Apr 11, 2022 County Council Regular Session

[00:00:06]

>> MAY COUNCIL MEETING OF MONDAY APRIL 11TH. >> WOULD YOU ALL RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND PLEASE REMAIN STANDING FOR THE INVOCATION? 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 AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

HEAVENLY FATHER, WE COME TO YOU THIS EVENING ASKING FOR YOUR BLESSING GUIDANCE, WISDOM AND SUPPORT AS WE BEGIN THIS MEETING. SHOW US HOW TO CONDUCT OUR WORK WITH A SPIRIT OF JOY AND ENTHUSIASM EVEN IF WE HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS, GIVE US UNITY OF SPIRIT. HELP US TO EACH LISTENED POLITELY AS OTHERS SHARE THEIR POINTS OF VIEW. HELP US TO WORK AS A UNIFIED TEAM IN COMBINING IDEAS FOR A GREAT OUTCOME. HELP US TO WORK AS A WHOLE RATHER THAN AS INDIVIDUALS TRYING TO PROMOTE THEIR OWN AGENDAS. FINALLY WE MEET.

MAY WE HAVE A SPIRIT OF CAMARADERIE IN THIS ROOM AND WORK TOGETHER ON OUR SHARED MISSION AND VISION FOR THOSE WHO LIVE WORK AND PLAY IN THIS COUNTY.

A MAN ATTENDANCE HAS BEEN TAKEN TEN OF THE ELEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE EITHER ONLINE OR

PRESENT. >> THE ONES ONLINE ARE COUNCIL MEMBER DAWSON COUNCIL MEMBER MCKELLEN AND COUNCIL MEMBER SOMERVILLE. THE OTHER MEMBERS ARE IN

PERSON. >> PUBLIC NOTICE OF THIS MEETING HAS BEEN PUBLISHED,

[4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

A SECOND, MR. CUNNINGHAM MADE THE SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OR

[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 28, 2022]

WITHOUT OBJECTION. >> AND I SEE NO OBJECTIONS. I WOULD ASK A MEMBER FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF FEB. 28, 2020 TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE MINUTES MISS HOWARD MAKES

THE MOTION FOR SECOND PLACE. >> MR. RODMAN MAKES THE SECOND DOOLEY MOTION DIDN'T SECONDED ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THE MINUTES SEEING NONE. THE MINUTES WILL BE APPROVED

[6. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT]

GOOD EVENING. COUNCIL MEMBERS OF BOTH HERE AND ONLINE AND EVEN TO THE CITIZENS OF BEAUFORT COUNTY AND THOSE WHO MAY BE WATCHING US ON THE COUNTY CHANNEL.

MY ONLY MATTER OF BUSINESS TONIGHT BEFORE YOU ALL IS TO AGAIN INTRODUCE EMPLOYEES AND TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR EXTRAORDINARY WORKFORCE THAT WE HAVE HERE IN BEAUFORT COUNTY.

OUR FIRST EMPLOYEE THIS EVENING IS FROM OUR ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE DEPARTMENT.

AND I WILL PAUSE A MOMENT TO ALLOW HER PICTURE TO COME UP. THIS IS LORRI DAVIS VALENTINE WHO IS A COUNSELOR AT OUR ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE DEPARTMENT.

SHE HAS BEEN WITH US FOR A TOTAL OF 13 YEARS OF SERVICE. SHE RECENTLY RECEIVED MULTIPLE NOMINATIONS FROM HER PEERS FOR THE FROM THE BEAUFORT ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE DEPARTMENTS QUARTERLY EMPLOYEE SPOTLIGHT AWARD. THE THINGS SAID ABOUT MAURY BY THOSE NOMINATING HER WERE NEVER HEARD HEAR HER SAY THAT IS NOT MY JOB.

LAURIE TENDS TO BE THE GO TO PERSON TO ASSIST WITH PATIENTS OR PATIENT QUESTIONS REGARDLESS

IF THE PATIENT IS ON HER CASELOAD OR NOT. >> HE IS ALSO RECOGNIZED FOR HER ABILITY AND WILLINGNESS TO BACK UP THE RECEPTIONIST. SHE WAS APPROACHED.

SHE HAS THE APPROACHABLE, DEPENDABLE AND WILLING TO ASSIST A PEER WHETHER ON OR OFF THE CLOCK. SO SHE DOES A GREAT JOB WHEN THE INTERESTING FACTS ABOUT HER IS THAT SHE HATES THE FACT THAT BEAUFORT AREA DOES NOT HAVE A ROLLER RINK BECAUSE SHE LOVES

TO ROLLER SKATE. >> SO I GUESS THAT IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO WORK ON AS A MATTER

OF RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES. >> AND BEFORE LORI SO LORI, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE WATCHING ME OR IF YOU WILL WATCH BUT I WON'T TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

I SAID IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT JOB THAT YOU ALL HAVE OVER THERE AND ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE DEPARTMENT. I APPRECIATE YOUR 13 YEARS SERVICE TO BEAUFORT CANDIDATES WHO WILL HOLD ALL THE APPLAUSE UNTIL WE GET THROUGH ALL OF THE EMPLOYEES.

THIS EVEN IN OUR SECOND EMPLOYEE. MANY OF YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH OR AT LEAST YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH HER NAME. THIS IS KATHERINE MEADE.

[00:05:02]

SHE DOES ALL THINGS RELATED TO TAKING CARE OF OUR EMPLOYEES FROM ORIENTATION TO TRANSITIONING OUT OF EMPLOYMENT WITH THE COUNTY. WE HOPE WE BRING MORE ON THAN WE HAVE TRANSITIONING WITH. SHE PLAYS AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN BOTH OF THOSE.

HER FOCUS AREAS ON MANAGING POSITIONS AND PROCESSING PERSONNEL ACTIONS PEOPLE GET RAISES ARE PROMOTED, PROMOTED OR DEMOTED OR OTHER THINGS. SHE HANDLES THAT PAPERWORK.

SHE WAS THE PRIMARY PROJECT MANAGER FOR H.R.. DURING THE RECENT COMPROMISE VACATION STUDY WHICH WAS A BIG, BIG, BIG JOB, KATHERINE RELOCATED TO BEAUFORT COUNTY IN 2007 AFTER SPENDING HER CHILDHOOD SUMMER MOPS WITH HER GRANDPARENTS AND LANDS IN AND FALLEN IN LOVE WITH THE AREA. SHE IS ACTIVE IN HER SMALL COMMUNITY AND COORDINATES THEIR ANNUAL JULY FOURTH PARADE. SHE ENJOYS SPENDING TIME WITH HER FAMILY ARE AT OUR LOCAL BEACHES HUNTING FOR SHARKS, TEETH AND FISHING AND AS A VERY AVID CLAPS AND FAN.

SO TWO A THREE ISN'T TOO BAD. THERE'S A FINALLY I'LL SHARE THIS WITH THE PERMISSION OF KATHERINE BECAUSE OF A HIPPO REQUIREMENT. SHE HAS GRANTED US PERMISSION TO DO THIS AS OF LAST WEEK. KATHERINE IS A PROUD TO HOLD THE TITLE AS THYROID CANCER

SURVIVOR AND ENCOURAGES EVERYONE TO CHECK MAKE. >> YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IN THE PICTURE THERE SOME OF THE NUTS OF HER GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS TO THANK WHAT SHE WAS ALLOWED ALLOWED US TO SHARE THAT ON BEHALF OF EVERYONE MEDICAL CHECK UPS ARE VERY

IMPORTANT. >> ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS ABOUT WORKING IN COUNTY IS THE MEDICAL BENEFITS THAT WE ENJOY HERE. SIR, THERE'S NO REASON FOR US.

YOU'RE IN THE EMPLOYMENT OF BEAUFORT COUNTY NOT TO TAKE CARE OF OURSELVES AND HAVE VARIOUS CHECKUPS AS NECESSARY. OUR FINAL EMPLOYEE THIS EVENING IS IN OUR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT. MISS SHANTE DANIELS, SHE'S OUR VOICE OVER IP ADMINISTRATOR.

SHE HAS WORKED WITH US FOR FIVE YEARS. HER DUTIES INCLUDE CONFIGURING, INSTALLING AND MAINTAINING VOICE ACCESS TO EACH OF THE TWELVE HUNDRED PLUS DESK PHONES FROM BEAUFORT COUNTY AS YOU ARE, MR. HILL SAY IN THE LAST EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING.

SHE IS ABOUT TO UNDERTAKE THE PROCESS BEGINNING TO UPDATE SOME OF THOSE OLD PHONES THAT WE HAVE HERE WHICH WILL BE A BIG JOB. BUT I KNOW SHE'LL BE UP TO THE CHALLENGE. SHE'LL DO IT VERY WELL. I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE EVER SEEN SEAN DAY WHEN SHE DID NOT HAVE THAT BEAUTIFUL SMILE ON HER FACE.

SHE IS A HAPPY PERSON AND I AND I ENJOY WORKING WITH HER. ONE OTHER THING IS THAT SEAN DAY FEELS AS I'M FAIRLY DIFFICULT ABOUT LIVING IN BEFORE COUNTY IS THAT SHE IS

ALLERGIC TO SEAFOOD. >> SO AREAS ARE A LITTLE LIFE COUNTRY AND BEING ALLERGIC TO

SEAFOOD. SO THAT'S ALL OF THE EMPLOYEES. >> SO LET'S GIVE THEM AN ALL AROUND. APPLAUSE AS I APPRECIATE ALL THEIR HARD WORK AND NURSE

[7. PRESENTATION OF A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING MAY 1ST - MAY 7TH AS CORRECTIONAL OFFICER'S WEEK]

CHAIRMAN I TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU. >> THANK YOU.

OKAY. WE HAVE TWO PROCLAMATIONS. MR. MCKELLEN, YOU'RE GOING TO READ THE FIRST PROCLAMATION WHICH IS RECOGNIZING MAY 1ST THROUGH MAY 7 AS CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS WEEK ANNOUNCED MICHAEL ,WE ARE AND HAVE COLONEL GRANT AND LANCE CORPORAL LEAKE HERE

WITH US. >> WE ALL SET. IT'S MY PLEASURE TO WELCOME YOU HERE TONIGHT. AND I READ THIS PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF NATIONAL CORRECTIONAL OFFERS MEET OFFICERS WEEK WHEREAS IN 1987 CONGRESS PASSED WHEN PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN SIGNED A BLACK LAW NINETY NINE 611 PROCLAIMING THE FIRST WEEK OF MAY AS NATIONAL CORRECTION OFFICERS. AND WHEREAS THE OPERATION OF CORRECTIONAL DETENTION FACILITIES REPRESENTS TWO CRUCIAL COMPONENTS OF OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

>> AND WHEREAS CORRECTION OFFICERS PLAY A VITAL ROLE IN PROTECTING THE RIGHTS THE PUBLIC SHOULD TAKE PART IN CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND WHEREAS CORRECTIONAL PERSONNEL ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY AND DIGNITY OF THE HUMAN BEINGS CHARGED THAT ARE CLEAR AND WHEREAS CORRECTIONAL PERSONNEL WORK UNDER DEMANDING CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACE DANGER IN THEIR DAILY WORK LIVES OFTEN SACRIFICING PERSONAL AND FAMILY TIES.

[00:10:04]

>> YOU PROVIDE A NECESSARY BUT OFTEN THANKLESS AND UNRECOGNIZED BEHIND THIS SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC AND WHEREAS THE STAFF OF THE BEAUFORT COUNTY DETENTION CENTER HAS CONTINUALLY DEMONSTRATED THEIR SKILL AT PROFESSIONALISM IN RUNNING ONE OF THE FINEST FACILITIES IN THE STATE. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BEAUFORT COUNTY COUNCIL PROCLAIMS MAY 1ST MAY 7 NATIONAL CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS WEEK DATED TODAY REMEMBER THE DAY OF APRIL 2000? TWENTY TWO SIGNED BY JOSEPH

PASSIM, CHAIRMAN OF COUNTY COUNCIL. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> WE MAY BE SHORT OF PERSONNEL UP HERE BUT I CAN GUARANTEE YOU THE REST.

MOREOVER, AT THE FACILITY WORKING I WILL LET COLONEL GRAFF SAY IF YOU WORDS ON

BEHALF OF THE DETENTION CENTER . >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

IT'S A PRIVILEGE TO BE HERE. TODAY BUT THE HARD WORK IS DONE BY THESE OFFICERS AND THEY WEREN'T REALLY CAUGHT. I REALLY APPRECIATE THEM. I HAVE.

LANCE CORPORAL LEAKE, HE'S BEEN WORKING AT THE DETENTION CENTER FOR OVER 18 YEARS.

>> SO HE ENJOYS HIS JOB AND WE APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT COUNSEL HAVE DONE FOR US OVER

THE YEARS AND WILL DO IN THE YEARS TO COME. >> THANK SO MUCH.

>> AS ACTUALLY OUR SECOND PRESENTATION IS A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING APRIL 11TH THROUGH

[8. PRESENTATION OF A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING APRIL 11- APRIL 17 AS ANIMAL CONTROL WEEK]

>> NOW WE CAN'T DO WITHOUT ALL THESE PEOPLE, INCLUDING ALL THE VOLUNTEERS THAT AREN'T HERE.

>> GREAT TO BRING YOUR LITTLE OF RENEWED GROUP UP. >> WE CAN SEE EVERYBODY.

YES. WE GOT ALL THROUGH. WOW.

THIS IS GREAT. >> EXCELLENT. OFFICERS HERE.

>> SHERIFF, YOU HAVE LAWYERS. >> YEAH. GREAT.

