TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
	MACON-BIBB COUNTY SALES TAX ROAD PROGRAM
	MAY 2, 2002
	4:07 P.M.
 
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
 
BOB FOUNTAIN
BILL CAUSEY
BRINK STOKES
KAREN McDUFFIE
BILL VAUGHN
BILL WIKLE
 
OTHERS PRESENT:
 
ED BROWN
BOB CLEVELAND
ISABEL DAVIS
ROBBY GIBBS
LINDA GOLPHIN
SUSAN HANBERRY
DORIS HENDLEY
JOHN HINMAN
LINDSAY HOLLIDAY
ELDRED HORLECK
LEE MARTIN
ARNETTA QUICK
ERIC QUICK
ALICE PATTERSON
JOE PATTERSON, JR.
MICHAEL RYAN
TERRIE SALTER
SHERRIE SAWYER
TOM SCHOLL
KEN SHEETS
ALAN THIESE
JIM THOMAS
DEBORAH TOUCHTON
JAMES TOUCHTON, JR.
ROBIN WEBB
REV. GREG WILLIAMS
 
REPORTED BY: PATRICIA C. USSERY, CCR B-1238

	CLAUDE JOINER REPORTING SERVICE, INC.
	410 AMERICAN FEDERAL BUILDING 
	P. O. BOX 94
	MACON, GEORGIA  31202-0094
	TELEPHONE: 478/742-6611 or 746-7804
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Could we call our May meeting to order for our TAC meeting for May 2002.  We have our April minutes before us.  Are there any corrections or deletions or additions to those minutes?  (No response).  If not, could I have a motion for approval of the minutes.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	So moved.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	I have a motion.  Could I have a second.
 
MR. WIKLE:	Second.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Discussion?  (No response).  All in favor, say, Aaye@.
 
UNISON:		AAye@. 
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Opposed?  (No response).  So carried.  All right.  Item 3, Community Comments.  There will be another opportunity under Item 8 in our agenda.  Is there anyone who would now like to address our group?  (No response).  Okay.  Moving right along to Item 4, our public meeting.  Steve Duval.  Steve will be talking about two meetings.  Steve?
 
MR. DUVAL:	Good afternoon everyone.  A couple of public meetings that we had, the first one being the meeting that we had concerning the South Downtown Connector.  That was held on April 18th at the Greater New Bethel Baptist Church.  And if I could call everybody’s attention to Tab 4A in your agenda packet.  This is a summary of that particular meeting.  
 
Let me just say, you know, this is a summary of the meeting, but one thing, I want to make a couple of other points there.  At that particular meeting, the Pastor had said that we could use the sanctuary of the church, and, you know, I thought it wasn’t necessary.  I thought we had enough room, ample space, in the basement of that church.  You know, hindsight is 20/20, and if I had it to do over again, we would have had that meeting in the sanctuary of that church to accommodate the number of people that we had.  I was probably expecting maybe 50 people at the most, and as you can see we had nearly a hundred.  I think we actually had over 100 people at that particular meeting.  So any problems that arose, you know, from that, it can be said we probably didn’t have enough space to accommodate everybody and that was a foul up at that meeting.
 
That being said, I think the meeting was attended well.  We tried to get the message out about the whole project as best we could.  I have contacted several of the people who are going to be personally affected by this particular project if it’s built as the concept drawing says right now, and that would be those people affected on the board that’s over in the corner.  And we’re trying to make personal contact with everybody that’s going to be affected like that.
 
Aside from this particular meeting, we had another meeting with the congregation at the Trinity CME Church on Liberty Street last night, and several of those people showed up from the church and they had concerns about the project as well.  And Mayor Ellis attended that meeting and he spoke about, you know, some of the people’s concerns, or addressed some of the people’s concerns that they might have about the project.  And, also, Mr. Peter Brown spoke about the Beall’s Hills projects that’s going on over in the neighborhood also to kind of let the people know, you know, what’s going to be going on in that area.  So we’re following up this particular meeting that we had on the 18th with subsequent meetings, and I’m meeting with people individually to bring them up to par on what’s happening on the project also.  If there are any questions -- 
 
At the church, they were concerned because the proposed project, Liberty Street is going to be a cul de sac instead of going into the new project, so they were concerned whether they were going to lose their church and what they should do as far as how this road would impact the church.  And we explained the current design, or the current concept to them, and they, it was well received.  It was well received.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Now, when we say the current concept, are we talking about Mr. Passano’s concept?
 
 		MR. DUVAL:	Yes.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	The one behind you, Bill.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Well, what is our next step?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Bill, I think, and what I’ve asked Steve and them to do, I think we should contact all the affected property owners, everybody.  And I think we ought to be able to visit with the Chairman, the Mayor and Council and Mr. Hart, whomever, in that district, and we need to get some direction from our elected officials where we need to go with this project.  I think we need to bring the full, what we believe to be a full report of the hearing and the fact that we met with everybody and explained the project and here’s what we found and we need some direction with the project.  Do you want us to go on with the project or don’t you.  We can pretty much lay it up there and see what happens.
 
MR. SCHOLL:	How was this meeting advertised?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	It was not.  It was, we were guests of the church.  We were invited by the church.  
 
MR. DUVAL:	Any other questions?
 
AUDIENCE:	  	 Even though that meeting was at the church, wasn’t all the peoples that are involved, shouldn’t they have been notified so that if they wanted to come to the church to that meeting could be there?
 
MR. DUVAL:	Well, actually what it was, they called us, the members of the Deacon Board called us and asked us would we come over and make a presentation to them, and that’s what we did, we accommodated them.  Anybody who wanted to come, of course, could come, but we didn’t advertise it.
 
AUDIENCE:	  	If you didn’t know anything about it, then how can you come?
 
MR. DUVAL:	Well, we were invited by the church, and if they had wanted to notify everybody, then that would have been fine.  But we just made a presentation to the members of the church.  And I think a few other folks who were members of the church and also live in the neighborhood, a couple of people were there, but we spoke mostly to the members of that particular church.  And we’re willing to come to anybody.  I mean if you call us and ask us to come and make a representation about this particular concept or whatever, we’re willing to do that at any time.
 
MR. SCHOLL:	But you won’t be able to describe this as a public meeting?
MR. DUVAL:	No, no.  I just said this was a follow-up from that particular meeting.  That’s all that was, right.
 
