO RESOLUTIONS WERE SUBMITTED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL
PURSUANT TO THE ADOPTION OF A SINGLE MOTION MADE BY COUNCILOR HENDERSON AND
SECONDED BY COUNCILOR SUBER, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE NINE MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL PRESENT FOR THIS MEETING:____________________________________________
A Resolution (26-05) ? Authorizing the acceptance of a deed to River Crest
Drive located in Phase VII, River Crest.
A Resolution (27-05) ? Excusing Councilor Evelyn Turner Pugh from the
January 24, 2006 Council Meeting.
*** *** ***
THE FOLLOWING TWO ZONING PETITIONS, RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY BOTH THE
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING DIVISION WERE SUBMITTED AND AN
ORDINANCE AND PUBLIC HEARING WAS CALLED FOR BY COUNCILOR MCDANIEL:
__________________________________________________
Petition submitted by Anthony Gilbert to rezone approximately 70.7 acres
of property located at 7500 Layfield Road from RE1 (Residential Estate 1) to
RE5 (Residential Estate 5).
(4-A-06-Gilbert)
Petition submitted by Michael Moore to rezone approximately 0.541 acre of
property located at 3321 North Lumpkin Road from LMI (Light
Manufacturing/Industrial) to GC (General Commercial). (5-A-06-Moore)
-----------------------------*** *** ***-----------------------------
WORKSESSION AGENDA:
STREETSCAPES:
Deputy City Manager David Arrington gave a brief overview of the current
streetscapes projects that are taking place on Broadway. Mr. Arrington said in
his presentation this morning he will give an overview of the project, which
will include the scope of work, current work area ? status, and the amount of
work that?s remaining, as well as the coordination of the projects.
He then went into some details and highlighted the following information:
SCOPE OF THE WORK:
Stormwater/Sewer Separation
Hardscapes
Landscaping
Lighting/Amenities
Traffic Signals
Deputy City Manager Arrington said some time back, there was a
presentation given by Traffic Engineer Ron Hamlett talking about the advantages
and safety features of the LED Light, and said this area of Broadway will be
outfitted with those lights.
He said the briefing that you were given back in September pointed out
that work was going on in the 1200 block of Broadway and said at that time,
there were some decisions that had to be made; which there were some options
available, as far as providing some accommodations for the businesses in the
downtown area and to minimize the disruption during the holidays. He said the
option selected was to move the work off of the 1200 block and onto the side
streets to allow traffic to move up and along Broadway to facilitate business
for the Broadway businesses during the holiday periods. He said at that time,
it was identified that this would probably delay some of the progress by two
months. He said in talking with the contractor that is the timeframe that they
are working on now.
WORK SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETE:
1300 Block
1200 Block
12th Street ? Broadway to Front
Deputy City Manager Arrington said the work in these areas is complete and
encouraged the Council members if they have an opportunity to go down and see
the work that has been done in this area.
STATUS OF CURRENT WORK AREA:
Broadway from 11th to 12th
Status
West side from 11th to 12th 90% complete
East side from 11th to mid-block 30% complete
Substantially complete with entire block within 8 ? 9 weeks
ADDITIONAL WORK AREA:
11th Street from Broadway to Front Ave.
Status
North side ? Substantially complete in 4 ? 6 weeks
South side work to immediately follow
Completion of 1100 Block ? June 2006
WORK REMAINING:
Quadrant 4 of 1100 Block
Median of 1100 Block
Intersection of 11th Street & Broadway
South side of 11th Street
1000 Block
10th Street from Broadway to Front
Mr. Arrington said the contractor and the City is working in close
cooperation with CSU, as there are a number of construction projects with CSU
and we want to make sure that the timing of this work coincide with the opening
of school in August so that the students can get into their dorms with minimum
disruption.
SCHEDULE:
7 weeks for each quad to include:
Demolition
Stormwater/Sewer
Utilities
Hardscapes
Partial resurfacing
Traffic/Parking back on street
Weather and unforeseen conditions could affect schedule
Councilor McDaniel said there is probably going to be a real problem with
parking, as there are a lot of restaurants down there and then asked, how are
we going to assist with the parking for all of the restaurants?
Deputy City Manager Arrington said they are working with the Uptown
Merchants, Uptown Business Group, Uptown Columbus and Columbus State
University. He said, as you know Columbus State University owns a significant
portion of that block, but said they are looking at some different strategies;
which hopefully will be a little different than what was utilized on the
previous blocks to get the work in and out, as well as to accommodate those
businesses.
He said they are planning on meeting with the 1000 block merchants
separately and discussing those strategies to come up with some reasonable
accommodations for them. He said there is going to be disruptions, but what
they want to do is to minimize the disruptions and get those work crews in and
out as soon as possible. He said one of the things discussed, was possibly
instead of utilizing the quadrant method to make the improvements along
Broadway, is to do one side completely and then another side and then just
provide for a walkway access to either side of the street as the construction
is being done.
Mr. Arrington said they are going to discuss those approaches and get the
ideas from the merchants themselves and see what they can bring to the table to
help assist in this regard.
After Mr. Arrington concluded his presentation, some members of the
Council expressed their views on this matter, after which Mr. Arrington and
City Manager Hugley then responded to further questions of members of the
Council.
In his final conclusion of this presentation, Mr. Arrington pointed out
that the project is 60% complete and is on budget and said that?s a credit to
Mr. Harry Westcott, Project Manager,
Mr. Richard Bishop and Freeman & Associates and the close
coordination that they have had on this project.
City Manager Hugley then responded to questions of members of the Council
as it relates to whether or not we contract with landscaping companies as to
keep the area clean with all the new plantings. He said we have the BID
Uptown, and we contract out a number of our major intersections to private
companies. He said we have contracted out 9th Street areas of Uptown, the
Riverwalk and Veterans Parkway. He said we are currently spending a little over
$1million for major intersections, gateway projects, etc.
