10. DISCUSSION OF WHETHER TO A FIXED PERCENTAGE OR A FLAT RATE DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR FY2026 COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT (COLA) IN BEAUFORT COUNTY EMPLOYEE’S SALARIES. (FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of the 3% COLA equates to $2,240,509 for all County employees that are a part of the County’s comp & class plan. Currently, that amount, if we were to allocate a flat rate increase, would be equivalent to $1,885 per full-time employee and $943 per part-time employee increase in salary) - Mike Moore, County Administrator; Pinky Harriott, Chief Financial Officer; and Katherine Mead, HR Director

[10. DISCUSSION OF WHETHER TO A FIXED PERCENTAGE OR A FLAT RATE DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR FY2026 COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT (COLA) IN BEAUFORT COUNTY EMPLOYEE’S SALARIES. (FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of the 3% COLA equates to $2,240,509 for all County employees that are a part of the County’s comp & class plan. Currently, that amount, if we were to allocate a flat rate increase, would be equivalent to $1,885 per full-time employee and $943 per part-time employee increase in salary) - Mike Moore, County Administrator; Pinky Harriott, Chief Financial Officer; and Katherine Mead, HR Director]

RAISES HIS HAND ON LINE TWO. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS A DISCUSSION OF WHETHER TO HAVE A FIXED PERCENTAGE OR A FLAT RATE DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR Y TO 2026 COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT COLA IN BEAUFORT COUNTY'S EMPLOYEE SALARIES.

AND OUR ADMINISTRATOR WILL COME FORWARD TO TALK ABOUT THAT. SO I NEED A MOTION.

SORRY. THANK YOU. I'LL MOVE.

MANAGER I CAN WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND TO TO BEGIN THIS DISCUSSION.

[00:55:02]

ALL IN FAVOR. OH WE'RE GOING TO TO VOTE FOR YOU YEAR FROM NOW WE'RE GOING TO HEAR THIS IS JUST TO START THE DISCUSSION, PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.

OKAY. AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS IT.

GOOD. AGAIN, WE ADDED THIS ITEM TO THE AGENDA BASED ON OUR DISCUSSION AT THE LAST WORKSHOP . UH, CONSIDERING OUR STAFF IS IN THE PROCESS OF PUTTING THE BUDGET TOGETHER, WE THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO GET A DECISION COUNCIL ON HOW WE WERE GOING TO PROCEED WITH A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT FOR THIS YEAR.

SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS ASKED IS WHAT'S THE IMPACT THE BOARD FOR A 3% COLA? WELL THAT EQUATES TO MILLION $240,509 FOR ALL COUNTY EMPLOYEES.

THEY'RE ARE PART OF THE CLASS AND COMP PLAN. IF WE WERE ALLOCATE A FLAT RATE THAT WOULD BE EQUIVALENT $1,885 PER FULL TIME EMPLOYEE AND $943 PER PART TIME EMPLOYEE.

SO THAT'S REALLY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A 3% AND IF YOU WENT A CASH AND OBVIOUSLY IN THE PAST WE'VE DONE I THINK MORE THAN THAT AMOUNT SO WE WANTED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

I'VE GOT OUR FINANCE PINKY CFO AND H.R IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

OKAY WE'RE OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION QUESTIONS BUT COUNCILMAN CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU MANAGER I'M GOING TO SPEAK THE REST OF COUNCIL BUT THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PERCENTAGES, PERCENTAGES CAN BE ALL KINDS OF WAYS BASED ON THE VOLUME OF THE NUMBER 3% OF 100,000 IS A LOT DIFFERENT THAN 3% OF 30,000. USUALLY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A COLA IT'S ABOUT INCREASE IN THE COST OF LIVING OR BATTLING THE COST OF LIVING SHOULD SAY AND THE ONES THAT NEED THEM MORE OFTEN THE ONES AT THE LOWER END OF THAT PAY SCALE THAN THE HIGHER END SO WE ADVOCATE THIS LAST TIME ENDED UP I THINK IT WAS LIKE TWO YEARS AGO WE DID THE $3,000 INCREASE AND THEY WERE ABLE TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. I GUESS MY REAL QUESTIONS ARE I MEAN OBVIOUSLY I'M IN FAVOR OF THE FLAT RAISE ACROSS THE BOARD. I ESPECIALLY TWO QUESTIONS ARE DOES RAISE MILLAGE AND HOW ARE WE PLANNING TO BUDGET FOR THE OTHER 2.2 MILLION? MY UNDERSTANDING IS IF WE WENT WITH THE 3% VERSUS THE CASH PER EMPLOYEE WOULD NOT IT WOULD BE NEUTRAL RATE CORRECT. CURRENTLY THE PERCENT EQUATES TO A 2.2 MILLION THAT HE'S JUST STATED. BUT IF WE WERE TO TAKE THAT OPTION OFF THE TABLE AND START ALL OVER WITH A $3,000 FLAT INCREASE A I DON'T THAT IT WOULD FULLY INCREASE MILLAGE BUT IT WOULD NOT WE WOULD BE A LOT MORE THAN THE POINT $2 MILLION SO YEAH A CASH AMOUNT MORE THAN WHAT'S LISTED HERE WOULD AN INCREASE RIGHT LET ME LET ME BETTER CLEAR MY QUESTION HOW WE ALREADY MADE PREPARATIONS FOR THE EXISTING $2.2 MILLION PROPOSAL AND DOES THAT RAISE MILLAGE CORRECT. THAT'S TO 3% AND IT WOULD NOT INCREASE MILLAGE, CORRECT.

I REALLY JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS NEED FROM US TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

I'D LIKE TO DO THE FLAT THE FLAT PAY. I DON'T KNOW HOW THE REST OF THE COUNCILORS I KNOW WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE DISCUSSIONS SEEM VERY POSITIVE THE LAST DISCUSSION LAST WEEK BUT JUST WHAT YOU NEED FROM US AT THIS STANDPOINT IS I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE UNDER CRUNCH FOR DEADLINE AS WELL. I DON'T WANT TO SEND YOU BACK TO A DRAWING BOARD. I STILL THINK A FLAT RATE IS STILL BETTER THAN 3% FOR I'M ASSUMING BY NUMBERS I RAN IS LIKE 77% OF OUR EMPLOYEES. I TOTALLY DON'T DISAGREE BUT I THINK AT THIS POINT MAYBE IN FEBRUARY WE COULD HAVE AT BOTH OPTIONS WHEN WE WERE DOING THE STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT SORRY BACK THEN WE COULD HAVE PRESENTED BOTH NUMBERS.

WE STAFF UNDERSTOOD THAT COUNCIL WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE 3% WHICH IS ALREADY BUILT INTO THE BUDGET AT THIS POINT LIKE TO YOUR POINT IF WE GO BACK AND DO THE 3000 FLAT I'M JUST USING THAT SAME NUMBER IT WOULD INCREASE IT WOULD BE MORE THAN THE 2.2 AND WE WOULD HAVE TO START OVER AND LIKE MR. LAWSON SAID HAVE A FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING WHERE I'M PRESENTING YOU THE BUDGET BASED ON THE 3% SO WE WOULD HAVE TO PROBABLY HAVE SOME SPECIAL CALL MEETINGS AND ALL OF THAT TO BE ABLE TO MEET THE DEADLINE FOR THE THIRD READING JUST BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE OF THE COUNCIL SCHEDULE AND COMMITTEE SCHEDULES.