MR. MARTIN:	It sounds like that if approval comes in on the comment cards, then everything is okay, but if you get some dissension then you start going one on one to each of the affected individuals.  And that’s really, I mean this program has been going on for a long time and this is the first I’ve ever heard that you actually go to each individual whose home is going to be taken and they’re only hearing one side of the story.  They’re only hearing your side.  The reason for a public meeting is just that, so that everybody can be heard.  And it seems to me you circumvent the public process in doing it extrovertly.
 
MR. DUVAL:	Okay.  Well, let me just say this.  I’m in charge of public relations for the program.  Now, I took it upon myself to go to each individual house in that neighborhood and also tried to make a wide sweep of that entire neighborhood and invite everybody to that particular meeting.  There are people in this room today who were invited by me personally because I made a personal effort to do that, and I’m going to make every effort always to do that as much as I possibly can.  But it’s not like I’m trying to circumvent any public process.  I want everybody to be there.  And I think I had more people there than I expected this time.  I think I did my job well to get them there.  I just didn’t have an adequate enough public address system to address them once they got there, and I take responsibility for that.  But I’m not circumventing anything.  I’m trying to get the information out to the people.  And when we’re going to have public meetings, I want the public to be involved in it.  And anytime you invite us to come and make a presentation, we’re going to show up.  Thank you.  
 
AUDIENCE:		 Mr. Duval.
 
MR. DUVAL:	Yes, sir.
 
AUDIENCE:	  	 I see in today’s paper that Mr. Etheridge is quoted as saying I expect we’ll be hearing from a lot more people about this.  Are you all actively soliciting comment cards from people now that the public meeting two weeks ago has ended?  Are you actively soliciting other comment cards such as were disseminated at that meeting two weeks ago?
MR. DUVAL:	The comment cards themselves?
 
AUDIENCE:		 Yes.
 
MR. DUVAL:	What are you saying, are we --
 
AUDIENCE:	   	 Are you asking, for example, at the meeting last night or --
 
MR. DUVAL:	No.
 
AUDIENCE:	   	 -- in any other way are you asking people to fill out those cards?
 
MR. DUVAL:	No, sir, we’re not.
 
AUDIENCE:	  	 So you’re not going to receive anymore cards than what you’ve already received, 59?
 
MR. DUVAL:	Unless we have a public meeting.  If we have a public meeting, we’ll put out cards and we’ll get more cards.  Yes, ma’am.
 
MS. HANBERRY:	I’m Susan Hanberry.  Steve, I want to thank you for calling me personally about a meeting that was cancelled.  I think you do a good job.  However, the meeting that was held about the South Downtown Connector, some of the problems with it had nothing to do with you, and I don’t think you need to take responsibility for them.
 
Mr. Etheridge ended the meeting early.  Mr. Etheridge refused to answer questions that were written down on cards, and I have never seen that happen at a public meeting before.  I’ve never been to a public meeting where there wasn’t a needs and purpose statement passed out to the public, where there wasn’t a project description passed out to the public, and I think if we’re really going to call any of these things meetings, they need to be held in the proper way.  And that’s not your fault, Steve, and I appreciate your personal attention.  But there were a lot of people at that meeting, and I’m sure those people would like to have their questions answered by the people who were supposed to do that at that meeting.  There were many irregularities in that meeting, and it was very distressing.  
 
AUDIENCE:	   	You say you’re the public relations manager.  I live in that area where she’s talking about.  I’ve been living, I’ve been in that area ever since 1955 when I was born.  I was born and raised in the house I’m in now.  And I think that was a bad publicity type thing you had.  You all didn’t have anything written on paper about what you were going to do.  I went to the meeting and they talked about the road running along side the railroad and they talked about the new bridge, the 20-foot greenway or park that you’re going to put out there.  But you didn’t give any of those answers to the peoples in that community.  You spoke out about a few houses that going to be taken by that.  But there’s more houses than that that’s going to be affected.  My house is going to be affected.  I’m sitting up on a hill.  It’s going to be affected by noise pollution and pollution from the vehicles and the pollution from people coming in and out of there.
 
What I’m saying is you should have had in the time that you had written information given to the people so that they can know what’s going on in their neighborhood.  I think everybody in this room that has anything to do with the County Engineering or whatever they have to do with it are responsible for not giving the proper information out.  That is why the people were mad.
 
I was mad because I heard one thing at one meeting and at another meeting there was something else emphasized there, and then when we get in here you might be emphasizing something else.  And then I read in the paper this morning Jack says, well, overwhelmingly the people rejected it, and what you said, but we’re going to go back and look at it again.  I was at a meeting at City Hall last week, and the people out in Lake Tobesofkee said we don’t want these houses on the lake.  It was rejected.  You understand what I’m saying.  And I’ve been to some other meetings where if the people rejected it, you don’t go back to the drawing board again, just find out what you can do to solve the problem.
 
Not only are you going to build that connector there, but coming up Edgewood Avenue you have to go down to Broadway, down to the Fall Line Freeway exit and do something there, which you’re not telling the people.  So you need to tell the people all that needs to be known so that they can be comfortable with what you are saying.  Don’t tell somebody on the north side of town one thing and come downtown and tell us another thing.  That’s what we’re saying.  And that’s why I’m out all the time on television every day showing that there’s a void somewhere in here, that all of you are not represented properly.  Represent the people properly.  Give them the right documents that they need so that they’ll know they’re getting the right forms for their houses and what you’re going to do.  That’s all I’m asking.
 
We’re not saying we don’t want a road.  We’re saying that give us the right information.  If you go to north Macon, you’re not going to go half cocked out there.  I’m going to tell you that now.  They’re going to have some lawyers on your back.  But these are poor people that need you not to be half baked or half cocked when you come here with information.
 
MR. DUVAL:	Let me just answer part of that question.  I know there was several things that you said in there, and it’s a point well taken.  But you said we need to tell you what we’re going to do.
 
AUDIENCE:	   	 Yes, sir.
 
MR. DUVAL:	The fact of the matter is we don’t know what we’re going to do yet.  That’s the reason for the public meeting, to come with a concept to let you have input into what we’re going to do.  This is not set in stone.  So if you want me to sit here and say that this is how this road is going to look, I can’t tell you that right now because that has not been decided yet.
 
AUDIENCE:	  	 -- that’s what I’m saying --
 
MR. DUVAL:	We’re coming to get input from you.  We want to hear from you when we get there.  That’s the reason why we have a public meeting.  So if you say you need to tell us what you’re going to do, I can’t tell you what we’re going to do because it has not been decided what we’re going to do yet.  So that’s the answer to part of that question.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Steve, we can -- Thank you.
 