READY, SIR? GO AHEAD, LARRY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WELCOME TO OUR GUESTS, ALL OF THE DIGNITARIES AND ALL OF THE VOLUNTEERS AND STAFF, EVERYONE WHO IS WORKING IN COOPERATION WITH THE ANIMAL CONTROL STAFF AND WITH THE

HILTON HEAD. >> YOUR NAME HEIDI. I'M HAPPY TO READ THIS PROCLAIMED TONIGHT IN YOUR HONOR. THE NATIONAL ANIMAL TERRANCE CROWLEY'S INITIATION IS DESIGNATED THE SECOND WEEK IN APRIL EACH YEAR AS NATIONAL ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL INITIATION WEEK WHEREAS VARIOUS FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY'S TAKE THIS TIME TO RECOGNIZE A CASE WILD ANIMAL CONTROL OF ANIMAL SERVICES STAFF OR THEIR DEDICATED SERVICE PROVIDED THE CITIZENS ACROSS THE NATION. AND WHEREAS EVERY DAY ANIMAL PAROLE OFFICERS AND SHELTER ATTENDANTS PUT THEMSELVES IN A POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATION TO PROTECT THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF ALL KINDS OF ANIMALS AND THE PUBLIC. AND WHEREAS IN ADDITION TO FIELD WORK AND ANIMAL LAW ENFORCEMENT, DIFFERENT COUNTY ANIMAL SERVICES ALONG WITH HEALTH AND HATE HILTON HEAD HUMANE ASSOCIATION DELIVERS CRITICAL COMMUNITY PROGRAMS SUCH AS ADOPTION AND OUTREACH EVENTS SPAY NEUTER PROGRAMS, VACCINATION AND MIKE CHIP

CLINICS. >> AND WHEREAS BEAUFORT COUNTY RECOGNIZED THE ANIMAL SERVICES AND HILTON HEAD HUMANE ASSOCIATION STAFF WHEN THEIR DEDICATION AND SERVING ANIMALS AND RESIDENTS OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BEAUFORT COUNTY COUNCIL FOR CLAIMS APRIL 11TH. APRIL 17 NATIONAL ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL APPRECIATION WEEK THEY DID TODAY. JOSEPH CASTLEMAN CHAIRMAN YOU FORGOT EXCELLENT.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT IT REALLY DOES TAKE A TEAM TO DO WHAT WE DO. AND AS YOU SEE THERE IS A TEAM UP HERE AS NOT JUST EVERYBODY THAT WORKS AT THE ANIMAL SERVICES BUILDING. CERTAINLY IT TAKES COOPERATION WITH OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT, WITH OUR SHERIFF AND HIS STAFF THAT HELP US WITH THE ANIMAL CRUELTY CASES. IT TAKES OUR ATTORNEYS THAT GO IN AND PROSECCO THOSE CASES FOR

[00:15:02]

OUR VETERINARIANS AND ALL OF OUR ANIMAL SERVICES OFFICERS .

SO IT TAKES A LOT OF PEOPLE TO BE A TEAM OUT HERE TO MAKE SURE THAT NO ONE THE ANIMALS TAKEN CARE OF , WHICH IS THE IMPORTANT THING. AND SECONDLY, OUR CITIZENS ARE TAKEN CARE OF . SO I WILL TURN IT OVER TO SAY A FEW WORDS AND RECOGNIZE WHO

SHE'D LIKE TO JUST A FEW WORDS. >> THANK YOU FOR THIS. IT MEANS A LOT.

AGAIN, LIKE HE SAID, ALL THESE PEOPLE MEAN THE WORLD TO ME BECAUSE WE COULDN'T DO IT WITHOUT OF COURSE OUR ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS APPRECIATE ALL THE HOURS.

THIS IS A NEW ONE. SHE'S LEARNING THAT BRADY I KNOW WHAT I'D DO WITHOUT HER.

AND THEN KNOW SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. THEY HANDLE DISPATCH.

THEY ASPIRE THERE WITH US IF WE'RE IN A DANGEROUS SITUATION. FANIA YOU KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT HER. AND THEN A PATROL VET THEY HANDLE ALL OF OUR WILDLIFE INJURED WILDLIFE AND THEY DO OUR FORENSIC. I CAN DO IT WITHOUT DR. MURRAY K.. AND THEN OF COURSE PHIL FOOTE SAID THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE. VERY GOOD. >> THANK YOU ALL FOR CONGRATULATIONS. THE REWARD FOR A JOB WELL DONE. EVERYBODY IS VERY PROUD OF IT.

I APPRECIATE THIS. THANK YOU ALL FOR TAKING THE TIME TO MEET TONIGHT.

WE OFFER OUR HEARTY CONGRATULATIONS AS YOU CELEBRATE THIS IMPORTANT WEEK.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU AGAIN.

>> DAVID, EVERYBODY ELSE ON THE OTHER SIDE GOT PURPOSE. JUST LIKE YOUR UNCLE ACTUALLY.

[9. CITIZEN COMMENTS]

>> WE ARE READ OUR CITIZEN COMMENTS SECTION. WE DO HAVE TWO INDIVIDUALS WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS COUNTY COUNCIL THIS EVENING. THE FIRST IS LAND.

IT'S IN LANSING. HOW WILL PLEASE STEP FORWARD? >> GOOD EVENING, MR. WOLF.

GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> MEMBERS OF COUNCIL MY NEIGHBORS LAY OUT HOW I'M AN OLD RETIRED LAWYER IN BEAUFORT COUNTY. I HAD THE PRIVILEGE MANY YEARS AGO OF REPRESENTING THE COUNTY AS OUTSIDE COUNTY ATTORNEY. I COME TODAY TO TELL YOU THAT WE LIVE OF COURSE IN THE MOST DYNAMIC AND REGRESSIVE AND BEAUTIFUL COUNTY IN THE STATE

OF SOUTH CAROLINA. >> I THINK YOU'D ALL AGREE WITH THAT.

AND THE REASON THAT WE DO LIVE IN SUCH A BEAUTIFUL PLACE IS THE WATER THAT SURROUNDS BOAT LANDINGS AND ACCESS TO THE WATER ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL TO THE PLEASURE OF OUR CITIZENS AS WELL AS MANY, MANY MONEY MAKERS THAT MAKE THEIR LIVING AS CRABBERS OR FISHERMEN OR DOCK BUILDERS. ALL OF THESE FOLKS USE OUR BOAT LANDINGS.

I KNOW THAT YOU'VE GOTTEN SOME ADVICE IN THE PAST THAT THERE IS FIVE OR SIX LANDINGS THAT WE DON'T HAVE A DEED TO AND THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. AND I WILL TELL YOU ALL THAT I'VE ALREADY MET WITH WITH MR. TAYLOR COUNTY ATTORNEY AND DEPUTY BRITTNEY WARD I BELIEVE WAS HER NAME WHO HAD THE OPINION THAT WE DID NOT OWN LAND IS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE A DEED. I'M HERE TO TELL YOU WE OWN ALL THE LAND.

THERE'S A DOCTRINE CALL A PRESCRIPTIVE EASEMENT WHICH PROVIDES TO PUBLIC USES A PARTICULAR AVENUE WITHOUT INTERRUPTION FOR A PERIOD OF 30 YEARS.

>> THEN THE PUBLIC IS GRANTED PERMANENT ACCESS TO IT. WE HAVE 30 YEAR PRESCRIPTIVE

EASEMENTS ON EVERY SINGLE ONE OF OUR LANDS. >> I'VE BEEN IN BEAUFORT CARRYING MY SAIL FOR 54 YEARS SO I CAN TESTIFY THAT I FISHED OUT OF VIRTUALLY EVERY LAND THAT WE HAVE AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE NO LAND IS EVER BEEN CLOSE BY LANDOWNER THAT SURROUNDS THAT LANDED AND THE SCITUATE TODAY IS THE SAME. WE STILL WE STILL OWN THOSE LANDS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE COUNTY DO A BETTER JOB WITH MAINTENANCE. WE HAVE SO MANY REVENUE ITEMS THAT HELP PAY MENOS MAINTENANCE FOR LANDING UNLIKE O REX GRATION THAT DOES NOT HAVE ANY REVENUE OPTIONS.

PEOPLE WHO OWN BOATS AND MOTELS ARE PAID HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS DOLLARS TO THIS GARY EVERY YEAR

OUT OF THAT. >> SURELY WE CAN FIND ENOUGH MONEY TO MAINTAIN THESE ENDS

MORE MONTHLY BASIS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE SAFE. >> I CAN TELL YOU THE FIVE

[00:20:04]

>> WHAT WE DO OR I MEAN IT IS OUR LAND AND WE NEED TO REPAIR THEM.

>> I UNDERSTAND FROM WHAT MR. GREENWAY THAT THEY IS SOME SORT OF STUDY UNDERWAY.

WHAT IS THE SLOWEST STUDY I THINK I'VE EVER SEEN BECAUSE THIS IT'S INTERRUPTED.

YOU GOT A POTHOLE IN MY LAND AND IT BRICKYARD JUST BIGGER THAN THIS ENTIRE DAY THIS YEAR AND YOU CAN'T BACK YOUR TRAILER IN THAT EASY, DAD . SO TY SO I IMPLORE YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL TO TAKE SOME ACTION AND AND GIVE SOME DIRECTION TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY IDEA. HE IS YOU AT HIS JOB HERE AND YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHICH LAND WE ACTUALLY OWN AND DON'T OWN. HE HAS TO BE GIVEN DIRECTION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, SIR. JESSE WHITE.

GOOD EVENING, JESSE. >> GOOD EVENING. JESSE WHITE ON BEHALF OF THE COASTAL CONSERVATION LEAGUE. I JUST WANTED TO OFFER MY THANK YOU TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MR. GREENWAY AS WELL AS TO YOU. CHAIRMAN PLACEMENT AND COUNCIL MEMBERS RODMAN HOWARD AND MICHAEL. FOR ATTENDING THE WORKSHOP LAST WEEK WITH HILTON HEAD AND SENATOR DAVIS TO DISCUSS THE 278 BRIDGE PROJECT AS WELL AS AN ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR.

MR. FÉLIX DON'T WANT TO LEAVE HIM OUT. WE BELIEVE IT WAS A REALLY PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSION AND MEETING AND WE'RE GREATLY APPRECIATIVE OF THE COUNTY'S WILLINGNESS TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT TIME TO DO ADDITIONAL DUE DILIGENCE ON THIS PROJECT SO THAT THE END RESULT IS SOMETHING THAT EFFECTIVELY ADDRESSES TRAFFIC CONGESTION, IMPROVES SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY, MINIMIZES ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND ESTABLISHES A GATEWAY ON AND OFF THE ISLAND THAT THE REGION LEADERSHIP AND COORDINATION WITH THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD SIDOTI AS WELL AS OUR LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION. SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. >> OK. >> IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO

[10. LIASION AND COMMITTEE REPORTS]

>> WELL, MISS HOWARD. >> YES. MR. CHAIRMAN, NATURAL RESOURCE COMMITTEE MET APRIL 4TH AND WE'VE GOT SEVERAL THINGS ON THE AGENDA COMING FORWARD FORMAT INCLUDING RESOLUTIONS FOR THE AGREEMENTS WITH OUR MUNICIPALITIES FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND UTILITY PROGRAM AND EDUCATION ON M.S. FOR AND ALSO THE CONTRACT AWARD FOR THE

WHITEHALL PARK. >> PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION AND ON APRIL 7TH I HELD A COMMUNITY MEETING AT SHELL POINT BAPTIST CHURCH WITH THE SHELL POINT RESIDENTS TO UPDATE THEM WITH PUBLIC WORKS TELLING THEM UPDATE ON THE STORM WATER AND THE TRAFFIC STUDIES IN THE

STATUS OF THOSE PROJECTS. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE, MR. CHAIRMAN?

>> MR. MACALLAN. YEAH. HOW DO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES AND PUBLIC SAFETY. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF ITEMS THAT ARE PRESENT THIS EVENING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. THIS MAY INCLUDE APPOINTMENTS TO THE DIFFERENT COUNTY LUFKIN.

>> YOU'RE FIRED. THIS REPORT TO THE BEAUFORT COUNTY DISABILITIES AND SPECIAL NEEDS BOARD. THE DEFENSE CAME OUT AND FILED THIS REPORT.

THE LADIES IN ST. HELENA FIRED DISTRICT COMMISSION AND LEAVE BEAUFORT COUNTY COLLECTION RECREATION BOARD AS WELL AS BEAUFORT MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOR ALL OF THE INFORMATION RELATED

TO THOSE NAMES CAN BE FOUND. >> THOSE APPOINTMENTS THE NAMES CAN BE FOUND WRITTEN IN THE CONSENT AGENDA WHICH IS THE BACKUP MATERIALS AND ON THE AGENDA.

THIS MEDIUM. >> THANK YOU, MR. LAWSON. JUST A REAL QUICK REMINDER THAT THE NEXT FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING IS NEXT MONDAY AT 2 O'CLOCK.

EVERYONE'S INVITED TO COME HERE IN PERSON OR JOIN US. >> YES.

AND EVERYONE SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE CALENDAR THAT HAS BEEN PUT OUT AND APPROVED BY COUNTY COUNCIL FOR THE BUDGET TIMELINES. SO WE WANT TO ADHERE TO THAT.

[11. MATTERS ARISING OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION]

OK. >> NO OTHER COMMENTS WE'LL HAVE WE'LL MOVE ON TO MATTERS

ARISING OUT OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. >> WE DID HAVE A LENGTHY EXECUTIVE SESSION. THERE WILL BE A COUPLE ITEMS COMING OUT OF THERE AS WE GO

[00:25:02]

ON THE AGENDA. >> WE WILL TAKE CERTAIN ACTIONS AS A RESULT OF WHAT WE

[12. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA]

MAY I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA WHICH I'LL MOVE ON MOVING MR. MACALLAN MAKES THE OH. MR. CUNNINGHAM MAKES THE SECOND.

WE DO HAVE NINE. I'M SORRY EIGHT ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

DULY MOTIONED AND SECONDED. AND IT WILL BE MOVED WITHOUT OBJECTION AND I SEE NO OBJECTIONS. THEREFORE THE CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVED GOING ON TO OUR ACTION

[13. PUBLIC HEARING AND THIRD READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE TEXT AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 14, ARTICLE II: ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCES]

ORDINANCES. >> MAY I HAVE SUCH A MOTION? PLEASE DON'T MOVE.

MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. MCCOLLUM MAKES THE MOTION. >> I'LL MAKE A SECOND.

MISS HOWARD MAKES THE SECOND. IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE WISHES TO MAKE A COMMENT AS PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING SEEING NONE. IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF COUNCIL

WISHES TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS REGARDING THIS ITEM? >> SEEING NONE DULY MOTIONED

[14. PUBLIC HEARING AND THIRD READING OF AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL TO TERMINATE AN EASEMENT AND EXECUTE AN EASEMENT ENCUMBERING A PORTION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY BEAUFORT COUNTY AND KNOWN AS FORDS SHELL RING]

ITEM NUMBER 14 IS A PUBLIC HEARING. AND THIRD READING OF AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL TO TERMINATED EASEMENT AND EXECUTE AN EASEMENT ENCUMBERING A PORTION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY BEAUFORT COUNTY KNOWN AS FORDS SHEL REIN. MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO THIS HOWARD MAKES THE

MOTION A SECOND, PLEASE. >> SECOND, MR. GLOVER MAKES THE SECOND.

IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO MAKE A COMMENT REGARDING THIS ITEM SAYING NONE? IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION BY ANY MEMBER OF COUNCIL REGARDING

THIS AGENDA ITEM? >> SEEING NONE. THIS WILL BE APPROVED WITHOUT

[15. PUBLIC HEARING AND THIRD READING OF AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE SOUTHERN BEAUFORT COUNTY CORRIDOR BEAUTIFICATION BOARD]

>> MR. CHAIRMAN HOWARD MADE THE MOTION. MR. DAWSON MADE THE SECOND.

IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO COMMENT ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM SEEING NONE? ANY COMMENTS BY ANY MEMBER OF COUNCIL? MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE SOUTHERN BEFORE COUNTY ORDER BEAUTIFICATION BOARD.

WE HAVE SOME MEMBERS OF IT WHO HAVE JOINED OTHER BOARDS TO SERVE THE PUBLIC AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT AND WE APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT THEY SERVED ON THIS BOARD.

>> EXCELLENT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? MR. GREENWAY, DID YOU WISH TO SEE THIS ITEM OKATIE. ALL RIGHT. DULY MOTIONED AND SECONDED AND

[16. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE FOR A BUDGET AMENDMENT YEAR FISCAL YEAR 2022. FISCAL IMPACT- FUNDING WILL BE FROM THE OPERATING SURPLUS OF FISCAL YEAR 2022]

>> ITEM 16 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE FOR A BUDGET

AMENDMENT. YOUR FISCAL YEAR 2022. >> A MOTION PLEASE MAKE THE MOTION. MR. LAWSON MAKES THE MOTION A SECOND PLEASE.

PLEASE. I'LL SECOND MR. CUNNINGHAM. >> THANK YOU.

ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WISH TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS ITEM ? SEEING NONE. MR. GREENWAY TWO. TWO THINGS I JUST WANTED TO BRING TO COUNCIL ATTENTION IN CASE ANYONE WANTED TO INTRODUCE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION.

ONE WE HAD A DISCUSSION OF SHORT TIME GO TO PROCEED WITH THE PURCHASE OF OF FIVE

PARCELS NEAR TCO. >> THIS WOULD BE AN EXCELLENT TIME TO FORMALLY AMEND THIS MOTION TO TAKE THE FUNDING AS WE DISCUSSED FROM THIS PARTICULAR SURPLUS.

THAT BE ONE POINT TWO MILLION DOLLARS IF ANY ANYONE WANT TO DO THAT.

DURING THE LAST BUDGET WORKSHOP THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION THAT WAS HELD ON THURSDAY OR SOME SKOSH IN ABOUT THE POTENTIAL OF RAISING THE PROPOSED 3 PERCENT COLA THAT SOME PART OF THIS REMEMBER UP TO 5 PERCENT NOW AND NOT WORRYING ABOUT DOING SOMETHING IN THE FALL FOR THE EMPLOYEES. IF YOU ALL ARE INTERESTED IN DOING THAT NOW THEN NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO A MAN FOR THAT AS WELL. SO THE 3 PERCENT WOULD GO TO 5 PERCENT AND THEN THE ONE POINT TWO MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE PURPOSE PURCHASED THE T C L PROPERTIES. AS DISCUSSED EARLIER THIS OK MR HOWARD YOU WILL MAKE.

>> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ALLOCATE THE ONE POINT TWO MILLION DOLLARS FOR PURCHASE

[00:30:03]

OKAY. DULY MOTION IN SECOND TO AMEND FOR ONE POINT TWO MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE TCO PROPERTIES AND TO INCREASE THE COLA TO 5 PERCENT.

>> IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT? I'LL MAKE SURE I HAVE A QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN. I'D LIKE TO GET A DEFINITE DATE ON THAT ON THE COLA CALL

DIRECTLY AFFECTED. >> IT'LL BE IT'LL BE THE I CAN'T GIVE YOU AN EFFECTIVE DATE BUT IT'LL BE THE FIRST FULL PAY PERIOD FOLLOWING THE THIRD READING.

>> OK. >> I CAN IN A SECOND THING I WANT WILL MAKE IT CLEAR FOR THE RECORD THE PHYSICAL AMOUNT FOR THE PURCHASE IS ONE MILLION TWO HUNDRED FIFTEEN THOUSAND

DOLLARS. >> YES. OK.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS AMENDMENT WILL BE APPROVED WITHOUT OBJECTION.

AND I SEE NO OBJECTIONS. WE'RE BACK. >> WELL ONE COMMENT ON THE ON THE COAL RULE THAT WILL ACTUALLY INCLUDE ALL EMPLOYEES UNDER UMBRELLA.

IT WILL INCLUDE ALL EMPLOYEES UNDER THE BEAUFORT COUNTY UMBRELLA.

IT WOULD NOT INCLUDE THE FIRE DISTRICTS EMPLOYEES BECAUSE THEIR HANDLED SEPARATELY.

>> WE. WE DO. WE DO THE PAYROLL FOR SOME OF THOSE BUT THEY'RE THERE OUTSIDE OF THAT THE UMBRELLA WILL INCLUDE ELECTED AND APPOINTED POSITION AS WILL INCLUDE ELECTED OFFICIALS UNDER YES.

>> UNDER UNDER OUR UNDER OUR JURISDICTION. YEAH.

THANK YOU. IT'S OK. >> OH, CAN I.

CAN I MAKE A CORRECTION HERE? WHAT DOES NOT APPLY TO A COUNTY COUNCIL DOESN'T.

>> I'M SORRY. SAY AGAIN. MR. MCCALL, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT APPLIES TO COUNTY COUNCIL. WELL, WE HAVE A GENERAL ELECTION IN NOVEMBER.

WE'RE GOING TO. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH, I'M SORRY I DIDN'T I

DIDN'T TAKE THE QUESTION INCLUDE YOU ALL? >> YEAH.

>> NO, THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO COUNCIL UNTIL THE NATS GET BACK ANY MONEY IF YOU GIVE IT TO ME

JUST A LATER EFFECTIVE DATE IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. >> YES.

POSTELECTION YES. IT HAS TO BE DONE AFTER THE NEW COUNCIL SETS IN JANUARY.

OK. ONCE AGAIN IT WAS DULY MOTIONED, SECONDED, DISCUSSED.

AND IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION. THIS WILL BE APPROVED WITHOUT OBJECTION.

>> ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS SAYING NONE? THE THE AMENDMENT IS APPROVED.

WE'RE NOW BACK TO THE MOTION THAT INCLUDES THE AMENDMENT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION REGARDING THAT SEEING NONE. THE ITEM WILL BE APPROVED WITHOUT OBJECTION AS AMENDED.

[17. SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL CHAPTER 82 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF BEAUFORT COUNTY, TO TERMINATE THE COLLECTION OF SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES, TO REFUND ALL SCHOOL IMPACT FEES PAID, TO TERMINATE THE COLLECTION OF PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES IMPACT FEES, ROAD FACILITIES IMPACT FEES—SOUTHERN BEAUFORT COUNTY SERVICE AREA, ROAD FACILITIES IMPACT FEES—NORTHERN BEAUFORT COUNTY SERVICE AREA, LIBRARY FACILITIES IMPACT FEES, FIRE FACILITIES IMPACT FEES AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO]

>> WE'RE NOW AT ITEM NUMBER 17. I'M GOING TO READ ITEM NUMBER 17.

I WILL THEN ASK MR. CUNNINGHAM TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND WHAT WE READ ITEM 17 AS A SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL CHAPTER EIGHTY TWO OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCE OF BEAUFORT COUNTY TO TERMINATE THE COLLECTION OF SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES TO REFUND ALL SCHOOL IMPACT FEES PAID TO THE COLLECTION OF PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITY IMPACT FEES ROAD FACILITY IMPACT FEES SOUTHERN BEAUFORT COUNTY SERVICE AREA ROAD FACILITY IMPACT FEES NORTHERN BEAUFORT COUNTY AREA LIBRARY FACILITY IMPACT FEES FIRE FACILITY

IMPACT FEES AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERE TOO. >> SO I WILL NEED A MOTION FOR THAT AND A SECOND AND THEN I WILL TURN TO MR. CUNNINGHAM. I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION.

MR. CUNNINGHAM MAKES THE MOTION A SECOND PLEASE. MR. RUDMAN MAKES THE SECOND.

MR. CUNNINGHAM, YOU WISH TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

I MOVE THAT WE AMEND SOMETHING PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED. SPECIFICALLY I MOVE THAT WE AMEND THE ORDINANCE WHICH COUNCIL ADOPTED ON MARCH 28 20 22 WHICH GAVE FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY TO AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL CHAPTER EIGHTY TWO OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF BEAUFORT COUNTY TO TERMINATE THE COLLECTION OF SCHOOL IMPACT FEES TARIFF ON ALL SCHOOL IMPACT FEES PAID AND TO TERMINATE THE COLLECTION OF ALL OTHER IMPACT FEES TO BIFURCATING THAT ORDINANCE SO THAT GOING FORWARD WE HAVE ONE ORDINANCE WHICH REPEALS THE SCHOOL IMPACT FEES ORDINANCE AND REFUNDS ALL SCHOOL IMPACT FEES PAY.

AND A SECOND ORDINANCE WHICH REPEALS PROSPECTIVELY ALL OTHER IMPACT FEES WHICH PROVIDES THAT

[00:35:06]

MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. MCCLELLAN, YOU WILL BE THE SECOND. >> OK, DISCUSSION SEEING NO

DISCUSSION. >> THE MOTION TO AMEND WILL GO. >> I HAVE MY HAND UP.

I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD.

MR. SOMERVILLE. YEAH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I AM GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THIS FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. I THINK FIRST OF ALL I THINK THE PROVOCATION IS CORRECT.

I CERTAINLY WOULD SUPPORT THAT AS A SEPARATE. WELL, I'D SUPPORTED THE SEPARATE MOTION BUT IT INCLUDES THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. I KNOW THE REASON FOR REASONS AS I UNDERSTAND IT FOR TERMINATING THE SCHOOL IMPACT FEE.

THERE ARE TWO REASONS I'M AWARE OF . I DISAGREE WITH BOTH.

ONE IS THAT THAT THE THERE ARE NO CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WILL COMPLETE IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS. I DON'T THINK THAT'S CORRECT. UNFORTUNATELY I CAN'T GIVE YOU A SPECIFIC RIGHT NOW BUT I WILL HAVE IT BY THE NEXT READING WHICH I GUESS WILL TWO WEEKS FROM NOW IF IT EXISTS. I THINK IT DOES, YES. THE SECOND REASON AS I UNDERSTAND IT AS A MATTER OF EQUITY IT'S QUOTE UNQUOTE NOT FAIR TO CHARGE THE DEVELOPERS AND UNINCORPORATED P4 COUNTIES SOUTH OF THE BOARD AND CHARGE DEVELOPERS IN THE TOWN LIMITS OF PARTY BILL AND LOVE TO THEM. WELL, WE WE BOUNCED ALONG A DECADE OR SO WITH SOME SOME FOLKS SOME MUNICIPALITIES CONTRIBUTING TO THE.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE LIBRARY IMPACT A AND SO I'M CONTRIBUTING TO THE PARKS AND REC IMPACT FEE AND OTHERS NOT. SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY THERE'S CERTAINLY A PRECEDENT FOR HAVING SOME PARTICIPATED SO I'M NOT. BUT I ALSO I HAVE I ALSO HAVE FAITH I DO HAVE FAITH THAT THE MUNICIPALITY IS A PARTY OF LOFTED IN HEELS AND HE WILL CHANGE THEIR CHANGED THEIR RESISTANCE TO THE SCHOOL IMPACT FEE AND INCOME ON BOARD.

SO I'M GOING TO GO AGAINST IT. THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THE CURRENT AMENDMENT AND THEN THE ACTUAL MOTION. THANK YOU.

LET'S BE CLEAR. WE'RE ACTUALLY WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON RIGHT NOW IS TO TAKE THIS AND SPLIT THEM AND WE'LL VOTE ON EACH. CORRECT.

>> CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S ALL I JUST WANT TO

CLARIFY. OK. >> ANY OTHERS OK.

WE DO HAVE ONE OBJECTION. >> DO I NEED TO CALL THE ROLL OR ARE THE REST OF YOU.

>> JOE, MAY I. YES. IF THIS IS IF THE AMENDMENT IS

JUST RIBAUT CASE NOT CERTAINLY SUPPORT THAT. >> THAT'S AMAZING.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO. IT'S GOING TO SPLIT IT IN TWO SEPARATE ORDINANCES AND THEN WE WILL TAKE ACTION ON EACH INDIVIDUAL OR SO THEN WE WILL HAVE UNANIMITY ON THE MOTION TO AMEND SAYING THAT THIS IS DONE WITHOUT OBJECTION AND I SEE NO

OBJECTIONS. >> OK. >> SO WE'RE BACK TO THE MAIN MOTION WHICH NOW INDICATES THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEPARATE THIS INTO TWO SPECIFIC ORDINANCE.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION SEEING NONE? >> ITEM NUMBER 17 WILL BE

APPROVED WITHOUT OBJECTION. >> MISSING ONE THING. GO AHEAD.

WHEREVER APPROVING THE REPEAL AND WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US AT THIRD READING IT'LL BE IN THE FORM OF TWO SEPARATE ORDINANCES AT WHICH TIME WE CAN TAKE WHATEVER ACTION WE DEEM

NECESSARY. >> OK EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> SO PURPOSE OF THIS WAS TO SPLIT THESE INTO TWO SEPARATE ORDINANCES SO WE CAN TAKE EACH OF THOSE SEPARATELY. WE HAVE DONE THAT. SO THAT'S WHERE WE STAND THIS EVENING GOING FORWARD. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.

