Columbus, Georgia

Georgia's First Consolidated Government

Post Office Box 1340
Columbus, Georgia, 31902-1340
(706) 653-4013
fax (706) 653-4016

Council Members

MINUTES

COUNCIL OF COLUMBUS, GEORGIA

REGULAR SESSION

NOVEMBER 20, 2007





The regular weekly meeting of the Council of Columbus, Georgia was called to

order at 9:05 A.M., Tuesday, November 20, 2007, on the Plaza Level of the

Government Center, Columbus, Georgia. Honorable W.J. Wetherington, Mayor,

presiding.



*** *** ***



PRESENT: Present other that Mayor Wetherington were Councilors, Wayne Anthony,

Glenn Davis, Julius H. Hunter, Jr., Charles E. McDaniel, Jr., and Evelyn

Woodson. City Manager Isaiah Hugley, City Attorney Clifton Fay, Assistant

Attorney Jamie Deloach, Clerk of Council Tiny B. Washington and Deputy Clerk of

Council Sandra Davis were also present. Councilors R. Gary Allen, Mike Baker,

Jerry ?Pops? Barnes, and Berry H. Henderson took their seats at 9:07 A.M.

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

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

ABSENT: Councilor Evelyn Turner Pugh was absent

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

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

INVOCATION: Offered by Pastor Earl Rawlings of Crystal Valley Baptist Church.

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

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

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Led by students from Britt David Magnet Academy - 3rd and

5th grades.

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

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

MAYOR'S AGENDA:

THE FOLLOWNIG TWO RESOLUTIONS WERE SUBMITTED AND READ IN THEIR ENTIRETY

AND ADOPTED BY THE CONCL AND THEN PRESENTED TO THOSE NAMED IN THE

RESOLUTIONS:______________________________________________



A Resolution (497-07) - Commending and congratulating Mr. Bob Huff for

being named the Georgia Nursing Home Association Volunteer of the Year.



Councilor Davis went into some details about the work that Mr. Huff was

doing and continues to do. Councilor Davis expressed how moved he was after

reading an article about Mr. Huff, a very humble individual and a true leader

who demonstrates the meaning of giving back to the community - deserving and

worthy of this recognition. Councilor Davis moved the adoption of the

resolution. Seconded by Councilor Henderson and carried unanimously by those

six members of Council present at the time, with Councilor Allen, Councilor

Barnes and Mayor Pro Tem Turner Pugh being absent for this vote.

*** *** ***



A Resolution (498-07) - Commending and congratulating members of the

Columbus High School Lady Blue Devils Volleyball Team upon their victory in the

Class AAA State Championship Tournament. Councilor Henderson called upon the

Lady Blue Devils Volleyball team to step forward to be recognized and provided

some details about the team.



Councilor Henderson stated his appreciation and opportunity to recognize

these ladies today. Councilor Henderson has followed the team who has only been

playing volleyball for the past three or four years. The Lady Blue Devils has

come a long way and had to overcome obstacles some of the other club teams do

not have to face - mainly access to facilities, coaches, and other resources

that limit their ability to get together during off season (for practice).

Despite this, the Lady Blue Devils preserver by demonstrating true team spirit

in wining their Class AAA State Championship.



Last year the Lady Blue Devil made it to the Final Four.

During this time, Councilor Henderson also called for a resolution to honor

Donna Fleming (Coach of the Lady Blue Devils) on being named Georgia?s Coach of

the Year.



Upon reading the resolution, Councilor Henderson asked each of the young

ladies representing the Lady Blue Devils Volleyball Team to raise their hand so

they can be recognized as he read their names. Columbus is proud of the Lady

Blue Devils.

Councilor Henderson moved the adoption of the resolution. Seconded by Councilor

Allen and carried unanimously by those nine members of Council present at the

time, with Mayor Pro Tem Turner Pugh being absent for this vote.



When asked to make a comment, the coach of the Lady Blue Devils (Coach

Fleming) thanked the Council for having the team here today and for recognizing

these amazing ladies in this special way.

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

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

PUBLIC HEARING: Columbus Water Works? Rate Increase Presentation.



Mr. Emory Blount (Senior VP of Finance/Employee Customer Service Division)

addressed the Council, introduced himself and other representatives attending

this meeting:

Bob Tante - Executive VP

Gwen Ruff - Deputy Director of Finance/Employee Customer Service

Banthia Hill - Manager of Accounting



This public hearing is regarding the possibility of 2008 rate increase and

five year projections that are in place. Mr. Blount provided a brief history of

previous financial planning, current events that led to why we are here today.

Mr. John Davis (Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc.) is also on hand and will

be part of this presentation.



History: He said in 1996 Columbus Water Works (CWW) completed CSO

project environment project mandated to many cities within the State of

Georgia. At a cost of $75 million, obtain $20 million grant - met the challenge

on completing this project on time (1996) - The only city in the State of

Georgia that met and corrected its problems. Experienced $3.2 million loss of

revenue in 2001 and 2002 as a result of closing textile factories including the

Columbus Carpet Mill, (2007) $1 million loss revenue by the unfortunate closing

of Swift Manufacturing. During this period of time CWW spent $15 million from

reserves in the past 10 years to meet various needs and to maintain the proper

service Columbus, GA needs. CWW has also developed and implemented a

comprehensive five-year financial plan for 2003 through 2007 that included a

10-year capital improvement program. Contracted with Fort Benning to provide

water and sewer service in October 2004 - A good partnership for both Columbus

and Fort Benning.



Mr. Blount said this brings us (CWW) to why we are here today to discuss

proposed financial planning for 2008 through 2012 and also to advise you

(council) that we are working on a master plan for BRAC and to also advise you

that Columbus citizens will not be paying for any of BRAC improvements. This is

where we stand with the growth of Fort Benning.