MR. DUVAL:	We’re doing the best we can.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	We’ll come to community comments under Item 8 and we’ll answer all of the questions people have then.
 
MR. DUVAL:	Okay.
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Thank you, Steve.  And, Steve, I think you did an excellent job.
 
MR. DUVAL:	Thank you.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Where I do see us going with this project is we’re going to get all the information we can get and give it to our Macon officials, and whatever they want to do with this project.  Now, this is not like this is a project that hasn’t been approved.  It was approved by the voters of this community in referendum, so this is not something new that’s being put out there.  It was approved by the majority of the people in this community in a referendum, and we forget that.
 
MR. MARTIN:	Was a four-lane concept approved with a wide median?  I don’t remember that, Bob.  And I don’t remember it being next to the railroad track.  Maybe I’m missing something here, but --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Lee, you’ll have an opportunity under Item 8.
 
MR. MARTIN:	Well, it’s hard for you to make a statement and then we have to wait until the end of the meeting --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Well, that’s the way it is.
 
MR. MARTIN:	-- to answer it if it’s not accurate.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Item 5.
 
AUDIENCE:	   	 I mean if you can’t answer the question when he’s asked it, you need to let somebody else talk.
 
MR. MARTIN:	Absolutely.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Steve, did you finish 4B?
 
MR. DUVAL:	Oh, no, I did not.  Excuse me.  Getting to 4B, we had a stakeholders meeting scheduled for the Western Loop project and we had to cancel that meeting.  We have not gotten another date for that meeting as of yet, but we will reschedule that meeting and we will notify.  Hopefully all the stakeholders, like Ms. Hanberry said, we notified all the stakeholders and then we had to call back and cancel that.  Hopefully everybody was notified.  I tried to call everybody, and I  left machine messages and everything on that particular project.  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Steve, we want to meet with these consultants for some engineering concepts prior to that.
 
MR. DUVAL:	Exactly.  Right.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	All right.  Moving right along, Item 5, our Tucker Road project.  Joe?
 
MR. JOHNSON:	Good afternoon.  I just wanted to give you all a brief status on the Tucker Road project.  As many of you all know, that project has been going on for several years now, but at our last meeting, not our last meeting, but the last time we spoke about Tucker Road, we had informed you all that we were going to have Nimrod Long, an architect from Alabama that’s working on the Greenway path downtown, to give us some suggestions on this project.  This past Friday, myself, Ken Sheets with the County, Bibb Causey with the City, Mr. Nimrod Long, Terry Salter and Cleve Cunningham from Cunningham and Company, our design consultants on this project, met out at Wesleyan College and did a walk-through to look at the preliminary plans that we had shown at the last public hearing.  And we spent about four hours, I believe, walking from one end of the project to the other getting some feedback from Mr. Long.  He has a lot of experience in this type of project and we just kind of picked his brain a little bit about how to fit this project and landscape.  
 
Some of the suggestions that he gave to us was to use a 6-foot concrete path.  We had different suggestions on what type of path, but he did recommend 6-foot concrete paths.  He recommended clearing a lot of the small vegetation from around the path back towards the roadway so people feel a little bit safer as they walk down this path, and in effect you would have just your larger trees that would be left and all of your smaller diameter shrubs and bushes would be removed.  He suggested adjusting some of the slopes on the front of some of these houses to give a little protection for the path raising it up a little from the road but having the path a little bit lower than someone’s yard to kind of give a barrier between someone’s yard and the path and the road.  
Then we had various other little problems up and down the road, just some little problem spots, and we used his expertise to come up with some suggestions.  So at this point we’re working on the plan.  We’ve given our consultant 30 days to come back with a set of right-of-way plans.  At that point we’ll start contacting property owners individually and meeting with them and showing them exactly what we propose.  At that point we can change the plans again to accommodate some of the property owners.  So that’s where we’re at right now.  And I just wanted to give you all an update.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Thank you, Joe.
 
MR. JOHNSON:	Any questions from the committee?  (No response).  Thank you.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	So we have Mr. Long on board with us?
 
MR. JOHNSON:	Yes, sir.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	I mean he’s a part of the program?
 
MR. JOHNSON:	Yes, sir.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Good.  Okay.  Item 6, Van, our Coleman Avenue project, Project 72?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	Yes, sir.  I have an item of information for the committee today.  I guess it was back in August of last year Dr. Kirby Godsey and Mercer had requested that the Executive Committee help on the Coleman Avenue project, and the Executive Committee did approve $500,000 to help fund the streetscape over there and the sidewalks.  And this past April 18th, Mr. Fountain, Mr. Causey and myself went to the pre-construction conference over at Mercer, and their prime contractor for the job is Chris R. Sheridan. 
 
Mercer has let a contract totaling 2.6 million dollars to construct this project, and work is getting started over there now.  The part directly in front of Mercer’s Administration building has a completion date of August of this year, and the remaining part of that work is to be done by the end of the year.  Mercer will bill the Road Program as the work is completed on a monthly basis for the Road Program’s share of the money.  And that was just for you all’s information as to the status of that project.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Any comments on that project?  (No response). Have they started Bill?  Have they actually physically started?
 
MR. CAUSEY:	(Nods head affirmatively). They got their permit yesterday but they’ve already started mobilizing their equipment.
 
MR. WIKLE:	They’re well underway.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Have you talked to Bill about our request?
 
MR. CAUSEY:	I have not.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	I do want to get with Bill on that.  Kind of like we’ve done down here by the Tubman and the Sports, you know, what we’ve done across Cherry there.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Right.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	That was a plea by Dr. Godsey on that after walking across that brick. All right.  Project 55, Van, New Clinton Road?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	Back in September, this is just another item for information for the committee, the Road Program declared the house at 2776 New Clinton Road a surplus property and ask that Bibb County dispose of the property.  And this item went to the Properties Committee of the County Commission and the Board and the Purchasing Department through Mr. Smallwood has advertised the property in the paper for four times, I think, for a month, as prescribed by law.  But on April the 17th we didn’t get any bids on the property.  So we were recommending to the Purchasing Department that maybe we do some other things as it’s readvertised again for sale.  One would be that we would mail out to all the real estate companies in town a notice about the sale and the information that they would need to look into it; also, place a sign on the property itself so that people would know that it was for sale.  We’ll have the property cleaned up again as far as the yards, and maybe also take the minimum bid that we had on it previously off the property.  And maybe that would be a way to get some more interest.  If anybody has got any other ideas of what we might can do, we’d appreciate the --
MR. CAUSEY:	Is it liveable?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	Oh, yeah.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Have you contacted Chester or --
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	No, we haven’t.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	-- Renaissance Housing?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	No, we haven’t.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Do you want me to talk to them and ask them to call you?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	Yeah, that would be great if you could do that.  Again, this is just for information, too.  If anybody does have any ideas about what we might do any different or in addition, let me know.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Okay.  Are there any comments on the New Clinton Road project?  (No response).  Okay.  Item 8, Community Comments.  Is there anybody that would like to make any comments?  (Hand raised).  Yes, sir.
 