SO THAT MAKES SENSE. WE'D HAVE TO HAVE THE SPECIAL MEETINGS EVEN IF WE JUST DID IT AS THE FLAT RATE AND CHANGE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT HAVE TO TO RAISE THE BUDGET RIGHT.

AND I THINK IF WE WANT TO DO THIS WE NEED TO MAYBE CONSIDER DOING THE COMBINATION.

I THINK SOME OF YOU HAVE MENTIONED FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR 27 JUST NO WELL IN ADVANCE WE CAN PROVIDE YOU THE OPTIONS BEFORE YOU GO INTO YOUR STRATEGIC RETREAT THAT MAKE SENSE? YES, MA'AM. THE QUESTIONS ON THE SIDE YES, IT'S NOT A QUESTION, A COMMENT AND WHEN I LOOK AT WHAT DOING AND OBVIOUSLY IF WE GO WITH A FLAT RATE IT WOULD BENEFIT OUR EMPLOYEES ON THE LOWER END OF THE PAY SCALE.

HOWEVER, WHEN WE OFFER A COLA COST OF LIVING INCREASE IT'S ACTUALLY MEANT TO HELP ALL ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES. AND SO AS 3% YOU KNOW WOULD BE HELPING EVERY EMPLOYEE

[01:00:04]

ACCORDING THEIR SALARY WITH THE 3% RAISE, YOU KNOW AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM. I'M GUESSING THAT IF WE WENT WITH WITH $3,000 PER PERSON THAT WOULD END UP BEING ANOTHER FOR $1.4 MILLION. SO THAT WOULD BE LIKE 3.6 MILLION. 3.7 MILLION IS PROBABLY AT RIGHT NOW IF WE DID THAT I AM YOU KNOW, I'M HAPPY WE'RE DOING THIS. I KNOW WE HAVE SUPPORT TO IT.

IT'S JUST HOW WE DO IT. IF I HAD A CHOICE I'D PROBABLY STAY WITH JUST THE 3% ACROSS THE BOARD FOR EVERY EMPLOYEE AND EMPLOYEE GETS TREATED THE SAME THAT THE OTHER COMMENTS YES SIR. I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD AS WE DISCUSSED DURING THE WORKSHOP WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THE STUDY WE DID THE CLASS COMP LAST YEAR.

THIS YEAR WE'LL HAVE THE 3% AND THEN WE WILL BE INITIATING A STUDY TO LOOK AT THE STEP INCREASES IN A MERIT BASED PAY WHICH WE COULD IMPLEMENT NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

COUNCILMAN MCMILLAN, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? YES, I DO.

CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, SIR. YEAH, I'M IN FAVOR OF A FLAT RATE INCREASE DOLLAR AMOUNT RATHER THAN A PERCENT AMOUNT BECAUSE AS LOW POINTED OUT $30,000 EMPLOYEE AGAINST $900 $100,000 EMPLOYEE GETS 3000 OFF.

AND I THINK THAT IT MAY BE BETTER TO INCREASE THE SALARIES THE SAME AMOUNT FOR EVERYBODY.

THE QUESTION I HAVE I THINK ON THIS MATTER IS HE A VERY ODD NUMBER 1880 $5 $943.

I KNOW THAT YOU'VE CALCULATED IT PERFECTLY TO COME UP WITH THE 2.240 BUT I'M GOING TO SUGGEST IT'S NOT GOING TO BREAK THE BANK. WE SIMPLY GO TO $2,000 FOR OUR FULL TIME AND 1000 FOR OUR PART TIME AND I MAKE MIGHT MAKE A MOTION TO INCREASE THAT AMOUNT JUST BECAUSE IT'S EASIER TO UNDERSTAND AND IT'S A SIMPLE NUMBER IT'S 1885 IT'S $2,000 AND IT'S NOT 943 IT'S 1000. AND I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO HAVE A RELIGION EVERY YEAR TO ACCOMPLISH THAT. NOW JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE 2.2 OR THE 1885 AND THE 943 FOR THE PART TIME IS WHAT WAS CALCULATED BASED ON CURRENT EMPLOYMENT FOR TIME AND PART TIME EMPLOYEES ENDED AT 2.2 AND CATHERINE RAN THE SALARY ROSTER DAY SO I'M A LET HER TALK TO THAT I GUESS THE REAL INDICATOR IS I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY VACANCIES WE HAVE IN THE COUNTY IN TIME WHEN YOU COUNT THE POSITIONS OR PEOPLE WE COUNTED POSITIONS SO STAFF AND VACANCIES SO YOU'RE ALLOCATING MONEY HERE FOR WHERE VACANCIES AREN'T FILLED BUT THAT YOU EXPECT TO FILL, CORRECT? BECAUSE WE WANT TO ALSO BRING UP THE STARTING BASE RATE.

YEAH, I UNDERSTAND. OKAY YEAH WELL I DON'T KNOW I DON'T KNOW WHAT MY SUGGESTION DO BUT I DON'T WANT TO JUST I DON'T WANT TO MAKE I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS GO AWAY IF IT HAS TO BE 1885 AND 943 SO BE IT. BUT I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE AROUND FOR EVERYONE.

I UNDERSTAND IF IT WAS A FLAT RATE OF 2000 AND A FLAT RATE OF ABOUT THAT CAN'T HAPPEN IN I'M SATISFIED WITH THE WAY IT IS BUT I DON'T WANT TO SEE A 3% INCREASE TO $30,000 A YEAR EMPLOYEE BECAUSE THAT'S ONLY $900 AND I THINK THEY DESERVE TO HAVE MORE.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS JUST TO CLARIFY MY STATEMENT, MR. LAWSON I'M NOT LOOKING TO TO PUSH IT FOR THE 3000 I DON'T WANT TO SEND THEM BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD.

I JUST THINK IT'S MORE BENEFICIAL TO A HIGHER VOLUME OF OUR COUNTY EMPLOYEES AT A FLAT RATE THAN IT IS PERCENT RACE. THAT'S ALL.

JUST TO CLARIFY MY STATEMENT JUST MEANT SO UNLESS THE LAST TIME WE GAVE IT 3000 FLAT RATE AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD THING. HOWEVER I'M GOING BACK TO OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING MEETING WE ALL AGREED TO A 3% I BELIEVE THE STATE IS 2.5% COLA SO WE'RE ABOVE THE STATE AND I JUST HAVE SOME ANGST OVER THE FACT THAT WE'RE CHANGING OUR MIND WITH TWO WEEKS THE FINANCE COMMITTEE THERE WILL HAVE TO BE EXTRA MEETINGS.

IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU GO 2000 WITH WHAT MR. MCGOWAN SAID OR 3000 IT'S STILL BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD CHANGING EVERY AT 3% IS REALLY EASY VERSUS THE OTHER.

SO I HAVE I'M PULLED IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. IT'S GOING TO BE MORE WORK I GET IT AND WE SHOULD IT'S OUR FAULT WE SHOULD HAVE DONE IT EARLIER WE WENT INTO LATE THE OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OF STAFFERS RECOMMENDS THAT COUNTY COUNCIL PROCEED WITH THE 3% COLA INCREASE TO EMPLOYEE SALARIES AS PREVIOUSLY PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED RATHER THAN AWARDING A FLAT RATE DOLLAR INCREASE. SO AT THIS TIME WE'LL ENTERTAIN

[01:05:03]

A A MOTION TO EITHER WHATEVER IS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE IT FOR THE FLAT RATE OF 1885 I WANT TO COMMEND THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING A 3% CALL YES THAT'S WHAT THE NOT THE DOCUMENT SAYS SO CAN I GET A CLEAR WELL WE NEED A SECOND THEY'RE OUT THERE REQUESTING A PERCENT COLA NOT A FLAT RATE. YES SIR WE NEED A A SECOND AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS IT SOME MORE ON THE SECOND. RIGHT.

