[00:00:01]
MEETING OF THAT BUFORD[1. CALL TO ORDER]
COUNTY COUNCIL.UH, ATTENDANCE TONIGHT IS, HAS BEEN TAKEN IN CHAMBERS.
WE HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS, CUNNINGHAM GLOVER, HER VISHAAN, HOWARD LAWSON, RODMAN SOMERVILLE, AND PASS A MINT.
AND ONLINE WE HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS, DAWSON, FLUE, WELLING, AND MCKELLEN.
THEREFORE WE HAVE A FULL COUNCIL TO TAKE ACTION THIS EVENING.
WOULD YOU ALL RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF THIS MEETING HAS BEEN PUBLISHED, POSTED AND DISTRIBUTED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SOUTH CAROLINA FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.
I WOULD LIKE A MEMBER OF COUNCIL TO OFFER A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.
[4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA]
MR. RODMAN MAKES THE MOTION A SECOND, PLEASE.MR. SOMERVILLE MAKES THE SECOND DULY MOTIONED AND SECONDED AND IT WILL BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT OBJECTIONS.
THE AGENDA IS REVIEWED, UH, IS APPROVED.
WE WILL TAKE A LOOK AT THE COUNCIL AGENDA AT
[5. AGENDA REVIEW]
THIS POINT IN TIME.UH, WE HAVE SEVERAL ITEMS, BUT, UH, SEVERAL OF THOSE ITEMS SHOULD GO RATHER QUICKLY.
WE HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA WITH FOUR ITEMS ON IT.
I WILL ASK THE NATURAL RESOURCE COMMITTEE, CHAIR AND PUBLIC FACILITIES CHAIR, JUST TO, UM, GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THOSE ITEMS. AND WE HAVE SEVERAL ITEMS ON THERE FOR US TO DISCUSS.
WE WILL BE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION IN THE CAUCUS MEETING TO DISCUSS TWO ITEMS. THERE MAY BE MATTERS RISING OUT OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS REGARDING THE AGENDA SEEING NONE? IS THERE ANY COUNCIL MEMBER DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT
[6. COUNCIL MEMBER DISCUSSION]
IN TIME, MR. CHAIRMAN? UH, WHEN WE GET TO ITEM NUMBER 13, I WILL OFFER AN AMENDMENT WITH THAT ORDINANCE.YOU HAD DISCUSSED THAT WITH ME BEFORE, SO I WILL, UM, I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, AND THEN TURN IT TO YOU IF YOU WISH TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THAT MOTION.
JOHN, ANY OTHER COMMENTS, MR. ROB, UM, COMMENT AT PUBLIC FACILITIES.
WE HAD A LONG CONVERSATION ON THE INTERSECTIONS AT THE, UH, BUCK WALTER AND THE NORTHERN CONNECTION TO BLUFFTON PARKWAY.
UH, LET ME SUMMARIZE WHERE I KIND OF THINK WE ARE, AND HOPEFULLY THIS IS A LITTLE BIT HELPFUL.
UM, EVERYTHING THAT, UH, THAT WE'RE DOING ESSENTIALLY SAYS WE'RE, WE'RE NOT UNDERTAKING FIVE, FIVE B IN ANY FORM.
AND, UH, THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, THAT ON A 2006 REFERENDUM, UH, RAN OUT OF MONEY, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE RE PERMITTED AGAIN AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
AND THE, THE NEXT STEP, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED WITH, THAT WOULD BE, IF IT CAME BACK WITH, UH, THROUGH LATS AS, AS PART OF THEIR PRIOR DESIGN PRIORITIZING WHAT IT IS WE NEED TO DO.
UH, SECONDLY, UH, WE DO HAVE A ITEM ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT FOR ACCESS MANAGEMENT, WHICH IS RUNNING FROM 2 78 DOWN TO THE, UH, BLUFFTON PARKWAY AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLANS, UH, ARE ESSENTIALLY LAYING OUT WHAT THE INTERSECTIONS ARE GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
SO PEOPLE HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT THE LONG RANGE THINKING IS, PLANNING PURPOSES.
IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY GET INTO ANY FINANCING OR DESIGN OF PARTICULAR INTERSECTIONS.