Rates: The Columbus Water Works (CWW) presented a graph showing the wage

at a rate of 20CCF=20 hundred cubic feet=15,000 gallons. Columbus rate is

excluding CSO charge (this data was collected April 2007) the third least

expensive county (Others being Talbot and Harris counties). The two other

counties with cheaper rates do not provide sanitary service. Columbus provides

both water service and sanitary service. CWW is doing fairly well with charges

for service.



Staffing and Cost:

1997 - 1998 250 employees

2007 - 2008 221 employees

Staff reduction of 12%

Audited expenses

1996 was base year when CSO problem was completed; went seven years

without any rate increases.

1996 - 1997 Operating Expenses

$12,520,892

2006 - 2007 Operating Expenses

$23,448,871

Eleven (11) year difference

$10,927,979

Increase per

year $993,453

Annual average rate increase 7.9%



The rate increase reflected here is a bit high, but due to 9/11/2001

tragedy, security has become most important to our citizens. Therefore, there

was a 2% increase in security cost on program being developed for homeland

security to protect facilities that treat sewage and produces water. The

previous five-year program had an attachment of a 10-year Capital Improvement

Program (CIP) .The status of that program is as follows:



Mr. Blount said after five years, we have funded 69 projects at a cost of

$120 million - 18 projects were un-funded - which we proposed to fund in 2011

with Bonds totaling $40 million. At the time the CIP will be completed with a

total of 87 projects at a cost of $160 million.

Rate Changes for Projected (next/new) Five Year Plan:

FY2008 2009

2010 2011 2012

Proposed Plan 3.9% 4.0%

3.9% 3.9% 3.8%

Recommended 3.88%

FY 2008 is currently at 3.9% - after some analyst and other studies, the

recommended rate is 3.88%.



At this point during the presentation, Mr. Blount reintroduced Mr. John

Davis who will provide more details about rate projections and rate policies

for the next five years.



Mr. John Davis (Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc.)

Mr. Davis stated that he is here to talk about the financial plan for the

upcoming five years. The two main issues are:

Five-year Financial Plan/Projects

Rate increases needed to fulfill our financial plan in 2008.

Our goal in developing this financial plan was to have a new set of five-year

rate projections that priorities efficiency and system sustainability through

the year 2012 for CWW.



Mr. Davis showed a graph during his presentation ?Deficit without Rate

Increase?. The graph showed a projection of revenue required for CWW and

revenue under existing rates. According to Mr. Davis, there is a deficit

beginning in 2008 that the CWW will have to address. The way the CWW intend to

address this deficit through the financial plan is through a combination of use

of financial reserves and rate increases - that are being laid out here today.

The cumulative deficit over the five-year period is approximately $17.3

million. Mr. Davis further states the following are the reasons that are

driving the need for rate increase:

Inflationary increases in costs - costs continue to rise both for citizens and

the Columbus Water Works as they try to perform their duties and provide

service.

Funding of Capital Program:

- Infrastructure Renewal

- Regulatory Requirements

- System Expansion







Debt service coverage requirements - when a government entity borrows money,

they not only have to provide the debt service that pays back (that money) but

they also have to provide an excess of the debt service that proves that they

are capable of borrowing that money. The excess money can then be use to fund

the capital program.



Rate Increase Projections: Based on the feedback from the CWW Board and

discussions from last year, Mr. Davis said we have proposed a flat set of

increases that are approximately 3.9% per year over the next five years -

beginning in 2008. Would like to point out at this time that 3.9% is actually a

little bit lower than the Nationwide average increase of approximately 4% per

year according to the American Water Works in a 1996 survey. Specific rates we

are recommending will not be effective until January 1, 2008.

Water base charges for different meter sizes.

i.e. Current Minimum Charge ($3.26) Projected Minimum Charge ($3.37)

this is the base charge for most residential customers.

Water Volume Charges (most residential customers)

Non-Industrial Current Rate

Proposed Rate

0-15 CCF

$1.16 $1.20

over 15 CCF

$1.25 $1.29



In addition to water, CWW also have wastewater charges and CSO (combine Sewer

Overflow) charges.

Current Base Charge ($1.94) Proposed Base Charge

($2.02)



Volume charge that most customers will see:

Current Proposed

$2.32 $2.42

Customers are also subject to CSO charge - current charge ($4.94); Proposed

Charge ($5.06). Base on the rate themselves, it will manifest into a typical

bill for residential customers as such:



5 CCF (low user) 10 CCF (average user) 20

CCF (high user)

2007 $25.06

$42.46 $68.59

2008 $26.01

$44.11 $71.20



Even with the projected rate increase, Columbus position among its peer

utilities would not go up - would still remain the lowest cost provider of both

water and sewer service.



Observation and Conclusions:

2008 rate increases are necessary to continue the capital program and address

projected deficits.

Projected rate increases are below the national average for water and sewer

rates.

Projected customer bills continue to compare favorably with other similar

communities in the region.

An ?affordability program? is in place to assist low-income customers with

water and sewer bills.

Lost revenue due to prolonged drought restrictions could necessitate additional

rate adjustments.



Questions and Feedback:



Questions from Councilor Davis and Feedback from CWW representative:

Councilor Davis stated that he would have liked the opportunity to have a

dialogue in the form of a work session before this public hearing....

nevertheless, a five-year plan is up and now this is a new five-year plan rate

increase - the reasons for increase would be loss of water usage due to drought

and capital improvements? Mr. Davis informed Councilor Davis that it?s a

combination of a few reasons. There has been some adjustment to historical

water use by large users and adjustments that all customers have made with

regards to the drought restrictions and cost, while controlled, continue to

increase due to inflation. In addition, there is also maintenance of the

capital program and the ability to fund that.