Councilor Davis said if we are contracting with some of these landscaping
companies, and because the City of Columbus is investing a lot of money down
there and with a lot of plantings being done, and a lot of pine straw, and with
that comes a lot of weeds. He said he thinks that we really need to concentrate
on keeping the area pristine. He said that is really a big concern of his and
said if we need to pass a message on to the landscape contractors to really
stay on top of that, we need to do that.
He said he thinks it?s going to be very vital to what we are trying to
accomplish here.
City Manager Hugley said we have a staff person in our Forestry Division
who is responsible for monitoring those contracts with gateways and other
streets mowing, cutting and plantings. He said this individual goes out and
inspects all of their work and said if there is anything that is not properly
done, they are required to go back and redo it and if it is not, we don?t pay
them for that portion of the contract work.
Councilor Woodson asked questions about the streetcars and what is the
status of that project. She said she has been told that this project was part
of the sales tax project, where there was some funding of $12 million set aside
for this project. She sad there hasn?t been any discussion on this matter and
she needs to know where we are with this plan.
City Manager Hugley pointed out that we have a presentation on road
projects that will be coming up later in this meeting and said our Director of
Community Development, Mr. Rick Jones, will be mentioning that project. He said
$11 million was included in the SPLOST for a walking/jogging and trolley on
rails trail. He said there have been several public hearings on this matter,
which has been presented to the public. He said we are on track with that and
have some design on that project.
Councilor Woodson said it looks like the trail was supposed to
come through downtown, but with all the changes we are making now, she doesn?t
foresee that happening.
City Manager Hugley said the original plan for the trail was initially
supposed to be from the Civic Center to the Trade Center, then from the Trade
Center out to CSU, CSU to Cooper Creek, and Cooper Creek out to Flat Rock Park.
He said the Civic Center to the Trade Center portion is not under consideration
at this time, and primarily it will be from downtown up to and around the TSYS
area, up through Linwood Boulevard, around near the Medical Center, to CSU and
then out to Cooper Creek and then out to Flat Rock Park. He said we do have
the design and have had at least two public hearings.
*** *** ***
MEDIANS ON BROADWAY:
Councilor McDaniel said when we were up at Callaway Gardens having one of
our Council Retreats, Mr. Bo Callaway stated that he was interested in
contracting with the City to keep up those medians downtown on Broadway. He
said they can do a beautiful job, and he was just wondering if the City has
given any thoughts to talking with them.
City Manager Hugley said he doesn?t know if we?ve contacted them directly,
but said we did put it out to bid and they did not bid on it. He said he
doesn?t know when that contract is scheduled to expire, but said certainly he
can have someone to talk with Callaway Gardens and see what their interest is
and if it is something that they would be willing to bid on or if there is some
other method that we might be able to talk to them about.
Councilor McDaniel said he mentioned this at one of our Strategic meetings
and said it would be beautiful work, whatever they have in mind.
Councilor Henderson said as far as the maintenance of the greenspace that
is going to be down there along with those newly planted streetscapes area, the
Business Improvement District really doesn?t play an active part in it, other
than just policing it, as far as picking up trash and things of that nature.
City Manager Hugley said that is correct, the Business Improvement
District will not do any of the greenspace maintenance, as that is contracted
out.
*** *** ***
CHEROKEE AVENUE TIMELINE:
Deputy City Manager Arrington said last Fall there was a lot of discussion
about what changes should be made along Cherokee Avenue to improve safety and
said a decision on the specific changes were deferred until the first of the
year so that sanitary sewer lines repair could be made by the Columbus Water
Works? contractor, and some work was to be done by Atmos Energy and also so
that the City could repair a part of the wall and the culvert along Cherokee
Avenue.
He said during this intervening period, additional information has come to
our attention that requires some additional work to be done.
Mr. Arrington then went into some details and explained the timeline of
how the information came to them, what the work involves and their
recommendation on how they think we should proceed.
He said back in March 2005 the City initiated a storm water sewer
infrastructure inspection, and part of that process is televising all the storm
sewer infrastructure and based on the televised information our consultant, JJ
& G conducts an assessment of the specific pipes within the community and makes
a determination about their condition and what repairs should be made to ensure
the proper flow of water.
He said in August 2005, they televised Cherokee Avenue storm water
infrastructure. He said this is about the same time that a public hearing was
held on what changes should be made to Cherokee Avenue.
Mr. Arrington said from August to September 2005, Cherokee Avenue was
being televised and the information was being generated for the consultants and
then in September, the data was delivered to JJ & G, and they began viewing the
information and making determinations on the condition of the storm-water
infrastructure along Cherokee Avenue. He said then in November 2005 it was
determined that Gordy Construction Company, the contractor who was performing
the repairs for the Columbus Water Works happen to be at a location, which was
the same location that some storm water repairs needed to be made; therefore,
the City went ahead and contracted with Gordy Construction Company to perform
those repairs at that location because they were already there. He said that
was only one of many repairs that needed to be made along that area.
He then went into further details showing maps of the areas where the
repairs needed to be made, which included those pipes televised along Cherokee
Avenue, which was identified in the yellow markings. He also showed those areas
which were identified defects along Cherokee Avenue, which was identified as
priority one or priority two repairs, and highlighted in the red markings on
the map.
He said priority one means the sewer pipe has significant damage that
would disrupt the flow or even a total collapse. priority two means that the
pipe?s condition is in such bad shape that it is in eminent danger of
collapsing and becoming an obstruction.
Mr. Arrington said in meeting with JJ & G twice over the last week, they
have stated that this information is even in its preliminary form and there may
be additional repairs that may be necessary based on their assessment. He said
specifically at Camille Drive along Cherokee Avenue up to Hilton Avenue, there
are some collapsed pipes that don?t factor in the numbers he will provide to
the Council. He said the consultants have to determine what the pipe is there
for and if it?s an abandoned line or not and where does it come from. He said
there is a lot of analysis that continues to be done; therefore, the
information that has been provided for you today should be considered
preliminary.
