[00:00:01]
CLOSED CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY BEAVER COUNTY OR COME TO THE BUFORD
[1. CALL TO ORDER]
COUNTY COUNCIL CAUCUS MEETING.UH, I'D LIKE, UH, MR. RODMAN TO, UH, BANG THE GAVEL.
AND JUST A SECOND BEFORE I ASK HIM TO DO THAT, I'LL JUST SAY WE'RE, UH, PRESENT IN THE ROOM.
MR. RODMAN, MR. HOWARD, MR. CUNNINGHAM, UH, MS. HOWARD, I'M SORRY.
MR. DAWSON, MS. LEE, MR. LAWSON AND REMOTE.
WE HAVE, UH, PAUL SOMERVILLE AND BRIAN FLUE.
ELLING SO, UH, I'M GOING TO ASK, I AM REMOTE.
SO I'M GONNA ASK, UH, STU ROBIN TO GANG BANG THE GAVEL AND DO THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
AND, UM, I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT WE'VE ISSUED A PUBLIC NOTIFICATION, UH, THAT, UH, THIS MEETING HAS BEEN POSTED AND DISTRIBUTED IN COMPLIANCE WITH SOUTH CAROLINA.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, UH, NEED A MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I HATE
THAT WAS MR. RODMAN SECONDING THE MOTION.
[4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA]
THE AGENDA WILL BE APPROVED.ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS HEARING? NONE.
THE AGENDA IS APPROVED AND THAT MOVES
[6. COUNCIL MEMBER DISCUSSION]
US TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, WHICH IS A DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE AGENDA, AND ANY OTHER MATTERS THAT MAY, UH, THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY WANT TO DISCUSS.I BELIEVE, UH, WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS AT LEAST TWO ITEMS THAT I KNOW OF.
AND ONE IS, UM, ITEM NUMBER ONE ON THE, UH, ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA.
WE'LL SEE WHAT THAT IS ON THE HERE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH IS, UH, THE, A THIRD READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO ALLOCATE, UH, 2018 1 CENT SALES TAX, ADDITIONAL REVENUE TO THE SIDEWALKS AND MULTI-USE PATHWAYS PROGRAMS. UM, I THINK THERE WAS A STILL, YOU WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? I HAVEN'T TROUBLE HEARING YOU FALL.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN GET CLOSER TO THE MIC.
I HAVE A FEELING THAT THERE'S AN INTERNET CONNECTION PROBLEM HERE.
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY NOW? OKAY.
WE, UH, WE'VE APPROVED THE AGENDA WITHOUT OBJECTION.
AND NOW WE'RE IN THE APPROVAL OF THE, THE AGENDA DISCUSSION OF THE AGENDA.
SO REVIEW THE AGENDA, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS COMMENTS.
AND I JUST SAID THAT I BELIEVE TWO ITEMS WE'RE GOING TO WANT TO DISCUSS THAT I'M AWARE OF IS ITEM NUMBER ONE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH THE ALTERCATION OF ADDITIONAL PENNY SALES TAX FUNDS TO THE MULTI-USE PATHWAY PROGRAM.
I THINK HE WANTS TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT.
THE SECOND THING THAT WE DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS THE ITEM NUMBER 17 ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS THE ACCEPTANCE
[00:05:01]
OF THE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS.AND I THINK WE'RE PARTICULARLY GOING TO WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT TO DO A REFERENDUM AT 22 23 44.
SO STILL YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND YEAH, LET, LET, LET ME, UH, LET ME SPEAK TO THE FIRST ITEM, WHICH IS THE, UH, ALLOCATION OF THE MONEY LEFTOVER FROM THE, UH, THE REFERENDUM.
AND AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE BETTER PART OF ABOUT 16 MILLION THAT WAS, UH, WAS LEFTOVER AND WE'RE AT THIRD READING AND THE PROPOSAL IS TO ALLOCATE IT ALL TO, UM, TRAILS.
AND I THOUGHT IT WAS WORTH JUST A BRIEF DISCUSSION IF EVERYBODY STILL WANTS TO GO THAT WAY AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM AND, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I'LL VOTE FOR IT, BUT IT, IT, IT DOES SEEM TO ME THAT, UM, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WE'VE HAD IS THAT IT'S TAKEN A LONG TIME TO GET AROUND, TO SPENDING THE MONEY FROM FOR YEARS, UM, AND THAT, UH, WE HAVE SOME NEEDS, POTENTIAL NEEDS.