THE SECOND BY MS.. MISS BROWN. OKAY LARRY, GO AHEAD DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I JUST WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION.

I'M SURPRISED TO HEAR THAT AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND A LOT OF GOVERNMENT IS LOCATED IN THE EXCUSE MEANING IT'S IN THE BACKUP MATERIALS FOR I UNDERSTAND.

WELL I'M SIMPLY SAYING THAT THAT MEANS THE LOWER PAID EMPLOYEES GET LESS OF A REST AND THE HIGHER PAID WHY YOU SHOULD GET A HIGHER RATE AND SO I OBJECT TO THAT I THINK THAT EVERYONE SHOULD GET THE SAME RATE THAT'S ALL YOU STAFF IS RECOMMENDING WHAT WE DISCUSSED THAT BACK TO YOUR POINT ABOUT AT STRATEGIC PLAN IT WAS AGREED ON 3%.

THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN PUT IN THE BUDGET SO FAR. THE COUNCIL WANTS TO DIFFERENT DIRECTION. WE'LL GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. WELL IT'S GOING TO BE 3% ANYWAY . IT'S JUST GOING TO BE IT'S GOING TO BE PAID DIFFERENTLY.

THAT'S AND YOUR MATH IS STILL 3%. IT'S JUST GOING TO BE EFFICIENT. IT WON'T 3% FOR ALL EMPLOYEES AT THE AMOUNT IN IN EMOTIONAL IT WAS $1,885 PER FULL TIME EMPLOYEE. YEAH I GET THAT BUT IT'S STILL 3% TOTAL THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. THE MONEY ISN'T CHANGING IT'S JUST THE WAY IT'S BEING DISTRIBUTED. THE LOWER PAID EMPLOYEES WILL GET A HIGHER OF DOLLARS AND THE HIGHER PAID EMPLOYEES WILL GET A LESSER AMOUNT OF DOLLARS PARTICULARLY IF THEY'RE OVER IF THEY GET IF THEIR $100,000 EMPLOYEE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT'S AROUND $64 FOR COMMUNITY OF 1885 AND WHATEVER THAT AN INDIVIDUAL OKAY ALL ANY OTHER DISCUSSION YEAH JUST FOR CLARIFICATION YOU IF WE DID THE FLAT RATE IT WOULD BE NO DIFFERENCE IN THE WORK IF WE DID THE 3% NO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD, NO OTHER MEETINGS, NO POSTPONING IT WOULD JUST BE CHANGING THE WORDING.

IT WOULD NO WOULD CHANGE IT WOULD REQUIRE US TO CHANGE ALL COUNTY ALL SALARIES AND WAGES THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE COUNTY THAT MEANS THAT THE NUMBERS THAT I WOULD HAVE PRESENTED TO YOU THE 21ST I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND ADJUST. SHE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND WE'D HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER TO ADJUST FOR A FLAT RATE NOT A FLAT 3% BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WAS PRESENTED IN LAST WEEK'S BUDGET WORKSHOP. SO BASICALLY WE WOULD GO BACK AND ADJUST EVERY SALARIED WAGE LINE ITEM IN ACROSS 48 DEPARTMENTS.

YES, BACK OFFICE WISE THERE'S THAT WORK BECAUSE YOU'RE GETTING A HIGHER INCREASE FOR SOME EMPLOYEES AND LESS OF AN AN INCREASE FOR OTHERS. BUT THE SENSE OF THE BUDGET ITSELF IT DOES NOT CHANGE ALL MR. MCCALLUM'S POINT THE 3% COLA IS EQUIVALENT TO 1885 AND 943. IT WILL BE A LOT OF WE WILL NOT HAVE THE BUDGET ACCURATELY PRESENTED FOR THE FINANCE COMMITTEE ON THE 21ST WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND EDIT ALL OF THE LINE ITEMS IN THE SOFTWARE BECAUSE LIKE I SAID RIGHT NOW WHAT WE ENTERED WAS BASED ON THAT 3% FOR DEPARTMENT SO EVERY DEPARTMENT IN THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO GET ADJUSTED FOR SALARIES AND WAGES WHICH WHICH WILL DO JUST TO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE BUT KNOW WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW THE WILL OF COUNCIL QUESTIONS NO NO MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

IS EVERYONE CLEAR ON WHAT WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON? RIGHT.

DO I BELIEVE THAT THE MOTION OF UNDERSTAND IT CORRECTLY WAS FOR THE FLAT RATE FEE AND WAS SECOND? IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

SO WE'RE VOTING YES OR NO? NO, IT WAS JUST FOR THE FLAT RATE IT WAS 3%.

NO, NO, NO, NO. WE HAD A MOTION. WE HAVE A MOTION.

IT'S ON THE FLOOR AT THE FLAT. YOU SAYING THE STAFF WAS RECOMMENDING 3% BUT THAT'S NOT THE MOTION? NO, THE MOTION WAS FOR THE FLAT OF $1,885.

MADAM CHAIRMAN, LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND EVEN WITH THE FLAT RATE, THE THE EQUIVALENT WILL STILL BE THE POINT $2 MILLION THAT YEAH. SO IF YOU GO WITH THE COLA IS STILL 2.2 MILLION IF YOU GO THE FLAT RATE IS STILL EQUIVALENT SO THE BOTTOM LINE OF THE BUDGET WILL NOT CHANGE IT'S JUST THE INDIVIDUAL LINE ITEMS IN EACH DEPARTMENT WILL CHANGE.

RIGHT. YEAH. AS WE JUST POINTED OUT THE MOTION INCOMPLETE BECAUSE IT NOT ADDRESSED THE PART TIME EMPLOYEE.

OH OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT? YEAH I CAN MAKE THE MOTION AGAIN INCLUDE IT SO THE MOTION TO BE FOR FULL TIME EMPLOYEES WOULD GET A FLAT RATE OF $1,885 AND PART TIME EMPLOYEES GET AN INCREASE OF $943 A SECOND THAT COULD. ANY DISCUSSION REGARDING THAT AMENDMENT? YES, SIR. TO SAY THAT I WILL VOTE AGAINST IT BUT I WILL MAKE SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND I'M NOT VOTING A INCREASE IN SALARY. I'M JUST VOTING AGAINST THE FLAT. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION IN A

[01:10:05]

SECOND. I'M LOOKING TO WIN ONE MORE. ONE MORE COMMENT.

YEAH. WITH THE FLAT RATE YOUR CURRENT EMPLOYEES WILL X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS INCREASE. HOW DOES THAT IMPACT THEIR THEIR POSITION IN AN ON THEIR SALARY SCHEDULE? IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY, WE WILL BE ADJUSTING THE SALARIES SCALES AS WELL BY THE EXCUSE 943 RATE BY HALF OF THAT SO EVERY STARTING PAY BAND WILL INCREASE BY $943. YEAH THAT'S THE ONLY IMPACT YOU HAVE FOR OUR VACANCIES AND OUR PAY SCALES. YEAH CORRECT. OKAY.

