Aug 18, 2025 Finance Administration and Economic Development Committee

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:06]

ORDER THE ADMINISTRATION ON MONDAY AUGUST 18TH 2025 AT 2 P.M. AND I COULD STAND FOR THE PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE PLACE. MY POINT IS AGENCIES OF LAND OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE AMOUNT FOR WHICH STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE ARE

[3. STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH FOIA]

[4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

SECONDLY IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION SO NO DISCUSSION. WE WILL PROVE THAT WITHOUT OBJECTION SEE NO OBJECTION. SO TODAY'S AGENDA HAS BEEN APPROVED.

[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

EVEN A SINGLE DISCUSSION. WE APPROVED THOSE WITHOUT OBJECTION AND I SEE NO

[6. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD – 15 MINUTES TOTAL]

I MEAN THIS IS AN ISSUE IT'S NOT A PERSONAL ISSUE IS NOT A CONTRACT ISSUE.

NOTHING UNDER NEGOTIATION. SO I THINK IT IS SOME TO THE IT IS TO CRITERIA WHERE IT COULD BE A PUBLIC PRESENTATION NOT A PUBLIC DISCUSSION. WE'RE ASKING THAT THAT BE CONSIDERED IN THE COUNCIL CONSIDER I THINK WE WE ALL HAVE DOUBTS AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ATTORNEY IS GOING TO SAY AND EVEN IF WE HAVE TO AGREE THAT WHATEVER HE SAYS CAN'T BE USED IN A COURT OF LAW AND MR. TREVINO WOULD AGREE TO THE SAME THING THAT WHATEVER WE SAY IS CAN'T BE BROUGHT BACK UP IN A COURT OF LAW TO BE USED FOR EITHER SIDE.

SO THAT'S ALL WE ASKING FOR IS TO HEAR HIS PERSONAL OPINION THEN AND THEN THE CONCERNS OF GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT THANK YOU YES ROUND AND THEN SECONDLY WE HAVE A EMAIL THAT WAS SENT TO THIS ALL AROUND AND ASKED THAT I READ IT AGAIN THIS IS FROM MR. GRAHAM TRASK WHO IS NOT A AN INTEREST WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS COMING COUNSEL ITSELF BUT I'M GOING TO READ THIS FOR HIM AS THE CHAIR AGAIN THIS IS FROM MR. GRAHAM TRASK AND IT SAYS PROTECT GIFFORD FOUNDATION AND CORPORATE APPLAUDS THE EFFORTS OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND COUNTY COUNCIL TO PROVIDE STRICT OVERSIGHT AND CONTROL THE EXPENDITURES OF THE COUNTY ABC ECONOMIC CORPORATION CEO JOHN O'TOOLE IT APPEARS THAT THE COUNTY EDC HAS UP UNTIL THIS POINT BEEN ABLE TO HAND OUT HUNDREDS THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IF NOT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF TAXPAYER MONEY WITH LITTLE IF ANY OVERSIGHT BY COUNTY COUNCIL ON ACTIVITIES

[00:05:01]

THE COUNTY EDC IS A WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY WHILE THE CURRENT RESOLUTION IS OVERDUE STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION IT DOES NOT GO FAR ENOUGH THEREFORE IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE FOLLOWING PRESENT PROVISIONS BE ADDED ONE RESTRICTING APPROVAL REQUIRED COUNTY COUNCIL AND ALL MONIES GIVEN TO THE COUNTY EDC NOT JUST THE JOB SITE FUNDS DUE TO ELIMINATE ANY FURTHER GRANT SHENANIGANS. NUMBER TWO THE PURPOSE OF EARMARKS TO COUNTY EDC ENTERED INTO WITH THE STATE DOES NOT QUALIFY THE LIST OF OFFICIALLY APPROVED SECTORS OF FOCUS AS DETERMINED BY THE COUNTY EDC BOARD.