UM, AND THE LADY'S ISLAND PROJECT, WHICH I UNDERSTAND NOW IS A 60 MILLION INSTEAD OF A 30 MILLION PROJECT.
AND WE KNOW THAT WE'VE GOT TO HAVE SOME NEEDS FOR THE, UH, UH, FOR THE 2 78.
AND I WAS AN EARLY PROPONENT OF THE FACT THAT WE OUGHT TO DO THE, DO THE TRAILS, BECAUSE IT WAS 10 MILLION ON THE BALLOT.
AND THERE WAS NO, WHEN WE FIRST WOKE UP TO THE FACT THAT IT WOULDN'T SUPPORT THAT WE HAD 20 MILLION WAS THE NUMBER THAT WAS, UH, WAS PUT OUT THERE.
UM, SO MY, MY SENSE IS, AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE QUITE SOME TIME TO DO ALL THOSE.
MY, MY SENSE IS THAT WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO APPROVE 20 MILLION, NOT ANOTHER 10 AND KEEP, KEEP OUR POWDER DRY WITH, UH, FOR SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT THAT MAY NEED DOING, COMING OFF THE REFERENDUM AND IN KEEPING WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE REFERENDUM.
BUT IF I'M THE ONLY ONE THAT FEELS THAT WAY, THEN, UH, YOU KNOW, END OF DISCUSSION.
ANYBODY ELSE SHARE THAT CONCERN? OKAY.
UH, LET ME CHIME IN IF I MAY, UM, STEW, PARDON ME? YES, OF COURSE.
UH, YOU'VE BEEN ADVOCATING FROM THE VERY START OF, UM, TAKING SOME OF THIS, UH, SURPLUS MONIES AND, UH, SPENDING IT OFF ST MAN FOR ALL THE ITEMS RATHER THAN, UM, UH, ALLOCATING IT ALL TO THE PATHWAYS.
AND I SAID FROM THE VERY START THAT, UM, IN THE 2018 REFERENDUM, UH, WE OUT, WE ADVERTISED 24 PROJECTS AND THERE WAS ONLY $10 MILLION ALLOCATED TO THOSE 24 PROJECTS.
AND SO AS OF TODAY, UM, THERE'S ONLY BEEN A COUPLE OF THE PROJECTS DONE OF THE 24.
WE STILL DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TO GET IT ALL DONE.
AND I WILL TELL YOU THE, THE PEOPLE WHO, UM, THE SIDEWALKS, UH, THE COMMUNITY THAT THE SIDEWALKS ACTUALLY ALLOCATED FOR THOSE FOLKS ARE HIGHLY UPSET OVER THE FACT THAT WE PRESENTED TO THEM 24 PROJECTS SAYING THAT THE REFERENDUM WAS GOING TO COVER IT ON IT ONLY TO FIND OUT THAT IT DID.
AND SO NOW THEY, THEY FEEL AS IF THEY THEY'VE BEEN SHAFTED, THEY FEEL AS IF THEY CAN'T TRUST US.
AND I WOULD, I WILL TELL YOU STEW, AS I'VE TOLD CONSOLE IN THE BEGINNING, WHEN WE STARTED THIS DISCUSSION FOR THE SURPLUS MONEY, IF WE DON'T COVER THOSE 24 PROJECTS FROM THE 2018 REFERENDUM, WE STAND A VERY SLIM CHANCE IF ANY, OF PASSING THE NEXT REFERENDUM.
AND SO I WOULD ADVISE US TO LESS STAY THE COURSE AND ALLOCATE THE 15 MILLION THAT SURPLUS THAT WAY HAVE ON HAND.
THAT'S THE ALLOCATE THAT TO ENSURE THAT WE GET ALL 24 OF THE PROJECTS, SIDEWALK, PROJECT DONE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU'RE NOT ON SPEAKER.
IT'S IT'S REALLY, I ABSOLUTELY BELIEVE EXACTLY WHAT THEY SAY.
AND THANK YOU, GERALD FOR VOICING THAT.
I DON'T SEE ANY REAL SUPPORT ON COUNCIL TO CHANGE THE ALLOCATION.
SO IT LOOKS, THERE ARE SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS I THINK WE WILL PROCEED AS INDICATED IN THE RECORD OF THE RESOLUTION.
PAUL, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE, THE ITEM REGARDING THE, USING THE ACCESS
[00:10:01]
2018 SALES TAX, UM, FOR SIDEWALKS AS ITEM, NUMBER ONE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.THAT'S NOT THE AGENDA I'VE GOT.