THAT'S WHAT THE FLAT RATE OPTION BECAUSE IT RAISES THE STARTING SALARY IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YES, SIR. OKAY.

YES, SIR. THAT RAISES THE STARTING SALARY FOR ANYONE.

RIGHT. AND IF WE DID THE PERCENTAGE WE WOULD DO THE SAME CONCEPT OF INCREASE IN THE STARTING PAY BANDS BY ONE AND A HALF PERCENT.

BUT THAT SALARY START WILL BE MUCH LOWER. SORRY THAT'S STARTING WITH 3% WOULD BE MUCH LOWER. RIGHT. SEE A HIGHER INCREASE FOR HIGHER PAID EMPLOYEES AND A LOWER INCREASE FOR LOWER PAID EMPLOYEES BREAK EVEN POINT IS $63,000 A YEAR. ANY EMPLOYEE THAT MAKES THAN $63,000 A YEAR MAKES MORE MONEY THIS WAY THAN THEY DO OVER ANYBODY. $63,000 WILL RECEIVE LESS OF AN INCREASE I'M SURE I CALL THE QUESTION. OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO DO A ROLL CALL VOTE FOR THIS. YOU CALLED THE QUESTION THAT MAY BE CALLED THE QUESTION.

YOU MADE THE MOTION. MR. CUNNINGHAM, HOW YOU VOTE YES.

AND PAUL YOU WERE THE SECOND. SO THE SECOND THAT'S CORRECT. IN YOUR VOTE IS THAT'S THE FLAT RATE. FLAT RATE. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. GO IN AND ORDER. I'LL START.

DO YOU WANT TO CALL THE PLACE TO BURN? THAT'D BE BETTER OFF HERE.

YES. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER? YES. LET ME I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT YOU KNOW THAT REALLY YOU DON'T HAVE TO. I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT AND YOU KNOW, IN MY REALLY WAS WHEN YOU COME TO POSITIONS IN THE COUNTY THE FLAT RATE HOW DOES THAT AFFECT SUPERVISORS VERSUS EMPLOYEES ETCETERA ETCETERA. DOES IT CHANGE THE RATE FOR THE SUPERVISORS? WELL WE HAVE DIDN'T REALLY DISCUSS IT DURING THE VOTE.

YEAH I KNOW WE ARE BUT YOU KNOW THEY WILL CALL THE QUESTIONS FOR THE QUESTION COUNCIL AND GLOVER'S YOU JUST HAVE TO VOTE YES OR NO. I'M SORRY.

WELL, I WAS ABSTAIN. I WAS THERE. NO.

OKAY. A MEMBER LAWSON. MARK LAWSON? NO. BUT FOR A PAY INCREASE. BUT NOT FOR FLAT RATE COUNCIL MEMBER MACGOWAN YEAH. COUNCIL MEMBER PASSING IT? YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER RATES? YES. CHAIR HOWARD.

YES. VICE CHAIR. CABINET NO.

THAT'S TWO NO. SEVEN YES. AND ONE ABSTAINED.

SO THE MOTION PASSED. YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT.

[11.a. 2025/19 AN ORDINANCE FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (CDC): APPENDIX B (DAUFUSKIE ISLAND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE) DIVISION 3 (PERMITTED USES) TO PERMIT THE USE OF ANIMAL SERVICES: CLINIC/HOSPITAL IN D2 RURAL (D2R)]

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO THE AGENDA.

THE NEXT THING IS ORDINANCES FOR A THIRD READING. YEP.

OKAY. WE HAVE ORDINANCE 2025 SLASH 19.

IT'S AN ORDINANCE FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE APPENDIX B TO FACILITATE ISLAND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE DIVISION THREE PERMITTED USES TO PERMIT THE USE ANIMAL SERVICES CLINIC HOSPITAL IN DEE RURAL VOTED THE FIRST READING MERCHANT WAS 11 ZERO VOTED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING ON MARCH 24 IT WAS TEN ZERO.

CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS READ LIKE THE MOTION SECOND? THANK YOU MR. LAWSON AND MR. AND VOTE BY A SHOW OF HANDS PLEASE DO NOT THE CRITERIA OH WHAT IS NOT WHAT BETTER WAY TO MONITOR IT IT MADE IN MOTION. OH MR. LAWSON, IF YOU DON'T MAKE A MOTION I MOVE THAT WE GRANT THE REQUEST FOR THE TAX AMENDMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT IS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH ANY PROVISION OF THIS DEVELOPMENT CODE OR THE CODE OF ORDINANCES IS REQUIRED BY CHANGED CONDITIONS.

[01:15:03]

DOES ADDRESS A DEMONSTRATED COMMUNITY NEED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE INTENT OF THE ZONES AND THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT CODE OR WOULD IMPROVE COMPATIBILITY AMONG THE USES AND ENSURE EFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE COUNTY IT WOULD RESULT IN LOGICAL AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND WOULD NOT RESULT IN ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WATER, AIR NOISE, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, WILDLIFE ,WETLANDS AND THE NATURAL FUNCTIONING OF THE ENVIRONMENT OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR THE MOTION READ EZRA AND LORRAINE VOTE YES. YES.

[11.b. 2025/13 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR CHEROKEE FARMS ROAD ASSOCIATED WITH A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DATED DECEMBER 15, 2014 (PUBLIC HEARING)]

THANK YOU. OKAY NEXT 2025 SLASH 13 IS AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR CHEROKEE FARMS ROAD ASSOCIATED WITH THE AGREEMENT DATED DECEMBER 15, 2014 PUBLIC HEARING VOTE AT FIRST READING ON MARCH 10TH WAS 11 TO 0 VOTED THE SECOND READING ON MARCH 24 IT WAS TEN ZERO SO I'D LIKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS READ SO MOVEMENT CHAIRMAN THANK YOU, MR. GLOVER. A SECOND, MISS HOWARD. AND NOW IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ORDINANCE PROPOSAL? OKAY, SEE NOW SEE NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ANY QUESTIONS COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL . THIS IS THE THIRD MEETING. ALL RIGHT.

ALL IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE AS READ 2020 513 SHOW YOUR HANDS AND THERE WE GO.

[11.c. 2025/14 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE BIG ESTATE JENKINS COMMUNITY CENTER FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 132 BOOKER T. WASHINGTON CIRCLE (PUBLIC HEARING)]

THANK YOU. 2025 PLEDGE 14 IS AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH BIGGEST STATE JENKINS COMMUNITY CENTER FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 132 BOOKER T WASHINGTON CIRCLE THE THE FIRST READING MARCH 10TH WAS 11 ZERO AT THE SECOND READING MARCH 24 IT WAS TEN ZERO.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHES TO DISCUSS THIS ORDINANCE? OKAY, SEE NO ONE. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE WILL HAVE A ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNSEL. ALL RIGHT THEN LET YOUR VOTE HAVE HANDS ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION A SECOND ON THAT. OH, I'M SORRY.

DID YOU SECOND IT, MADAM CHAIRMAN? I WOULD ON BEHALF OF GENERAL DAWSON I WOULD PUT THIS ENTER IT AS AN EMOTION. I'LL SECOND IT.

OH, OKAY. YEAH. ALL RIGHT.

SO SO ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS ORDINANCE AS. READ.