THEREFORE THE COUNTY EDC REMOVE ITSELF IN THE PROCESS AND THESE MONIES KEPT IN A SEPARATE COUNTY ACCOUNT PENDING FURTHER DISCUSSION AND THE PUBLIC INPUT ON THE PROPOSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS NAME VILLAGE ENTREPRENEURIAL AND NUMBER THREE ACCORDING TO THE COUNTY EDC THEY DO NOT HAVE A POLICY AS TO ACCRUAL AIRLINE AND HOTEL POINTS WHICH TO DATE HAVE BENEFITED THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS HAS FUNCTIONAL TO GAIN AS A SUBSTANTIAL AND SEPARATE LINE ITEM OF THE COMPENSATION TO THEM. THIS MUST STOP NOW THE COUNTY'S POINT ACCRUAL SYSTEM MUST BE ADOPTED BY COUNTY EDC BEING ALL AIRLINE AND HOTEL POINTS MUST THE ORGANIZATION NOT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PERSONALLY? IN FACT THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON APPARENTLY FOR YEARS QUITE FRANKLY SHOCKING THE AMOUNTS. MR. TRASK I DON'T HAVE IS ADDRESS OR ANYTHING ELSE BUT I'M GOING TO. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER THAN SAN DIEGO? NO, NO. I CAN GIVE YOU THIS OR YOU'LL GET TO THAT AND WORK FOR PARKINSON THAT TO YOU BUT IT WAS SENT TO TO FOLLOW UP ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE I POST PUBLIC COMMENT. SEEING NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENT

[7. AGENDA ITEMS]

AND I THINK WE HAVE OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR THIS IS THE FIRST TIME SANDY NOVAK'S GOT A CHANCE TO ADDRESS US PERSONALLY AND THEN YOU'VE RECENTLY JUST STARTED BOB.

SO THERE'S NOVAK YOU FOR BEING HERE I'M SORRY YES YOUR EMOTION ON THE SECOND POINT SECONDED BY THANK YOU SO AGAIN HAVE THAT OPEN UP NOW FOR DISCUSSION IS NOVAK WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE YOUR PRESENTATION YOU STARTED THE WORDS RIGHT OUT OF MY MOUTH IN ORDER TO KEEP PROJECTS AND THE FUNDING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY COUNTY COUNCIL IN 2025 STAFF'S REQUESTING THAT WE CARRY FORWARD THE REMAINING PURCHASE ORDERS AND THE FUNDS FROM 25 SO THE FUNDS WILL MOVE WITH IT INTO 26 AND THIS WILL INCREASE THE 2026 BUDGET BY THE 25 MILLION ROUGHLY ALMOST $25 MILLION AND THESE ORDERS IMPACT THE GENERAL FUND THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS IN THE CAPITAL PROJECT. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT LIST? SO THESE ARE THESE ARE THINGS THAT WERE IN LAST YEAR'S BUDGET THAT HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLETED THAT WE'RE NOW MOVING TO THE NEW FISCAL YEAR. SO IT WAS NICE TO CLARIFY THAT.

SO AGAIN WE'RE NOT ALLOCATING ANY NEW MONEY. THESE ARE ALL OLD MONEYS BUT JUST MAKING THEM AVAILABLE THEN TO BE USED IN THIS NEXT COMING YEAR AND AGAIN QUESTIONS WITH REGARDS TO THAT I KNOW THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY. YES.

IS AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME MY HISTORY WILL SEE THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY BEING CARRIED OVER FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR INTO THE NEXT OR JUST MY QUESTION FROM THE MINISTRY OTHER PROJECTS THAT WILL GO IN IS THE LAST WORK OVERWHELMING FOR OUR STAFF TO GET IT DONE WITHIN A YEAR?