Councilor Davis asked - has the last five-year plan accomplish its objective?

(Response) Yes. As stated in the history of the CWW previous financial planning

and events that happen to this point indicated that the next (other) five-year

plan had attached to it a ten-year capital improvement program (response by Mr.

John Davis, CWW Consultant).



Councilor Davis asked - has the expansion in service (lines) taken into

consideration this usage - would CWW pass on the majority of the cost as it

relates to this increase? (Response) A connection to outside counties had to

come to City Council for approval. When this happens, it will be stated in

presentations where those costs are coming from. In addition, it has been the

policy of the Columbus Water Board (with Council approval) that those counties

pay from the construction and installation up to the county line and also pay

greater rates than we charge our citizens. Citizens do not pay for those

improvements - those are passed on. The expansion and construction, taking

place (now and in the future) on Fort Benning is completely funded by the

Federal Government (response by Mr. Emory Blount, CWW)



Councilor Davis asked - with all the growth and talk about water loss and

usage, there has also been a tremendous growth in Columbus, wouldn?t that help

in offsetting some of the costs? (Response) The Impact of BRAC (2010-2012 time

frame) would be towards the end of this five-year plan and we would need to be

in a position to finish up this capital program and have infrastructure ready -

from that point on - that growth will have an impact and citizens would see the

change in trend of what the Water Board is having to do about asking for water

rates (response by Mr. Emory Blount, CWW).



Councilor Davis asked - how does that relate to what?s being collected

today and then all of a sudden we?re having this massive growth, selling water,

and collecting revenue. Would you (CWW) then go back and give the citizens a

credit or reduce water rate? (Response) The Water Board would look at it and

any excess money that had no needs and Board could not justify keeping it - I

believe they (Water Board) would take the necessary action. We had to make the

projection on the demand on water each year on how much we were going to grow

in sale, factoring in increase of growth in number in the new five-year plan

(response by Mr. Emory Blount, CWW).



Mr. Emory Blount further states: There is a projection of growth going

forward. I?d like to point out also that the plan is revisited every year,

projections are refined going forward and at that time, should growth

materialized in excess of what?s been projected, there is an opportunity for

reduction in rate.



Question from Councilor Anthony and Feedback from CWW representative.

Councilor Anthony asked - You are here at our request to provide us an update

is that correct? (Response) Absolutely. It is an opportunity for us (CWW) to

talk with the public and discuss as well as to advise Council as to what the

actions of the Water Board are and have a relationship here so if anything

that?s questionable or need further clarification we?re going to do that

(Response by Mr. Emory Blount, CWW).



Councilor Anthony states - I understand that based on that slide show

presentation (and its been consistent for several years) that we (Columbus, GA)

are the lowest of 12 comparable communities in our region is that correct?

(Response) That is correct (Mr. Emory Blount, CWW).



Councilor Anthony asked - what kind of capacity do we have for growth in

case (both) within the county and other counties wanting access? (Response) Yes

we do and Mr. Tante can also attest to the fact that we have a 90million gallon

capacity output at our plant and our reduction sustain 10% of what we used last

winter which is less than 27 million. CWW prepares for a peak day, not what the

average day is. Our peak day has been about 51 million gallons so we have

growth there for up towards the 90 million gallon mark per day (Response by Mr.

Emory Blount, CWW).



Councilor Anthony states - I want to commend the Columbus Water Works, the

Board, and staff for its efforts on our behalf and the other communities along

the Chattahoochee River on the controversial debate that has been going on for

over 20 years. Thank you for continuing to work on that. Mr. Emory Blount

responded: getting back to growth and plant capacity. The Federal Government is

in negotiations to re-establish another plant on Fort Benning that draws out of

the Chattahoochee River - so it would not involve expanding our North Columbus

plant but we are in the process of establishing a water facility on Fort

Benning (Response by Mr. Emory Blount, CWW).



Councilor Anthony asked - for those persons having trouble paying their

bill (low income) during a given period of time, do you (CWW) have some

assistance available? (Response) What we do is piggyback on the city plan. If

someone goes to citizen services and applies for the 350 low-income, they send

it up, since we bill the garbage fee for the city, we automatically give the

citizen the same 31/2 hours discount. Currently there are 916 citizens in our

community that are on that low-income exemption (response by Mr. Emory Blount,

CWW).



Councilor Anthony asked - is there a minimum charge that a person with a

meter who uses very little water? (Response) Yes. Base on meter size, the

minimum a customer is charged is $3.26 (current charge) or $3.37 (projected

minimum charge). Rates are effective January 1, 2008 - that is with bills rated

- what this means is that for water used November and December this year (2007)

we bill on a 60 day cycle - therefore water bill in January 2008, will be for

usage in Nov/Dec 2007. This has been in practice for the past four or five

years.



Questions from Councilor Woodson and Feedback From CWW Representative:

Councilor Woodson asked - where did you say the new plant is going to be

located? (Response) On Fort Benning at the existing plant or at another

location on the installation- looking at other sites as possibility (response

by Mr. Emory Blount, CWW).



Councilor Woodson asked - is that going to stay on Fort Benning property

or will it be off on South Lumpkin Road? (Response) We (CWW) have no plans to

take it off-post (Mr. Emory Blount, CWW).