AND THIRD READING ON TWO SEPARATE ORDINANCES WHEN WE DO THAT THIS EVENING.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, WE COULD HAVE A DISCUSSION IF YOU SO DESIRE. >> I'M JUST THINKING THAT IF WE'RE SEPARATING THEM THEN WE SHOULD HAVE A VOTE ON EACH OF THOSE MOVING FORWARD TONIGHT

FOR THE SECOND READING GLOVES. >> THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE DID IS IF I'M CORRECT, WE VOTED TO SEPARATE THEM. SO WE NEED TO HAVE TWO VOTES ONE FOR SCHOOL IMPACT FEES AND

ONE FOR THE REST. >> CORRECT. TONIGHT WE NEED TO HAVE TWO VOTES. GRASSO THE MOTION WAS TO AMEND AND THE MOTION SUCCEEDED.

>> SO NOW YOU HAVE A BIFURCATED ORDINANCE AND THERE IS DRAFT ORDINANCES FOR EACH ONE IN YOUR

[00:40:02]

MR. CHAIRMAN, FOR YOU TO TAKE VOTES ON THE REPEAL EACH OF THOSE IMPACT FEES.

>> OK. SO YOUR SECOND READING WILL HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND FOR THE REPEAL OF THE SCHOOL IMPACT FEES AND RETURNING THE FUNDS FOR THE SCHOOL IMPACT FEES.

SO I WILL NEED SUCH A MOTION FOR THAT. SO MOVE.

MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. CUNNINGHAM MAKES THAT MOTION. >> I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> AND MR. CLAWSON WILL MAKE THE SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION REGARDING THAT? JOE, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME GETTING MY LITTLE HAND UP HERE,

SO THAT'S OKAY. >> YEAH. >> FOR THE REASONS I STATED EARLIER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SCHOOL IMPACTS THE ONLY RIGHT AND THAT'S CORRECT.

>> RIGHT. I'M I'M GOING TO OPPOSE THAT FOR THE REASONS I STATED EARLIER. NUMBER ONE, I THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME SEE IP PROJECTS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT CAN COMPLETE WITHIN THREE YEARS. AND SECONDLY THERE IS A THERE'S A PRECEDENT FOR HAVING SOME DISCIPLINES AND SOME NON PARTICIPANTS AND ALSO HAVE HOLD OUT HOPE THAT HARDY VALE BLUFFTON AND HILTON HEAD WILL CHANGE THEIR POSITION AND

SUPPORT BASED BACK. >> SO I VOTE AGAINST IT. OK.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. CUNNINGHAM? YEAH.

YEAH. I WAS AGAINST SCHOOL IMPACT TO BEGIN WITH WHEN WE VOTED ON THIS THIS SUMMER IS THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT I HAVE WITH IT.

ONE OF THEM IS THAT S ABROAD PAYS NORTH ABROAD DOES NOT. SOMERVILLE IS ONE OF HIS STATEMENTS IS THAT THE SCHOOLS CAN GET PROJECTS DONE IN THOSE THREE YEARS.

BUT IS DEFINITELY GOING TO BE UNFAIR FOR THE TAXPAYERS THAT GOT HIT WITH THAT IMPACT FEE AND BLUFFED IN AN UNINCORPORATED AREAS OVER THERE THAT ARE PAYING FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE NOWHERE EVEN AROUND THEM WHERE SOMEBODY RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THEM DID NOT PAY THAT IMPACT FEE BECAUSE AT THAT TIME BLUFFTON WAS NOT SIGNED ON.

IT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF REPEALING ANY OF THESE IMPACT FEES RIGHT NOW IS TO CREATE UNITY AND ALL THE MASSIVE PARTIES AND THE COUNTY. SO THAT'S THAT'S THE MAIN LINE BETWEEN. IT'S NOT WHETHER WE AGREE WITH IMPACT FEES WORK OR DON'T WORK RIGHT NOW IT'S GETTING EVERYBODY ON BOARD THE MUNICIPALITIES AND THE COUNTY ALL WORKING TOGETHER. THERE'S A REASON WE HAVE TO BRING EVERYONE TO THE TABLE.

SO IT'S EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED. THE OTHER ISSUE OF THE SCHOOL IMPACT FEE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LET HER PAY IT TWICE. AND I MEAN BY THAT THESE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING HERE MOVING HERE. YES. THEY ARE GOING TO PAY THE IMPACT ON THE NEW HOUSE. YOU ALSO HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS AREA THAT ARE MOVING TO OTHER HOUSES THAT ARE PAYING THAT IMPACT FEE AS WELL. ALREADY RESIDENTS OF COUNTY BUT EVERYBODY UP HERE KNOWS THAT THIS IMPACT FEE IS NOT GOING TO BE ENOUGH TO BUILD A NEW SCHOOL. THERE STILL WILL BE A REFERENDUM AT SOME POINT IF THEY WANT TO BUILD ANOTHER SCHOOL AND BE FOR COUNTY. I MEAN THAT'S JUST THE REALITY OF IT. COST OF BUILDING HAS SKYROCKETED AND BEYOND THAT IT WOULD TAKE YEARS FOR RAISE 50 TO 60 MILLION DOLLARS TO GET EVEN INTO RETROSPECT TO BUILDING SOME TYPE OF SCHOOL THAT DOES NOT COUNT THE OTHER PROJECTS MAINTAIN IN OTHER SCHOOLS. JAY JACKSON YES AND I HAVE SUPPORTED THE SCHOOL A PACK FEE FOR QUITE AWHILE. MATT, WE'RE DOING THIS AS WE KNOW IN BLUFFTON THINGS ARE GROWING AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MONEY. THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT.

BUT OBVIOUSLY THIS IMPACT FEE HAS BEEN UNFAIR. HILTON HEAD NOT JOINING A HARDY VILLE NOT JOINING BLUFFTON WAS WAS ON THE EDGE AND THEY HAD NO ONE TO NORTHERN BEFORE COUNTY HAS HAS HAS HAS IT HAS TO DO BECAUSE IT WAS JUST FOR SOUTHERN BEEF FOR COUNTY.

>> SO AGAIN WE'VE GOT TO FIND MONEY OTHER PLACES AND THAT'S GONNA BE UP TO THE SCHOOL BOARD TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THAT MONEY COMES FROM. I WAS HOPING TO GET MORE SUPPORT FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD WITH THIS AND WITH PROMOTION OF IT BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES THAT ASK FOR IT. BUT THIS POINT I'M ACTUALLY I'M EXCITED THAT WE CAN REPEAL THIS

AND AND GET BACK TO WHERE WE WERE BEFORE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> CHAIRMAN, LET ME MAKE SURE I

UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE TODAY. >> THE IMPACT FEE IS SOMETHING THAT SOMETHING ABROAD IS COLLECTED IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS OR A HOME AND THE COUNTY IS COLLECTING IMPACT FEES BUT OTHER ENTITIES ARE NOT JOINING IN.

SO IT'S THE ONLY CORPORATE AREA THAT PAYING FOR THE IMPACT FEES AND NOBODY ELSE.

THAT'S AN AREA AND UNTIL WE GET EVERYBODY ON THE SAME PAGE I THINK WE NEED TO DO WHAT THIS

[00:45:01]

>> SO I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION IS ON THE. THANK YOU.

MR. RAHMAN. >> YEAH. I THINK THE SCHOOL IMPACT FEE HAS TWO NEGATIVES TO IT. ONE IS THAT I THINK WE'VE CHALLENGED THE DISTRICT TO STEP FORWARD AND TAKE AN ACTIVE ROLE AND I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT HAPPEN. AND SECONDLY, I THINK OF ALL THE IMPACT FEES. TH ONE THAT HURTS AFFORDABLE HOUSING THE MOST WHEN YOU START TO ATTACK, YOU KNOW, NINE THOUSAND DOLLAR UPFRONT PAYMENT.

WE WE SAY YOU WANT TO DO AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUT THIS ACTUALLY MAKES GOES THE

OPPOSITE WAY. >> YES. NOW THE ACTION WE TAKE TONIGHT

IS NOT THE DEFINITIVE ACTION. >> RIGHT. OK, THIS IS JUST THE SECOND READING SAYING THAT WE WANT TO GO TO THE THIRD READING WITH A PUBLIC HEARING TO ELIMINATE THE SCHOOL IMPACT FEE. SO EVERYBODY IS CLEAR ON THAT. OK.

EVERYBODY BUT MR. SOMERVILLE IS GOING TO BE AN EYE ON THAT, OK? >> OH MAN.

>> MAKE ONE LEFT COMMENT BEFORE YOU SLOW HER DOWN. YEAH.

ONE THING THAT OCCURRED TO ME IS IF WE DO IT AND REVERSE THIS IMPACT FEE AND REFUND THE MONEY AT THAT POINT AS I UNDERSTAND IT AT THE POINT THAT THEY PULL THE PERMIT WHEN THEY WHO THEY'VE ALREADY BILLED OR THE DEVELOPERS ALREADY TAKEN MONEY FROM THE RESPECT FROM THE BUYER BUYERS. SO WHO GETS IT? IT GO BACK TO THE BUILDER OR

THE DEVELOPER OR DOES THAT SOMEHOW? >> WELL, IT DEPENDS UPON IF IT'S JUST PULLING THE PERMIT THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO BE REFUNDED THE MONEY BECAUSE THE PERMIT TO BUILD THE HOUSE DOESN'T MEAN IT HAS BEEN TURNED OVER TO AN INDIVIDUAL.

BUT IF IT AN INDIVIDUAL ALREADY HAS CONTRACTED HAD THE HOUSE BUILT AND LIVING IN THE HOUSE

THEY ARE THE OWNER OF RECORD AND THEY WOULD BE REFUNDED. >> IS THAT NOT CORRECT?

>> NO. >> WE WILL ACTUALLY REFUND THE PAYER OF THE IMPACT FEE WHOEVER

WROTE US THE CHECK. >> OK. OR THE IMPACT WE WILL YOU KNOW.

>> THAT'LL BE UP TO INDIVIDUALS IF THEY PAID A CONTRACTOR FOR THAT.

IT'LL BE UP TO INDIVIDUALS TO WORK WITH THAT CONTRACTOR TO GET THEIR MONEY BACK IF THEY PAID FOR IT. WE WE WE ALL HAVE TO REFUND THE MONEY TO THE PERSON WHO WROTE US THE CHECK ENTRIES CAUSE THAT'S THE RECORD THAT WE HAVE. OK, OK.

>> OK. ONCE AGAIN THIS WILL BE APPROVED WITH NINE.

>> YES. AND ONE NO. >> OK.

SO THIS IS MR. GREEN MADE A COMMENT. LET ME JUST MAKE THIS COMMENT.

WE DO HAVE A PR PERSON ON STAFF WHO WOULD NOTIFY THE PUBLIC THAT IF WE GET TO THE POINT THAT THEY NEED TO GO AHEAD AND SEE ABOUT THE IMPACT WILL WILL IF THIS GOES TO THIRD READING AND THIS IS REPEALED WILL WE WILL HAVE TO DO A LOT OF WORK TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR AND WE

WILL DO THAT WORK. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. >> MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 18 IS AN APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING APRIL AS I SAID I'M SORRY AS THE SECOND ONE. YEAH.

HOW SOON WE FORGET. OK. THE SECOND ONE IS THE MORE CONTROVERSIAL ONE BECAUSE THIS IS REPEALING ALL IMPACT FEES PRO SPECT OF LATE AND THAT THE IMPACT FEE FUNDS THAT WE HAVE NOW WILL BE SPENT ON PROJECTS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE

PIPELINE. >> SO MOVE. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. CUNNINGHAM

MAKES THAT MOTION A SECOND PLEASE. >> ALSO CHAIRMAN MR. DAWSON

MAKES THE SECOND DISCUSSION AGAIN. >> WHATEVER WE DO TONIGHT IS

FOR THE THIRD READING AND PUBLIC HEARING. >> MR. LAWSON, I AM GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THIS AND JUST AS I MENTIONED OUR OUR LAST MEETING WHEN WE VOTED FIRST READING ON THIS IS THAT I THINK THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY IN A KNEE REACTION OF THE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE GOTTEN. I'M NOT THE SMARTEST GUY IN THE ROOM.

WE HAVE SMART PEOPLE OVER HERE AND WE HAVE SMART PEOPLE IN THE IN THE PUBLIC THAT OBVIOUSLY CAN COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT WOULD MARY TOGETHER WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING HERE.

[00:50:01]

I THINK THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD IF THIS GOES THROUGH TWO WEEKS AND AGAIN TONIGHT AND SECOND READING. SO WE STILL HAVE TIME BUT I'D LIKE TO GIVE OURSELVES MORE TIME TO FIGURE THIS OUT THAT WE WOULD BE CREATING A VACUUM THAT WOULD PUT US IN A BAD SITUATION. SO I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO VOTE AGAINST THIS TO REPEALING ALL IMPACT FEES BECAUSE I KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IMPACT FEES ARE. AND AGAIN, I THINK THAT THERE IS A SOLUTION OUT THERE THAT WE JUST HAVE NOT THOUGHT ABOUT THIS AND GONE THROUGH IT

CORRECTLY. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M GOING TO VOTE ALSO AGAINST THIS AT THIS SECOND READING. I HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE TOWN OF PORT OIL IN THE CITY OF BEAUFORT. THEY ALL WANT THE IMPACT FEES TO HAPPEN. I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BRING EVERYONE TOGETHER TO AGREE ON SOME WAY TO GET THIS DONE. SO AT THIS TIME BECAUSE SECOND READING I AM GOING TO VOTE AS

COUNCILMAN LAWSON IS AGAINST THIS. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? MR. CHAIRMAN, I WISH YOU ALL I'M GOING TO GO AGAINST THIS AS WELL.

>> BUT WE NEED TO I THINK EVERYBODY WOULD AGREE. CORPORATE WORLD WE JUST GET ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES TO SIGN ON TO ALL OF THESE IMPACT FEES AND THEN UPDATE THEM WITH THE LAST IN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAST STUDY. THAT PARTICULAR PRICE DID IT.

THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MR. CUNNINGHAM? WHY NOT? I'M IN FAVOR OF REPEALING THEM AND IT'S FOR A COUPLE REASONS THAT ONE I'VE ALREADY STATED WE NEED TO GET THIS UNIVERSAL ACROSS THE BOARD.

WE JUST HAD A MEETING LAST WEEK WHERE PEOPLE SAT IN FRONT OF US AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW THINGS IN THEIR AREA WEREN'T TAKING CARE OF . BUT YET THEY WEREN'T A PART OF THE PROJECT LIST OR WEREN'T A PART OF THE IMPACT PIECE. AND THEY GONNA TO YELL AT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN FRONT OF THEM. AND THAT WAS US THAT NIGHT.