[00:10:01]

SO SOME OF THESE PRIVATE C IP ALL THAT PASSMAN GO AHEAD. YES IN YEARS PAST WHAT WAS BEING DONE WAS AT THE END OF THE YEAR ANY PURCHASE THAT WAS NOT FINISHED WAS CANCELED AND A BRAND NEW PURCHASE ORDER WAS PUT OUT SO. THAT'S WHY THE 25 MILLION LOOKS A LOT MORE THAN IN PRIOR YEARS . AND THEN THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE IS TELL ME WHAT IS WHAT THIS WHAT IS WHAT WHAT IS A SWAT WHICH PROJECT DOES NOT PROBABLY NEED ONE? SO WHEN HE TALKS ABOUT SWAT TEAM THE ONLY THAT'S THE PART OF THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE THAT VERY MUCH SOUNDS LIKE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IT BUT WE'VE GOT A NINE MILLIMETER PISTOLS. IT'S A GUN.

OKAY. IT'S NINE MIL AS THE SHERIFF. YEP, SURE.

AND GUN SEIZURES. SO HAVING AN ILLUSTRATION. OKAY.

I THINK WE HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS IN THE QUESTIONS. NO, DON'T DO IT.

WE'RE REQUESTING THAT YOU MOVE THIS TO WEDNESDAY TO THE SPECIAL MEETING.

ALL RIGHT. SO ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THE DISCUSSION WE APPROVED THIS WITHOUT OBJECTION. THIS QUESTION IS OUR CHAIR AND VICE ON WEDNESDAY. YEP. YEP.

WE JUST HAD THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WE WANT TO MOVE IT TO.

OKAY. BEFORE WE GO INTO EXECUTIVE. RIGHT.

GOTCHA. ALL RIGHT. SO ANY MORE SINGLE DISCUSSION OR NOTHING ONLINE WE WILL APPROVE THIS WITHOUT OBJECTION. YEAH.

JOE MR. JOE GOOD. NO, I WAS GOING TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AGAIN.

MY APPROVALS WITHOUT OBJECTIONS NO OBJECTION. THIS HAS BEEN APPROVED IT WILL MOVE TO COUNTY COUNCIL ON WEDNESDAY VERSUS ALL RIGHT LET'S MOVE ON TO ANY OF OUR AGENDA ITEMS AND IS A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AND TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS FROM THE SOUTH CAROLINA RECOVERY FUND PSC OUR HOPES FOR AND THIS IS REBECCA WITT WHO IS OUR DIRECTOR IT'S A ONE I'LL TAKE A MOMENT THE FLOOR I DO DESERVE A SECOND THAT'S ALMOST AWESOME.

SO WE'RE GOING TO OPEN FOR DISCUSSION AND OBVIOUSLY WE DO HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM A WHAT YOU'RE LIKE YOU MUST WORK FOR BEING HERE. THANK YOU.

GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. IT'S GOOD TO. SEE YOU.

I'M HERE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE THE SCHOOL FUNDS AND SO A LITTLE BIT OF BACK STORY ABOUT WHAT THAT IS THE NATIONAL LAWSUIT INVOLVING THE PHARMACEUTICAL AND DISTRIBUTORS OF OPIOID SETTLED THAT LAWSUIT AND THOSE WERE GIVEN OUT TO THE STATES WHO PARTICIPATED SOUTH CAROLINA BEING ONE OF THOSE STATES AND COUNTY WAS ALSO LISTED SO THOSE FUNDS PASSED THROUGH THE SOUTH CAROLINA OPIOID RECOVERY FUND BOARD OR SCHOOL BOARD AND BEAUFORT COUNTY HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPLY FOR THE GUARANTEED POLITICAL SUB FUNDS DIVISION OR GPS FUNDS WHICH COMPRISE 15% OF THE TOTAL OF THE STOLEN SOUTH CAROLINA'S FUNDS. THE REMAINING GO INTO OTHER CATEGORIES SUCH AS

[00:15:03]

SO EACH YEAR WE PUT TOGETHER A PROPOSAL FOR THOSE FUNDS BASED ON NEED AND THE BOARD APPROVES THE APPLICATION OR DENIES THE APPLICATION. WE ALSO ATTACHED A LETTER OF SEVERABILITY SUCH THAT ANY STRATEGY IN THE APPLICATION IF DENIED WOULD NOT CAUSE THE ENTIRE APPLICATION TO BE TOSSED OUT. SO THIS THIS APPLICATION DOES GRAND TOTAL FOR ALL OF THE STRATEGIES $580,163 THERE IS NO MATCHING FUNDS REQUIRED.