Councilor Woodson asked - could someone explain to me how the charges are

accumulated? Is it a percentage or a dollar rate for water waste and CSO

because it seems like it?s always higher than my water bill? (Response) There

is a cost of service done annually to update the financial plan. It allocates

them between service for water, water waste, and CSO. And what we?ve (CWW) seen

with the cost structure of the CWW is that the cost allocated for wastewater

tends to go up at a higher rate than the cost allocated for water. The reasons

for this is regulatory in nature by the regulations impose by the state for the

level of treatment that is required to discharged. Therefore, that wastewater

rates go up a little more, the water rate go up a little less and the average

for a typical customer is 3.9% increase on their monthly bill (response by Mr.

John Davis, CWW Consultant).



Councilor Woodson asked - if I understand you correctly, the reason its

higher than the water bill is due to the regulatory fees you receive for

it-because that?s what I understand and would like clarification on that?

(Response) In addition to all the pressure increases you have for water and

wastewater, inflationary cost are subject to both capital program to some

extent and wastewater additionally has pressure of regulatory requirements that

general water do not have. That is why waster water cost goes up faster than

water cost does (response by Mr. John Davis, CWW Consultant).



Councilor Woodson asked - what you are telling me is that $4.94 that

citizens pay now has to do with CSO, treatment, and other things done to

maintain it in addition to regulatory fees? (Response) Yes (Mr. John Davis, CWW

Consultant).



Councilor Woodson asked - how is the $4.94 CSO charge calculated?

(Response) The $4.94 CSO charge is calculated on per account basis so once

we?ve taken the cost, cash needs and allocated them to Combine Sewer Overflow

(CSO) we then divide by the number of accounts - and that is how the CSO charge

is calculated. Storm sewers and sanitary sewers are combined and the reason

that charge on per account basis is because it is not base on flow. Cost is

driven by the amount of rain and the amount of storm water that gets in the

combine system (response by Mr. John Davis, CWW Consultant).



Councilor Woodson asked - so that charge is not base on the amount of

water I use but rather by the weather and the number of people who receive

water from the CWW? (Response) Correct (Mr. John Davis, CWW Consultant).



Councilor Woodson asked - customers needed help in clarification on a

matter. With the given drought, why has customers? bills continue to increase?

When customers? contacted customer service, they were informed that if someone

was to come out and take a look at the problem, it would cost the customer

$35.00 to $49.00? Why is this so? (Response) The CWW policy is to serve the

customer. If a customer bill has increased and the customer suspects a leak or

incorrect meter readings, CWW will send a service technician to the customer

address, check the meter for misread or leaks - there is no charge to the

customer for this service. If there is water around the meter, the service

technician will perform a check to determine whether the leak is on the

customer side or the public right-of-way - again, there is not charge for this

service. If it is determined that the leak is on the customer side of the

property - any cost for repairs is the responsibility of the customer. A leak

on the right-of-way will be repaired by CWW at no cost to the customer. If the

service technician determines that the meter is broken or malfunctioning, there

is no charge to the customer. If a customer is unfortunate to have a leak on

private property and a repair bill is submitted to CWW Customer Service Center,

CWW will adjust their bill using (CWW Board Approved) leak policy. This policy

is in place and is used by many customers throughout the system (response by

Mr. Emory Blount, CWW).



Questions form Councilor Baker and Feedback from CWW Representative:

Councilor Baker asked - the presentation states the date that the new rates go

into effect, is that Calendar Year. In other words, do you operate in calendar

year? (Response) Rate study is done and implemented during the wintertime. CWW

operate on the same fiscal year as the city. The rate effect beginning in

January 2008 is for the last part of the current (2007) fiscal year (response

by Mr. John Davis, CWW Consultant).



Councilor Baker asked - it is my understanding that we do some business

with Phenix City, AL - if this is so, will rate increase apply there as well?

(Response) The CWW conducts emergency (only) business with Phenix City.

However, rate increases apply to all our contracts except for Fort Benning

(response by Mr. Emory Blount, CWW).



Councilor Baker asked - what if the community or people use the

conservation program to cut back on water usages. Is it possible to conserve

ones? way into a rate increase? (Response) You (citizens) can be forced into

conservation b the state and it will put a push on CWW to continue to operate

base on fix charges. CWW have $199 million water debt that has to be paid. If

cost goes down, CWW would use reserve funds and hope that the situation will

improve. Predominantly, costs are fix but revenue is variable (response by Mr.

Blount, CWW).



After more than forty-five minutes of discussion on the proposed water

rate increase, Columbus Water Works officials and the consultant responded to

further questions of Mayor Wetherington and members of the Council. Mr. Paul

Olson and Mr. Walter Gould also came forward and address some of their concerns

with respect to the proposed rate increase. Some of their concerns were:

- Five-year plan is too much to ask of citizens and should be flexible.

- CWW should have to come before Council every year to for vote on percentage

rates.

- The total percentage CWW is requesting (2008 thru 2012) averages out to more

than 4% per year.

- Current water rates are continually high without the new projected rates.

- If new rates are passed, how much more will citizens have to pay especially

those who are living on fixed income?



With no further comments or questions regarding the rate increase from

Columbus Water Works, this concludes the hearing on Columbus Water Works.

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

***------------------------------MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETING: Minutes of the

August 28, 2007 Council Meeting of the Council of the Consolidated Government

of Columbus, Georgia were submitted. Councilor Henderson made a motion to

receive the minutes. Seconded by Councilor Woodson and carried unanimously by

those nine members of Council present at the time, with Mayor Pro Tem Turner

Pugh being absent.

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

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

CITY ATTORNEY'S AGENDA:



THE FOLLOWING THREE ORDINANCES WAS SUBMITTED AND EXPLAINED BY CITY

ATTORNEY FAY AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL:

______________________________________________



An Ordinance (07-75) - Amending the text to the Unified Development

Ordinance to permit school, vocational and non-academic, in the CRD (Central

Riverfront District), NC (Neighborhood Commercial), GC (General-Office), RO

(Residential-Office) and CO (Commercial-Office) zoning districts as a principal

use. (46-A-07 Hocut) Councilor McDaniel moved the adoption of the resolution.