He said the problem areas that have been specifically identified in the
survey, includes five (5) cracked pipes or joint failure, one (1) pipe cut by
unknown utility, one (1) pipe collapsed, as well as data analysis still in
progress.
Mr. Arrington said the purpose of this presentation today is to let you
know that we don?t feel it is the right time to make a decision on how to
proceed with Cherokee Avenue. He said it is their recommendation that they
approach this in three phases, which includes.
PHASE 1:
Complete Priority 1 and Priority 2 repairs on Cherokee Avenue between Garrard
Street and Hilton Avenue before resurfacing, estimated timeframe 6 ?8 months
based on currently available data.
PHASE 2:
Conduct televised survey assessment of storm water lines on Cherokee Avenue
from Garrard Street to 13th Street and perform priority repairs as identified.
Timeframe based on number of repairs required.
PHASE 3:
Upon completion of all priority repairs, to make a recommendation to Council on
Cherokee Avenue, which includes the following:
Maintain current 4-lane design
Convert to 3-lane with turn lane
Convert to 3-lane with turn lane and pedestrian/bike lane
Other recommendations to insure the highest level of safety to the public
including guardrails, speed humps, etc.
After Mr. Arrington concluded his presentation, he then responded to
several questions of members of the Council.
City Manager Hugley said when they come back to the Council with a
recommendation, which could possibly be a year from now, they will bring some
options for the Council to consider. He said when you talk about speed humps;
he wouldn?t recommend that we put speed humps on a 4-lane roadway.
*** *** ***
BIG BOX ORDINANCE:
City Manager Hugley said we presented to you plans on the
Big Box Ordinance, which came from a Committee a few months ago and said you
had some recommendations that you wanted us to look into and said Mr. Jones
went back to the Committee and they have discussed those things and he is here
this morning to update you on where we are with all of those recommendations.
He said we will need some direction from the Council today, because what
they would like to do is to bring this back within the next two-weeks on first
reading as a public hearing.
Mr. Rick Jones of the Transportation Planning Division said they did go
back to the Big Box Committee and presented them with the findings and
questions that you had to them and had some conversation about that.
He then gave a brief recap of those items that were discussed when they
came before the Council during its Council Work Session, which includes the
following information:
BACKGROUND:
The Transportation Planning staff formed the committee in April to develop a
?Big Box? ordinance. Committee consisted of: Richard Bishop, Will Johnson,
Stella Shulman, Rachel Buice, Phillip Thayer, Milton Jones, Leah Braxton,
Harold Bryant, Elizabeth Barker and Ann King.
The committee reviewed ordinances from several
Communities, including: Fort Collins, CO, Stoughton, WI College Park, GA
Gwinnett County, GA, Roswell, GA Carrollton, GA and Peachtree City, GA
PURPOSE:
Maintain an overall integrity to development
? Landscaping
? Architectural design
? Signage
q Promote pedestrian access
q Insure long-term health of the natural environment
? Applicability
q Retail development totaling 200,000 square feet
q Developments of 100,000 square feet
Mr. Jones said they went back to the committee and talked with them about
this issue, and outlined the concerns of the Council and pointed out that these
are the responses to those concerns.
RESPONSES TO PREVIOUS QUESTIONS:
? Threshold of 100,000 vs. 50,000 square feet
q The Big Box Committee met to review this request and
still supports the 100,000 square feet requirement
? Committee also recommends that different standards be developed for those
less than 100,000 square feet
Mr. Jones said if you look at what?s already in the community now, which
would fall into this category, most of all of these operations are already at
100,000 square feet or more. He then outlined several of those businesses.
Actual Sq. Footage Prototypical Size Range
114,760 Wal-Mart 200,000
123,000 Target 145,000
109,308 Sam?s Club 140,000
141,000 Sears 140,000
131,804 Home Depot 140,000
128,997 Lowe?s 140,000
N/A BJ?s Wholesale 110,000
N/A Costco 130,000
Belks 60,000
Kohl?s 70,000
132,336 Macy?s 140,000
82,300 JC Penney?s 140,000
Furniture Stores:
Haverty?s, Ashley 40,000
Sporting Goods:
Dick?s, Sport Authority 40,000
City Manager Hugley said he knows that there were some expression of
considering something less than 100,000 square feet and said Mr. Jones has
shared with you their concerns for going to something less than 50,000 square
feet, then it might be something that we need to come back and address later.
He said if it is something that the Council wants to do now, it would delay the
ordinance, but we would need to go back and address some things.
Councilor Allen said he thinks the committee and staff have done excellent
work to get us to this point, but said it seems that maybe we could have two
sets of guidelines, (1) 50,000 ? 100,000 square feet and then (2) over 100,000
square feet.
Mr. Jones said the committee feels for the most part that this is a good
threshold for now. He said some of the requirements we have in the ordinance
may not be applicable to a building of 40,000 square feet or they just can?t
meet the threshold; therefore, the committee would like to have the opportunity
to look at 50,000 square feet or something of that nature, to see what
regulations should actual apply to it. He said they are asking for two
separate categories.
Councilor Allen said what he wants us to look at, is to be more pro-active
rather than reactive. He said oftentimes we find ourselves reacting to
situations where someone has done something and is grandfathered in and then we
have to go back and change the ordinance. He said we could continue the
committee and ask them to continue their work and look at something so that we
can have teeth in the ordinance.
City Manager Hugley said they would then move forward with the ordinance,
100,000 square feet on first reading on the second Tuesday in February and then
we could go back after we have adopted this ordinance and deal with something
less.
Discussions continued on this subject for approximately forty-five minutes
with several members of the Council expressing their views on this subject,
with City Manager Hugley and Mr. Jones responding to further questions of
members of the Council.
After it was requested by the Council that we go ahead and incorporate the
other provisions as it relates to 40,000 square feet buildings, City Manager
Hugley then pointed out that he will delay bringing the ordinance back in
February and we will ask the committee to move forward to work on incorporating
the other provision in the ordinance.