I SHOWED THAT I DIDN'T HAVE MS. NUMBER 19 ON THE REGULAR AGENDA.
WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT I'VE GOT, I'VE GOT ONE ON MY, MY VERSION OF IT HAS IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, BUT IT SHOULD BE ON THE, ON THE REGULAR AGENDA.
SO LET'S JUST SAY, LET'S JUST CALL IT ITEM 19, THE VERSION THAT I HAVE, DOESN'T HAVE IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, BUT IT ABSOLUTELY SHOULD NOT BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SO IT'S 19, RIGHT? I, I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA, THAT EARLY AGENDA THAT, UH, THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WAS FOR THE CAUCUS.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE THERE ARE ANY CHANGES TO THAT AGENDA THAT WE APPROVED ALREADY.
THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT.
THEY, UH, SO AS FAR AS I KNOW, WE DON'T NEED TO DISCUSS THIS ANYMORE.
I DON'T SEE ANY SUPPORT FOR CHANGING THE ALLOCATION, UH, TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE PATHWAYS.
UH, SO THE NEXT ITEM THAT I KNOW WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT, UH, IS THIS ITEM 17 ON THE AGENDA ADOPTING THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PRINCIPAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
YOU REMEMBER WHEN DEAN MORRIS MADE HIS PRESENTATION? HE MENTIONED TO US THAT THERE WAS A SPLIT DECISION OR THE COMMITTEE AS TO WHETHER IT SHOULD BE DONE.
IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, HE SAID THE SPLIT WAS BETWEEN 22 AND 24.
SOMEBODY REMEMBERS IT DIFFERENTLY, WILL SPEAK UP, BUT, UH, I, WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT 23.
AND I KNOW THAT INITIALLY THERE WAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT WHETHER IT WAS EVEN LEGAL TO PUT IT ON AT 23.
WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT, AND I'M NOW CONVINCED.
LEGAL'S CONVINCED THAT IT IS LEGAL.
SO OUR DISCUSSION IS REALLY GOING TO BE ABOUT 22, 23 AND 24.
SO, UH, ANYBODY WANTS TO START WEIGHING IN ON THAT, CAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TALK ABOUT IT FOR SURE WHEN WE GET TO COUNCIL, BUT I THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO KIND OF KICK IT AROUND AND SEE WHAT THE SENSE OF THE BODY IS.
IT SEEMS LIKE I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT, UM, I BELIEVE COUNCIL HAS RESOLVED AND IT'S NOT AN ORDINANCE, BUT WE'VE RESOLVED IN THE PAST, NOT TO HAVE COUNTY-WIDE OR ELECTIONS REGARDING COUNTYWIDE REFERENDA DURING OFF-CYCLE YEARS WHEN THERE IS NO COUNTY OFFICIAL BEING VOTED ON.
WE'VE SAID THAT WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE A RESOLUTION.
I AGREE THAT THAT'S NOT BINDING BY LAW.
THERE THERE'S NO REASON WHY WE CAN'T DO IT, EXCEPT THAT WE CAN BE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT ONLY, ONLY A SEGMENT OF THE POPULATION WILL SHOW UP, EVEN WHEN IT'S JUST, COUNTY-WIDE, UH, JUST COUNTY ELECTIONS, UM, FOR COUNTY COUNCIL AND FOR AUDIT OR TREASURE AND SHERIFF, ET CETERA, WE REALLY DON'T GET EVERYBODY SHOWING UP TO THE POLLS AS WE DO DURING A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND A US OR A SOUTH CAROLINA SENATOR ELECTION.
AND SO I, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY 23 IS A BAD IDEA, UH, FOR THAT VERY REASON.
AND FOR NO OTHER REASON THAT IT DOESN'T REALLY GIVE US A REAL, UM, OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE CONSTITUENTS, WHAT OUR CITIZENS THINK ABOUT AN ISSUE, UM, REGARDING THE REST OF IT, YOU KNOW, I INTEND TO VOTE, NO.
UM, JUST BECAUSE I THINK IT WILL FAIL AND I DON'T WANT THE COUNTY TO HAVE, HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF FAILURES ON, UH, SALES TAX, REFERENDUM QUESTIONS.
AND SO THAT, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ON MATTER.
ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THIS? I'VE GOT SOME THOUGHTS, BUT I'LL HOLD MINE UNTIL COUNCIL WANTS TO ANYBODY ELSE ON COUNCIL, MELISSA, WEIGH IN ON THIS.