[11.d. 2025/15 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE YOUNG MEN’S SOCIAL CLUB AND SOUTH PINE LADIES’ UNION FOR A PORTION OF THE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 242 AND 228 SCOTT HILL ROAD (PUBLIC HEARING)]

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ORDINANCE 2020 515 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE YOUNG MAN SOCIAL CLUB AND SOUTH PINE LADIES UNION FOR A A PORTION OF THE REAL ESTATE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 OR 42 AND TO 28. SCOTT ROAD THE VOTE AT THE FIRST READING MARCH 10TH IS 11 0/2 READING MARCH 24 IT WAS TEN ZERO. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS READ YET IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING. I KNOW THE MOTION.

WE APPROVE THIS LEASE AGREEMENT. THE MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. GLOVER. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC WISH TO ADDRESS THIS ORDINANCE ? OKAY. SEEING THIS ONE I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING ANYBODY AND COUNSEL HAVE A QUESTION OR DISCUSSION. MADAM CHAIRMAN, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THIS WAS LONG OVERDUE AND I'M GLAD TO SEE THIS COMING TO FRUITION AT THIS TIME.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. GLOVER. ALL RIGHT.

ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ORDINANCE AS READ. ALL RIGHT.

[11.e. 2025/16 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE DALE-LOBECO COMMUNITY CENTER FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 15 COMMUNITY CENTER ROAD (PUBLIC HEARING)]

THANK YOU. AND 2025 SO 16 IS ALSO A PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE DALE BEAGLE COMMUNITY CENTER FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 15 COMMUNITY CENTER ROAD. VOTED THE FIRST READING MARCH 10TH 11 ZERO VOTED THE SECOND READING MARCH 24TH TEN ZERO AND THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING SO CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO THE ORDINANCE AS READ CHAIRMAN AND I ON BEHALF OF MR. DAWSON INTRODUCING A MOTION I YOU'RE REPRESENTING HIM WELL, THANK YOU.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THIS OR THIS MOTION? I'LL SECOND.

THANK YOU, MR. BARTHOLOMEW THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC WISH TO ADDRESS ORDINANCE? ALL RIGHT, I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYONE ON COUNCIL HAVE A COMMENT QUESTION THANK YOU. SO LET'S TAKE TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS READ. OKAY SO 2020 516 IS APPROVED. OKAY.

[12.a. 2025/20 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND BEAUFORT COUNTY'S BUDGET ORDINANCE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 (ORDINANCE NO. 2024/25) TO AMEND SECTION III COUNTY OPERATIONS REVENUE, PARAGRAPH B. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND; AND SECTION IV. COUNTY OPERATIONS APPROPRIATION, PARAGRAPH B. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND AND ADD APPENDIX A AND APPENDIX B TO THE FY 2025 BUDGET]

MOVING TO ORDINANCES FOR FIRST READING 2025 SIZE 20 IS AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND COUNTY'S

[01:20:04]

BUDGET ORDINANCE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025. IT WAS SUMMER 2020 FOR SIZE 25 TO AMEND SECTION THREE COUNTY OPERATIONS REVENUE PARAGRAPH B CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND IN SECTION COUNTY OPERATIONS APPROPRIATION PARAGRAPH B CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND IN AD APPENDIX IN APPENDIX B TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET THE PUBLIC WILL BE ON APRIL 28 SO CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ORDINANCE AS READ I'LL MAKE THE MOTION.

MR. LAWSON YES, IT IS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

I HAVE A SECOND? A SECOND? THANK YOU.

AND MISS HARRIET, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS IS THE FIRST READING FOR THIS ITEM WAS PRESENTED AT FINANCE COMMITTEE. THIS IS DUE TO THE ISSUANCE OF OUR 2025 BONDS.

ORIGINALLY THE PLAN WAS TO ISSUE BONDS AROUND THE $90 MILLION PRICE TAG BUT WE ENDED UP DOWN SOME OF THE PROJECTS AND WE PREPARED WE ENDED UP ISSUING BONDS FOR COUNTY PROJECTS AS WELL AS BEING ANTI-COAL TO THE TUNE OF $72 MILLION.

SO WE ARE JUST PROSPECTIVELY AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 25 BUDGET TO REFLECT THAT CHANGE AND YOUR BACKUP IS THE ATTACHMENT THE DETAILS OF THE TWO DIFFERENT BONDS AS WELL AS THE PROJECT LOAD THAT WAS APPROVED. QUESTION COMMENT YES.

MR. GLOVER EVEN THOUGH WE DOWNSIZED THE AMOUNT, THE NEEDS ARE STILL THERE.

SO WE'RE PULLING PHONES OF THE BALANCES. WHAT IS HOW I READ THIS? NO, NO, NO, NO, SIR. THIS IS STRICTLY RELATED TO THE BOND THAT WE JUST DID A COUPLE A FEW MONTHS AGO. YEAH, THE BOND ISSUANCE THE THE THE FUNDING FOR THE PROJECTS WILL CONTINUE TO BE PRETTY CLOSE TO $90 MILLION RIGHT NOW $68.6 MILLION I DO IF ANYBODY ASKS IS A QUESTION SO BRENNAN CAN YOU PUT UP THE PACKET ON PAGE 82? I JUST WANT FOR THE PUBLIC SO YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ORDINANCE IS THEY'RE SHOWING CURRENT MILLAGE AND ALSO SHOWING THE DIFFERENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND DEBT SERVICE AND SO ON THAT STARTS ON PAGE 82 I THINK PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND THEN WHEN YOU GO TO PAGE FIVE THAT TALKS ABOUT THE HIGHER ED ALLOCATION WHICH SOME RESIDENTS MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT INDIGENT CARE BMA INDIGENT CARE FOR VIEW FOR JASPER HAMPTON AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND THEN THE FIRE DEPARTMENTS ARE THERE.

I THINK THE PUBLIC SHOULD KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AS FAR AS WHAT APPROVED FOR 25 BECAUSE WE'RE COMING UP 26 AND ALL THIS IS GOING TO BE BACK IN HER FACE .

ANYBODY ELSE COME AND QUESTION OKAY THEN WE'LL TAKE A VOTE ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS ORDINANCE 2025 SAYS 22 AMEND THE BUDGET ORDINANCE RAISE YOUR HANDS THANK YOU ORDINANCE 25 SIZE 21

[12.b. 2025/21 AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL ORDINANCE 2021/24, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING ENTERPRISE SYSTEM.]

IS AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL ORDINANCE 2021 SIZE 24 WHICH ESTABLISHED THE SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING ENTERPRISE SYSTEM AND THIS PUBLIC WILL BE APRIL 28TH SO THIS IS FIRST READING CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS READ MAKE A MOTION? THANK YOU MISS HOWARD. SECOND ON THAT WHO IS THE SECOND VOTE PAULA? OKAY AND MISS HARRIET GO ALL IN ORDER TO DO WHAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IN OUR FEBRUARY STRATEGIC SESSION WAS TO BRING THE SOLID WASTE ENTERPRISE FUND INTO THE GENERAL FUND.

THERE WAS THIS ORDINANCE OUT HERE PASSED IN JERRY WAS HERE TO TAG TEAM WITH THIS BACK IN 2022 TO CREATE THE ENTERPRISE FUND SO IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD WE HAVE TO REPEAL THE CURRENT ORDINANCE TO BE ABLE TO MOVE THE SIDEWAYS BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND.

ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT? I THINK MAYBE A COMMENT IF MR. PHILLIPS COULD COMMENT ABOUT THINGS HAVE CHANGED SINCE 2022 AND SO THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHY I WOULD DO WHY WE'RE NOT DOING THIS. YES, SURE.