Mr. Jones then continued with the presentation, outlining the following
information:
RESPONSES TO PREVIOUS QUESTIONS:
? Building Code Defines Gross Leasable Areas:
q ? as ?the total area designed for tenant occupancy and
exclusive use. All tenant areas, including areas used
for storage, shall be included in calculating gross
leasable area.?
? Life Safety Code Defines It As:
q The total floor area designated for tenant occupancy
and exclusive use, expressed in square feet, measured from the centerline of
adjoining partitions and exteriors of outside walls.
? Need to make ordinance retroactive?
q Vested Rights issues may prevent any action of this
type.
q The ordinance will actually be part of the UDO, which
unless it is clearly defined by a time limit, would not
allow this action
q Provisions would apply to any new development and to
any 100,000 square foot building left vacant more than
six months
COMPATIBILITY WITH CITY PLANS:
? Requires written compatibility report
q Detailed description of project
q Compatibility with adopted city plans
q Impact on utilities
q Impact on physical and ecological conditions
q Impact on the community
q Transportation and traffic impact analysis
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS:
? Transportation/Infrastructure
q Interparcel vehicle access points between contiguous
tracts
q Utility lines underground
q Sidewalks, streetlights and lighting for parking areas per
the UDO
q Raised pedestrian walkways through parking areas
q Parking lots divided into separate areas using
landscaping and/or sidewalks
q Interconnected walkways
? Landscaping Requirements
q 20 Tree Density Units
q Landscaped islands throughout all surface parking
areas under the UDO
q Minimum 10 foot wide landscaping strip between
primary developments and adjacent parcels
q Landscaped strips in accordance with the UDO
requirements for buffers and trees
PARKING/YARD, HEIGHT 7 SETBACK:
? 25 percent of the required parking spaces may be
reduced for small vehicle parking
? Decorative, commercial quality bicycle racks, cart
return areas, benches and trash receptacles
SIGNAGE:
? Modest, coordinated signs throughout the
development
? Requires a planting area around the base of any
monument sign
? Allows consolidated signs
? Prohibits: billboards, painted wall signs, bench
signs and roof signs
? Allows internally illuminated signs
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN:
? Roadway facades shall be made of glass, wood,
and/or brick, stone or stucco
? No metal sided or portable buildings
? Use of selected roofing materials and designs
? Screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment
? Railings, benches, trash receptacles, bicycle racks
shall complement the building design
? Additional performance guidelines
q Facades of multi-tenant buildings shall be varied in depth or parapet height
q Distinct architectural entry for individual tenants? entrances shall be
provided for suites exceeding 10,000 square feet
? Out parcels shall be compatible to the principal structure
? Walls visible from roadways/parking areas shall
incorporate changes in building material/color
? Roof parapets shall provide visual diversity
? Articulation of building design shall continue on all
facades visible to the general public
OUTDOORS STORAGE:
? Exterior storage structures are to be properly
screened from view
q Includes truck parking and loading areas
q Screened attractively from adjacent parcels and streets
q Cannot be located within 15 feet of a public street,
sidewalk, or on-site pedestrian way
? Seasonal merchandise (Christmas, Halloween)
q may only be displayed in an outdoor area 4 times per
calendar year
q Cannot exceed 8 weeks per year
? Storage areas and sale of other merchandise
q Permanently defined and screened
q Screening materials to conform to principal structure
? Fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, cement , etc.
cannot be stored outside
MAINTENANCE OF VACANT BUILDINGS:
? Applicable to vacant buildings over 100,000 square
feet
? Owner to keep the exterior appearance as when it
was fully occupied
? Owner to maintain landscaped and parking areas,
cleanliness of the site, and security patrols
? Efforts by the owner shall be made to market and
re-tenant the property
? Buildings vacant more than 60 days and have not
complied with ordinance
q City notifies the owner in writing to comply within 30
days
q Failure to comply, the owner will be cited by Inspections & Codes to
Recorder?s Court
OTHER POSSIBLE VACANT REQUIREMENTS:
? Require a demolition bond of 110% if 70% of the
building becomes vacant
? Require a voluntary vacating if the property is not
used in a set time, to allow the landlord to lease to
another company
? Develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
between the developer and the City to determine
what is to be done if the building becomes vacant
RESPONSES TO PREVIOUS QUESTIONS:
? Eminent Domain
q Proposed state legislation would establish limits
q Existing regulations would require designation of
slum/blighted area, plan of action and approval by
Council
? Increasing Fines
q Regulated by state law and city charter
? Sending cases to state or superior court
q Local ordinances are required to be heard by municipal
courts (I.e. Recorders or Environmental Court)
? Existing Ordinance on Delivery Times
Section 14-204(h)
Trucks. No person shall load any garbage, trash
on compactor truck, or any other truck, whereby
the loading, unloading or handling of boxes,
crates, equipment or other objects is conducted
within a residential district or within 300 feet of any
hotel or motel between the hours of 10:00 pm. and 7:00 a.m.
? Proposed Ordinance on Delivery Times Section 14-204(h)
(h) Trucks. No person shall load, unload or handle any boxes, crates, equipment
or other objects, including any garbage or trash on compactor truck, within 300
feet of a residential
structure or within 300 feet of any hotel or motel between the hours of 10:00
pm. and 7:00 a.m.
Councilor Henderson pointed out that there is a situation that he has been
dealing with on and off for the past several years and said there is a
residential structure outside of 300 feet from the commercial structure, but
there is no vegetation. He said when a truck pulls up, whether it?s emptying
dumpsters or just off-loading at 5:00 a.m. in the morning it carries. He said
he would ask that the staff look at some type of buffering requirements, even
if the distance was greater than 300 feet.
Mr. Jones said this ordinance that we are talking about now does deal with
buffering requirements, required screening of loading areas as well. He said
you can?t make it retroactive in that regard, but you can take care of future
development of this type. He said this ordinance is beyond the UDO, but it is
part of the noise ordinance and can be amended now to take care of that without
having to go through the zoning process to make that happen.