Seconded by Councilor Allen and carried unanimously by those nine members of

Council present at the time, with Mayor Pro Tem Turner Pugh being absent for

this vote.



An Ordinance (07-76) - Rezoning property located at 1143 and 1145 27th

Street and 2701 Waverly Avenue from RMF1 (Residential Multi-Family 1) District

to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) District. (34-A-07 T.J. Real Estate, LLC) The

proposed use is retail. Councilor McDaniel moved the adoption of the

resolution. Seconded by Councilor Allen and carried unanimously by those nine

members of Council present at the time, with Mayor Pro Tem Turner Pugh being

absent for this vote.



An Ordinance (07-77) - Rezoning property located at 10119 Veterans Parkway

from RE1 (Residential Estate 1) District to GC (General Commercial)

District.(44-CA-07-Waddell) The proposed use is offices and self-storage.

Councilor McDaniel moved the adoption of the resolution. Seconded by Councilor

Allen and carried unanimously by those nine members of Council present at the

time, with Mayor Pro Tem Turner Pugh being absent for this vote.



*** *** ***



THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE WAS SUBMITTED AND EXPLAINED BY CITY ATTORNEY FAY

AND AFTER SEVERAL MINUTES OF DISCUSSION WAS DELAYED FOR TWO

WEEKS:_____________________________________________________



An Ordinance - Rezoning property located at 3705 Willis Road from SFR2

(Single Family Residential 2) District to RO (Residential-Office) District.

(45-CA-07 J.B. Chastain, MD)



Councilor Henderson said this is a very narrow piece of property and it

presents some challenges from an engineering standpoint. A single family

residence is just tot he South of this property and the original site-plan

showed that the building on the South side will overlook into the neighbor?s

backyard. Engineering and planning also asked to minimize curb cut on that

narrow street. Can the site-plan be flipped - putting the building on the

Northern side where they would look over the property into the two-story

apartment buildings?



At this point Councilor Henderson made a motion, which was seconded by

Councilor Hunter (and carried unanimously by those nine members of Council

present at the time, with Mayor Pro Tem Turner Pugh being absent for this vote)

for Dr. Chastain (who was present) to be heard but also informed the Council

that Dr. Chastain had indicated that difficulties in rotating the site-plan due

to a very large sewage pipe.



Dr. Chastain addressed the Council and stated - I went out there to see

what the situation was. The architect had a good reason for drawing the plan

the way he did. There is a large sewer 225 feet down on the property line. The

sewer is on Dr. Chastain property exiting from the adjacent apartment building.

The top of the sewer measures five feet and it would be very difficult to think

about having buildings on that side of the street.



Councilor Henderson said the Council has coy of the plan that were

provided by the owner of the apartment building North of Dr. Chastain property

- the plans do show where the sewage line comes in and it is about five feet on

Dr. Chastain?s property. The other apartment has worked out a way with the line

and connection. They have positioned the sewage covers between buildings to

minimize the impact on residents. Is it possible for Dr. Chastain to

reconfigure the building to where the sewage cover(s) is between the buildings

instead of in someone backyard?



Deputy City Manager Arrington said the engineering plans for the property

North of Dr. Chastain property - looking at the plans, there is a sanitary

sewer line running south between the Southern most apartments and there is a

10-foot easement on either side of the sewer line that terminates five feet

onto Dr. Chastain property.



Councilor Davis said he has no knowledge of conversations with residents

who live adjacent to this property but do understand what Councilor Henderson

is saying. However, if the property were to rotate to fit this particular plan,

the current neighbors may object to dumpsters being so close to their property.

In addition, there is also the issue of lights from motor vehicles entering the

parking lot. Councilor Davis suggests that Dr. Chastain work with the adjacent

building (owner) on a landscaping buffer scheme that would help in a few years

in alleviating some of the visual issue that may arise.



Dr. Chastain said he would take Councilor Davis? suggestions into

consideration.



Councilor Davis asked the City Manager for an update on one of the issues

residents expressed concerns about in regards to the conditions of the street

(Willis Road). (Response) After Council meeting last week, one of the staff

members went out (on that same day) to that location. The citizen complained

that there were 34 pothole but upon inspection of the street by both the staff

member and City Manager, found no such thing. There are however, numerous

utility holes that have been patched - in addition, that street is on the list

for local area road project list for 2008. There were no potholes identified.

Council was also informed last week that there were only three calls (in 2007)

for potholes - two of the calls (August 13, 2007) were request to put this very

street on the list for repair- the other pothole call was handled August 15,

2007 - this street is in need of resurfacing (response by City Manager Hugley).



Councilor Davis then asked if there is an opportunity for this street to

be paved?



City Manager Hugley said he cannot make that commitment to Council at this

time but it is on the list that goes to Department of Transportation and it is

our hope that this street is one that will be selected for re-pavement.



Councilor Woodson asked if there are fire hydrants in that area

appropriate for the area? City Manager Hugley said there is a standard and

process when applying for permits - Fire/EMS verify that standards are being

met in terms of fire hydrant. If that is not in place, building permits are not

going to be approved. There is a process in place that is followed and adhered

to very strictly.



After more than thirty minutes of discussion about Dr. Chastain?s

property, Mayor Wetherington called for a vote on the issue. Councilor Allen

made a motion to delay. Seconded by Councilor Woodson. With a vote of 7 (delay)

to 2 (Councilors Baker and Barnes to pass), with Mayor Pro Tem Turner Pugh

being absent, this issue was delayed two weeks.