SO THE READER'S DIGEST VERSION . YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

SO INITIALLY WE HAD AN ASSESSMENT DONE IN 2020 AND MADE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS ON WE OPERATE SOLID WASTE AT OUR CONVENIENCE CENTERS THAT LED TO THE DEKALB PROGRAM THAT WE'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH BUT ALSO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ENTERPRISE FUND ENTERPRISE FUND IS WHERE BUSINESS LIKE ACTIVITIES PLACE INSIDE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND SO THE INTENT THERE WAS WE HAVE A REVENUE SOURCE THEN THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE THE REVENUE SOURCE AT THE TIME WAS A PLANNED MURF

[01:25:03]

MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY AND WE'VE WORKED THROUGH THAT IN DIFFERENT ITERATIONS AND WHAT WE'VE COME TO THE CONCLUSION IS THAT RIGHT NOW WE'RE PROBABLY NOT SIZED FOR A FULL MURF IN ITSELF MUCH LIKE CHARLESTON IS BUT WE HAVE THAT IT HASN'T DISCOURAGED US FROM FORWARD WITH THOSE WITH THOSE PRACTICES WE'VE JUST DOING THAT THROUGH A CONTRACT BASIS UNTIL OUR RECYCLING MATERIAL GROWS TO BE SUSTAINABLE THEN WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE RECEIVING THOSE THOSE TIPPING FEES FOR MATERIAL RECOVERY FACILITY. SO WITHOUT REVENUE COMING IN THEN AS A FUNCTION IN MUCH LIKE A GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT AND THAT'S THE REASON THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING THIS BRINGING IT BACK IN FROM AN ENTERPRISE FUND BACK TO A GENERAL.

THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING, MURPH TO THE PUBLIC THANK YOU, RICK. INSTEAD OF SMURF LIKE LITTLE BLUE THINGS. OKAY. THE OTHER QUESTION FROM COUNCIL COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO TAKE A VOTE ON THE ORDINANCE AS READ IN FAVOR. I'LL OPPOSE EVERYBODY TO THE REVOTE.

[12.c. 2025/22 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ABANDONMENT OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT TMS R510 007 000 0116 0000.]

OKAY. ORDINANCE 2025 SIZE 22 IS AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ABANDONMENT OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT RECORDED IN THE DEED BOOK 3044 AT PAGE 2170 AND THIS PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE APRIL 28. I'D LIKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS READ OR DOES THE MOTION CAME AS OUR THANK ANYWAY CARE TO SECOND THE MOTION. WHICH ONE ARE YOU DOING? YEAH DID YOU DO 22 OR 2325 2228. OKAY THE BANDING ABANDONING THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT WE DID THE SOLID WASTE RIGHT. OKAY SO SEE IN YOUR AGENDA SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR MS. HOWARD I NEED A SECOND OR IT GOES SECOND FOR DISCUSSION.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. GLOVER. LET'S OPEN A DISCUSSION.

DISCUSSION? SURE. COULD WE SEE EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENING HERE? AND I GOT I GOT THE MAP ACCELERATING BUT IS THERE SOMEONE HERE TO SPEAK TO IT MEAN MR. HARRIS THIS IS ON HILTON HEAD, ISN'T IT, GERARD YEAH, THIS IS ON HILTON HEAD OFF OF JONESVILLE ROAD AND WE HAD RECORDED A EASEMENT BACK 2011 AND THE EASEMENT WASN'T THE LOCATION WHERE WE ENDED UP NEEDING IT AND SO WE HAVE AN EASEMENT OVER PROPERTY THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY STORMWATER FEATURES.

SO THE FAMILY HAS ASKED THAT WE REMOVE EASEMENT AND AGAIN WE DON'T HAVE ANY STORMWATER FEATURES SO WE'RE OBLIGED TO THE FAMILY TO BRING THIS UP BUT THE AREA IS BEING DRAINED PROPERLY. YEAH, YEAH THERE'S NO DRAINAGE ISSUES OUT IN THE FIELD IS JUST WHY WE'RE IN THIS WAS PROCURED. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE REASONING WAS BACK THEN BUT THERE IS NO DRAINAGE ISSUE AND THERE IS NO FUTURE PLANS FOR A DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT OR DRAINAGE CANAL OR CONVEYANCE SYSTEM IN THIS LOCATION. OKAY.

APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTION OR COMMENT FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS READ PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND, MR. BACON.

[12.d. 2025/23 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ABANDONMENT OF AN EASEMENT ENCUMBERING PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS TMS NO. R300 035 00A 0004 0000 AND R300 035 00A 0004 0000.]

THERE IT IS. OKAY. THANK YOU.

2025 SIZE 23 IS AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ABANDONMENT OF AN EASEMENT ENCUMBERING PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS TMS NUMBER. OH GOD.

OUR 300 03500A00040000 AND OUR 300 03500A00040000. THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE APRIL 28 ALTHOUGH I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ORDINANCE AS READ SO MOVEMENT CHAIRMAN THANK MR. GLOVER DO I HAVE A SECOND FOR THIS ORDINANCE NOW? ALSO I CAN THINK OF AS HOWARD DO WE NEED SOMEONE TO TO DISCUSS THIS OR IS THERE HAVE BEEN INTEREST IS HIGH AND AS YOU KNOW UNDERSTAND I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS THE A STORMWATER DRAINAGE IN THIS COMMUNITY HAS BEEN OUT THERE FOR YEARS AND APPARENTLY THE LANDOWNERS COULD NOT GET TO DETERMINE HOW THEY WOULD TRAINOR'S AREA AND SO I GUESS THE IS JUST SAY HEY LET'S TAKE IT OFF THE BOOKS IS THAT THE WAY OWENS THAT'S THE WAY IT IS MR. FREDERICKS WITH YOU YEAH. THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE LAST ONE.

THIS IS A VERY OLD EASEMENT 2005 THAT WE OBTAINED AND WE HAD COORDINATED WITH THE DIFFERENT VARIOUS PROPERTY OWNERS AND NOBODY WAS WILLING TO GIVE THE SURROUNDING

[01:30:04]

EASEMENTS RELOCATE A DITCH. SO THIS IS WE OBTAINED IT ON THIS ONE PARCEL BUT NOT THE REST OF THEM. SO WE HAVE AN EASEMENT WHERE WE PLANNING TO PUT A DITCH 20 YEARS AGO AND THAT PROJECT CAME TO BE AND SO THIS IS RETURNING THAT SAME THING REMOVING THE EASEMENT FROM THAT PROPERTY WE PRESENTLY HAVE IN THIS IN THIS CASE HERE THE DRAINAGE REALLY HAS NOT IMPROVED BUT. WE CANNOT GET THE LANDOWNERS TO AGREE TO SOME KIND OF THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. I'LL HAVE NO PROBLEM MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU, SIR. AND THIS IS FOR FREMONT AND PATTY WILSON'S FOR PATTY ROUND . THANK YOU PATTY WILSON.

I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THERE AN ERROR ON THIS BECAUSE THEY BOTH SAY 004 ON THIS ONE OF 005.