After the conclusion of his presentation, Mr. Jones then responded to
several questions of members of the Council, and after continued discussion by
the Council members, additional information was requested as outlined below:
BIG BOX ORDINANCE:
Mayor Poydasheff asked Mr. Jones to make sure he works with the City
Attorney to come up with a reasonable definition as to what ?vacancy? means as
it relates to the Big Box Ordinance.
Mayor Poydasheff said in making the many amendments to the ordinance,
let?s make sure the City Attorney is consulted when drafting the language in
the ordinance.
*** *** ***
TRANSPORTATION PROJECT UPDATE:
Mr. Jones said in his presentation today, he is going to highlight those
projects that are ready for construction now.
Mayor Poydasheff asked Mr. Jones if the TIP is based on our policy
committee recommendations, and the study that we had done by the consultants
working in tangent with Phenix City and everything that we have done in the
past. He also asked, if we are updating that Transportation Plan in light of
BRAC, which was completed prior to BRAC.
Mr. Jones said, yes and everything that they do is in coordination with
our Transportation Improvement Program and our Long Range Transportation Plan.
He said that is what DOT requires of us, and it is what the Federal Highway
Administration demands of them.
Mr. Jones also responded to questions of Councilor Allen as to what is the
Policy Committee.
Mayor Poydasheff asked Mr. Jones to provide a copy of the Long-Range
Transportation Plan that was done by the consultant to the members of Council.
Mr. Jones said the projects that he will be talking about today are active
projects that are ready for construction now and ready to go forward. He said
these projects are actually in the Transportation Improvement Plan.
He then spent some twenty-five minutes in going through this presentation
and highlighted the following projects:
St. Mary?s Road- Buena Vista Road to Robin Road
? Widening from 2 to 4 lanes
? Includes landscaping and sidewalks
Projected Cost
ROW (78 parcels) $2,664,000
Construction $4,525,000
City Responsibility
ROW (SPLOST)
Status
ROW to be completed by February, 2006
Construction to let in June, 2006
Estimated to be completed in January, 2008
I-185 Interchange at SR1- (Victory Drive)
? Reconstruct the interchange at 1-185 and SR1 (Victory Drive)
Projected Cost
Construction (State) $8,245,000
City Responsibility
None
Status
Project advanced due to sale of state bonds
Construction scheduled to let in FY06
On schedule to begin this fiscal year
I-185 from St. Mary?s Road to Victory Drive
? Realignment of roadway to correct substandard curvature South of St. Mary?s
Interchange
? A third lane will be added in each direction providing for a 6-lane facility
Projected Cost
ROW (State/Federal) $15,600,000
Status
Project advanced due to sale of state bonds
Construction scheduled for FY06
On schedule to begin this fiscal year
ATMS/Signal/CCTV/Fiber
? Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) that would monitor traffic
conditions, to include the use of cameras, and variable message signs
? ITS Center to be developed and housed in Government Center Annex
Projected Cost
Engineering (State) $ 200,000
ROW (City) $ 0
Construction (State) $3,407,000
Status
Starting design concept
Construction to begin in FY07
Mr. Jones, in response to questions of members of the Council, as to how
this program will work, said how they envision this working is that you will
see the same system that the Georgia Department of Transportation has where
they have a large room with monitors of this size or larger that you have in
the Council Chambers. He said there would be cameras at different intersections
(major intersections) and they will be able to gauge that traffic. He said if
we had an accident at any of those intersections, we would be able to
immediately spot that and then we would put it on the message board to let
people know, as well as let the emergency personnel know that as well.
He said at the same time what they envision doing is when we know that
traffic starts to bottleneck in the afternoon or areas really get to be
congested, the signalization can be monitored from that standpoint. He said we
could adjust that and make all those cycles change without having to send a
person out.
Councilor Woodson told Mr. Jones that he may want to consider going to
Atlanta, in the Buckhead area to look at their system that they currently have
in place and determine if this is the same system that we are wanting to put in
place.
Councilor Hunter asked Mr. Jones, how much are we able to have
synchronization of signals throughout the City; is it limited to just certain
areas or can we do it throughout the City?
Mr. Jones said our intentions are to do it throughout the City with this
system. He said right now you are limited to what you can do. He said the whole
idea is to be able to adjust when we have problems; especially to manage
congestion throughout the community. He said this system will help us do that.
Councilor Hunter then gave an example of a traffic signal and the timing
of the traffic light at the intersection of St. Mary?s Road and Oakley Drive
and as you proceed east on St. Mary?s Road, there is another traffic light that
follows and at that traffic light you are entering I-185 going south towards
Fort Benning. He said a number of times it happens that you get the green light
at
St. Mary?s Road/Oakley Drive to proceed east only to be stopped by the traffic
signal at St. Mary?s Road and the I-185 south entrance. He said this creates a
huge backup and then asked
Mr. Jones if there is something that we can do to deal with that right now and
asked the staff to look at trying to synchronize the traffic light at St.
Mary?s Road & I-185 south entrance.
Councilor Allen said to avoid having to hire additional staff to implement
this system, he would encourage Mr. Jones to consider shifting this observation
or monitoring of the traffic patterns to the 911 Center.
Mr. Jones said there will be at least another year before we will have
this system fully operational and said we still have to bring the consultant on
board that will help us to identify all the ins and outs of this program before
we are really ready to bring this back to you.
Veterans Parkway (US 27)- American Way to Cooper Creek
? Adding turn and decel lanes
? Traffic signalization
? Part of the larger Veterans Parkway project
Projected Cost
Engineering Authorized
Construction (Estimated) $3,200,000
Status
Permit requested from DOT to construct section in front of new school sites to
accelerate project
Environmental completed in November
MOU has been developed for MCSD
Acquiring needed ROW
Targeted for completion August/September
Councilor Davis said one of the concerns is with the parents taking their
children to school in the mornings off of Williams Road turning left on to
Veterans Parkway heading down to the school. He said they feel like there is a
problem there and we need a turn arrow. He said he is pleased to know that we
are moving forward to 4-lane that area, which will help significantly. He then
asked Mr. Jones why we can?t put in a turn arrow.