*** *** ***



THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE WAS ALSO SUBMITTED AND EXPLAINED BY CITY ATTORNEY

FAY AND ADOPTED BY THE

COUNCIL:___________________________________________________



An Ordinance (07-78) - Providing for the demolition of ten structures

located at:

3419 Terminal Court (Willie B. Harris, owner)

2052 Schatulga Road (Vincent A. Jackson & Brenda F. Bloodshaw, owner)

2334 Huggins Street (KMG Homes, LLC, owner)

2821 Colorado Street (Nellie Mae Martin, owner)

800 Morris Road, Lots 112 &117 (Mercer W. Morris, owner)

2060 ? Mason Street (Nathan Shuler, owner)

1032 28th street (United Congregation Christian Church, owner)



Rev. Johnson was present for this meeting and addressed the Council in an

effort to save the building from demolition. He stated that he sent an email to

his Councilor (Davis) and also to Councilor McDaniel.



Rev. Johnson then read the email to and a letter (from another property

owner) in which he asked for time to continue to work on the structure until

January 1, 2008. He further stated that all materials for this phase of the

rebuilding has been donated and is asking for the opportunity to succeed or

fail as he knows where his extra help is coming from.



Councilor Davis said Rev. Johnson did contact him. This property has been

on the list for a short time, however, since demolition is at the City

Managers? discretion - if no progress is being made then Rev. Johnson is aware

that demolition will go forward as planned. He said based on Rev. Johnson?s

plan, he would like to know if the City Manager would grant him (Rev. Johnson)

his request.



City Manager Hugley said the staff informs him that the time schedule

provided by Rev. Johnson to complete all necessary work could not be met. He

said Deputy City Manager Arrington met with Rev. Johnson and his staff to

discuss the schedule.



Deputy City Manager Arrington confirmed his meeting with Rev. Johnson and

further stated that Rev. Johnson did provide an outline of his plan and was

very open about his schedule over the next few weeks. He said Rev. Johnson also

identified five working days (during the holidays), however, I expressed my

concern over him being able to complete the work and also the amount of money

being put into the structure and not completing the improvements necessary to

save the property from demolition.



Rev. Johnson said all the materials have been donated to complete this

project and make the building secure. He said our main objective is to secure

the building and in addition, some of the wood being removed is reusable.



City Manager Hugley said he has a lot of compassion for Rev. Johnson and

he wants to do the right thing, but it would not be his recommendation to take

this structure off the list.



Councilor Davis said it is not unusual for him to use discretion in these

matters but Rev. Johnson seems to have people willing to help and therefore, he

would ask for 60 days delay in this matter.



Rev. Johnson then presented some photographs showing some of the

improvements he has done to the structure. One such photograph showed where the

back porch of the building has been removed. At this time Ms. Wiggins (Building

Inspection) objected stating that Rev. Johnson is not allowed to demolished the

back porch without approval from the Historic and Architectural Review Board.

In addition, due to water damage, Rev. Johnson will have to replace the entire

system, which will be a substantial cost, and work, which will not be completed

in the time Rev. Johnson is asking for (January 1, 2008).



After 35 minutes of further discussion about obtaining permits, the

necessary and mandatory repairs that must be done to this structure, and the

amount of money that Rev. Johnson stand to lose, Council voted 5 to 4

(Councilors Baker, Mc Daniel, Davis, Hunter) for this structure to remain on

the demolition list.



*** *** ***



708 Lawyers Lane (Catha Williams, owner)



Mr. Williams was present for this meeting and in addressing the Council

stated that he was not aware of the 1st reading, but was informed of the 2nd

reading; which is why he is here today. Mr. Williams further stated that he has

since done some work on the house but was not aware that all the work had to be

completed and asked why was his property still on the demolition list?



Ms. Wiggins (Building Inspection) said this property was on the demolition

list for June 2007. She said Mr. Williams bought this property from Betty

Campbell to save it from demolition - he has since bought a building permit -

done very little work with poor workmanship. Mr. Williams has not called for

any inspections and no inspection has been made except for the times an

inspector went there to check for work. In addition, Mr. Williams was notified

on two separate occasions about this issue. The 1st notice was returned

unclaimed. The second notice was hand delivered to his home. He opened it, saw

what it was, handed it back and refuse to sign for it. This was on July 31,

2007.



With no further questions or objections, and no motion, this item will

stay on the demolition list.



*** *** ***



2107 Schatulga Road (Ricky Williams, owner)



City Attorney Fay called for a motion on the ordinance. Councilor Allen

made a motion to adopt the ordinance. Seconded by Councilor Anthony and carried

unanimously by those nine members of Council present at the time, with Mayor

Pro Tem Turner Pugh being absent for this vote.



*** *** ***



THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE WAS ALSO SUBMITTED AND EXPLAINED BY CITY ATTORNEY

FAY AND INTRODUCED ON FIRST

READING:_____________________________________________



An Ordinance ? Rezoning property located at 1939 and 1943 Wynnton Road are

proposed for rezoning from RO (Residential-Office) District to GC (General

Commercial) District. (48-A-07 Gibson)



City Attorney Fay said this item would be voted on at the Consent Agenda

next week.

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

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

PUBLIC AGENDA:



THERE WAS NO ONE LISTED ON TODAY?S PUBLIC AGENDA.



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

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

CITY MANAGERS? AGENDA:



THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS WERE SUBMITTED AND EXPLAINED BY CITY MANAGER

HUGLEY AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL:___________________________________________



A Resolution (499-07) - Authorizing a permanent encroachment at 1032

Broadway for the construction of a balcony. Councilor Mc Daniel made a motion

to approve the resolution. Seconded by Councilor Allen and carried unanimously

by those nine members of Council present, with Mayor Pro Tem Turner Pugh being

absent for this vote.