AND WE GOT AN EARFUL. THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT. AND THEY WERE UPSET AND RIGHTFULLY SO. SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO BRING THE MINNESOTA PARTIES TO THE TABLE AND TO GET THIS DONE. I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE REST OF THESE IMPACT FEES GO AWAY. I WANT TO SEE THEM RENEGOTIATE .

WE KNOW THE TIME FRAME FROM THE LAST TIME THESE HAVE BEEN SIGNED NEGOTIATED AND THEY ARE WAY OVERDUE. I WAS IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THAT WRAPPED IN AND I WAS AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. THE LAST TIME THESE WERE NEGOTIATED AND I'VE TOLD EVERYBODY UP HERE BEFORE AND I'VE TOLD PEOPLE I DON'T PLAN ON DOING THIS JOB FOREVER.

SO I'M NOT A BIG PERSON OF KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD.

I THINK THE TIME TO DO IT IS NOW WE'VE ALREADY MADE IT TO SECOND READING.

WE MOVE FORWARD TO THE THIRD READING THAT GIVES US ANOTHER TWO WEEK TO GET TWO WEEKS TO GET SOMETHING ACCOMPLISHED AND THEN WE CAN REVISIT IT THEN. BUT I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THIS UNTIL WE GET SOMETHING ACCOMPLISHED BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BE IN A SITUATION LIKE WE HAVEN'T HILTON HEAD WEATHER TO TWO AND A HALF YEARS.

DISCUSSING ROADS AND NOTHING'S BEEN MADE AND WE'RE ABOUT TO GRANT ANOTHER EXTENSION AFTER THAT TIME. SO AGAIN I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS SAYING NONE OF THIS WILL BE APPROVED WITH SIX YES AND THREE NO THREE NO BEING MR. LAWSON MS. HOWARD AND MR. SOMERVILLE KNOWS WELL THEN IT WILL BE FIVE TO

FOUR. >> THERE'S TEN OF US. >> I'M SORRY.

THERE'S TEN OF US. SIX TO FOUR. OK.

MOTION IS APPROVED SIX YES OR NO? AGAIN, THIS IS THE SECOND READING. YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE MUNICIPALITIES AT TRYING TO ESTABLISH A MEETING WHERE ALL OF US CAN HEAR THE SAME THING, UNDERSTAND THE RULES, REGULATE GUNS AND LAWS THAT WE ARE ALL SUBJECT TO ON THIS MATTER.

[18. APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING APRIL AS FAIR HOUSING MONTH ]

ITEM NUMBER 18 A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING APRIL AS FAIR

HOUSING MONTH A MOTION PLEASE. >> I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. MS.

>> HOWARD MAKES THE MOTION A SECOND A SECOND MR. GLOVER MAKES THE SECOND ANY QUESTIONS

CONCERNS SAYING NONE. >> THIS WILL BE APPROVED WITHOUT OBJECTION AND I SEE NO

[19. APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO REVISE THE BEAUFORT COUNTY EMERGENCY DISASTER POLICY & PROCEDURES A.9]

OBJECTIONS. >> NUMBER 19 HIS APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO REVISE THE BEAUFORT COUNTY EMERGENCY DISASTER POLICY AND PROCEDURES A DOT 9 MOTION PLEASE MOVE ITS CHAIRMAN MR. CUNNINGHAM AND MR. LAWSON MAKE THE MOTION AND SECOND AND ANY DISCUSSION SAYING NONE. THIS WILL BE APPROVED WITHOUT OBJECTION AND THERE ARE NO

[20. APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO AMEND RESOLUTION 2021/22 WHICH SUPPORTS PUBLIC ACCESS AND PASSIVE RECREATION PROJECTS ON RURAL AND CRITICAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM PASSIVE PARK PROPERTIES; AND CONTRACT AWARD FOR WHITEHALL PARK PHASE I CONSTRUCTION (IFB #030122)]

[00:55:04]

CONTRACT AWARD FOR WHITEHALL PARK. >> PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION IS A MOVE TO MR. GLOVER MAKES THE MOTION A SECOND UNLIKE THE SECOND THAT MR. SOMERVILLE YOU

WILL BE THE SECOND ON THAT. >> ANY DISCUSSION I'D LIKE TO JUST MENTION ON TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE DUE TO A BALD EAGLE NESTING. YEAH I'M PERIOD.

SO WE'RE GLAD TO GET THIS GOING . AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

>> YEAH. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? THIS ONE COULD COME IN THIS GYM. I'VE LEARNED THAT TO VOTE AGAINST ANYTHING STEPHANIE BROUGHT YOU LEARNED YOUR LESSON. OKAY.

[Items 21 - 24]

WE'RE GONNA TAKE ITEMS 21, 22, 23 AND 24 AS ONE VOTE BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND UTILITY AND THE CITY OF BEAUFORT, THE TOWN OF PORT ROYAL, THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON AND THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION AS HOWARD MAKES THE MOTION FOR THOSE ITEMS.

>> THE SECOND PLEASE. THE SECOND MR. CUNNINGHAM MAKES THE SECOND.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION SEEING NO DISCUSSION, THOSE ITEMS WILL BE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT

[25. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A REVISED RESOLUTION OF BEAUFORT COUNTY RESPONSES TO TOWN OF HILTON HEAD COMMENTS ON THE US 278 CORRIDOR TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.]

OBJECTION AND I SEE NO OBJECTIONS. >> ITEM NUMBER 25 AND MOTION PLEASE TO RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL OF A REVISED RESOLUTION OF BEAUFORT COUNTY RESPONSES TO THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD COMMENTS ON THE 278 QUARTER TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. SO WE'LL NEED A MOTION FIRST AND THEN MR. RUDMAN WANTS TO

MAKE AN AMENDMENT SO MR. GLOVER MAKES THE MOTION. >> MR. MCKELLEN, DID YOU MAKE THE SECOND? YEAH. OK, THIS CHIMA PREFER A HIDDEN

FLAIR MAKING MOTION OUT SECOND. >> IT DIDN'T WORK OUT THAT WAY. AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE ON THE HOOK NOW. SEE, YOU SHOULD LISTEN. IF IT'S MR. RODMAN, DO YOU WISH TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE AMEND THE US 278 COURT TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RESOLUTION WHICH WE PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED ON MARCH 28 OF THIS YEAR AS SET FORTH IN THE BACKUP TO THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 25 ON TODAY'S AGENDA.

OK. SECOND PLEASE. NOW SECOND THE MOTION.

MISS HOWARD DOES THE SECOND DISCUSSION. >> MR REDMAN, DO YOU WISH TO

DISCUSS FIRST? >> YES. SO I WAS HAPPY TO GO FIRST.

LITTLE A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THIS ISSUE. I THINK WHERE WE ARE IF YOU GO BACK ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO AND THIS HAS BEEN A VERY CONTENTIOUS THING.

>> IT MAY HELP KNIT COMMUNITY BUT IF WE GO BACK TO ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF GO SENATOR DAVIS AND I CAME TO COUNCIL AND YOU ALL APPROVED PUTTING IN PLACE A SO-CALLED PEER REVIEW OR AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW FOR THE 278 AND I THINK THAT WAS VERY PRODUCTIVE AT THE END OF THE DAY. SECONDLY, SINCE SHORTLY THEREAFTER WE APPROVED FUNDS FOR A LAND PLANNING EXERCISE BUT IT TURNED OUT THAT THE TOWN THEN DECIDED TO DO IT IN HOUSE

AND THEN THEY DECIDED TO DO IT WITH THE CONSULTANT. >> AND SO WE NEVER ACTUALLY DREW ON THE FUNDS WE APPROVED BUT THEY CAME FORWARD. THE LAND M.K. ASK WITH A SERIES OF 20 SIX RECOMMENDATIONS AND IN A BROAD SWEEP I THINK THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NOT DISPUTED BETWEEN COUNTY COUNCIL AND TOWN COUNCIL AND

ADMINISTRATIONS. >> THERE ARE A I WOULD CATEGORIZE MAYBE TWO CATEGORIES OF THAT EACH HAD TWO OR THREE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS. ONE WAS IT HAD TO DO WITH THE ARRIVAL EXPERIENCE WHERE SOME PEOPLE SAID LOOK ALL IT JUST LOOKS LIKE A CONVENTIONAL HIGHWAY THAT'S NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE ARRIVAL EXPERIENCE THAT WE WERE PROMISED.

>> THE SECOND IS THAT THERE'S A COUPLE OF ITEMS. A GOOD EXAMPLE IS THE SO-CALLED WIDTH OF THE TRAIL WHICH IS THE PATHWAY FOR BIKES AND WALKERS ON THE BRIDGE TOWN WANTED 14 AND I THINK THE DESIGNERS HAD 10 FEET AND THEY MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN AN AGREEMENT AT 12 BUT IN ANY EVENT THAT'S AN ITEM THAT CAN BE WORKED AS THE DESIGN GOES FORWARD.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DECIDED TODAY. IT ALSO TURNS OUT THAT UNDER THE FEDERAL MANDATES OF DOING THESE KIND PROJECTS THERE IS WHAT'S CALLED A VALUE

[01:00:01]

SO I THINK I THINK WHERE WE ARE IS THAT WE HAD THE RESOLUTION THAT WE PASSED TWO WEEKS AGO WHAT'S BEFORE US NOW IS TO ACTUALLY EXTEND THAT FOR 90 DAYS AND THERE WOULD BE SOME VERY ADVERSE ACTIONS AND PROBLEMS IF WE WERE TO DO THAT .

AND THIS MAY BE A GOOD PLACE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TO HIGHLIGHT FOR US WHAT ARE THE ADVERSE IMPACTS THAT ARE FACING US. WERE WE TO DO THIS PARTICULAR RESOLUTION TO EXTEND IT THE 90 DAYS THAT. IS IT LOGICAL FOR YOU ALL TO SPEAK TO WHAT THE T IS TELLING US BEFORE MR. CHAIRMAN GO AHEAD, MR. MCCOLLUM.

>> WORRIED MINISTRATIONS. YES. I'D LIKE TO HAVE A CLARIFICATION ON THIS. YES, I'D LIKE TO KNOW THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE EMOTION THAT APPROVE THE REVISED RESOLUTION AND THE AMENDMENT BEING PROPOSED.

>> THE DISTINCTION THERE ISN'T THERE? >> THERE ISN'T THERE ISN'T ONE.

IT'S THE SAME POINT WE MADE WHY WE MADE AN AMENDMENT WITH NO TWO TO INDICATE TO EVERYONE THAT THE ORIGINAL MOTION THAT WE PASSED DID NOT INCLUDE THE EXTENDED TIME RIGHT.

>> OK. AND THIS AGENDA ITEM CHANGED THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THAT WE ACTUALLY BUY ROBERT'S RULES HAD TO DO A PROCEDURE TO ALERT EVERYBODY THAT FROM THE LAST MEETING TO THIS MEETING WAS A SPECIFIC CHANGE THAT'S THE ONLY THING.

BUT YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THE AGENDA ITEM CONTAINS THE CHANGES.

>> WE'RE JUST TRYING WHY DO IT SO WHY LOGICALLY WHY ARE WE CONSIDERING AN AMENDMENT IF THERE'S NO DISTINCTION AS I SAID, ONLY BECAUSE WE TOOK AN OFFICIAL ACTION LAST TIME.

>> RIGHT. SET THE TIME AT 30 DAYS THEN WE MAY MET WITH HILTON HEAD ISLAND BUT NOW WE'RE PUTTING IT ON THE AGENDA AND WE HAVE TO AMEND THE MOTION THAT WE TOOK AT THE LAST MEETING IN ORDER TO HAVE THIS ONE LEGITIMATE, IF YOU WILL. THAT IS THE ONLY THAT'S THE ONLY DISTINCTION THAT WE'RE HAVING BY ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER YOU HAVE TO AMEND SOMETHING THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY ACTED UPON SIMPLY A PROCEDURAL YES, IT IS JUST FANCY DRILL.

>> I CAN JUST SAY IT STILL BE 30 DAYS WITHOUT THE. >> CORRECT.

CORRECT. NO, MY MOTION WAS FOR THE REVISED WHAT'S RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. AND INCLUDING 90 DAYS. YEAH WE'RE HAVING TO DO AS UNDO

THE RESOLUTION THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED. >> RIGHT AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE MOTION AND DO THE AMENDED MOTION TO GET THE 90 DAYS AND THE 30 DAYS IN THEIR FIRST MOTION WAS TO PROVE TO THEM NO YOU ON THE OTHER DID GREAT.

>> YOU DID. YOU'RE NOT GETTING OFF THE HOOK THAT EASY.

TRY THAT. >> OKAY. FOREVER YOU WERE RIGHT.

>> OK. >> SO THE QUESTION WAS WHAT ADVERSE EFFECTS MAY BE FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OR THE FEDERAL WHILE MILLETTE JARED.

ELABORATE ON SOME OF THE THINGS WHERE WE THINK WE NEED TO GO QUICKLY ON THIS.

BUT WHAT WE ARE CERTAINLY CONFRONTING NOW IS ONE I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING THIS EVENING DOES NOT STOP WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND NEPA PROCESS. WE'RE STILL PROCEEDING ON WITH THAT BUT WE WANT TO WORK WITH TOWN NED ALLEN CERTAINLY WANTING TO WORK WITH SENATOR TOM DAVIS WHO IS ATTEMPTING TO ADDRESS SOME CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN VOICED BY SOME RESIDENTS OF HILTON HEAD ISLAND IN IN THE

SENATE DISTRICT. >> SO WE WANT TO DO THAT. BUT THAT DOES CREATE SOME COMPLICATION. WE NEED TO GIVE DOJ T SOME CLARITY SO I CAN'T OKATIE SOME CLARITY ABOUT WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DO WITH REGARDS TO THE PROJECT WHILE WE'RE IN THIS 90 DAY PERIOD AND THE 30 DAY WHILE WE'RE WAITING ON HILTON HEAD TO RESPOND AFTER THE ADDITIONAL

[01:05:01]

>> SO THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THE TWO POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE TONIGHT. WE THINK WE CAN ADDRESS THOSE THINGS.