UM, IF WE DO IT IN 22, IT'LL BE RUSHED.
UH, I'M NOT SAYING IT CAN'T BE DONE, BUT IT'LL BE A RUSH.
AND IF WE DO IT IN 24, IT SEEMS TO ME IT'S SO FAR OUT IN THE FUTURE THAT WE'D ALMOST HAVE TO RECONVENE THE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT WOULD BE MORE THAN TWO YEARS DOWN THE ROAD.
AND A LOT OF THINGS CAN CHANGE IN TWO YEARS.
I'M NOT SURE WE'D HAVE TO RECONVENE THE TAC, BUT, UH, I THINK IT'S VERY POSSIBLE IF NOT LIKELY THAT WE HAVE TO RECONVENE.
SO IT KIND OF PUTS US IN A BOX AND THE BOX IS, UM, IT, IT DOING 22, YOUR RISE, YOU'RE DOING 23.
YOU RUN INTO THE, THEY HAD OBJECTIONS ABOUT THE OFF YEAR ELECTION, BY THE WAY THAT THE LEGALITY OF IT IS, AS IT IS EXPLAINED TO ME, EVEN THOUGH NONE OF US ARE ELECTED ON THE OFF YEARS, THE CITY COUNCIL PEOPLE ARE ELECTED ON OFF YEARS.
SO THEY, SO IT DOES COUNT AS THAT AS A GENERAL ELECTION.
AND THEN OF COURSE, 24 IS WAY OUT THERE.
SO, UH, LOGAN, DID I SEE YOUR HAND, YOUR HAND UP LOGAN
[00:15:04]
UM, IF WE'RE GOING TO GET THE SUPPORT OF THE PEOPLE, NO MATTER WHEN WE DECIDE TO PUT THIS ON, I THINK WE NEED TO BE HONEST WITH THE COUNCIL.WE PUT OURSELVES IN THIS HOLE, UM, BECAUSE WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS LAST SUMMER AND NOT LOST, OR THE CHANGE OF GOVERNMENT.
WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUSHING FROM DAY ONE, UM, THAT FAILED MISERABLY OVER 77% VOTED, NO FOR REASON.
AND NOW WE PUT OURSELVES IN THAT HOLE, UM, BECAUSE WE WANT TO GO DOWN THAT.
SO IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE, UM, YOUR TIME IS EITHER 20, 22 OR 2024.
UM, WE, WE TRIED TO PUT IT IN AN, AN OFF ELECTION AND WE SAW HOW THAT HAPPENED.
UM, I THINK WE NEED TO BE UPFRONT AND HONEST WITH THE PEOPLE, IF WE WANT TO GET ANYTHING ACCOMPLISHED AT ALL, AND THEN DON'T GET ME WRONG.
I HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES WITH THIS TO BEGIN WITH, UM, WHAT GOT PRESENTED TO US.
AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.
UM, BUT I DO THINK STEP ONE IS IF WE WANT THE SUPPORT, WE HAVE TO ADMIT THAT WE MESSED UP AS A COUNCIL, ALL 11 OF US ON THAT.
UM, WE DIDN'T DO A GOOD JOB PUTTING FORWARD THE NECESSITY OF THIS PROJECT INSTEAD OF THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE WENT ON RECORD SAYING WE DID FOR THE MISSILE PALLIATIVES.
SO WE, WE DROPPED THE BALL AS A COUNCIL.
UM, I'LL BE THE FIRST TO SAY THAT.
AND I THINK WE NEED TO PICK THAT UP AND SEE WHAT WE CAN GET DONE FOR 2022.
CAUSE IF NOT, UH, UM, WITH, UM, UM, MR.
UH, I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO GO.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT SENDS THE RIGHT MESSAGE.
AND LAST YEAR SHOWS THAT LOGAN, I COULD MAKE AN ARGUMENT AGAINST 22 AT THREE AND 24.
I CAN ALSO MAKE AN ARGUMENT FOR THEM, I GUESS, UH, WHO ELSE HASN'T WANTS TO WEIGH IN ON THIS? THANK YOU, LOGAN.
MR. CHAIRMAN CAN NOT DO IT AN OFF YEAR ON 2023.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO WORK.
AND I HATE, I WOULD HATE TO SEE SUCH A HUGE FAILURE, LIKE WE HAD WAS LITTLE LOSS.
UM, AND, AND I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE IT IN 2023.