THIS IS ALL WHAT'S COMING INTO THE COUNTY. THE APPLICATION CONTINUES THE STRATEGIES THAT WE HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFULLY WORKING ON AND ALSO THE KEY DIFFERENCES ARE INCREASES ARE TO ENGAGE CITIZENS STRUGGLING WITH OPIOID USE MISUSE INTO THE SERVICES THAT THEY NEED. SOME OF THIS IS PREVENTATIVE, SOME IS INTERVENTION, SOME IS TREATMENT AND THEN SOME AS RECOVERY. WE ALSO INCLUDED TO DO A COUNTY WIDE NEEDS ASSESSMENT THAT WILL GIVE US THE DATA THAT WE NEED IN COMBINATION WITH CITIZEN FEEDBACK TO KNOW WHAT GAPS WE HAVE ABATING THE OPIOID CRISIS SPECIFICALLY IN FOR COUNTY SO WE CAN USE THAT INFORMATION AS WE PUT FORWARD OUR APPLICATIONS IN THE NEXT 3 TO 5 YEARS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE HITTING THE RIGHT TARGETS WITH THE FUNDS THAT WE ARE REQUESTING.

SO THAT'S MY PRESENTATION. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? WE'VE ALREADY GOT THIS A COUPLE OF YEARS. YES, MA'AM. THIS WOULD BE THE FOURTH APPLICATION AND YOU'VE DONE A LOT OF EDUCATION RESIDENTS. THE ONE THAT COMES TO MIND IS YOUR NURSING. THEY COME TO THE LIBRARIES. THEY GET IT.

I MEAN THAT'S BEEN BIG SUCCESS IN MY AREA. THEY FIND IT NOT THAT THEY NECESSARILY NEED IT BUT YOU HAVE A LOT OF VISITORS, A LOT VENDORS NEVER KNOW.

SO I DO APPLAUD THAT. THANK YOU, MA'AM. SATURATING THE COUNTY WITH NARCAN FOR CITIZENS HAVE ON HAND TO CARRY AS PART OF THEIR FIRST DAY KITS ARE HAVE WITH THEM HAS RESULTED IN LIVES BEING SAVED FROM. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. IT WAS GOOD. THANK YOU.

THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION. IN ADDITION IT WAS COMMENTS TO THE CHAIRPERSON OF THIS HOUSE THAT IF WE CAN ACTUALLY END THIS I WOULD LOVE TO TALK MORE ABOUT A LOT OF YOUR STRATEGIES I DON'T KNOW WOMEN'S APPROPRIATE TO DO THAT. TODAY YOU TOTAL A BUDGET AND YOU WILL GET FUNDED BUT I THINK THE COMMUNITY SERVICE MAY BE THE APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR YOU IN THE DISCUSSION. OPENNESS WITHOUT. SERVICE IS OBVIOUSLY THAT FIRST AND THEN THEN THE QUICK QUESTION IS THAT OF THE REPORT THERE IS AN ACRONYM G P S ENTITY WHAT IS A GP AS ENTITY? YES SIR. THAT IS THE THE GOVERNMENTAL OR I'M SORRY GUARANTEED POLITICAL SUBDIVISION. SO WE APPLIED FOR THE FUNDS.

OKAY. THERE'S DIFFERENT MESSAGE TO THE DISCRETIONARY.

WHICH WILL KILL YOU. OKAY. OKAY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ON THE.