WE CAN CERTAINLY PROVIDE SOUTH CAROLINA O T SOME DIRECTION ON WHAT THEY NEED TO DO WITH REGARDS TO WORK. WE THINK WE CAN DEAL WITH THE ISSUES WITH THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION WITH REGARDS A PROCESS IN ADVANCING IF WE NEED TO AND JARED'S GOING TO GIVE YOU THOSE DETAILS RIGHT NOW AS TO WHAT WE NEED TO DO. SECONDLY, BEFORE I STEP AWAY, DOES IT BY HAVING QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE TWO POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES?

>> WE WANT TO WORK WITH THE TOWN. WE'RE COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH FOUND. WE WANT TO HONOR SENATOR DAVIS IS IN CAMPUS WORK AND HIS

INVOLVEMENT IN THIS SITUATION. >> BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO KEEP THE PATH WE HAVE TO KEEP MOVING.

WE HAD TO KEEP THE PATH FORWARD CLEAR FOR ECPAT HE AND THEIR TEAM THAT'S WORKING ON THIS

PROJECT ON OUR BEHALF. >> AND MORE IMPORTANTLY AND HOW I WANT TO SAY THIS AND IT NEEDS TO BE MADE CLEAR TO EVERYONE WHO IS FOLLOWING THIS PROJECT IS THAT THE T IS PROVIDING

PROJECT MANAGEMENT TO BEAUFORT COUNTY. >> WE ARE THE PROJECT OWNERS IF

YOU WILL. >> IT IS OUR PROJECT. IT'S NOT ANYONE ELSE'S PROJECT ,BEAUFORT COUNTY'S PROJECT. SO WHATEVER HAPPENED HERE I WOULD RECOMMEND TO YOU ALL ON THE COUNTY COUNCIL AS A COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND THE SPIRIT OF WORKING WITH THE TOWN AND HILTON HEAD ISLAND. AND AND DOING THESE THINGS MOVING FORWARD IS IT NEEDS TO BE MADE CLEAR THAT THE COUNTY IS THE IS THE APPLICANT TO THE CEO TO AND AS WE'RE GOING TO DO OTOH PROJECT MANAGEMENT. SO THIS IS OUR PROJECT. I GUESS I GUESS THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE CLEAR BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT PEOPLE FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A COUNTY PROJECT.

IT'S NOT A HILTON HEAD PROJECT. IT'S NOT A STATE PROJECT. IT IS A COUNTY PROJECT THAT IS BEING MANAGED ON OUR BEHALF BY THE SOUTH COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

THERE ARE A LOT OF SKILLED PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT AT THE OKATIE AND WITH THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND ALL OF THAT, A LOT OF WORK THAT A LOT OF THEIR WORK IS BEING CRITICIZED BY FOLKS WHO HAVE NOT SPENT AS MUCH TIME STUDYING THESE ISSUES AS THOSE FOLKS DO GOATEE AND THE PROJECT ENGINEERS FOR DUTY HAVE SPENT STUDY IN THIS ISSUE.

>> SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO DO IMMEDIATELY AFTER WHATEVER HAPPENS HERE TONIGHT IS THAT WE NEED TO SCHEDULE A WORKSHOP WITH YOU ALL AT A TIME THAT'S CONVENIENT FOR YOU ALL SO THAT WE CAN GET IN A ROOM WITH D O T REPRESENTATIVES AND THE PROJECT ENGINEERS.

>> CASEY I ENGINEERING AND THEY CAN TELL YOU ALL THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE BECAUSE AN END TO END ANALYSIS THROUGH THE CORRIDOR HAS ALREADY BEEN PERFORMED BY THE UN AND WE HAVE THAT DATA. SO THIS NDA ANALYSIS IS OUTSIDE OF THE PROJECT SCOPE AT THIS POINT AND CARRIES IT THROUGHOUT THE ISLAND SO YOU ALL NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> OKAY. SO JARED, I'M I'LL LET YOU FINISH OFF THE DETAILS THERE.

>> WHAT YOU DO THAT IS REALLY YOU TALK ABOUT JUST BEING REALLY COUNTY PROJECT WHICH MEANS THAT THE BOTTOM LINE IS IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COUNTY.

YES. SARA, THE IS A CONCERN. WE'RE ON THE HOOK.

WE'RE ON THE HOOK. >> YES, AND BEING ON THE HOOK WITH THE STATE AS WELL AS THE MUNICIPALITY INJECTING DELAYING ACCELERATES. IS THAT SOMETHING I SEE IN THE RESOLUTION? IT DOES. IT DOES TALK ABOUT ANY DELAY WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY BUILD THE RIO HILTON HEAD IN SOME LOCATIONS AND THIS RESOLUTION. BUT WHAT ABOUT THESE STATES? IF THIS WE WE HAD TO PROVIDE A QUARTERLY REPORT WHERE WE'RE ON THE PROJECT STATUS TO THE STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANK, WE HAVE TO

BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY WHERE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS. >> SOME FOLKS SAY, HEY, DON'T

[01:10:06]

>> SO WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER WE DO HERE, THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION, THIS TALENTED INDIVIDUAL STANDING ON MY RIGHT IS NOT IS NOT CALLS TO DELAY.

>> IT'S FOR OTHER REASONS. WE'RE HAPPY TO WORK WITH THOSE ENTITIES FOR THOSE OTHER REASONS. BUT WE MAY NEED SOME EXTRA HELP DOWN THE LINE OF KEEPING OUR FUNDING M. INTACT AND CONTINUING TO MOVE THIS THROUGH THE FEDERAL PROCESS.

>> JEFF JERRY, SO TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFICS TO WHAT ERIC WAS TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY IN OUR MEETING LAST WEEK WITH TOWN COUNCIL AND SENATOR DAVIS WAS THERE AS

WELL. >> THERE WAS A COUPLE COMMENTS THAT ME THAT WERE MADE BY SENATOR DAVIS AND FOLLOWED UP WITH A LETTER TODAY. SO COUNCILMAN ROBB AND BACK TO YOUR COMMENT THE 90 DAYS SO LONG AS WE PROVIDE DIRECT DIRECTION TO D.A. AND THEY CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD AND THE COMMENTS AS PROPOSED BY SENATOR DAVIS DON'T AFFECT THAT DIRECTION, THEN THERE IS NO ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE PROJECT SCHEDULE ON THE PROJECT COST.

HOWEVER, SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE STIPULATED ARE PROVIDED IN THE IN THE JOINT MEETING AS WELL IN THE FOLLOW UP LETTER DO PER PRESENT AN ISSUE WHERE IT COULD IN FACT PRESENT DELAY AND ADDITIONAL COSTS SPECIFICALLY ONE OF THE COMMENTS WAS AN INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THIS END TO END THE VEHICULAR THROUGHPUT TO SEE IF THERE'S DELAYS AND OTHER MEANS IN COORDINATE WITH D.A. AND OUR DESIGN CONSULTANTS.

>> THIS INDIAN SIMULATION HAS BEEN COMPLETED. I THINK CASEY COULD GIVE US SOME MORE INFORMATION ON WHAT THAT IS FOR ALL OF OUR SAKES. BUT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS A LITTLE BIT MUCH MORE THAN THAN JUST THE INDIAN SIMULATION IS ACTUALLY LOOKING AT MULTIPLE ALTERNATIVES, SOME OF WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN LOOKED AT IN THE 19 ALTERNATIVES.

SOME ARE BEYOND THE TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS AND THREE TO FOUR MONTHS WHICH PROPOSES HOW LONG THIS WOULD TAKE IN OUR IN OUR OPINION WOULD TAKE MUCH LONGER AND COST MUCH MORE TO THE TUNE OF POSSIBLY 2 TO 3 MILLION IN EFFORT AND UP TO 12 MONTHS OR SO IN TIMELINE. SO ONCE YOU GET INTO THOSE FIGURES THERE IS A REAL COST IN REAL TIME AND DELAY. AND ADDITIONALLY WHATEVER EFFORTS ARE MADE WOULD THEN HAVE TO BE VETTED THROUGH D.A. AND OUR DESIGN ENGINEER THROUGH THE NEPA PROCESS.

SO ADDITIONAL TIME DELAY ON THAT FRONT. SO DOJ T HAS POSITION TO US THAT IF WE DO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT AS ADDITIONAL STUDY THAT WE POSTPONE ALL EFFORTS WITH

D.A. SCOPE ALERT AS WHATEVER MAY COME. >> THAT STUDY WILL AFFECT THE WORK THAT THEY'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH CURRENTLY TO PRESENT OUR NEPA APPLICATION.

SO THERE'S NO POINT IN IN DIRECT INDIA TO MOVE FORWARD IF THEY'VE GOT TO REDO THERE WERE AFTER A SET STUDY IS TAKING PLACE AS FAR AS THE 26 CHANGES THAT WERE SUBMITTED.

THERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC ONES AGAIN THAT WE NEED TO PROVIDE DIRECTION TO.

THEY WERE ALL ADDRESSED IN THE RESOLUTION IN THE NATIONAL RESPONSE, TWO OF WHICH ARE VERY

IMPORTANT TO DFT AND THE TIMELINE OF THE PROJECT. >> ONE IS THE TWO BRIDGES VERSUS ONE BRIDGE. THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL COST WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT AS WELL AS THE THE SHOULDERS, THE BRIDGE THOSE ARE FEDERALLY MANDATED AND THOSE COSTS AGAIN ONCE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROCESS THOSE ARE GOING TO BE THINGS THAT ARE OUTSIDE THAT HAVE TO BE DETERMINED. THE DESIGN CAN MOVE FORWARD. THOSE ARE THE CRITICAL PATH AND DESIGN FORWARD. AND THEN THIRDLY, ONE OF THE LAST COMMENTS THAT WAS PRESENTED WAS A COORDINATION SYNCHRONIZATION OF THE SIGNALS ALONG THE CORRIDOR, NOT JUST IN THE PROJECT CORRIDOR BUT ON BOTH SIDES ON THE ISLAND AND ON THE MAINLAND.

THERE HAS BEEN WORK BY THE OKATIE AND THE COUNTY AS WELL AS HILTON HEAD OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS ON THAT WHERE MONEY HAS BEEN EXPENDED AND THOSE SIGNALS HAVE BEEN COORDINATED

AND ARE HAVE BEEN UPGRADED TO ADAPTIVE. >> SO WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR HAS ALREADY BEEN IMPROVED SOME OF THE SYNCHRONIZATION SO THAT THAT ITEM TO TO SEE THAT THESE

[01:15:05]

ARE ALREADY SYNCHRONIZED, THOSE ARE INDEED SYNCHRONIZED. >> NOW THERE COULD BE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS IN TIMING OVER TIME SIGNALS KIND OF GET OUT OUT OF SYNC SO THEY COULD BE RETIRED AND THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S EVALUATED. BUT ACTUAL PROCESS HAS BEEN LOOKED AT IN PREVIOUS YEARS THROUGH DST. SO THAT'S JUST MORE SPECIFICS AND I'LL GLADLY TAKE ANY QUESTIONS WITH THAT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION IF WE HAD TO DELAY SOMETHING THAT TAKES 12 MONTHS TO DO THE STUDY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT COULD NOT BE A OPEN DOOR TO GROUPS THAT MIGHT WANT TO FIGHT THIS AND SAY WE HAVE TO START

THE NEPA PROCESS OVER AGAIN. >> IT COULD BE. >> SO ALL THE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE SO FAR ONLY A PROCESS WE BASICALLY HAVE THEN WHITTLING IT DOWN TO A FUNNEL FROM THE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.

SO WE'RE OPENING THEM BACK. EXPLORE ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVES THEN.

YES, THEORETICALLY WE COULD GO WE MAY HAVE TO RESTART OUR DO OVER SOME OF THE WORK THAT'S

BEEN DONE WHICH WOULD BE EVEN MORE DELAY. >> THANK YOU, MR. MCCLELLAN.

YOU KNOW, WELL, WE WERE ALL IN ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING AND SENATOR DAVIS MADE THIS

PROPOSAL. >> THE RESPONSE WAS OVERWHELMINGLY DEFINITE.

YOU NOBODY SAID ANYTHING. WE NOW A WEEK LATER COMING IN WITH THIS ARGUMENT OBJECTING SEPARATELY TO ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS THE SENATOR MADE.

ARE WE NOW PREPARING TO TELL THE TOWN OF MILTON HAD SENATOR DAVIS HIS 90 DAY PROJECT IS GOING TO TAKE A YEAR AND COST THREE MILLION DOLLARS WHILE HE IS AT THE MEETING TOLD US IT WAS A QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS THAT HE COULD GET IT DONE IN 90 TO 120 DAYS.

IF THAT'S THE CASE, WHY WASN'T SOMEONE SPEAKING UP AT THE MEETING AND CHALLENGING THIS

WHEN IT HAPPENED RATHER THAN A WEEK LATER? >> SO NO, WE'RE NOT.

>> WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO DOING THE STUDY OR AT LEAST LOOKING IN TO THE SCOPE AND THE COST OF IT. WE ARE HERE TODAY TELLING YOU ALL WHAT WE ARE BEING TOLD BY THE D O T AND THE CONSULTANTS. WE HAD A CALL WITH THEM TODAY WHICH IS A PART OF OUR MONTHLY STATUS CALL WITH THEM AND THESE ARE THE THINGS AFTER SEEING SOME DETAILS FROM THE SCOPE THAT WAS GIVEN TO US JUST A DAY IN WRITING BY SENATOR DAVIS AS A RESULT OF THAT.

THAT'S WHERE THIS THAT'S WHERE THESE LATEST CONCERNS ARE COMING FROM.

SO IF I WAS WATCHING TELEVISION AND I WAS NOT AT HILTON HEAD THIS THE FIRST DAY DURING AGAIN WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT AGAINST US DO WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT WE SHOULDN'T DO THE STUDY THAT'S

NOT OVERSEEING AT ALL. >> WE WANT YOU ALL TO UNDERSTAND.