UH, SAY MR. GLOVER'S DOING THIS BOOK.
DID YOU HAVE A DOC WHERE HE WAS SAYING HELLO? SURE.
WELL, PAUL AND I REALLY DIDN'T REALIZE THAT YOU WERE THAT'S.
UM, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE REFERENDUM, UH, THAT THE TASK FORCE BROUGHT TO US, UM, LAST AT THE PUBLIC FACILITY MEETING.
AND, UH, IS THE QUESTION ON THE BOARD, WHETHER WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THE 20, 22 REFERENDUM OR THE 2024? THAT THE QUESTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR.
LET ME JUST WEIGH IN ON MY SIDE.
UM, UM, I THINK THAT THE FUTURE, WE CAN NEVER TELL WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
SO WHEN I WAS SELLING INSURANCE, I WAS TOLD THAT YOU BUY INSURANCE WHEN YOU NEED IT, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T REALLY DETERMINE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN DOWN THE ROAD.
SO I BELIEVE RIGHT NOW THAT THE STAFF HAS BROUGHT US A, A BILLION DOLLAR PROJECT PLAN FOR 10 YEARS, AND THEY HAVE WORKED WITH A, A CITIZEN GROUP THAT HAS BROUGHT US A $700,700 MILLION FUNDING PROJECT.
AND THE ONLY QUESTION WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS NOT THAT WE DON'T NEED THAT TO DO IT IS WHEN DO WE DO IT? I AM OF THE BELIEF THAT NOW IS THE TIME TO DO THE PROJECT, TO DO THE REFERENDUM.
UM, THERE ARE A LOT OF, UM, UH, PEOPLE I'VE TALKED TO AND THEY FEEL THAT, UM, IF THEY'RE GOING TO SEE SOMETHING DONE, WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SEE IT IN THEIR LIFETIME.
SO THAT'S WHERE I STAY IN AT THIS TIME.
UM, I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS WITH A 20, 22 AND LET THE CHIPS FALL WHERE THEY MAY, I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN GET A LOT OF SUPPORT FOR THIS, UM, BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT'S PACKAGED.
AND I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
WE HAD TO SEVERAL WITH PEOPLE THAT WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM CHRIS, UM, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
UH, MY INCLINATION IS THAT THIS SHOULD BE A 20, 24 ITEM IF WE REALLY ARE GOING TO GET THE SUPPORT OF THE PEOPLE AND THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE.
I THINK WHERE WE'RE SITTING RIGHT NOW,
[00:20:01]
WE DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF SUCCESS BEHIND US WITH THE BRIDGE AND WITH THE REFERENT, THE LAST REFERENDUM THAT WE JUST FAILED MISERABLY.UM, I WOULDN'T SUPPORT A 2022 REFERENDUM.
I WOULDN'T SUPPORT A 2023 REFERENDUM.
I APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT ON THAT.
WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM GERALD AND WE HAVEN'T HEARD I'LL GO NEXT.
UM, I, UM, ACTUALLY AGREE WITH YORK.
I MEAN, NOW'S THE TIME, UH, IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT OFF FOR, FOR TWO AND A HALF MORE YEARS, IT'LL BE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ASK THAN WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR RIGHT NOW.
I THINK WE HAVE INTELLIGENT, UM, UH, VOTERS.
I THINK THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT WE NEED AND, UH, I'D RATHER HAVE US GO AHEAD AND, AND IF IT FAILS, IT FAILS, BUT LET THE VOTERS DECIDE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR, UH, GERALD.
CAN WE HEAR FROM YOU ON THIS? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR.
I THINK IT WOULD BE ILL-ADVISED FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS REFERENDUM.
NOW I ADVOCATED FROM THE VERY BEGINNING THAT WE SHOULD, UH, PUT THIS OFF TO 20, 24.
HOWEVER, AT THAT TIME I THOUGHT I WAS THE ONLY ONE AND A GOOD COLLEAGUE OF MINE SAID, WELL, BEING THAT YOU DIDN'T WANNA SUPPORT IT.
UM, DO YOU SUPPORT THE PROJECTS THAT, UH, THAT'S GOING TO COME FROM IT? AND YES, I DO.
I JUST THINK THAT THE TIMING IS, IS, UH, IS NOT THE RIGHT TIME TO DO IT.
AND I THINK WE STAND A BETTER CHANCE OF GETTING MORE CITIZENS SUPPORT FOR THE REFERENDUM.