MR. RYAN:		Mr. Fountain --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Please state your name.
 
MR. RYAN:		Michael Ryan.  I’d like to clear up what appears to be some confusion about a concept for the South Downtown Connector that was presented by the charette team at the Beall’s Hill charette in November of last year by those individuals from the University of Miami.  I spoke to Mr. Giotodani (phonetically) several times, and every time I spoke with him, including this morning, he has stated that the concept presented then, and this was also presented to many of the people in this room, was a two-lane concept.  And he’s actually quoted in the paper today regarding response to your current concept, and he says that what they would propose would be a maximum, including everything, a maximum of 80 feet of right-of-way, and that leads to the question I would like to ask you.  I see that as your concept for this project has evolved over several years, it has gone from a 100-foot right-of-way requirement to I believe this is requiring a 120-foot right-of-way.  Is that correct?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Michael, this is just a concept.  We have not established a right-of-way.
 
MR. RYAN:		But there is a difference of 20 feet?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	In concept.
 
MR. RYAN:		In concept, okay.  I would like to, if you can possibly explain that to myself and other, I would like you to do so.  But allow me to make another comment first, or actually to ask another question, and this regards the 4-F requirements.  4-F, as some of you know, is part of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, actually that clause is incorporated into other Federal laws now, and essentially it sharply curtails the approval of funding of projects which threaten historic sites.  Now, your interoffice memo, this is the memo from Mr. Schneider (phonetically) to Mr. Etheridge of several years ago, and the subject of the memo is how to avoid 4-F requirements for the South Downtown Connector project and the Edgewood Avenue project.  And I’m asking you is it still the policy of the Road Program to avoid Federal requirements and avoid restrictive Federal preservation requirements for that recognized historic district?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	It is our policy to follow all laws and regulations of this community, whatever they may be, the applicable laws and regulations.
 
MR. RYAN:		At a campaign meeting back in the Fall of 2000 that was held at Mercer Law School, Chairman Olmstead and his opponent, Mr. Dorsey, were making, answering questions addressing citizens’ concerns, many of those citizens were residents of Macon’s historic districts, and a question was put to both of them as to whether they, if each of them had been elected, whether they would seek for any project that involved historic property, whether they would seek or require that the Road Program adhere to and satisfy the highest strictest level of Federal, of historic preservation law, which is presumed to be Federal law, and both of those parties, including Mr. Olmstead, assured those assembled that they would do that.  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	We’ll take that for the record, Michael.  Thank you.  Yes, sir.
 
MR. WILLIAMS:	I’m Greg Williams, and as I said, I’m one of the residents in the area.  From what I see here when you put the Downtown Connector in the neighborhood you will be not only separating the neighborhood but you will be taking a vital part of the neighborhood, some over 100 acres, for the highway.  For other examples the Edgewood to the Fall Line Freeway exit down on Seventh Street.  Also, there’s a concept coming up that was presented about a few months, about a year ago about the facilities down below Seventh Street.  It was a concept now, they were not making a pure statement.  What I’m trying to get to is that when you come out and make a statement that you are going to do something in some neighborhood, whether it’s poor or medium or middle class or whatever, you must have the attitude that you want to have interest in the neighborhood or interest in the people.  Sometimes I see some of the representatives in this room that snub, and I’m telling the pure truth.  Well, as representatives of the community, you must look at everybody on the same place.  If you’re not looking at our area as you’re looking at the peoples in North Macon with big money, or the bankers, or the realty companies, then you are doing us an injustice.  
 
I am constantly in contact with the Justice Department right now, like I told City Council.  When I say something, I’m going to do it.  I’m a minister in the church, and being a minister I don’t have a 300 or 400 ministry, I’m a one man ministry and I present myself to God.  When I presented myself, I presented myself for a reason.  And I said one thing, I’m going to take care of the peoples around me as a shepherd.  I am in contact with the Justice Department about a lot of stuff that’s going on.  You have to respect me just as I respect you.  If I say, good evening to you, I expect you to say, good evening to me, too.  
 
But when you come to our community, you think of us as being welfare recipients, derelicts, robbers, thieves, prostitutes, drug dealers.  That’s what be in the back of your mind, even though you don’t think that out loud.  You think it’s just prostitutes, thieves, robbers.  I was born and raised in that community in 1955.  My grandmother left us the house.  She said, son, this is your house.  She died laying up there on the bed.  She said, son, this is yours.  But what I see now is what my grandmother gave to me you’re going to take away at the flicking of an eye.  And I want some respect.  And I think these people in the back back there want some respect, too.  If you’re going to take their personal property from them and send them to another area of town and not give them vital information that they need, plus being a historical area and we hadn’t been allowed to do anything to our house. 
 
I came three years ago and said I want to remodel my house and the City told me, no, you can’t do anything.  You have a variance of 33 feet.  I said, can I do anything in the back of my house, and they said, no, because we have an alley in the back of my house.  I said, can I do anything to the side of my house, and they said, no, you can’t add on to the side of your house.  
 
So all of this time you all have been planning about roads and parks and all this other stuff, the Downtown Connector, you have not allowed us to have fair and due process for our own homes.  All I’m asking is that you treat us as if we are peoples in the community, too.  And you haven’t been.  You know you haven’t been doing it.  All of you around the table know you haven’t been doing us properly.  And then when Jack Ellis get in the newspaper that we’re going to repeat the process again and go back to the people and find out what they want to do, and he is the main one not treating us fair.  He knows what’s going on behind closed doors.  And I’m finding out little bits of information each day, and it’s going to come back up again.  
 
Remember, my name is Greg Williams.  I don’t tell anybody anything that’s not going to happen.  It’s going to haunt you dearly.  A lot of people running around talking about reparation and all this other stuff, suing cities.  You will lose dearly, even if it’s your grandkids, you’re dead and gone, your grandkids are going to suffer because you hadn’t did the people right.  When you go to north Macon, you say one thing.  When you come to the poor area, you say another thing.  You come to another area, you say another thing.  You have to have your facts in order.  Thank you.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Thank you.  Let Mr. Williams’ point of view be part of our record.  Susan?
 