A Resolution (500-07) - Authorizing the execution of a ?Certificate of

Ownership and Agreement? with the Georgia Department of Transportation for a

Gateway at Intersection 1 of I-185 (Victory Drive/I-185) and Supplemental

Resurfacing Project. Councilor Mc Daniel made a motion to approve the

resolution. Seconded by Councilor Allen and carried unanimously by those nine

members present of Council present, with Mayor Pro Tem Pugh Turner being absent

for this vote.



*** *** ***



THE FOLLOWING THREE PURCHASING RESOLUTIONS WERE ALSO SUBMITTED AND

EXPLAINED BY CITY MANAGER HUGLEY AND ADOPTED BY THE PURSUANT TO THE ADOPTION OF

A SINGLE MOTION MADE BY COUNCILOR MC DANIEL AND SECONDED BY COUNCILOR

HENDERSON, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE EIGHT MEMBERS OF COUNCIL PRESENT

AT THE TIME, WITH MAYOR PRO TEM BEING ABSENT AND COUNCILOR WOODSON BEING ABSENT

FOR VOTE.__________________________________________________



A Resolution (501-07) Authorizing the approval of the annual contract for

Professional Surveying Services for the Finance Department, Revenue Division,

with Moon, Meeks, Mason & Vinson, Inc., on an ?as needed basis?.



A Resolution (502-07) Authorizing the execution of Change Order No. 9

with Batson Cook Construction, for additional construction and FF&E

requirements, in the amount of $2,645,865.00. Resolution No. 72-03, dated

February 11, 2003, authorized the execution of the contract with Batson Cook

Construction.









A Resolution (503-07) Authorizing payment to Media Products of

Atlanta, in the amount of $10,877.00, for the emergency purchase of a

replacement playback system for CCGTV. The playback system is used to broadcast

recorded programs on CCGTV. The current system is over five years old and has

begun to malfunction, and parts to repair the equipment are obsolete due to its

age. The malfunctioning equipment is causing programs to play in fast motion,

stall or not play at all. CCGTV provides valuable information to the citizens

of Columbus. Therefore, the City Manager authorized the emergency purchase of

a replacement playback system.

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

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

CLERK OF COUNCIL?S AGENDA:



THE FOLLOWING FIVE RESOLUTIONS WERE SUBMITTED BY CLERK OF COUNCIL

WASHINGTON AND APPROVED BY THE

COUNCIL:______________________________________________



A Resolution (504-07) ? Canceling the December 25, 2007 and January 1,

2008 Council Meetings. Councilor Mc Daniel made a motion to approve the

resolution. Seconded by Councilor Allen and carried unanimously by those nine

members present of Council present, with Mayor Pro Tem Pugh Turner being absent

for this vote.



A Resolution (505-07) ? Approving the statute to honor the fallen Soldiers

to be located at the Government Center. Councilor Mc Daniel made a motion to

approve the resolution. Seconded by Councilor Allen and carried unanimously by

those nine members present of Council present, with Mayor Pro Tem Pugh Turner

being absent for this vote.



A Resolution (506-07) ? Approving the naming of the new Skateboard Park in

honor of Jonathan Hatcher. Councilor Mc Daniel made a motion to approve the

resolution. Seconded by Councilor Allen and carried unanimously by those nine

members present of Council present, with Mayor Pro Tem Pugh Turner being absent

for this vote.



The Resolution honoring Mr. Jonathan Hatcher was read into record by

Councilor Allen who stated that he felt privileged to do so. Upon reading the

Resolution, City Manager Hugley commented that he had the fortunate opportunity

to work with Mr. Jonathan Hatcher for whom he had the utmost respect. It was

unusual for us that a person at the 10th grade level be considered for

President of the Youth Advisory Council - Jonathan Hatcher did that. City

Manager Hugley further stated that the Presidents of the Youth Advisory Council

are usually seniors (high school) - Jonathan was not a senior but was very

efficient and effective in this position. I (City Manager Hugley) am proud of

his work. He is well deserving of this recognition. City Manager Hugley further

expressed thanks to the parents of Jonathan Hatcher (who were present for the

reading and acceptance of the resolution) for allowing him to work for this

government and the school district.

Councilor Woodson - I would like to see a plaque notarizing Jonathan as

President of Youth Advisory Council mounted in a location where others can see

and serve as motivation as for other youths.



Councilor Anthony said he would like to see the photographs of Youth

Advisory Council be published in the new papers showing the members, the work

they have done and what they are continuing to do. This can further serve as a

positive focus to our youths and in the communities.



A Resolution (507-07) ? Approving and receiving the report of the Finance

Director of those alcoholic beverage licenses hat were approved and/or denied

during the month of October. Councilor Allen made a motion to approve the

resolution. Seconded by Councilor Mc Daniel and carried unanimously by those

nine members present of Council present, with Mayor Pro Tem Pugh Turner being

absent for this vote.



A Resolution (508-07) ? Authorizing a variance request to waive the

minimum street frontage requirements in order to plant a landlocked lot at 7700

and 7746 Cooper Creek Road. Councilor Allen made a motion to approve the

resolution. Seconded by Councilor Mc Daniel and carried unanimously by those

nine members present of Council present, with Mayor Pro Tem Pugh Turner being

absent for this vote.



*** *** ***

















MINUTES OF THE FOLLOWING BOARDS WERE SUBMITTED BY CLERK OF COUNCIL

WASHINGTON AND OFFICIALLY APPROVED BY THE

COUNCIL:_______________________________



Board of Honor, November 15, 2007.

Convention & Trade Center Authority, September 25, 2007.