IF WE DO IT IN 2024, RATHER THAN, UH, 23 OR 22.
UM, THERE'S TWO THINGS OCCUR TO ME.
ONE IS WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT NEED FOR THE PROJECTS THAT ARE ON THERE.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF THEM THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY PRESSING, UH, BUT IT LONGTERM WHAT WE NEEDED FROM THE FUNDING STANDPOINT, I KIND OF COME DOWN TO THIS YEAR WOULD BE EXTREMELY TOUGH WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S HAPPENING NATIONALLY WITH INFLATION AND PEOPLE STRUGGLING.
I JUST THINK IT'S EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO, TO PASS ONE, UH, THIS PARTICULAR YEAR.
SO I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF, UH, OF MOVING IT OUT TO WHETHER IT'S 23 OR 24.
BUT IF WE DO THAT, I THINK WE NEED TO CONGRATULATE THE COMMITTEE FOR HAVING DONE A GOOD JOB.
AND FOR JARED, FOR HAVING LED THAT.
SO I GUESS I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF, UH, NOT DOING IT IN 22.
I JUST DO WHAT EVERYBODY HEARD THE SAME THING.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH SUPPORT FOR A 23 OR 22 ELECT, UH, WHERE TODAY? YES, SIR.
RON, YOU WANT TO COME IN? YEAH.
YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OCCURS TO ME AS I'M LISTENING TO EVERYBODY TALK IS WHERE WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT IN 2024, UH, PULLED THE REFERENDUM IN 2024, WE'D HAVE TO, UM, BECAUSE OF THE PASSAGE OF TIME, TWO AND A HALF YEARS, THE WHOLE LIST OF PROJECTS WOULD BE POTENTIALLY DIFFERENT OR AT LEAST PART OF THE LIST OF PROJECTS WOULD BE DIFFERENT.
AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S THE REASON TO VOTE NO, ON THE RECORD IN ITSELF ON ITS OWN THINGS, BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT WE'RE DOING THAT SAME YEAR.
WE HAVE A 10 YEAR REACH ON THIS, THAT WE'RE ROB LIGATING THE COUNTY FOR 10 YEARS AND IT WILL SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS FOR 10 YEARS.
AND YET WE'RE ADMITTING IN ART THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S EVEN GOING TO HAPPEN IN TWO AND A HALF YEARS.
SO WE'RE OBLIGATING REALLY ALL THE MONEY WE'RE GOING TO GET SALES, TAX REFERENDUM.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING IT, REFERENDUM AND JUSTICE LIST THAT WE KNOW ABOUT TODAY.
WE'RE KIND OF, WE'RE KIND OF WRITING OFF CHANCE OF HAVING THIS IN THE FUTURE REALLY WITHIN, WITHIN THE LIFETIME OF SEVERAL PEOPLE IN THE ROOM AND HOW SOME OF YOU ARE, UM, PEERS ARE DECENT.
SOME OF US WON'T BE ON COUNTY COUNCIL, SO IT'S KIND OF UNFAIR TO LOCK US, LOCK THE COUNTY IN ON A LIST OF PROJECTS THAT QUITE FRANKLY MAY BE OBSOLETE BY THE TIME, BY THE TIME IT COMES READY TO START CONSTRUCTION ON THAT, OR THEY MAY NOT BE ON HIGHEST PRIORITY IN, IN SEVEN YEARS OR FIVE YEARS OR WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION STARTS.
SO I'M GOING TO VOTE NO, BASED ON THE MERITS ON THOSE WHERE IT'S RIGHT NOW.
AND THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THE PROJECTS LISTED AREN'T IMPORTANT OR THAT THEY'RE NOT NECESSARY TODAY.
YOU KNOW, IF WE HAD MAGIC WAND AND A MONEY PRESS, WE WOULD DO
[00:25:01]
ALL OF THEM TODAY.UM, BUT YOU KNOW, I THINK IT, I THINK IT KIND OF, IT KIND OF DEFEATS THE PURPOSE OF HAVING A PERIODIC REFERENDUM ON THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.
IF I'M READING THIS CORRECTLY, UH, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY FOR US TO APPROACH THIS THING.
AND WHEN IT COMES TO COUNCIL, AS IT'S WRITTEN, IT SAYS WE WERE, UH, WE WERE APPROVING A RESOLUTION FOR THE RESOLUTION TO ADOPT ALL RECOMMENDATIONS AS PRESENTED BY THE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
UH, MY RECOLLECTION IS I DON'T HAVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN FRONT OF ME, BUT THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE FOR 2022.