MS. HANBERRY:	Susan Hanberry.  I have a couple of questions.  On page 15 of the minutes, and this, I couldn’t, I’m sorry, I’m hard of hearing and I couldn’t hear Mr. Wikle last week, or two weeks ago.  He said something about, this is about the Traffic Management Center, and it said that we got news today that the make ready costs are close to half a million dollars and we were surprised by that but the DOT is picking up those costs.  What does that mean?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Susan, it meant -- Van, maybe you and Bill can better answer that.
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	Susan, what that referred to was that DOT had recently let a large signal contract to redo signals at some 50 intersections around the City and County, and as part of that fiber optic cable would string those signals in a row in timing to the Traffic Management Center at the corner of MLK and Oak.  And as part of being able to get on existing telephone pole line or power pole line, Georgia Power and BellSouth had to make ready costs.  And that is they had to move some of their lines up to make room for the fiber cable to go on the bottom.  And those costs were to reimburse them for what we call make ready costs.
 
 		MS. HANBERRY:	Okay.  Thank you.  That was just something I hadn’t seen before.  Another comment.  When you were talking about the property on New Clinton Road, I don’t know if this is even, I don’t even know what it looks like, but the Green Space program is in the process of setting up a land bank or property, and I don’t know if that property might be something that could be donated, but I just wanted to throw that out.
 
I also had requested that Mr. Queen send a report status to the CAC that he went through last meeting, and we still didn’t get that, and I wish he would send that on to the CAC.  This is the status report that talks about all of the projects that have Federal environmental documents and where they are.  That would be most helpful for us to have.
 
Another question.  Was the South Downtown Connector meeting noticed in the newspaper’s legal ads?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	I don’t know, Susan.  
 
MS. HANBERRY:	I would like to know that/
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	I can find out for you.
 
MS. HANBERRY:	I would appreciate it.  And just a couple of comments again about that meeting.  We keep hearing that this is just a concept and then we hear that the voters approved it.  You can’t have it both ways.  The voters didn’t approve everything that you’ve done.  You’ve changed all kinds of things in this program.  Some things have been scaled back and some things have been scaled up.  And this contract was written with enough legal room so that basically you all can do what you want to.  So don’t think you can really hide behind voters approving these projects.
 
When you say it’s a concept, you know, if it’s a concept, we should have been able to talk about it.  The meeting was ended early.  No one would answer any questions.  You know, how can you really understand what’s going on if there isn’t some sort of a dialogue.  And that meeting was really a failure.  
 
I also heard Mr. Etheridge at that meeting say that if the residents don’t want it, we’re not going to do it.  And now we’re saying, well, the residents don’t want it, so I guess we better go back and figure out some way to make the residents want it.  You know, we need to really do what we said we were going to do.  You said that in the meeting.  When you have meetings with just the people whose houses you’re taking, this is a part of the community and part of a whole community, not just a few peoples houses that you’re taking.  The person next to them is also going to be affected.  So you can’t just have these little small meetings.  You really need to be transparent and open with these meetings and open to listening to being and answering questions, and that did not happen.
 
As a member of the CAC, in our document, our memorandum of understanding with the Federal Highway, the CAC is also charged with looking at environmental justice issues in the community.  And that isn’t happening here.  I see a road and it’s a better concept that running it right down Edgewood but it’s still splitting the community.  When we have documents that say that we’re trying to avoid 4-F, how is that environmental justice.  When we hear thrown about at the meeting some things like, well, it’s going to revitalized the neighborhood.  Well, how do we know that?  What’s the purpose and needs statement?  None of that was at the meeting.  And it’s really important that you do these kinds of things.  I am very troubled by everything that I saw there.  
 
When the charette came and looked at the whole community, they identified several traffic problems, and this project is going to do anything to any of them.  The things they identified were that Oglethorpe Street needed traffic calming and they also said that the bridges at Oglethorpe and Hazel Street needed to be rebuilt.  Those are the things that are going to revitalize this neighborhood, not putting a four-lane road through the middle of the neighborhood.  And I think you all need to hear that and you need to listen this time because you said some things that are going to be real hard to unsay I do believe.  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Susan, thank you for your point of view.  Is there anyone else?  Michael, let me see if there is anybody else.
 
MR. MARTIN:		 I’ll defer to Michael, but I’d like to say something after he gets through.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Okay.  Doc, did you have something?  I’m going to try to get to everyone.
 
DR. HOLLIDAY:	I’d like to put in my two or three cents worth here.  A couple of meetings ago I brought you all a picture of the creek that wasn’t shown on the Forest Hill Road EA, a picture of my dad in front of that creek, and he was standing in the driveway, and for the record this is a picture of a driveway at 744 Forest Hill Road that’s showing a creek after one-half inch of rain and it’s flowing fluorescent orange.  And I understand that the County Engineering Department is in control of sedimentation and erosion --
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Not if it’s in the City they’re not.
 
DR. HOLLIDAY:	All right.  Then who would I talk to?
 
MR. CAUSEY:	(Indicating himself).  
 
DR. HOLLIDAY:	Bill, let’s get together and talk about this.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	When was this?
 
DR. HOLLIDAY:	That was about a month ago.  The next issue, the roundabouts.  This is a Federal publication on roundabouts.  There are about four or five states that are so impressed with this they have their own web sites touting the success of this device.  And nobody here does that.  Nobody on this panel.  When I went to dental school, I didn’t want to do implants.  People come to me and want implants and I refer them.  You’ve got to know how to use them.  If you don’t know how to do roundabouts you bring in some people that know how to do them because we’ve got sufficient interest in the community.  We’ve been asking you.  We want some roundabouts.  We especially want them looked at by somebody who knows how to do them on Forest Hill Road.  So I’m not asking you all to do it because I know from talking to you that you don’t know how to do it.  I’m saying I want you to refer us to a specialist and bring somebody in who knows what they’re doing and then let’s talk about Forest Hill some more.
 