WHAT IS THE POTENTIAL THAT WE ONCE WE GET THE SCOPE WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE AND WHAT WHAT THE TIMEFRAME MIGHT BE, WHAT THE COST MIGHT BE BASED ON THE DETAILS WE'VE WE'VE SEEN WE GOT

TO DAY IN WRITING WE'RE NOT OPPOSING ANYTHING. >> WE'RE NOT SPEAKING AGAINST ANYTHING. WE'RE TELLING YOU ALL THE POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES AND AND TRYING TO PAINT A CLEARER PICTURE FOR YOU ALL ON. SO AS YOU CONSIDER THIS THIS SITUATION WE DID NOT KNOW THE DETAILS OF WHAT WAS BEING PROPOSED LAST WEEK IN THE WORKSHOP. LIKE WE KNOW TODAY THERE'VE BEEN MORE THEY'VE BEEN THEY'VE BEEN PROVIDED IN MORE DETAIL. AND AS A RESULT OF THAT AND OUR DISCUSSION ON TOTN CASES TODAY THIS IS WHAT THEY TOLD US IS THE POTENTIAL POTENTIAL CONFLICT SAYS OF THAT MY RECOMMENDATION TO YOU IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A RECOMMENDATION FROM COUNTY ADMINISTRATION IS ONLY AS YOU ALL GO INTO THIS UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES ARE.

I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU VOTE TO APPROVE THE REVISED RESOLUTION AS AS AMENDED FOR THE 90 DAYS AND THEN THE 30 DAYS DOWN TO HILTON HEAD TO PROVIDE A RESPONSE.

I WAS JUST TRYING TO WE WERE JUST TRYING TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO YOU ALL AS TO THE LATEST DETAILS THAT WE NOW KNOW BASED ON OUR CONVERSATIONS TODAY AND THE OTHER QUESTIONS READY IF I UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE AND WE LOOK LOOKING AT WHAT DOTY IS TELLING US THAT IF WE GO AHEAD WITH THIS RESOLUTION THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THE WHOLE PROJECT ON HOLD UNTIL IT'S DONE WHETHER

IT'S FOUR MONTHS OR 14 MONTHS FROM NOW. >> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING

OF WHAT I HEARD TODAY IS GOING TO HAPPEN. >> NOW LET'S THINK ABOUT IT FROM A COST STANDPOINT. THEY'VE MAINTAINED UP TILL NOW THAT THEY HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO

[01:20:03]

BECAUSE THE SIB MONEY IS A FIXED AMOUNT. >> IT'S NOT INDEXED TO INFLATION. THE REFERENDUM IS A FIXED AMOUNT.

IT'S NOT INDEXED TO INFLATION. SO IF IT GOES UP BY THAT KIND OF MONEY WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLACE TO GO FOR IT AT THIS POINT IN TIME. SO IT SEEMS TO ME IT'S VERY SHORT SIGHTED FOR US IN ANY FORM TO AGREE TO THIS RESOLUTION WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY IN MY MIND RUNS A HIGH RISK OF SHUTTING DOWN THE PROJECT OR AT A MINIMUM PUTTING IT ON HOLD BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT DOJ HAS SAID THEY'RE GOING TO DO IN WHICH CASE WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE A FURTHER MUSHROOMING OF THE OF THE COSTS. AND AM I MISSING SOMETHING IN

THAT? >> I DON'T THINK T HAS TOLD US THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THE PROJECT HOME. I THINK AUDIOTAPE YOU CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG HERE DOJ HAS ASKED US TO TELL THEM IF WE WANT THEM TO PUT THE PROJECT ON HOLD WHILE WE'RE UNDERTAKING

THIS ADDITIONAL STUDY. AND WE DO. >> WE DO.

I DO NOT I DO NOT RECOMMEND THAT WE DO THAT. I THINK WE NEED TO PROCEED ON WITH THE APPLICATIONS AND SOME METALS AS QUICKLY AS WE POSSIBLY CAN.

>> THANK YOU. WHAT DO YOU YOU ALSO TOLD US IS THAT THIS STUDY, THE INDIAN SIMULATION WHICH WAS TALKED ABOUT LAST WEEK THEY HAVE PERFORMED THAT THAT TASK AND CAN GLADLY GIVE US THAT INFORMATION. SO WE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING THE SCOPE THAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE LETTER TODAY FROM SENATOR DAVIS IS BEYOND THE TASK OF JUST LOOKING AT THE END IN SIMULATION IN THE CORE AND THE CORRIDOR.

SO PROVIDING DFT DIRECTION TO MOVE FORWARD AND AND PROVIDING COUNSEL AND JOINT COUNSEL WITH FOUND HILTON HEAD THAT DOESN'T DELAY REGARDLESS WHETHER WE GIVE THEM 90 DAYS TO RESPOND OR NOT. HOWEVER, IF WE GIVE A CONSULTANT A MOVE FORWARD TO GET A CONSULTANT TO DO THE ADDITIONAL STUDY THEN THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD PROBABLY BE BENEFICIAL TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO DUTY TO PAUSE WHAT THEY'RE DOING WHILE WE DO THAT STUDY.

BUT IF WE USE THIS STUDY THAT HAS DONE WHICH DESCRIBES THE INDIAN SIMULATION, THEN THERE WOULD NOT BE AN ADDITIONAL STUDY BEYOND WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN PERFORMED.

>> SO IN THAT SCENARIO WHY DO WE NEED THE 90 DAYS THE STUDY HAS BEEN DONE? PEOPLE CAN LOOK AT THAT IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME AND DECIDE IF IT'S REASONABLE OR NOT REASONABLE. IT'S THE IT'S THE 90 DAYS THAT'S THE KILLER.

IT'S INTERESTING IF YOU ALSO TAKE THOSE KIND OF INFLATIONARY NUMBERS AND YOU ESSENTIALLY MOVE THE PROJECT OUT A COUPLE OF MONTHS, YOU YOU'RE PROBABLY ADDING ON THE RANGE OF 3 4 OR 5 MILLION DOLLARS PER MONTH FOR EVERY MONTH THAT YOU MOVE IT OUT BECAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING COMPOUNDING OF ALL THESE INFLATION RATES. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULD NEED THE 90 DAYS. IF WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW A STUDY THAT'S ALREADY IN EXISTENCE AND WE'D LOOKED AT IT TOMORROW OR NEXT WEEK WHY DO WE NEED THE 90 DAYS AND PUT PUT A RISK OF ALIENATING FEDERAL HIGHWAY AND LCD OKATIE OR CAUSED WE WE MAY NOT NEED THE 90 DAYS IT CERTAINLY DOES NOT HURT FOR US TO GO TO PUT TOGETHER A SCOPE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WRITTEN DETAILS FROM SENATOR DAVIS AND CHECK TO SEE WHAT IT IS GOING TO ACTUALLY

COST AND HOW MUCH TIME IT WILL ACTUALLY TAKE. >> SO YOU KNOW YOU ALL WOULD NEED TO EVALUATE THAT IN MY OPINION. I DON'T.

I DON'T SEE ANY HARM IN DOING THIS RESOLUTION'S THIS EVENING TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO TAKE SOME ADDITIONAL TIME TO LOOK INTO THIS ISSUE TO SEE IF THE 90 DAY STUDY IS IS A LEGITIMATE TIMEFRAME AND IF THE COST IS IS CAN BE IF THE STUDY CAN BE DONE FOR THE COST BASED ON WHAT WE RECEIVED IN WRITING TODAY FROM SENATOR DAVIS, DO YOU THINK WE LOSE OR RETAIN THE MONEY FROM

[01:25:01]

THE SALE? >> IF WE GO OUT 120 DAYS WE WILL I THINK WELL THAT'S HARD

TO SAY. >> I DON'T WANT I DON'T WANT TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

I THINK WE CAN DEFEND WITH SENATOR DAVIS ASSISTANCE DELAYING THE PROJECT FOR 120 DAYS WHILE WE'RE DOING THESE ADDITIONAL STUDIES. I THINK THAT I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THERE'S FORTY FIVE OTHER COUNTIES OUT THERE WHISPERING IN THEIR POLITICIANS THAT THESE

PEOPLE ARE SITTING ON THIS MONEY. >> YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT AND THAT WE'VE GOT A GOOD USE FOR IT. I THINK THE MONEY IS GONE IF WE IF WE'RE DOING SOMETHING THAT'S ADDING THIS KIND OF DEAL. NOW HERE'S HERE'S THE

ALTERNATIVE. OK. >> IT SEEMS TO ME THE ALTERNATIVE IS TO SAY KEEP THE DNIEPER PIECE GOING, GET EVERYBODY ON BOARD ESSENTIALLY AGREE ON THE SMALL NUMBER OF ITEMS THAT ARE IN DISPUTED AND GET AN AGREEMENT THAT HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE DONE. SO FOR EXAMPLE, CAN THEY BE DONE IN PARALLEL WHICH I THINK THEY CAN AND THEN IN THAT CASE WE'VE KEPT THE PROJECT MOVING. WE GET AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN ON WHAT ARE THE THREE OR FOUR OR FIVE ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT AND THOSE GET WORKED IN PARALLEL AS OPPOSED TO IN THE END. TO ME THAT SEEMS LIKE THE MORE LOGICAL WAY TO GO AND NOT NOT RISK THIS AND INCUR MORE AND MORE COSTS THAT WE CAN'T

AFFORD. WHAT AM I MISSING? >> I MEAN THAT'S THE THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO THINK ABOUT IT. WE HAVE A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S OUT THERE THAT WE HAVE OBLIGATION TO. AND ANYTHING THAT WE DO THAT DEVIATES FROM OUR PROPOSED SCHEDULE WE WILL HAVE TO DEFEND AND MAKE MAKE KNOWN TO CIB ALONG THE WAY. SO WE'LL WE'LL BE IT UPDATE INITIATIVE THIS QUARTERLY NOT AT THE END OF THE PROJECT AND LET HIM KNOW THAT WE FINISHED OR WE'RE OUT OF TIME BUT WE'LL BE UPDATING THEM QUARTERLY SO THAT IS ONE THING WHETHER WE LOSE A MONTH IN CONSTRUCTION TIME OR A MONTH IN ENGINEERING TIME THAT IS THE SAME MONTH THAT WE SO THERE IS A POINT TO

BE MADE THERE. >> SO WEATHER WHETHER IT'S 90 DAYS OR 30 DAYS IN THE TOWN, WE CAN CONTINUE TO COORDINATE WITH THE TOWN BOTH NOW AND AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND DELIVERED PROJECT INTO THE DESIGN PHASE. AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, THERE IS A VALUE ENGINEERING OPPORTUNITY WITHIN THE DESIGN PHASE. SO THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE THE ONLY TIME THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE PROJECT WE'RE GOING TO STILL BE DESIGNING THE PROJECT FOR THE NEXT TO TWO AND A HALF YEARS. SO THE OTHER PIECE THAT ENTERS INTO THIS IT'S IN OUR RESOLUTION WHICH IS THE LAST ITEMS THAT THE TOWN PROVIDES ITS MUNICIPAL CONSENT FOR THE PROJECT. THIS THIS HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT CONTROVERSIAL AND THEN AS I UNDERSTAND IT BASICALLY SAYS IF DOTY OR THE COUNTY I GUESS IS GONNA DO A ROAD PROJECT INSIDE OF THIS, APPARENTLY THEY HAVE TO CONSENT TO IT.

AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THAT PEOPLE ARE AGREEING THAT THE TOWN THAT ACTUALLY HAS THE ABILITY TO VETO THE PROJECT. SO TO ME IT ALSO DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO GO OUT 120 DAYS AND THEN HAVE THEM VETO WISE. WE'LL HAVE THAT DISCUSSION TOMORROW.

AND GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY I THINK. I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD VETO IT. BUT IF THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, THAT'S UP TO THEM TO TELL

US A LOT MORE ABOUT MUNICIPAL CONSENT AND CIVIL CONSENT. >> I THINK YOU ARE YOU KNOW, ALREADY KNOW MUNICIPAL CONSENT AGAIN. WE NEED TO TRY TO ACHIEVE MUNICIPAL CONSENT IN OUR EFFORTS OF WORKING ONE TOWN AT HILTON HEAD ISLAND WITH THIS CORRIDOR PROJECT. MARK ORLANDO AND I HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING ON THIS PROJECT TOGETHER. HE AND I HAVE A GREAT WORKING RELATIONSHIP AS I DO WITH THE MAYOR OF HILTON HEAD ISLAND AND I CERTAINLY WANT TO DO EVERYTHING WITHIN MY POWER TO ATTEMPT TO ACHIEVE MUNICIPAL CONSENT WITH TALIA HILTON HEAD ON THIS PROJECT.

I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK TO WHETHER OR NOT THE LEGALITIES OF THAT BECAUSE I THINK THE DOJ HAS ALREADY WEIGHED IN ON THE LEGALITIES OF MUNICIPAL CONSENT ON THIS PROJECT.

THERE ARE SOME THERE ARE SOME EXCEPTIONS TO MUNICIPAL CONSENT AND THIS BRIDGE PROJECT IN THIS

CORRIDOR MEETS BOTH OF THOSE EXCEPTIONS IN THE STATE LAW. >> IT GOES ACROSS THE INTERCOASTAL WATERWAY AND THE BRIDGES ARE OBSOLETE. SO THAT'S THE LEGAL SIDE OF THAT EQUATION. BUT THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT WE NEED TO FORCE THAT ISSUE AND WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH TOWN AND HILTON HEAD ISLAND AND MAINTAIN THE QUALITY WORKING RELATIONSHIP THAT I HAVE WITH THE OFFICIALS THERE, PARTICULARLY IN THE CITY

[01:30:02]

MANAGER'S OFFICE LISTED BUT NOT TOO MUCH. >> ALL RIGHT.

MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT WE NOT ADD THE 90 DAYS LEAVE THE ONE THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE WHICH STILL HAS TIME TO RUN AND WHEN WE GET BACK TWO WEEKS FROM NOW AT OUR NEXT MEETING WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT WHERE WE ARE WITH THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD AND HOPEFULLY IN THE MEANTIME WE COULD ALL COME TOGETHER AND SAY HEY, LET'S AGREE ON. MOST OF THIS IS GOOD.

IT'S BEEN GOOD JOB IDEOLOGY AND THERE'S A COUPLE ITEMS THAT WE CAN EITHER WORK SHORT TERM OR WE CAN WORK IN THE VALUE ENGINEERING PHASE AND THEN WE MOVE ON.

OK. >> LAST COMMENT, MR. SOMERVILLE THEN WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE.

WE'RE COMING UP ON THE WITCHING HOUR WITH ALL OF YOU. >> I JUST HAVE SO MANY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS. I'M CONCERNED I JUST PUT OUT OUR ADDITIONAL PROJECTS AND ADDED WE'VE ALREADY ASKED THE TOWN OF HILL AND HAD TO PAY FOR THEM.

IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL PROJECTS AHEAD OF IF THERE AND SO THEY HAVE NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE AGREED TO DO THAT. SECONDLY GOT THE INFLATIONARY COST WHICH IS QUICK CLOCKS WE'RE GOING ON A TICK TICK TICK EVERY DAY. AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE MONEY WOULD COME FROM FOR THAT. AND THEN OF COURSE WE HAVE THE PROCESS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE INTERRUPTED. OF COURSE WE GOT SAID THAT THE SAME MONEY WHICH IS FINITE ALL THE MONEY WE HAVE IS FINITE AND THE SEED MONEY IS IT IS IT DANGEROUS?

I'M VERY MUCH AFRAID OF EXTENDING CURRENT. >> MR. MCCOLLUM REPRESENTING DISTRICT 10, WHICH IS THE NORTHERN PART OF THE ISLAND JIM COMEY LAST WEEK THIS WAS A GOOD

IDEA. >> IT'S NOT SUCH A GREAT IDEA. I THINK THAT A LOT OF WHAT SENATOR DAVID'S HAS REQUESTED WE DO IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. I THINK THE TRAFFIC STUDY OUTSIDE THE MUNICIPAL LIMITS HILTON HEAD HAS ALREADY TAKEN PLACE.

>> AND HILTON HEAD IS COMMITTED MONEY AND TIME TO STUDY 26 SIX TWENTY SIX TRAFFIC LOADS THROUGHPUT. I THINK IT'S BEEN DONE ALREADY BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE WANT TO DO IT AGAIN. I'M NOT SO SURE ANYBODY. NOW COUNCIL HILTON HAD WANTED TO DO THOSE THINGS. THEY ARE DOING THEIR OWN YOUR OWN TRAFFIC LIGHT ANALYSIS BUT WE CAN INCORPORATE THE ONE THAT WAS DONE IN THE PAST INTO THEIRS AND INTEGRATE IT.

>> IT SEEMS TO ME THAT A LOT OF WHAT SENATOR DAVIS WAS SUGGESTING WAS SUGGESTED BY THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE. I'M NOT SO SURE THAT WE CAN DO ANYTHING HERE TONIGHT WITHOUT HAVING FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE TOWN.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE TAKING ANY ACTION HERE UNTIL WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THIS LATE DEVELOPING INFORMATION THAT MR. GREENWAY IS JOINING US HERE TONIGHT BEFORE WE MAKE A DECISION ON THIS. WE HAVE A 30 DAY TIMEFRAME

ESTABLISHED AND WE WERE ASKED TO EXTEND IT. >> THAT'S WHAT THIS RESOLUTION WAS APPARENTLY GOING TO TRY AND DO. BUT I'M NOT SO SURE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO A LOT OF DAMAGE BY EXTENDING THIS AND HAVING THESE TWO PARALLEL EFFORTS UNDERTAKEN, BOTH OF WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN UNDERTAKEN AND NOW THEY'RE BEING UNDERTAKEN AGAIN.

SO I THINK WE HAVE TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT AND MAKE THAT KNOWN TO THE COUNTY OFFICIALS

THAT WE'RE NOT DOING THIS AGAIN. >> WE'VE ALREADY DONE IT MAY NOT MAKE A LOT OF SENSE BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT PEOPLE FROM THE TOWN AS IT THAT WE ELECTED OFFICIALS WERE THE ONES THAT WANTED TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS. I THINK IT COMING AS I SAID FROM COMMUNITY INPUT WHICH IS VALID THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.

BUT I THINK IT'S TIME FOR US TO RECONVENE A MEETING HERE AND LET EVERYBODY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S AT RISK BEFORE WE TAKE ANY ACTION YOU'RE DOING ANYTHING.

SO I AGREE WITH MR. RODMAN FOR A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT REASONS THAT PERHAPS IT'S JUST NOT A GOOD IDEA TO DO ANYTHING LIKE THOSE AND KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS.

AND RECONVENE ON THIS AND EXPLAIN ALL OF THIS TO PEOPLE SO WE CAN COME TO A COLLABORATIVE DECISION ON HOW WE ALL WANT TO PROCEED. MY SUGGESTION IS I AGREE WITH.

CAN I CAN I ADD SOME TIME BEFORE YOU ALL SPEAK, SIR? WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU ALL CONSIDER DOING IS DELAYING ACTION ON THIS ITEM TONIGHT. WE HAVE ANOTHER BUDGET WORK

SESSION FOR COUNCIL AT 10:00 A.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 21ST. >> SINCE WE HAVE THAT BUDGET OR SESSIONS SCHEDULED FOR THAT TIME, MAYBE WE CAN GET THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEO T AND KCCI HERE AS WELL. WE CAN INVITE THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD COUNCIL TO ATTEND A WORKSHOP SO THAT YOU ALL KING RECONVENE AND HERE THIS INFORMATION FROM THE D T OFFICIALS ABOUT THE SCOPE AND WHAT THAT LIKELY MIGHT ENTAIL AND ALL THAT SUE THAT WOULD BE

[01:35:03]

LET US SEE IF WE CAN GET A WORKSHOP SET UP DEO T FOR THE 21ST OF APRIL.

THAT WAY WE CAN TAKE THIS UP AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING ON THE 25TH IF WE NEED TO DO SO IF WE

DECIDE TO DO THIS. >> I THINK YOU GOT SLIPPING IMMEDIATELY.

I DON'T THINK. I DON'T THINK YOU CAN WAIT. YOU'VE GOT TO TELL THIS IT'S GOING TO BE OVER THERE TOMORROW. SOMEONE HAS TO BE IN TOUCH WITH NOW TO TELL EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENED HERE. BUT I AGREE WITH YOU WE SHOULDN'T TAKE ANY ACTION. BUT WE CAN'T WAIT. SET UP A MEETING FOR A WEEK OR TWO TO DISCUSS THIS. THIS IS AN EMERGENCY. SOMEBODY NEEDS TO BE CONSULTED IMMEDIATELY IN THE IN THE HILTON HEAD TOWN COUNCIL AND THEY NEED TO BE BROUGHT INTO

THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. >> NOT IN A WEEK OR 10 DAYS OR TWO WEEKS.

THAT'S WAY TOO SMALL. >> WELL, I CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION TOMORROW WITH NO, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM DOING THAT. THAT'S GOOD.

>> SO WOULD YOU PROPOSE. I'M SORRY, MR. SHANK. IS THAT A FAIR COMMENT? I WOULD SUPPORT THE DELAY WITH COUNCILMAN MCCALLUM. THIS SHOULD HAPPEN SOONER THAN NOT. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE SHOULD ALSO LOOP IN SENATOR DAVIS FOR SURE.

>> FRANKLY, I'M CONCERNED THAT THIS SEEMS TO HAVE BLOWN UP IN LIKE SIX DAYS.

THERE'S THERE'S SOMETHING IN HERE THAT I'M MISSING. I MEAN OF COURSE I MISSED THE MEETING LAST WEEK. SHAME ON ME. BUT THERE'S THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME SORT OF A PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED THAT THEN MAYBE THIS KIND OF UNSPOKEN AT THE MOMENT IF THIS THING GOES SOUTH AND INVEST IN SIX DAYS IS OBVIOUSLY QUITE JOB.

MR. CUNNINGHAM SORRY. BEFORE WE DO THAT, WE'RE NOW GOING TO GO PAST THE WITCHING HOUR. SO I'M GOING TO NEED MOTION TO EXTEND.

I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. THANK YOU. SECOND ALSO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

>> HI BUDDY. AGREED ON THEIR CALLS. OK, CAN RIGHT NOW MR. CUNNINGHAM? THANK YOU SIR. DON'T BUILD ROADS.

I DON'T HAVE DESIGNED ROADS. JERRY, I JUST HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT FOR THE TWO SAME YEAR QUARTER ON THE HILTON

HEAD BRIDGE A LITTLE OVER FOUR YEARS. >> HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE US

WHEN WE FINALLY COME TO AN AGREEMENT TO BUILD IT? >> IT'LL TAKE THREE YEARS.

THE BILL. SO SEVEN YEARS IF WE AGREED TO SOMETHING NOW.

HOW LONG SHOULD THIS HAVE TAKEN US? A BIG PROJECT TAKES SEVEN OR TEN YEARS. SO WE'RE STILL RIGHT ON TRACK. WELL, WE STILL WE DIDN'T

INCLUDE DESIGN IMPAIRMENT. >> THERE'S TWO AND A HALF YEARS FOR THAT.

SO ALL IN ALL WE START WORKING IN 2017 AND WE HAVE A CONSTRUCTION AT 2028.

SO ELEVEN YEARS. >> SO WE WOULD BE AT ELEVEN YEARS ONE'S DONE.

SO I'M NOT GONNA SUPPORT THAN I'VE BEEN TIRED OF KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD LIKE I'VE SAID THIS WHERE BEEN THAT I KNOW OF AT LEAST NEGOTIATING FOR OVER TWO YEARS AND SO I WON'T SUPPORT IT. IT'S TIME TO GET THE BALL ROLLING.

SO THE QUESTION IS DO WE WANT TO TAKE ACTION? MR. LAWSON, GET REAL QUICK.

>> FOR SOME REASON SITTING HERE REMINDS ME OF WHEN I WENT OFF TO COLLEGE AND MY DAD PULLED ME ASIDE WHO WAS A ASSEMBLYMAN GUY AND HE SAID TO ME HE BE PROJECT FINISHED COMPLETED IS TEN TIMES

BETTER THAN A PLUS PROJECT. YOU NEVER FINISH. >> AND AGAIN.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE SIT HERE AND REDESIGN THIS FOREVER AND EVERY TIME MAKE CHANGES AND CHANGE AND CHANGES WE NEED SOME. I'M I'M ALONG WITH EVERYBODY ELSE HERE THAT WE'RE AT THIS POINT NOW THAT WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> I WOULD ONLY ADD THAT WE'RE STILL MAKE A PLUS. >> YES, GO AHEAD.

>> YOU KNOW, MAYBE A QUICK WAY TO RESOLVE THIS. IF IT'S LATE I WOULD LIKE TO RESCIND MY MOTION. BUT THE MOTION RIGHT IS THE ACTION ON 25 IS YOUR MOTION ANYWAY. SO WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT REMOTE IS WHAT WE COULD DO IS EITHER POSTPONE ACTION TO A SPECIFIC DATE OR REFER IT TO A SPECIFIC COMMITTEE.

CAN WE JUST POSTPONE IT TO THE NEXT COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING? IF WE COULD I'LL SECOND YOU.

JUST MOTION. YES, THERE IT IS. OKAY.

>> I THINK WE'RE BETTER TO REJECT IT AND SEND THE RIGHT MOSTLY MESSAGE STREAM

OF COLUMBIA. >> WELL, I THINK THE MESSAGE IS BEING SENT OUT REJECTING THIS KEEPS IT AT 30 DAYS. POSTPONING IT RIGHT AT LEAST LEAVES THE DOOR OPEN, DECIDED SEE IF SOMETHING HAPPENS THAT WE'RE MISSING TO FIGURE OUT SOME CLEAR THE AIR WAS LET'S TAKE A CALL THE QUESTION ON THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR WHICH MOTION THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW IS TO POSTPONE IT TILL THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE THE TWENTY

SIXTH THAT THE MOTION WAS THE ONE THAT EVEN 90 DAYS, RIGHT? >> CORRECT.

NO. HE'S MOVED. HE'S MAY MOVE THEIR INVESTMENTS THAT ARE AMENDED MOTION. WE HAVEN'T VOTED ON THAT. RIGHT.

SO WE HAVE TO DO THE AMENDMENT FIRST WHICH WOULD BE TO POSTPONE ANY ACTION UNTIL THE

[01:40:07]

NO. >> IT ALSO MEANS THAT IF THIS MOTION PASSES THAT THE 30 DAYS IS IS THE RESOLUTION IS ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW. STILL CORRECT.

>> OK. WHICH STILL GIVES THEM TWO DAYS LEFT AT OUR NEXT KIND OF COUNCIL MEETING. GREAT. YEAH.

AND AS OF THIS MOMENT TO D.A. IS MOVING FORWARD FULL STEAM AHEAD WITH WHAT THEY ARE

WORKING. >> PERFECT. >> YEAH.

>> OK. IS THERE ANYONE OBJECTING TO THE MOTION TO POSTPONE ACTION UNTIL THE APRIL 26 MEETING OF COUNTY COUNCIL SAYING NONE THAT MODUS MOTION PASSES

UNANIMOUSLY. >> NOW WE'RE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION.

SO THE ORIGINAL MOTION IS NOW MODIFIED TO MOVE IT TO THE NEXT COUNTY COUNCIL THE NEXT COUNTY

ME MEETING. >> I THINK I THINK THIS MOTION THAT WE JUST DID SUPERSEDES

[26. CITIZEN COMMENTS]

THAT ONE. >> SO THAT'S IT. OK.

ALL RIGHT. THE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? YOU HAVE 18 SECONDS. I JUST WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO STILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE JOINT WORK SESSION WITH THE TOWN BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF DISCONNECT BETWEEN WHAT STUDIES HAVE BEEN PERFORMED, WHAT ANALYSIS ARE OUT THERE AND I THINK HAVING ALL OF THE PLAYERS PRESENT INCLUDING KCCI AND HCR RESPECTIVE ENGINEERING FIRMS COUNCIL AND HILTON HEAD COUNCIL AND STAFF WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL BECAUSE IT DOES FEEL LIKE EVERYBODY JUST NEEDS

TO GET ON THE SAME PAGE GOING FORWARD. >> SO THAT READ MY

RECOMMENDATION. THANK YOU. >> IS THERE ANY FURTHER ACTION ? JUST A COMMENT. WHEN I DO THE INVOCATION TONIGHT I TALKED ABOUT US WORKING TOGETHER. I THINK WE ACCOMPLISHED THAT TONIGHT. I THINK WE WERE VERY CIVIL. WE HAD SOME THINGS THAT WE HAD TO DISCUSS. THEY ARE SOME EMOTIONAL ISSUES. THEY ARE TIMELY ISSUES.

SO I'M VERY PLEASED WITH THE WAY COUNCIL ACTED THIS EVENING. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

NO FURTHER ACTION. THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED BEFORE THE CLOCK.

>> WHAT DID YOU DO? WHAT YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING.

WE'RE IN CLASS. EVERYTHI

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.