Ms. Donna Newman, Assistant Director of Engineering, said as you know,
Veterans Parkway is a State road and the previous Traffic Engineer for the
State has denied their many requests for a left-turn signal there; however,
since they have now replaced him with a new Traffic Engineer, we have had him
to come down to actually go through the intersection and he is now in agreement
that we can add a left turn signal and that will be included in this project.
Councilor Henderson said for a point of clarification, he thinks that it
is still no, but with a caveat that with the accelerated project of widening
that portion of the road. He said the response that he received directly from
the DOT?s representative was that they couldn?t put a turn signal there or
refused to because they felt it would make the situation worst until the road
is widened.
Macon Road - University Avenue to Reese Road
? Reconstruct 4 lanes road with turn lanes and intersection improvements
? Includes landscaping and sidewalks
Projected Cost
Engineering Authorized
ROW $17,540,000
Construction $4,940,000
Status
ROW costs are in both TIP and Tier II
Not scheduled for ROW until FY08
Federal/state funding for this project
Tier II Projects
Brown Avenue/CS 2227 @ Southern Railroad
? Bridge Replacement
Projected Cost
Preliminary Engineering Authorized
Construction To Be Determined
ROW (Estimated) $3,000,000
City Responsibility
ROW and replacement housing
Status
Design in process by DOT
Environmental to be started soon
Efforts will be made to move project into FY07 or 08 TIP
Temporary fix estimated at $280,000
Will require coordination with railroad
Whittlesey Road-Veterans Parkway to Bradley Park Drive
? Project is divided into two sections: Veterans to Whitesville; Whitesville to
Bradley Park
? Only Veterans to Whitesville is scheduled for construction
? Four lanes with median from Whitesville Road to Veterans Parkway
Projected Cost
Construction $6,000,000
ROW (42) $1,120,000
City Responsibility
ROW cost (SPLOST)
Status
Environmental completed in September
Purchase of Right of Way to begin in March
Construction could occur in FY08
Farr Road- Old Cusseta Road to St. Mary?s Road
? Widen and reconstruct 1.25 miles of 2 lane road to 4 lanes
Projected Cost
Unknown until initial design has been completed
City Responsibility
ROW
Status
Preliminary engineering has been authorized
Moon Road- Wilbur Drive to Veterans Parkway
? Widen and reconstruct 2 lane road to 4 lanes
? Consultants have been looking at alternatives to widening this roadway
Projected Cost
Construction TBD
ROW TBD
City Responsibility
TBD
Status
Public meeting held in October to discuss possible intersection improvements
along this corridor as possible alternative.
Staff recommendation will be made soon
Talbotton/Warm Springs Road- 7th Ave. to Woodruff Road
? Four lanes divided with raised median
Projected Cost
ROW (140 parcels) $4,000,000
Construction $10,300,000
State/federal to handle all costs
Status
Environmental completed
Reviewing possible intersection revision
3 years to acquire ROW; 2 years to construct
Mr. Jones, in response to some concerns of Councilor McDaniel regarding
the timeframe on this project, said they are in the process of forwarding those
plans to the DOT and said hopefully, they will soon be able to acquire the
rights-of-ways. He said acquiring rights-of-ways is a difficult task because
there are so many Federal requirements that go along with that.
Buena Vista Road- Brighton Road to Dogwood Road
? Widen 5 lanes to 6 lanes with improvements to the I-185 interchange
Projected Cost
ROW (140 parcels) TBD
Construction TBD
Status
Initial design has been completed
Public information meeting has been held
Effort being made to fund this project as an Interstate improvement project
St. Mary?s Road-Robin Road to Northstar Drive
? Widen 3 lane segment to 4 lanes
? Includes sidewalks and landscaping
Projected Cost
ROW (140 parcels) TBD
Construction TBD
Status
Preliminary engineering authorized
May require reconstructing the I-185 interchange
Staff has requested the project boundaries be extended to the Ft. Benning
reservation
Eastern Connector- US 80 to Buena Vista Road
? Construction of a four lane road for Muscogee Technology Park
Projected Cost
ROW N/A
Construction $23,700,000
City Responsibility
Design/Construction (SPLOST)
Status
Construction underway
Phase One (approximately .5 miles) awarded in early 2004 ? to be completed in
early 2006
STATE SAFETY PROJECTS:
Peacock/Brown Avenue Intersection Improvement
Wynnton Road
? Intersection improvement
Projected Cost
ROW (parcels 25) $679,000
Construction $587,000
City Responsibility
None
Status
State safety project
Environmental completed
Construction to start this year
Locally Funded Projects
Whitesville/Williams Road
? Widening, signalization and turning lane improvements
Projected Cost
Construction $1,500,000
Status
Under construction
Construction to be completed May 06
Median cuts will be minimized, utilizing the Georgia Welcome Center driveway as
access to development in this immediate area
Walking/Bicycle Trail
? Walking/Jogging trail from 14th Street Bridge to Cooper Creek Park along the
Warm Springs Road rail line
This is Phase I. Second phase will run from Cooper Creek Park to Psalmond Road
and will be built as funds become available
Projected Cost
ROW Own
Construction $6,000,000
City Responsibility
Construction (SPLOST/Federal funds)
Status
Public meetings have been held
Environmental/archeological completed
Discussions being held with Medical Center and CSU
ST. MARY?S ROAD TO OLD CUSSETA:
Councilor Suber asked what about the roadway from St. Mary?s Road to Old
Cusseta Road and the plans that we need to have an outlet to get from the
Northstar Drive area, or from the St. Mary?s Road/Bunker Hill Road area.