Last item, I told you there’s a new concept for the Fall Line Freeway, I-16 to 80, and there is information on the Internet about that.  The Web address, you can get there by going to www.Macon-Bibb.com, scroll down to Eisenhower Parkway Extension and click on that, and on that page you go down to where it says 16 to 80, a new option, and click on that.  And there’s a page about that.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Who is the author of it.  There’s multiple authors actually around the world.  This, this little thing we’ve got called the Ocmulgee National Monument is kind of like Jerusalem to us Christians, Bethlehem.  It is the seat of an entire people.  They have traced everything that they consider holy back to that one little site.  And we take it for granted as a part of Macon, you know, no big deal.  But there’s a lot of people around the world that are interested.  Travelers, tourists, cultural tourism is what it’s called, and there’s other small nations besides the Muscogee Creek Nation that see this as a threat to them, too, because if you can do this to their Bethlehem for such trivial reasons when there’s better, quicker, safer ways to do this road, then they realize nothing is safe.  And, so, there’s a lot of people coming from all over the world amazingly, and they’re going to focus on this because they think it’s the most incredibly stupid thing they’ve ever seen.  Thank you.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Thank you for your point of view, Dr. Holliday.  Lee.
 
MR.  MARTIN:	I just wanting to -- My name is Lee Martin, sorry.  I just wanted to buttress what Susan said.  Quoting from the paper this morning, I don’t think we’ve heard enough about the project to see whether there should be some changes, said Van Etheridge, Roads Program Manager.  I suspect that we’ll be hearing from a lot more people, especially elected officials.  And it goes on to say the Roads Program isn’t considering any changes to the project until more comments are received.  It is true that he stated at the meeting, and it should be in the minutes, that if the residents don’t want the project, it won’t be built.  And I say again that it seems to me that if you get the approval for a road that you want built, you don’t have anymore meetings.  But if you don’t get the approval you want, you keep having meetings until you  finally do get the approval.  And my question is how are you going to get those comments within the public process?  If you are actually seeking out and expect to get more comments, it doesn’t seem to me the way you’ve gone about doing it since the meeting is a public process, having a private meeting at a church or going to each residence individually isn’t within the realm of a public meeting.  So how are you going to solicit those comments that you expect to get in the future?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Lee, I don’t know that we, I guess I can answer.  I don’t know that I have an answer to you, but I don’t know that all of the comments that come will be solicited by us.  I think there will be many other comments.  And I don’t think they have to come from me or Moreland Altobelli.  There will be other dialogue on this project.  It will not be my call as County Engineer or our consultant, Moreland Altobelli, whether this project will be built or not.  It will be decided by elected officials.
 
MR. MARTIN:	But won’t they get the information from the Roads Program?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	We’ll give them all that we have.  We’ll give them everything that we have --
 
MR. MARTIN:	But the comments should come in a public forum, and that’s what public meetings are all about and that has been the tradition of the public meetings in the Road Program.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it.  You’re certainly entitled to your opinion.
 
DR. HOLLIDAY:	I second his opinion.
MR. FOUNTAIN:	You’re entitled to your opinion, too.
 
MR. WILLIAMS:	I would like to --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	I’ve got Mr. Michael Ryan behind you that had his hand up.
 
MR. RYAN:		I would like to refer to the need and purpose statement for the South Downtown Connector project, that essential document that you did not have available at the public meeting.  Mr. Fountain, you were asked specifically at that meeting by the residents assembled what was the purpose or the need for that project, and you told those people it would revitalize that neighborhood.  Now, the need and purpose statement states that that area will see a major shift in use.  Now it’s an historic residential neighborhood now, so that means to me goodbye historic residential and hello strip commercial.  How is that a revitalization of that neighborhood?  Do you revitalize a sick man with a bullet to the head?  I don’t think so.  
 
Another concern, Mr. Darnell stated, Connie Mac Darnell stated in the discussions, the informal discussions following that meeting that the S Line, that’s the Central of Georgia Railroad line that the current concept would parallel, he stated that the long term plans are to abandon that railroad line.  Now, that means a fair bit of vacant right-of-way that could be used for your road bed if it’s something that really is truly needed by the public.  Is any consideration being given to that?  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Michael, I don’t know.
 
MR. RYAN:		That’s a question.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Does anybody know?  
 
MR. RYAN:		I heard --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	All I know --
 
MR. CAUSEY:	No, not abandoning it, converting it to passenger rail is the only thing I’ve heard.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Yeah.
 
MR. RYAN:		Well, Darnell said abandoning --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	The only thing I know is what I’ve read in the paper and the Governor took the money out of the budget.
 
MR. RYAN:		Converting to passenger rail, there’s a problem with the grades.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Curves, right.
 
MR. MARTIN:	Not only that, but all the bridges have been torn down on that line into the Terminal Station, so if you’re going to make that a passenger rail you’ll have to rebuild every one of those bridges at enormous cost getting into the Terminal Station.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	There’s a --
 
MR. RYAN:		There’s a 19th Century track and bed there, too.  It’s not going to handle, it’ll handle 19th Century locomotives.  But Mr. Darnell has said that it’s going to, the long term plan, and I don’t know what he means by the long term plan, but it’s to abandon it.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Well, probably we could, the Georgia Rail Transit I believe is in charge of this, and I’m sure whatever they do is public record also.  But I don’t know anything other than what I read in the paper.  That’s all I know is what I read in that paper.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	And I don’t think anybody has heard the Railroad say that they were going to abandon that line.
 
MR. RYAN:		Darnell did say that.
 
MS. HANBERRY:	He did say that, and he said that they were going to build a new line capacity rail, that that line was not --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Susan, I heard what Mr. Darnell said, but I have not heard that from the Georgia Rail Transit Authority.  And I think they’re the ones that speak.  Mr. Williams.
 
MR. WILLIAMS:	Be that as it may.  Greg Williams again.  When you go back to the drawing board, I’m requesting that you look at who lives in the neighborhood.  Our elected officials would not live in that neighborhood.  In fact somebody asked me, Greg, why do you live in the neighborhood?  I was born and raised there.  Most of the elected officials, like Thelma Dillard, have lived in the neighborhood many years ago, but they abandoned the neighborhood to go some other place. But I haven’t abandoned the neighborhood.  If the elected officials decide to override what the people have spoke on, I would like for you to put it in paper which elected officials said that they would not go along with what has been spoken already.  Because those elected officials live in North Macon out of the way of our community, and they do not want to drive there.  They need to drive through that neighborhood some nights at 3 O’clock in the morning and find out who is in the neighborhood causing the problems.  Those are not the residents, temporary residents is what I would say.  
 
