Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Divestment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges transparency on parks assessment, questions camera use and divestment plans
Summary
A resident told the commission the parks assessment and any park divestment lack transparency: slides weren’t in the agenda packet, online slides were unreadable, and the legal basis for privately operated cameras in parks is unclear. She asked that contracts and open‑space restrictions be confirmed before any park is divested.
Alexandra Reynolds, a local resident, used her five‑minute delegation slot at the Feb. 3 commission meeting to press officials for greater transparency and legal clarity around the Augusta Richmond County Parks Assessment and the possibility of divesting parks to private groups.
Reynolds said the consultant slides shown during the parks assessment were never part of the agenda packet and are difficult or impossible to read when viewing the livestream. She also said two public‑record requests she submitted returned no responsive records about any legal authorization for privately operated cameras the consultant used for the assessment and asked the legal department to supply any documentation that authorized camera use for non‑public‑safety functions.
Reynolds listed six divestment concerns: confirm parks proposed for divestment do not have pending improvement plans or active contracts; confirm whether parks were created to meet open‑space requirements (which could bar redevelopment); verify the existence and enforceability of leases or agreements; question long‑term feasibility of HOA or citizen‑run maintenance; require conditions on development if parks are sold; and address chronic underfunding that she said has left parks degraded.
Administrator Allen told Reynolds staff will post presentations online for easier public viewing and said the administration will check with legal on any camera‑use documentation. Mayor Pro Tem Wayne Guilfoyle and other commissioners said they appreciate the input and that the governing body is taking a deliberate approach, noting some parks are under contract or have unique leases that would make divestment inappropriate.
Quote: "This information needs to be more accessible so it can be viewed by the public," Reynolds said. "If the legal department cleared the use of cameras by a private company with no public consent or public notification...the legal documentation or law allowing the cameras to be used should exist and should be somewhere in the public record."
What comes next: Staff agreed to post presentations for public access and to follow up with legal counsel on camera use and on whether contracts or open‑space requirements make parks ineligible for divestment. Commissioners indicated further discussion of park‑assessment results will continue in upcoming agenda items and audit reviews.