Mr. Jones said we have met with the representatives of
Ft. Benning on this issue, with the Mayor and City Manager?s assistance and
they said they could not open Moye Road back up because of security reasons and
training operations. He said they were very amenable to providing us with
property for an access road that could either connect St. Mary?s Road back to
Old Cusseta Road or St. Mary?s Road back up to Steam Mill Road on reservation
property and said they have already started to put that into motion and it is
included in their long range plans now.
He said they have put it into plans and can get a study initiated on it,
so that we can get some funding on it. He said you could not get a project
going with Federal funds unless you identify it in the long range plans first
and that is what they have done. He said they are going to try to accelerate
that project as best as they can in the very near future.
*** *** ***
WHITESVILLE/WILLIAMS ROAD:
Referring back to this project, Councilor Henderson said he noticed the
way they are doing the grading off the shoulder of Williams Road as it
intersects with Whitesville Road, there is a significant drop in elevation;
therefore, he is assuming that you will have to drop Williams Road as well. He
then asked, how are they going to route traffic and if they are going to put a
temporary road on that lower elevated area to continue to move traffic on
Whitesville Road.
Assistant Director Donna Newman came forward and responded to those
questions of Councilor Henderson.
Double Churches/Whitesville Road Intersection
? Widening, signalization and turning lane improvements
Projected Cost
Construction $1,500,000
Status
To be completed in 2006
Construction to be done under county contract
? Standing Boy Bridge
Replacement of existing bridge
Projected Cost
ROW (5) $ 200,000
Construction (SPLOST) $1,300,000
Status
Bids have been accepted
Construction to start in Spring
Bridge provides only access to neighborhoods in this area
Requires immediate attention
Local Area Resurfacing Program - LARP
Mr. Jones said they are looking at coming up with a list for the next
fiscal year, as the one this year is already complete. He said they are getting
ready to work on next year?s process in this regard.
After a thirty-five minute presentation, Mr. Jones then concluded his
presentation.
Mayor Poydasheff thanked Mr. Jones for this presentation and pointed out
that he and his staff are doing a good job. He said one of the thing that he
wants Mr. Jones to keep on his radar is BRAC, security, quick deployment of the
people that are living off post, and 65% of the people will be living off post;
whether in Columbus, Smith Station or Phenix City. He said these people need to
get in and out.
Mr. Jones and City Manager Hugley then responded to further questions and
concerns of members of the Council as it relates to various road projects,
transportation needs, as well as, planning for the growth of our City.
*** *** ***
RESOLUTION FOR COACH HERB GREEN:
Mayor Poydasheff asked the City Attorney to prepare a resolution for Coach
Herb Green, who just passed the 500th mark at Columbus State University.
*** *** ***
FORT BENNING SOLDIERS:
Mayor Poydasheff said he has heard some comments as to what is Columbus
doing to honor the returning troops and their families. He said they were
working on that and was planning on having a parade and some other things, but
said the Commanders at Fort Benning, which includes Commander Wojackosi who in
consultation with the other commanders decided that the soldiers don?t want a
parade at this time; therefore, it has been put on the backburner. However,
there will be a big celebration at Fort Benning sponsored by Fort Benning,
working together with the Mayor, City Manager and the City on March 24, 2006.
He said he would like to have as many people from Columbus and the surrounding
area to attend that event to support our troops.
RESOLUTION FOR COLUMBUS HIGH SCHOOL:
Councilor Henderson said he and Councilor Davis would like to ask for a
resolution to honor Columbus High School?s Wrestling Team, who won the State
AAA Wrestling Championship.
*** *** ***
DEARBORN DRIVE TRAFFIC CONCERNS:
Councilor Henderson said he would like to give accolades to Councilor
Allen as he did a great job mediating a discussion with some of the residents
on Holland Drive and the developers.
He said one issue that came up was that they do have some existing traffic
issues. He said there is one concern with an issue on Dearborn Drive where
there is a sharp turn, as well as it being a narrow road. He said he talked
with a young lady who lives at 5800 Dearborn who has said it has been a real
problem. He said since it is a narrow street, he would like for us to look at
possibly putting in some speed tables for this street.
*** *** ***
HOLLAND DRIVE DRAINAGE CONCERNS:
Councilor Allen said he would also like for the staff to look into those
concerns of some residents out on Holland Drive that are experiencing some
drainage problems. He said he would like for the proper Engineering staff to
go out and take a look at this matter as soon as possible.
*** *** ***
HOUSING AUTHORITY:
Councilor Woodson said she had requested a briefing from the Housing
Authority and said she would like for the staff to provide her with a date as
to when we will have a presentation on the Housing Authority as requested at
one of the Council?s Work Session. Also, provide an update on the Peabody
Project.
*** *** ***
Mayor Poydasheff called Mr. Allan Kamensky forward to address the Council.
Mr. Allan E. Kamensky said he is here this morning on behalf of WRJ
Development Company, LLC. He said Mr. Randy Jones is the owner of this company.
He said the reason he is here today is a simple one. He said WRJ Development
Company, LLC purchased a piece of property on October 7, 2003, which are three
condominiums units off of River Road. He said from that date until December 21,
2005 no tax bills were forwarded to WRJ Development for the three units that
they purchased, and on December 21, 2005 Mr. Jones at his office, received
three delinquent notices for tax years 2004 & 2005 from a company called
Delinquent Tax Solutions, Inc. He said on December 21, 2005, he contacted their
office and we started calling the Tax Commissioner?s office and realized that
the address that the Tax Commissioner had for WRJ Development and the property
that they purchased was 5800 River Road. He said the property address is 5900
River Road. He said the Tax Commissioner?s Office in all due respect couldn?t
get the correct address, but yet delinquent Tax Solutions, Inc. was able to get
the correct address and sent the delinquent notices.