So if you go back to the drawing board, make sure that our representatives are really representing our community, because we haven’t had any representation since 1960 something.  Think about it now.  When you take it back to the drawing board, request them, question them have they lived in the neighborhood.  Because there are some nice houses that they can be remodeled.  There’s some open spaces there that, I went to Mercer just last week and spoke to them about building a building somewhere in the area to modify that neighborhood and let the people regain their confidence about the neighborhood.  But there’s something else that can be there besides that roadway.  It’s not really needed.
That road, I stood on the side of the street for a whole month when I was running my campaign and I did not see 8,000 cars go down that road.  I stood out there in the sun.  The only time there’s cars come through there is from 7 O’clock to 9 O’clock in the morning and then from 4:00 until 6:00 in the afternoon, so what tells me that you want to spend 20 million to 30 million dollars on a road that would not be of any value to the community.  
 
It’s just like the downtown Hall of Fame and the Sports Hall of Fame and the Music Hall of Fame.  It’s no real value to the community because nobody is going there.  The Harriet Tubman Museum is going to be built there.  No real value to the community whatsoever other than cosmetics.  We’re not talking about cosmetics, we’re talking about people.  These are the people that pays your paycheck and they want that respect.  Thank you.
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Thank you.  Mr. Cleveland?
 
MR. CLEVELAND:	Just a couple things if I may.  Number one, has Connie Mac been elected to any office that I have missed?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Not to my knowledge.
 
MR. CLEVELAND:	So, basically, his opinion is like everybody else’s, they’ve got one.  I think, Mike, the question that you asked concerning the width of the right-of-way probably needs to be addressed to Planning and Zoning because in 1997, February, they basically widened a lot of the roads in the county, and my understanding at that time was it was because they had to comply with State Highway requirements, but I don’t know if that’s one of them or not.  But you have a --
 
MR. RYAN:		There are minimum right-of-way requirements for different classifications of roads, arterials, connectors.
 
MR. CLEVELAND:	Yeah.  
 
MR. RYAN:		My question was the change in concept, and actually this most recent concept, this has come out well after the Planning and Zoning regulations that you’re referring to.  
 
MR. CLEVELAND:	Well, I was saying that that may be where they came up with that right-of-way width, I don’t know.  That’s the question I understood you presented and I thought that might be the answer to your question.  
 
MR. RYAN:		What’s the requirement for an arterial road?  I think it’s 150 feet.
 
MALE VOICE:	I think so, yes.
 
MR. RYAN:		Isn’t that going to be classified as an arterial?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	I don’t know.  It hasn’t been classified.
 
MR. RYAN:		Isn’t that going to be classified as an arterial?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	I don’t really know.  
MR. FOUNTAIN:	It hasn’t been classified.
 
AUDIENCE:	  	 How come nobody knows anything?
 
AUDIENCE:	  	 You all are the engineers.  
 
(**REPORTER’S NOTE: Several people talking in the audience at one time.  Inaudible.**)
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	It hasn’t been classified yet.
 
MR. RYAN:		Bob, wasn’t the extra width due to the green space along the --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Yes.
 
MR. RYAN:		-- railroad tracks?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Yes, and we did that to pick up the extra space to put in the multi-use path, and that’s why you’ve got the extra right-of-way in it so that we could put the extra, the right-of-way went down towards the railroad track, and we bought it for the purpose of the multi-use path.  We’re proposing that.  That’s why we put extra right-of-way in it.  Of course, that won’t ever get anywhere --
 
MR. CLEVELAND:	Well, it occurs to me if that was the reason for the increase of the right-of-way and the railroad is going to be abandoned, that would be a perfect green space along the abandoned railroad, so you can go ahead and renarrow the street again.  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	I guess all this is just conjecture.
 
MR. CLEVELAND:	I thought that’s what we were doing, just sitting around talking about stuff like that.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Yes, sir.
 
MR. THIESE:	My name is Alan Thiese, and I want to change the focus of this meeting a little bit.  I think we should move forward on the concepts and designs on the Western Loop in a timely manner.  If I recall correctly, that was one of the things we looked at in the preliminary phase of getting this local option sales tax going.  I remember a meeting at Springdale Elementary School.  I don’t know what year, but it was way back when.  We all know that when Lowe’s moves in and Fuddrucker’s and all of that out there on Zebulon that is happening, the Western Loop is where it’s growing.  We need to get the Western Loop built before it becomes historic.  
 
Congestion out there, anybody that has kids going to any of the schools, public and private, it’s a nightmare. I would urge that we get on this, advertise the meetings.  The accident levels out there are raising every day.  I do live right close to Tucker and Foster.  The development is happening.  We need to be ahead of the power curve on this one.  Thank you.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Thank you.  Moving right along with our agenda.
 
DR. HOLLIDAY:	I want to respond to that.  Dr. Holliday wants to stay that the Western Loop is messed up and I just want to make sure that somebody --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	This is not the forum for that.  Moving to our Old and New Business under item 12.  Is there any old or new business to come before us?
 
MR. CAUSEY:	I’d like to ask a question, if I could, just for my information.  What is the status of Forest Hill Road, if anything?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Van, would you give us an update on Forest Hill Road?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	Yeah.  DOT has advised us that they have scheduled a stakeholders meeting for that project.  I believe it’s the 30th of this month.  They will be sending out letters and invitations to the stakeholders, and I believe it’s going to be at the Holiday Inn out near Arkwright.  So that’s the latest thing on that.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	And on the Western Loop, as I understand it, we will be, the stakeholders meeting is imminent -- I mean within the next probably two or three weeks -- on the Western Loop.  Is that a fair statement, Van?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	I think the first of next month, the first week, maybe second week of next month.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	There will be a stakeholder’s, not a public meeting but a stakeholders meeting on the Western Loop.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	The discussion about roundabouts has come up quite a few times, and I’m not a traffic engineer by any stretch of the imagination, but from what I’ve seen and read about it and heard, they can be very effective.  Actually they say they can be more effective, safer, cheaper than a signalized intersection, and I don’t know whether that’s true or not.  And what I would like to ask this committee to do, or the Road Program to do, we’ve hired the largest firm in the Southeast, and that we ask Moreland Altobelli to do an evaluation of roundabouts and how, if possible, they could be applied to any of our projects, not as traffic calming but in lieu of a signalized intersection.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Moreland Altobelli --
 
MR. CAUSEY:	They may not work, but we will at least have done --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Van has prepared an excellent document that I have not sent out, in fact it’s on my desk now, he has taken a lot of time to go through this, about the advantages and disadvantages of roundabouts.  And I’m going to try to get Shez, if she would, to distribute that to all the members of this committee.  It’s an excellent excellent paper that Van prepared on that.  And we’ll all look at it and we’ll bring it back.  We may want to talk to some people that have them, you know, if they’re that good.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Actually, I talked to two fellows in Gainesville, Florida, yesterday that are going to send me pictures.  They live near them and they are engineers and they say they work wonderfully, and they’re very large.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	But, anyway, we’ll try to get that sent out to everybody.  I’ve got one thing that was brought to me by Gordon Bennett, of Gordon Bennett Ford, I think, about Washington Avenue and that project at Washington and College.  And I think, Bill, you had come to me about that also.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	And Georgia at College.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	And Georgia at College.  Guys, is there anything we can do?  Bill, you’ve worked on those a long time.  Where are we really at with those two projects?
 