SO A SORT OF REDUCTION IN THE SUICIDE. AND OF COURSE THAT'S A CONCERN IS AND I THINK THAT'S WHY A LOT OF EMPHASIS HAS BEEN ON THE COUNTY BASICALLY AS PART OF THE LAWSUIT. WE GOT ON IT EARLIER SO THAT'S WHY I THINK PRIVILEGED BE ABLE TO GET GRANT FUNDING BUT IT'S ONE FOR 20 YEARS OF LEGALIZED IS A TIME IT'S A IT'S A IT'S A CLOSING THING IS IS GRANDFATHERED THAT GRANDFATHERED BUT IS A WAS TERMINOLOGY IS CLOSING OUT IN SO MANY YEARS. AND SO MY CONCERN IS REALLY THE OPIOID AS LONG AS WE THE MEDICAL DOCTORS AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES YOU WILL HAVE PROBLEMS. I THINK A LOT OF REDUCTION MAY HAVE COME DOCTORS NOW NOT ADVANCING AS MUCH OPIOID TREATMENT TO THEIR PATIENTS BUT IT'S IT IS THERE.

AND SO MY CONCERN IS ALL OF THE GRANDFATHERED THAT GRANDFATHERED TIME YOU KNOW OUR

[00:20:09]

BUT THE PROBLEM IS THOSE DON'T EXIST. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT STRATEGY YOU WILL BE USING TO SORT OF GRANDFATHER YOUR EXISTENCE TO COMMUNITY OUTLETS.

SO THAT'S MY CONCERN AND YOU HAVE A LOT OF STRATEGIES I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO MOVE ALL.

BUT YOU HAVE A LOT OF STRATEGIES. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW THOSE THAT HAVE TO CONTINUE OUR EFFORT OF FUNDING BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO ALWAYS BE AS WELL. MAY I ADDRESS THE YES. YES, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO RAISE THE QUESTION BUT I THINK THE QUESTION BUT THIS IS SO THE OPIOID ABATEMENT FUNDS ARE NOT SO MUCH TIME SENSITIVE IN WHEN THEY END BUT IN TERMS OF HOW THE STATES DISTRIBUTE IT THEM AND HOW THEY HOW HOW QUICKLY THEY SPEND THOSE DOWN. CURRENTLY THERE'S NEARLY $4 BILLION NATIONALLY AND I BELIEVE CLOSE TO $216 MILLION THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA HAS RECEIVED AS THEIR PORTION. SO THE SCORE BOARD IS THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT PROJECTS THAT ARE SUCCESSFULLY OUTPUTTING THEIR TARGETS FOR PREVENTION FOR FOR INTERVENTION TREATMENT AND RECOVERY CAN CONTINUE TO RECEIVE THE FUNDING AS THEY IMPROVE IT SO THAT THE FUNDS JUST ARE ACCOUNTABLE FOR IN TERMS OF SUSTAINABILITY BEYOND THESE FUNDS RUNNING OUT WHETHER THAT'S 15, 20 YEARS FROM NOW THE ALCOHOL AND DRUG DEPARTMENT NEXUS CARE A B FOR COUNTY HAS THAT CONTINUUM OF SERVICES IN PLACE ALREADY WE HAVE THAT ABILITY PROVIDE EDUCATION TO CITIZENS ON NOT ONLY OPIOIDS BUT ALL SUBSTANCES AND WE HAVE A VERY PREVENTION TEAM.

THIS HAS ONLY INCREASED CAPACITY TO FOCUS MORE ON OPIOIDS AND WE ARE ABLE TO MEET THE NEEDS OF CITIZENS CURRENTLY TO PROVIDE TREATMENT FOR THEM MEDICATION SPECIFIC OPIOID USE DISORDERS. SO IN ADDITION TO THESE SCORE FUNDS WE ALREADY HAVE SOME EXISTING CAPACITY AND THE SCORE FUNDS ARE SPECIFICALLY TO EXPAND CAPACITY SUCH THAT THE OPIOID CRISIS IS ABATED. NOW THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT OTHER SUBSTANCES DON'T COME ALONG BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW THAT THEY DO. BUT OUR DEPARTMENT HAS IN PLACE THE ABILITY TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO COMMUNITY HEALTH ORGANIZATIONS.