AM I CORRECT ABOUT THAT? OR WAS IT LEFT BLANK THAT WE WOULD FILL IN THE BLANKS IS KURT OR TOM ON THIS CALL? THERE'S, THERE'S TWO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT THAT RELATE TO THIS.
THE FIRST I, UH, THE FIRST ITEM IS A RESOLUTION, UH, FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER ADOPTING, UH, IN ITS ENTIRETY, THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WHAT WE COMMONLY HAVE COME TO REFER TO AS AN ACRONYM OF TAC, UH, WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK WITH, UH, TAC OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS OR A COUPLE OF YEARS TO REFINE THE PROJECT LIST.
IF YOU ALL ELECT NOT TO DO THAT, THE SECOND ITEM ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT THAT YOU ALL WILL BE DEALING WITH WILL BE AN ORDINANCE TO, UH, GIVE FIRST READING TO AN ORDINANCE TO DO THE REFERENDUM IN 2022.
SO BASED ON THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT, I'M NOT SURE IF YOU ALL WANT TO TAKE THAT ITEM UP, UH, AS A COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, UH, TWO OF YOUR, UH, COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE OUT OF THE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW.
UH, YOU MIGHT WANT TO, WHATEVER WE DO, I THINK SHOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS TO BE ABLE TO WEIGH IN ON THE VOTE, UH, THIS EVENING, IF WE, OR IF THERE'S SOME CHANCE THAT IT WOULD BE DEFEATED.
SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO TABLE THAT FOR A MONTH THEN TO GIVE COUNCIL MEMBER MCKELLEN AND COUNCIL MEMBER PASSMAN A CHANCE TO BE BACK IN TOWN SO THAT THEY COULD HAVE THEIR INPUT ON THAT.
SINCE WE DID THIS AS A COOPERATIVE COLLABORATIVE EFFORT FROM THE COUNCIL APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE TAC, BUT THAT'S JUST A CONSIDERATION THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU CONSIDER AS THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR.
LOGAN, DID I SEE YOUR HAND THERE? YEAH.
UM, TWO QUESTIONS, QUESTION ONE.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT NUMBER 20 IS SAYING THAT WE WOULD KEEP THAT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE INTACT? IT DOES.
IT IS NOT SAYING THAT YOU COULD KEEP THEM INTACT AND ASK THEM TO CONTINUE TO DO WORK, TO COME UP WITH MORE DETAILED PROJECT LISTS, MORE REFINEMENTS ON PRIORITY OF SCHEDULE, PRIORITY OF PROJECTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WHILE WE'RE WAITING TO DO TO REFERENCE, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO DO THAT.
YOU DO NOT HAVE TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION EXCEPT IN THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.
YOU COULD MODIFY THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
IF YOU WANT TO DO A SMALLER PROJECT IN 2022, A SMALL REVEREND, YOU CERTAINLY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT AS WELL.
AND THEN THE SECOND THING, IF I JUST, THE REST OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE TODAY, IF WE, SOMEBODY UP HERE DOES DECIDE TO POSTPONE THAT VOTE, I HOPE THAT WE CAN AT LEAST LEAVE IT ON THE AGENDA FOR NOW TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE TUNING IN SHOWED UP TODAY, SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS ITEM.
UM, JUST CAUSE IT IS A BIG ONE.
THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE INTERESTED IN THAT.
SO YEAH, I THINK THAT'S, IT, IT WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED.
YOU'RE SAYING I TH I THINK TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS NOW IN PUBLIC IS HEALTHY.
I THINK, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD STATEMENT.
I THINK YOU ALL SHOULD CONTINUE TO LEAVE IT ON THE AGENDA TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION.
NOW, THE PUBLIC COMMENT TO HAVE A DIALOGUE DURING THE COUNCIL MEETING SO THAT INDIVIDUALS CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE EVERYONE IS AT THIS POINT ON THE ISSUE.
AND THEN YOU CAN DECIDE AFTER YOU HAVE THAT DISCUSSION, WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO TABLE IT, TO BE ABLE TO ALLOW, UH, COUNCIL MEMBERS, MCKELLEN AND COUNCIL MEMBER PASSAVANT TO BE BACK IN TOWN.
SO WE COULD, WE WOULD TAKE OFF POSSIBLY.