OKAY. JUST SO YOU KNOW IT'S CORRECTED AND WHAT HAPPENED THE PLAN WAS TO MOVE THE DRAINAGE THE DRAINAGE GOES IN THE MIDDLE OF THOSE PROPERTIES AND THEY WANTED TO MOVE IT TO THE PROPERTY LINE BUT ONLY THESE PROPERTIES RIGHT THERE ACTUALLY GRANTED AN EASEMENT AND THE OTHER ONES DIDN'T AND THESE PEOPLE FAMILY MEMBERS WANT TO ABANDON THE EASEMENT. NOW I'VE GOT A QUESTION. YES.

IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE MY VOTE BUT WHEN WHEN ACQUIRE THESE EASEMENTS BACK IN 2011 FROM THE ONE WE JUST TALKED ABOUT IN 2005, DID WE PAY ANYTHING FOR THESE EASEMENTS? WE DON'T WE TYPICALLY DON'T PAY FOR EASEMENTS. OKAY.

BECAUSE WE'RE BENEFITING THE COMMUNITY BY PROVIDING A SERVICE HELPING PROVIDING BACK THEIR ORIGINAL RIGHTS THEY HAD BEFORE THEY GAVE US THE EASEMENT.

YEAH, THEY'RE STILL PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE DRAINAGE THROUGH THEIR PROPERTY BUT WE'RE JUST A BAND IN OUR EASEMENT. OKAY, I JUST NEED TO POINT OUT THAT THE ORBIT'S IS CORRECT WITH THE 004 AND 005 DISTRIBUTORS THERE IS ON THE AGENDA.

OKAY OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THE OTHER QUESTION COMING FROM ALL RIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE AS READ SO I'M HANDS MR. MCGOWAN OH THERE HE IS. OKAY, THANKS. ALL RIGHT, THAT CONCLUDES

[13.a. 2025/17 RESOLUTION APPROVING BEAUFORT COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION'S REQUEST TO PURCHASE 14.77 ACRES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT 134 PARKER DRIVE, BEAUFORT]

ORDINANCES FOR FIRST READING, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

WE'RE GOING TO GO TO RESOLUTIONS 13 A ON THE AGENDA 2025 SLASH 17 RESOLUTION APPROVING BEAUFORT COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION'S REQUEST TO PURCHASE 14.77 ACRES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT 134 PARKER DRIVE BEAUFORT AND I HAVE A MOTION A MOTION A MOTION BY MISS BROWN DO WE HAVE A SECOND? A SECOND SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GLOVER AND I KNOW MR. O'TOOLE IS HERE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNSEL, I'D TIM TO EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT.

OKAY. HE COULD COME FORWARD PARTICULARLY FOR THE PUBLIC IT'S PUBLIC FUNDS. MR. O'TOOLE HI HI. OKAY WELL PUT IT UP FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FOR YOU WANT TO ASK THEM. WELL IT'S 14.77 ACRES AT 134 PARKER DRIVE FOR FUTURE ECONOMICALLY SO IT SAYS IT WOULD BE SUBDIVIDED SO WHAT WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHT ON WHY WE'RE SUBDIVIDING IT AND WHAT MIGHT BE THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF A VERY GOOD YEAH I HAD MENTIONED THIS WHEN I SPOKE ON THE 17TH WE WERE LOOKING AT 500 ACRES IN NORTHERN BEAUFORT COUNTY AND AND FOUND THAT THEY WERE LARGELY WET SO FINDING DRY LAND TO DIVERSIFY THE COUNTY'S ECONOMY IS I BELIEVE WHY THE COUNCIL SET THESE FUNDS ASIDE THIS PARTICULAR SITE WE'VE DONE FIELD DUE DILIGENCE ON THIS SITE AND IT'S HIGH AND DRY LAND SO IT'S GOOD LAND. I BELIEVE I MENTIONED ON THE 17TH THAT HAVEN'T AT LARGE TRACTS AND THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED FOR YEARS BEAUFORT COUNTY TRYING TO GET A BIG TRACT TRYING TO GET A BIG DEVELOPER. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE YOU KNOW, WITH THE WITH HOMEBUILDER WITH THE GREEN GREEN SPACE EFFORTS WE'VE GOT TO REALLY CARVE OUT AREAS WHERE FUTURE FUTURE GENERATIONS CAN JOBS IN COUNTY A LOT OF I'LL SAY MIDDLE AGE PARENTS THAT I PEOPLE I MEET IN BEAUFORT COUNTY DREAMED THAT SOMEDAY THEIR RELATIVES WOULD BE ABLE TO NOT ONLY GO AWAY TO COLLEGE BE ABLE COME HOME AND FIND GOOD JOBS.

SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE WE HAVE GEISMAR ON THE FRONT EDGE AND I HAD MENTIONED THIS PUBLICLY THAT THEY WERE AT A POINT WHERE THEY WERE LOOKING FOR CASH FLOW,

[01:35:04]

THEY WERE LOOKING AT SELLING THEIR PROPERTY AND THEN LEASING IT BACK.

IF WE TAKE THIS PROPERTY AND WE'VE DONE SOME PRELIMINARY REVIEWS TO HAVE TO DO MORE WITH THE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUT WE COULD EXPECT TO GET AN ADDITIONAL 60,000 OR 80,000 SQUARE FEET ON THE ON THE 14 ACRES WE ALSO HAVE THE OPTION OF WITH THE CITY OF BEAUFORT THEY HAVE AN 11 ACRE PARCEL ADJACENT TO THIS THAT IS LANDLOCKED WE BELIEVE WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO COMBINE ANOTHER FIVE ACRES. SO WE'VE GOT A IN IN BEAUFORT COUNTY'S, YOU KNOW, LEXICON. WE'VE GOT A GOOD SITE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IF WE BUY THIS PROPERTY AND WE'RE CONFIDENT THAT WE'RE GETTING IT AT A GOOD PRICE CONSIDERING JUST BEYOND SELLING ACREAGE FOR 40,000 AND IN THE PUBLIC SHOULD KNOW WHILE WE'RE WE'RE YOUR AGENT WE SELL THESE PROPERTIES THE FUNDS COME BACK TO THIS COUNTY FUND I'M GLAD YOU POINTED OUT IT IS A SAVINGS OF ALMOST 9000 PER ACRE BECAUSE YOU'RE PAYING 31 AND CHANGE AND IT'S REALLY 40,000. YES. YEAH.

OKAY. I'M SURE. YES.

JOHN, I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. HOW HOW HOW MANY ACRES ARE LEFT AT THE COMMERCE PARK RIGHT NOW? THERE'S PROBABLY A 175. WE'RE FINDING SOME BIT CHALLENGING BUT OUR OUR FOCUS WOULD BE TO CONTINUE MOVE THAT WE HAVE ONE BUILDING 50,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING UNDER CONSTRUCTION THERE RIGHT NOW WE'VE GOT ANOTHER SMALL COMPANY IN LOOKING AT A 15,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING SO THAT ACREAGE WILL BE EATEN UP WE THINK PRETTY QUICKLY DEPENDING ON WHAT HAPPENS. WE'VE BEEN INTO WE'VE HAD PANDEMICS, THINGS LIKE THAT THAT HAVE SLOWED DOWN OUR FORWARD PROGRESS.

BUT WE'RE PRESSING ON AND LAST QUESTION WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS IS TRACK TO BACK HERE IS THAT CURRENTLY OWNED BY THE GEISMAR IS THAT PART OF ONE CONSOLIDATED PIECE.

YES YES SO THERE THAT COMPANY IS SELLING OFF THAT 14.77 TRACT.