SO I'LL ASSUME THAT YOU'RE WORKING THROUGH THOSE AS WELL. WE PARTNER WITH COMMUNITY HEALTH ORGANIZATIONS. ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S PART OUR OUTREACH PLAN.

THANK YOU. YES I'D SAY MORE QUESTIONS FROM US BUT SO KNOW QUESTIONS THIS WILL MOVE ON TO COUNTY COUNCIL AS A RESOLUTION THAT IS VERY OBJECTION JUST MOVING US FORWARD AND I SEE NO OBJECTION . SO THIS WILL MOVE TO COUNTY COUNCIL FOR A RESOLUTION. THANK FOR BEING HERE. I WANT TO SEE AND OUR AGENDA ITEMS AND THIS IS A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A POLICY THAT RESTRICTS AND DEFINES THE ALLOWABLE OF THE COUNTY COUNCIL'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SITE AND JOBS FUNDS WHICH ARE ALLOCATED ANNUALLY FOR USE BY THE D4 COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.

FISCAL IMPACT NO DIRECT IMPACT. HOWEVER THIS WILL RESTRICT THE FOCUS THE USE OF FUNDING IN THE ACCOUNT AND THANK NO AFTER PERSON ASK FOR A MOTION PLEASE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION FOR THIS. ALL RIGHT. SO ALMOST EVERYTHING SECONDED BY MISS BROWN AND WE'RE GOING TO PUT UP FOR DISCUSSION BUT FIRST WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A MR. HANKE COME FORWARD AND GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY. A LITTLE BACKGROUND IS HER PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE'VE HAD QUESTIONS BEFORE THE BREAK. THE COUNTY GIVES FUNDING TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION IN TWO SEPARATE ITERATIONS.

ONE IS OPERATING THAT IS NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. THAT IS A FLAT NUMBER THAT COVERS SALARIES EXPENSES AND OVERHEAD AND YOU'LL SEE THAT IN YOUR BUDGET EVERY YEAR.

I THINK IN PREVIOUS YEARS $375,000 THAT'S SEPARATE THAT AGAIN SALARY OVERHEAD THINGS LIKE THAT. THE SITE AND JOBS FUND IS WHAT WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT TODAY

[00:25:02]

JOBS IS A READ THROUGH THERE WERE VARIOUS ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS SINCE 2015 TO CREATE THE ORGANIZATION TO SET UP THESE FUNDS BUT THERE WAS NEVER A REAL DEFINITION OF THESE FUNDS IT WAS JUST FOR SITES AND FOR THE INCENTIVIZATION OF CREATION OR RETENTION OF JOBS EARLIER THIS YEAR IN THIS SAME ROOM WHEN MR. O'TOOLE WAS MAKING THIS PRESENTATION THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ASKED ABOUT CERTAIN AND GOOD QUESTIONS AND HE HIMSELF OFFERED UP HEY IF WE WANT TO PUT SOME GUARDRAILS THIS LET'S DO THAT.

SO I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH HIM SINCE THEN TO MORE CLOSELY DEFINE WHAT THESE FUNDS CAN BE USED FOR. SO ADDITIONALLY THE SITE AND JOBS FUND OPPOSED TO THE OPERATING FUNDING THAT OPERATING FUNDING JUST GOES IN QUARTERLY PAYMENTS TO THE CORPORATION THAT GETS REPORTED BACK IN THEIR BUDGET. THE SITE JOBS FUND ACTUALLY DOES STAY IN A COUNTY ACCOUNT THAT IS EXPENDED AND THEN APPLIED REIMBURSEMENT SO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS THE THE RESOLUTION REFERENCES AND ATTACHMENT SO I HOPE YOU GUYS HAVE READ THE ATTACHMENT AND FOR THE PUBLIC TO HERE AS WELL CERTAIN THINGS HAVE TO HAPPEN REGARDLESS WE DO HAVE A RESOLUTION THAT WE PASSED LAST YEAR THAT ANY PROPERTY ACQUISITION WHETHER BY US DEFINITELY BY US WE HAVE TO DO REZONE ORDINANCES.