WE COULD HAVE THE DISCUSSION BY LEAVING NUMBER 20 ON, AND THEN PERHAPS TAKE OFF NUMBER 18, WHICH IS THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE.
BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO, WE'LL DEFINITELY TALK ABOUT IT, LOGAN.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO DISMISS IT.
ANYBODY ELSE? ANY OTHER TOPICS THAT ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO TALK ABOUT? VICE CHAIRMAN SOMERVILLE? UH, TOM, KEVIN WANTS TO WEIGH IN.
IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THE TWO ISSUES IN THE ORDER IN WHICH ERIC JUST REFERRED TO THEM, THEN AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, YOU'RE GOING TO NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE NUMBER 20 UP AHEAD OF NUMBER 18.
UH, WHEN WE GET TO COUNCIL IN ABOUT 30 MINUTES, I'LL NEED A MOTION TO MOVE NUMBER 20 TO NUMBER 18.
[00:30:01]
WHAT YOU SAID? OKAY.WHO WANTS TO MAKE THAT MOTION? LET ME JUST MAKE SURE WOULDN'T DO IT.
HE'S ASKING YOU IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THE MOTION TO AMEND THE AGENDA.
I MEAN, I'M WILLING TO MOVE IT UP FOR YOU AND, UH, MOVE 20 TO 18 AND 18 TO 19, THE 19 TO 20.
AND JUST DO THAT IN THAT ORDER.
BUT, UM, AS OF RIGHT NOW, I WOULDN'T BE WILLING TO REMOVE IT FROM THE VOTE UNTIL WE HAVE OUR CONVERSATIONS.
WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT IN THE SYSTEM.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM MAKING THAT MOTION TO CHANGE THE ORDER.
YOU GET, GET LANGUAGE FROM TOM DURING THE NEXT 30 MINUTES.
WE'RE GOING TO PROBABLY END THE CAUCUS EARLY.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO BRING UP? IF NOT WE'LL TO PAUL, PAUL, JUST A QUESTION FOR YOU BECAUSE WE'RE HAVING TROUBLE HEARING YOU.
DID YOU WEIGH IN ON WHAT YOUR OPINION WAS BETWEEN 22 AND 23? YEAH.
WHAT I SAID WAS THAT I COULD MAKE AN ARGUMENT AGAINST ANY AT 24, 23 OR 22.
WE'RE JUST GONNA HAVE TO DECIDE, UH, DECIDE WHICH ONE, THE MAJORITY OF THE SPORTS.
AND ONE OTHER THING I'LL SAY IS I HOPE THAT WHATEVER WE DO IS UNANIMOUS BECAUSE IF WE HAVE A SPLIT DECISION COMING OUT OF THIS COUNCIL, I CAN ONLY GET ONLY SPECULATE ON WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE TO THE PUBLIC.
WHEN WE ASKED HIM, ASKED THAT WE COULDN'T EVEN AGREE AMONG OURSELVES AND WHEN IT SHOULD BE DONE.
SO HOPEFULLY AFTER WE'VE HASHED THIS AROUND, WE'LL, UH, WE'LL REALIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF UNANIMITY AND, UH, BE ABLE TO COME FORWARD WITH ONE VOICE 11 OF US, UH, TO DO IT ON WHATEVER DATE WE HOPE TO TAKE FOR A DATE.
IF I MAY, IF I MAY COUNCILMAN SOMERVILLE, IT'S VERY HARD TO HEAR WHAT'S GOING ON.
UM, SO I'M NOT SURE IF I HEARD, UM, COUNCILMAN CUNNINGHAM, ASK A QUESTION, UH, ALONG THE FOLLOWING.
AND THAT IS IF WE MOVE 20 ABOVE 18, WHETHER OR NOT THAT REQUIRES YOU TO AMEND THE AGENDA, I DON'T BELIEVE IT REQUIRES YOU TO AMEND THE AGENDA BECAUSE IT'S ON THE AGENDA.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A TWO THIRDS VOTE IN ORDER TO MOVE IT AROUND.
UM, I THINK IT WOULD JUST BE AN AGREEMENT AMONG COUNCIL OR NOT AN AGREEMENT AMONG COUNCIL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
UH, ANYBODY ELSE? WE GOT, WE HAVE 30 MINUTES.
IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE, IF NOT WE'LL, UH, WITH THIS BAND UNTIL THE SIX O'CLOCK I W I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE PAUSE FOR 30 MINUTES SO THAT WE CAN TRY TO GET THE AUDIO BETTER BEFORE SIX O'CLOCK.