Planning Advisory Commission, February 7, 2007.

Planning Advisory Commission, February 21, 2007.

Planning Advisory Commission, March 7, 2007.

Uptown Facade Board, October 15, 2007.



Councilor Allen made a motion to receive the minutes. Seconded by Councilor

Mc Daniel and carried unanimously by those nine members of Council present at

the time, with Mayor Pro Tem being absent for this vote.



*** *** ***



BOARD APPOINTMENTS:



BOARD OF HONOR:



Clerk of Council Washington pointed out that Mr. Milton Hirsch is

eligible to succeed him-self. Councilor Allen then made a motion to approve

the appointment. Seconded by Councilor Mc Daniel and carried unanimously by

those nine members present of Council present, with Mayor Pro Tem Pugh Turner

being absent for this vote.



*** *** ***



CONVENTION AND TRADE CENTER AUTHORITY:



Clerk of Council Washington pointed out that Mr. James Cantrell and Mr.

Frank Etheridge are both eligible to succeed themselves for another term of

office.



Mayor Wetherington then nominated Mr. James F. Smith to succeed

Mr. Cantrell and Mr. Allen Woodall to succeed Mr. Etheridge. Councilor Allen

made a motion to approve the appointment. Seconded by Councilor Henderson and

carried unanimously by those nine members present of Council present, with

Mayor Pro Tem Pugh Turner being absent for this vote.



*** *** ***



FAMILY & CHILDREN?S SERVICES BOARD:



Clerk of Council Washington pointed out that we have two nominees for

someone to succeed Ms. Joann Chester. Ms. Cynthia Saxton, who is Mayor Pro Tem

Pugh?s nominee and Ms. Susan Wilson, who is Councilor Davis? nominee. She said

due to Mayor Pro Tem Turner Pugh being absent, she would like to delay this

matter for one week.



*** *** ***



HOSPITAL AUTHORITY OF COLUMBUS:



Clerk of Council Washington said Mr. Tracy Sayers and Ms. Nancy Rinn are

both eligible to succeed themselves, but said we need two additional nominees

from which the Authority will select someone to succeed them. She asked if

there were any nominations, but there were none. She said she would bring this

item back in two weeks.



*** ***

***



MEDICAL CENTER HOSPITAL AUTHORITY:



Clerk of Council Washington pointed out that Mr. Ken Cooks and Dr. Kenneth

Goldman cannot succeed themselves. Councilor Davis then nominated Mr. Robert

George for Mr. Cooks seat.



Councilor Barnes nominated Mr. David Moore for Mr. Cooks seat.

Councilor Henderson nominated Dr. Michael Gorman for Dr. Goldman seat.



*** *** ***











PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMISSION:



Mr. James Wilson - eligible to succeed him-self.



Clerk of Council Washington stated she tried to make contact, but has not

spoken with Mr. Wilson to determine whether or not he would like to continue to

serve on this board.



She also pointed out that Ms. Cheryl Gallatin is no longer a resident of

Muscogee County and Councilor Anthony is currently working on a placement for

this seat.

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

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



OTHER COMMENTS AND REQUESTS FROM COUNCIL:



Councilor Barnes said he would like to say thank you to Mayor Wetherington

for his attendance at the Annual African event and other ethnic events. He said

would also like to express his appreciation and thank you on behalf of his wife

for the award she received for her work on the Theater Board. He said Mayor Pro

Tem Pugh was also honored at this event.



*** *** ***



GOD BLESS FT. BENNING:



Councilor Henderson said he would like to call for a resolution for Dr.

Tidwell for the outstanding job he is doing in the community. He also called

for a resolution for the gentleman (will provide name later) who collects

?slightly loved? stuff animals for Iraqi children. He said he has collected and

shipped over 30,000 (the goal is 100,000) - working with Fort Benning personnel

and is deserving of recognition. In addition, he said the Fire Chief has

donated his stations as drop-off points for collecting stuff animals.



Councilor Davis said he and his wife had a chance to go down to the ?God

Bless Fort Benning? event to expressed appreciation and support for our

Soldiers. He said we love Fort Benning and the Soldiers for all they do for us.







Mayor Wetherington said there was a great turnout of civilians and

military personnel at God Bless Fort Benning event. He said he would like to

commend Public Safety personnel for everything they have done. He said ninety

years ago a group of Columbus citizens went before Congress and asked for a

military base in Columbus. He said he couldn?t image what Columbus would be

without Fort Benning. He said our relationship with Fort Benning is stronger

with Major Wojdakowski, his wife, and command personnel.



Councilor Woodson said they were making dog tags that read ?God Bless Ft.

Benning? and children were able to share and enjoy themselves. She said the

most touching was when Dr. Tidwell gave his speech and Mrs. Tidwell asked

everyone to hug a Soldier. She said some Soldiers did not wait for you to go to

them - they came looking for their hugs. She said many of the Council members

went at different time this year but next year we should all go as a Council -

something to consider.



Councilor Anthony said he would like to send out accolades to the people

at Uptown, Public Safety, and Public Services. He said we should also have a

representative from Ft. Benning here at Council Meeting to publicly honor them

for the great things they are doing



City Manager Hugley said he received an email from the President and CEO

of Uptown praising Deputy City Manager Goodwin and the staff at Public Services

for their great work. He said the people working behind the scenes contributed

to ?God Bless Fort Benning? being a success.



*** *** ***



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

Henderson then made a motion to adjourn. Seconded by Councilor Allen and

carried unanimously by those eight members of Council present for this meeting

with the time being 12:00 noon.



*** *** ***





Tiny B. Washington, CMC

Clerk of Council

The Council of Columbus, Georgia





Attachments


No attachments for this document.

Back to List