MR. WIKLE:	I was under the impression that we had developed an acceptable plan.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	So was I.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	What do we need to do to implement the plan?
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Well, take another look at it and make sure that we still agree with it and go from there.
 
MR. WIKLE:	It was a compromise plan.  We worked with the Post Office and the In Town neighborhood, and I felt like we had met the basic requirements of everybody.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Well, Gordon wrote me a note and kind of, he said that the In Town, and he was speaking for the In Town neighborhood, Gordon was, that they had some money and they would even like to do a joint venture with the Road Program and help with the landscaping of this project.  So if we can try to do a joint venture on that thing, I think that’s great if we can do that.  If In Town wants to do that and we’ve got an acceptable concept on this thing.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	We also need to take a look at it again because our next phase of In Town sidewalks will be in that area and you don’t want to spend money to fix sidewalks if more money is coming later.  
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	Why don’t we bring the last drawings that we had back maybe to the next meeting and let you all look at them and make sure everybody is on board.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	And reaffirm that.
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	Then we can get that project designed.  It hasn’t been designed.  It’s been in concept and development for a lot of years.  It’s got to be designed.  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	So we can reaffirm that.
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	We’ve had so many alternates considered, we want to make sure everybody is okay with what we have now.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Okay.  Now, Russell is moving forward on our Mulberry at Second project?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	He is.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	So we’re moving forward with that one.  And have we heard anything on Zebulon Road, Van?  That project, and, of course, talking about congestion, that interchange right there, we’re going to --
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	Right.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	-- get into dire critical times for turn lanes out there.  Bill, are we close to getting those turn, I mean those lights, those ramps, signals put up on the ramps?
 
MR. WIKLE:	We got the approved permit back from the DOT to install the left turn lanes which in itself will be a significant improvement.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	When will we do that?
 
MR. WIKLE:	And I’ve got an application in for traffic signals.  But they will be done as a part of the resurfacing of Zebulon Road.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Do we have a time frame on it?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	We’re in negotiations with the contractor that’s going to do the work.  As soon as we get those prices in, we’ll put him to work.  He’s ready to get started on it.  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	The last thing, Bill, is I had a call from the City about the sidewalks on Cherry Street.  The motion, as I understand it, in talking to Van about it it would be done by the City, but it does not necessarily say it will be done with City in-house.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Well, the resolution says the City of Macon Public Works Department will do the repairs.  That’s what it says.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	So you’re saying that?
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Well, I wasn’t part of that resolution, and I don’t, I happen to think that we’re not capable of doing that level of work, that some design elements are going to be required: the brickwork, tree planters, doorways.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Well, I went over there and looked at it, Bill, and all it looks like to me is brick replacement unless I’m missing something.  
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Well, no, particularly at the corner of MLK and Cherry in front of the Southern United Building --
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	That’s where I went.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	-- they don’t want that grate.  They don’t want that drainage grate right at the front door there.  And that’s a critical design.  The handicapped ramps will be affected.  It’s a tough little corner.  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	How did it get there?  How long has it been there?
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Since Cherry Street was built.  I suspect when the Fifth Street connector was built.
 
MR. WIKLE:	I think what caused that was when the connector from Broadway to MLK --
 
MR. CAUSEY:	That’s super elevated.
 
MR. WIKLE:	-- the DOT put super elevation through that curve down there at Cherry and they kicked the sidewalk up to accommodate that super elevation.  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Are we talking about taking all that out and making it level?
 
THE COURT:	We don’t know, but we don’t want to have money to fix Cherry Street and just do piecemeal patchwork because that’s what we’ve been doing for all these years.  We want something nice.  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	So the feelings are, I guess between you and Dexter, you all don’t have the in-house capability to do this?
 
MR. CAUSEY:	That’s true.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	And we need to revisit this with the Administration?
MR. CAUSEY:	Well, similar to the In Town sidewalk plan that was done in-house with the Road Program, we would like to see if there is any help there to design the sidewalk.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Well, first of all, Bill, don’t we need to get some clarification on whether we can do this by contract because Dexter tells me he does not have the --
 
MR. CAUSEY:	I think we can work that out.  
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	By contract?
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Right.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	I think we need to talk to the Mayor about that.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	Right.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	And if you could do that, I think we would be off and running with it.
 
MR. CAUSEY:	All right.
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Does anybody have anything else?  Bob?
 
MR. CLEVELAND:	What’s a stakeholder?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Van, what’s a stakeholder, our definition?  Somebody that’s affected by the project?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	Well, I guess the way we’ve been using that term is that it’s anybody that’s got a stake in the project.  It can be a homeowner, a property owner, an elected official, a utility company.  We’ve used it very broadly.
 
MR. CLEVELAND:	What about taxpayers?
 
MR. ETHERIDGE:	I think that’s similar to a stakeholder.
 
MR. CLEVELAND:	Anybody in the county then, so it’s not going to be a private meeting, it will be anybody that wants to come, right?
 
MR. FOUNTAIN:	Bob, I don’t think it will be a public information.  I think that it will be a meeting where we’ll have an exchange.  There will be a group of people working on it.  I certainly think it will be open to the public, anybody that wants to hear what’s going on.  It may not be a public participation meeting, but the public can certainly hear what goes on at the meeting.  Okay.  All right.  
 
Moving right along, Item 13, our next meeting dates.  Our next TAC is June the 6th at 4:00 P.M.; COC is July the 26th, and we have not set an Executive Committee date.  
 
Does anyone else have any business to come before our committee? (No response).  If not, thank you all, and we are adjourned.

(MEETING ADJOURNED)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER
 
STATE OF GEORGIA
 
COUNTY OF BIBB.
 
I hereby certify that the within and foregoing record is a true, complete and correct transcript of the proceeding taken by me on the 2nd day of May, 2002.
 
     This 31st day of May, 2002.  

 
                               
       Certificate No. B-1238