Mr. Kamensky said on December 21, 2005 they began working through the Tax
Commissioner?s office trying to rectify the situation, to pay the taxes without
penalty or interest. He said they were notified that is not doable and that you
must come before the Council to pay taxes without penalty or interest. He said
what you need to understand is that his client, WRJ, and Mr. Randy Jones is a
very meticulous businessman. He said they have built and sold over 125 homes in
2005 along. He said they receive over 300 tax bills a year and these two tax
bills were never delivered. He said the reason they know they were never
delivered is because on December 30, 2005, the checks for the taxes, 2004/2005,
not including penalties and interest were delivered to the tax office. He said
those checks were returned to them on January 10, 2006 and the tax address that
they were sending these to changed from 5800 to 5900 River Road. He said the
Tax Office rectified the problem and corrected the address, but yet sent the
checks back and said not only do you owe us the principle, interest and
penalty, but you will also have to pay $50.00 per notice for a notice fee. He
said they are here before the Council on today, to ask that the penalty,
interest and notice fee be waived.
Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers said we have a procedure for doing this and it is to
go through the Tax Commissioner and have the Tax Commissioner provide us with
her side of the story or be here to address any questions. He said even with
what Mr. Kamensky has told us, he would prefer that we take that route.
Mr. Kamensky said they have tried to talk with the Tax Commissioner and
said their telephone calls have not been returned. He said the reason he is
here today is that if you look at the notice that was sent to them by
Delinquent Tax Solutions, they are threatening foreclosure of the property and
additional penalties and interest, and said that concerns them. He said the
reputation of his client is outstanding and they are here on a matter of
principle as well as $2,300.00. He said the frustrating part, as the City
Manager?s Office is aware of, is that on numerous times before Christmas and
after Christmas, we tried to get the Tax Commissioner to return their telephone
calls, but to no avail.
After Mr. Kamensky went into more details regarding this matter, Mayor Pro
Tem Rodgers said he would like to see this matter go through the channels and
said he would like to request a one-week delay. He said typically these matters
are listed to be heard on the Council?s agenda.
Mayor Poydasheff then asked Mr. Kamensky if he would put those points that
he made here today at this meeting in writing so that the Council can study
them. He said as a matter of fairness, at least for comments of the Tax
Commissioner and then the Council will have the benefit of both sides and they
can then weigh that at an appropriate Council meeting.
Mr. Kamensky said the only thing that he would ask is that the penalty and
interests at this point stop, because we have tendered money. However, Mayor
Poydasheff said he is not sure if we can do that.
City Attorney Fay said you must have a determination by the Tax
Commissioner, which has been made, stating that the default giving rise to the
penalty was due to reasonable cause. He said until she makes that
determination, this Council cannot waive the penalty and interest. He said the
City Manager could certainly get in touch with the Tax Commissioner and advise
her that this matter is on the table and is being delayed for one week and
let?s hold off on everything until that time. He said she has to make a
determination of some sort.
With continued discussion on this matter, Councilor Suber then made a
motion that we handle this matter on today, because
Mr. Kamensky has contacted the Tax Commissioner?s Office, as well as the City
Manager?s Office and done everything he could to rectify this matter. Seconded
by Councilor Anthony.
After some thirty minutes of discussion on this matter with members of the
Council expressing views regarding the legal and procedural matter on this
issue, and City Manager Hugley and City Attorney Fay responding to questions of
members of the Council, Councilor Henderson then made a substitute motion to
delay this matter for one week. Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers.
Mr. Kamensky also responded to further questions of members of the
Council.
City Manager Hugley stated that Tax Commissioner Lula Huff is enroute to
the Council Chambers.
Mayor Poydasheff said he is calling a five-minute recess until Tax
Commissioner Huff arrives.
With Tax Commissioner Huff now being present in the Council Chambers,
Mayor Poydasheff explained to Ms. Huff that
Mr. Kamensky has presented a case to the Council concerning his client, Mr.
Jones and pointed out that we have two motions on the floor, one to take action
on today and a substitute motion for a one-week delay. He said you have asked
for two weeks, but he doesn?t think that the Council was amenable to that, but
we really want your input on this matter.
Ms. Huff said she heard the statement that the Mayor just made and then
asked, what is your question to her? She said she would like to have a delay of
one-week and she will respond to you on next Tuesday.
Mayor Poydasheff said one of the concerns that were expressed by the
Council was the fact that Mr. Kamensky had tried to contract the office
numerous times and no one would sit down and listen. He also attempted to
tender checks and no one would accept them. He said a letter was also sent
stating that if they didn?t pay the delinquent taxes, the property would be
foreclosed. He said since early December, they attempted to contact the Tax
Commissioner?s office, to no avail. He said these were the remarks stated and
that the Council expressed some concerns.
Councilor Davis then asked Mr. Kamensky, if he and his client would be
willing to wait one week, but the concern is that they would suffer penalty
based on this delinquent tax notice and said he was trying to get someone to
answer his question, in that within that one week, are they going to suffer
these penalties.
Ms. Huff said they would not incur additional penalties or interest by
waiting one week. She said to the other statements that have been made, this is
her first time hearing of what you are saying and some of the statements that
have been made and this is why she would like to wait one week, to go back and
review those statements that have been made here today in order to be able to
properly respond to each of those. She said she heard some inadequate
statements and she would like to address each one of those statements
individually. She said at that time, she can also give you a response as to
what her recommendation would be and had she been given ample time to do that
in the notification, you would have it here this morning.
After continued discussion on this matter, Councilor Suber then withdrew
his motion to handle this matter today.
The question was then called on Councilor Henderson?s motion for a
one-week delay, which carried unanimously by those nine members of Council
present for this meeting.
*** *** ***
With there being no other business to come before the Council, Mayor Pro
Tem Rodgers then made a motion to adjourn. Seconded by Councilor McDaniel and
carried unanimously by those nine members of Council present for this meeting,
with the time being 11:58 a.m.
Tiny B. Washington, CMC
Clerk of Council
The Council of Columbus, Georgia
Attachments
No attachments for this document.