UM, THE ONE THAT POTENTIALLY WOULD COME FORWARD IN THE, IN THE FUTURE WOULD BE, UM, WHETHER WE DID A SIMILAR ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT WOULD RUN FROM BLUFFTON PARKWAY DOWN TO 46.
UM, THE FIRST ONE I TALKED ABOUT WERE ACTUALLY, UH, AMENDING ONE THAT WAS IN PLACE.
WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE ONE IN PLACE GOING IN THE OTHER DIRECTION, BUT, UH, THAT WOULD BE FOR STAFF TO BRING IT FORWARD AT SOME POINT IN TIME.
BUT IF, IF THEY DO, I WOULD ENVISION THAT IT WOULD INCLUDE TWO INTERSECTION CHANGES.
ONE WOULD BE MOVING THE EXISTING BLUFFTON PARKWAY INTERSECTION ABOUT 500 FEET TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS PART OF THE PLAN THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE MANY YEARS AGO.
UM, THERE WAS THE ORIGINAL PLAN FOR FIVE B.
THEN THE TOWN, UH, GAVE US A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TO DO A REALIGNMENT, WHICH WE APPROVED.
SO THAT'S THE CURRENT ONE THAT WE HAVE, WHETHER THAT WOULD BE ONE.
AND THEN THE SEGWAYS, IF YOU MOVED THAT ONE 500 FEET TO THE SOUTH, THEN LOGICALLY YOU WOULD MOVE THE, UM, ONE, IT PARKERS ABOUT THE SAME DISTANCE TO GET THE SPACING,
[00:05:01]
BUT THOSE ARE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLANS.I, I VIEW THEM AS KIND OF ROUGH, UM, BLUEPRINTS.
SO, UH, I THINK WHERE WE ARE RELATIVE TO THAT INTERSECTION IS THAT THE BALL IS IN THE COURT OF TOWN OF BLUFFTON TO SUGGEST WHICH OF THE ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE ON THE TABLE, UH, THAT THEY LIKE.
AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE A CONSIDERATION ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT TO WANT TO TAKE IT UP.
BUT THAT'S WHAT I SEE IS WHERE WE ARE ON THE, UH, TH THOSE INTERSECTIONS.
AND WHEN WE, UH, WE'LL BE LOOKING AT THE ACCESS MEASUREMENT PLAN, I WANT TO BE CLEAR, AND I'M GOING TO ASK ENGINEERING TO CLARIFY FOR ME, WHETHER WE'RE APPROVING SOMETHING, AN ACCESS MANAGEMENT THAT CONTEMPLATES MOVING THAT INTERSECTION, BECAUSE IF IT DOES, THEN I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST IT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT MOVING.
WE HAVEN'T DECIDED TO MOVE THE INTERSECTION FAR FROM IT.
SO IF WE APPROVE AN ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT ANTICIPATES OR CONTEMPLATES ARE MOVING THAT INTERSECTION, THEN I DON'T WANT TO VOTE FOR THAT BECAUSE I WOULDN'T VOTE FOR A CHANGE IN THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT CONTEMPLATED THAT UNTIL SUCH TIME, IF EVER, THAT WE AGREED TO MOVE THE INTERSECTION.
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THAT THAT'S NOT PART OF WHAT'S ON THE TABLE NOW, BUT GOOD TO HAVE IT VERIFIED.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALRIGHT, WELL, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, SO I
[EXECUTIVE SESSION ]
WOULD ASK A, A MEMBER OF COUNCIL TO MOVE.AND SECOND FOR US TO GO INTO EXEC EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR TWO ITEMS PURSUANT TO SOUTH CAROLINA, CODE 30, 40, 78 TO RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE REGARDING LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO A COMBINATION STACKS AND OR THE SAME CODE, UH, TO DISCUSS NEGOTIATIONS INCIDENT TO A PROPOSED CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS AND PROPOSED SALE OR PURCHASE OF PROPERTY EMOTION, PLEASE.
MR. SOMERVILLE MAKES THE MOTION A SECOND, PLEASE.
UH, MR. DAWSON MAKES THE SECOND DULY MOTION AND SECOND, THIS WILL BE APPROVED WITHOUT OBJECTIONS.
AND I SEE NO OBJECTIONS AT 5 0 7.
WE WILL RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.