CORRECT? YES. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY WE HAD MOTION IN A SECOND BUT THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION SHOW OF HANDS ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS PURCHASE WE HAVE. ALL RIGHT. ALL OPPOSE AND WE HAVE ONE OPPOSE IT. MISS BERNHARD, YOU GET THAT OUT .

[13.b. 2025/18 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE AIRPORT'S WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT POLICY]

DAVID. DAVID BARTHOLOMEW MM HMM. OKAY.

NEXT UNDER RESOLUTIONS IS THE 2518 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE AIRPORTS WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT POLICY. EVERYONE READ ABOUT THAT WILL MOVE.

MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE A MOTION ON SECOND SECOND ANY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS I SAID AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING THOUGHT THIS WAS VERY EXTENSIVE AND I APPRECIATED ALL DETAIL ON IT AND IT'S OBVIOUSLY NECESSARY FOR THE SAFETY OPERATING THE AIRPORTS AND FOR THE SAFETY OF THE WILDLIFE THERE. I DO PEOPLE TOO YOU KNOW ALL IN FAVOR BY SHOW OF HANDS AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS YOU. OKAY NEXT IS 2020 419 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE

[13.c. 2024/19 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO A NONTENANT COMMERCIAL OPERATING AGREEMENT BETWEEN BEAUFORT COUNTY AND PALMETTO ACES FLYING CLUB.]

COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR INTO A NON COMMERCIAL OPERATING AGREEMENT BETWEEN BEAUFORT COUNTY IN THE PALMETTO OASIS FLYING CLUB I HAVE A MOTION SO MOVE RIGHT I HAVE A SECOND WHO THE SECOND IS BY MR. CUNNINGHAM. ANY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS? YES, MA'AM.

COULD SOMEONE EXPLAIN THIS ARRANGEMENT THIS AGREEMENT IN THE PALMETTO EASE FLYING CLUB THIS KIND OF USE OF BACKGROUND YEAH PLEASE SIR OVER HILTON HEAD OUT ELLEN AIRPORT MEMBERS COME IN AT HANGARS. THEY'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO HAVE A BUSINESS.

THIS IS AN L.A. LLC AND THEY RENT OUT THEIR AIRCRAFT AND SO IN ORDER BECAUSE THEY'RE DOING AVIATION RELATED BUSINESS WE MUST HAVE AN OPERATING AGREEMENT WITH THEM.

DID YOU JUST STATE YOUR FOR STEVE PERRY? SORRY.

I'M SORRY FOR THE AIRPORT DEPUTY DIRECTOR YES, SIR. THANK YOU.

AND SO THEY ARE ACTUALLY RENTING OUT OR LEASING THEIR AIRPLANE FOR THE PUBLIC.

CAN YOU FLY OR WHATEVER AND STUFF? YES, SIR.

OKAY. AND THEY HAVE THE AIRPLANES THERE.

THEY DO JUST. AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE DOING A LEASE AGREEMENT.

[01:40:02]

IT WAS NO WE DO THIS EVERY YEAR ANY TIME SOMEBODY WANTS TO COME IN AND ENTER AN OPERATING AGREEMENT WITH THE AIRPORT, WE COME TO YOU GUYS AND ASK FOR PERMISSION.

OKAY. IF I REMEMBER THIS CAME OUT OF MY COMMITTEE WE GET A PERCENTAGE OF ALL THEIR PROFITS OF THE PROJECT, RIGHT? YES.

YEAH. YOU KNOW THE QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT.

BY SHOW OF HANDS ALL IN FAVOR AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS. ALL RIGHT.

[14. AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN OF PORT ROYAL TO ALLOW FOR THE FUNDING, CONSTRUCTION, AND DONATION OF A SPLASH PAD ON THE COUNTY-OWNED PARK SITE AT THE BRUCE EDGERLY FIELD AND PORT ROYAL CENTER ADJACENT TO THE NEW ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND]

AND NEXT ON THE AGENDA I'D LIKE HAVE MR. BROWN AND THE TOWN OF PORT ROYAL COME FORWARD.

THIS IS AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN OF PORT ROYAL TO ALLOW FOR THE FUNDING, CONSTRUCTION AND DONATION OF A SPLASH PAD ON A COUNTY OWNED PARK SITE AT BRUCE ARNOLD YEARLY AND PORT ROYAL CENTER ADJACENT TO THE NEW ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND.

AND YES I NEED A MOTION I'M SORRY I HAVE A MOTION GOING IN A SECOND BY MS..

BROWN AND IF YOU COULD COME FORWARD AND TALK ABOUT THIS AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WE MIGHT HAVE. YES. GOOD EVENING CHAIR COUNCIL ERIC BROWN PARKS AND REC DIRECTOR SO THIS THAT COMING BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS AN AGREEMENT INTER-GOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN PORT ROYAL AND BEAUFORT COUNTY TO FUND INSTALL AND RESPONSIBLE FALCONS OF A OF A SPLASH PAD AT OUR PORT ROYAL FACILITY THE ONLY COST THAT THE COUNTY TAKE ON IS AN ANNUAL MANUAL FEE OF $30,000 ANNUAL THAT'S WATER MAINTENANCE EVERYTHING TO THE SPLASH PAD THERE'S NO OTHER COST AFFILIATE ASSOCIATED THE COUNTY AS FAR AS INSTALLING THE SPLASH PAD ON THIS SITE AND WE HAVE ABOUT 40 WE'RE AVERAGING ABOUT 40 FAMILIES A DAY AT THIS SITE NOT ALL AT ONE TIME BUT THROUGHOUT THE DAY I HAVE ABOUT 40 WE THINK THAT THIS WOULD ENHANCE IT ESPECIALLY ON WEEKENDS SO BIRTHDAY PARTIES ETC. ETC. AS WE CAN ACTUALLY. WE'RE ACTUALLY SCHEDULED TO PUT A PAVILION AS WELL AND WE CAN ALSO YOU KNOW RENT OUT FOR BIRTHDAY PARTIES AND ETC. INSTEAD AH SO THAT BEING SAID WE ABSOLUTELY THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH KEVIN PHILLIPS, MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PORT ROYAL THANK YOU ALL FOR HAVING ME AND JUST THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY REALLY THIS IDEA SOMETHING THAT I SEE THAT WAS PLANTED A LONG TIME AGO I BELIEVE WE WERE THE RIBBON CUTTING FOR THIS PARK COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAIR HOWARD WAS THERE, TAB WAS THERE, COUNCILMAN BARTHOLOMEW WAS THERE. SHANNON WAS THERE REPRESENTATIVE STATE REPRESENTATIVE CUTTING THE RIBBON AND WHEN WE WERE THERE AT THAT PARK AND I ENCOURAGE ANYONE IF YOU HAVEN'T GONE OUT THERE IT'S A BEAUTIFUL PARK IT'S THE ONLY ADA ACCESSIBLE PARK NORTH OF THE BROAD IT GETS A LOT OF ATTENTION FROM A LOT OF FAMILIES AND JUST BRINGS A LOT OF JOY TO THE AREA I GO OUT THERE WITH MY DAUGHTER I'VE SEEN BARTHOLOMEW OUT THERE MANY TIMES COUNCILWOMAN ALICE HOWARD OUT THERE WITH HER GRANDCHILDREN AND I MEET PEOPLE FROM ST HELENA FROM LADY'S ISLAND, THE CITY OF BEAUFORT, FROM BLUFFTON, FROM BURTON, FROM OVER. THEY COME TO THIS THIS FACILITY BECAUSE IT'S SO NICE.