BUT IF THE CORPORATION USES THIS SITE FUNDING TO EITHER OR EXPEND ON IMPROVEMENT OF PROPERTY THAT HAS TO COME TO COUNTY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL AND THAT'S MEMORIALIZED HERE.

IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN IN ORDER TO DO RIGHT.

SO YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DO SOME INVESTIGATING OR DILIGENCE ON PROPERTIES THAT'S ELIGIBLE IF IT'S APPROVED PROPERTY BY THE BOARD THEY COULD GEOTECH MITIGATION OR JUST WETLANDS DELINEATION. THE MITIGATION WOULD BE SOMETHING WOULD BE AN IMPROVEMENT OF THE PROPERTY. THOSE ARE ALL LISTED IN SECTION ONE.

I FEEL LIKE SECTION ONE SITE DEVELOPMENT IS PRETTY CLEAR AND IN IN HOW IT CAN BE USED.

ADDITIONALLY YOU GUYS HAVE HAD IN THE PAST RECOMMENDATIONS TO CREATE AN MCP OR SPECIAL SOURCE OF REVENUE CREDIT THAT'S TRADITIONAL STATEWIDE IT GOES BY STATE LAW SO AN ATTORNEY HAS TO DRAW THAT UP AND SO THOSE FUNDS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE USE SO THE CORPORATION CAN ENGAGE THAT TO HELP INCENTIVIZE A COMPANY TO HERE THE SECOND SECTION ON JOB CREATION AND RETENTION IS WHAT WE'VE REALLY DIALED IN MORE CLOSELY AND THE KEY THE KEY PROVISIONS HERE ARE THAT IT HAS TO GO BY A FORMULA. THE CORPORATION HAS A FORMULA THAT THEY THEN VOTE ON AND IF GUYS WOULD LOOK BACK AT MINUTES FOR THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS THEY IN ALMOST EVERY CASE GIVE LESS THAN WHAT THEY COULD GIVE FOR THESE JOB INCENTIVES. THE CORPORATION NOW FORTH A PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD, THE STAFF THAT SHOWS EXACTLY HOW MANY JOBS WHAT THE AVERAGE WAGES ARE ETC. SO THAT HAS TO BE DONE THROUGH THE BOARD. SECONDLY, IT NEEDS TO BE WITHIN SECTORS THAT THE BOARD HAS SET FORTH. I PUT HERE JUST SO YOU GUYS COULD HAVE SOME COMFORT THEY COULD CHANGE YOU SAID IT MUST FALL WITHIN THE OFFICIALLY ADOPTED SECTORS OR FOCUS ALTHOUGH I'M OLD WHICH ARE CURRENTLY AND I LISTEN TO WHAT THE CURRENT ONES ARE AND IT'S EMBARRASSING FOR ME TO REALLY SIMPLY BE.

I KNOW MY DAD WAS EMBARRASSED TO SAY SECONDLY IT'S ENCOURAGED THAT THESE THAT THIS INCENTIVE FOR JOB CREATION OR RETENTION SHOULD GO WITH A DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE INCENTIVE PACKAGE HOWEVER AND COUNTY SOME OF THE COMPANIES THAT WE MAY LIKE TO INCENTIVIZE LIKE A SMALL CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS LIKE C US THAT HAPPENED THIS IS A VERY POSITIVE COMPANY AT THOSE NUMBERS THE STATE DOESN'T REALLY INCENTIVIZE THAT SO THERE ARE SOME ALLOWANCES AS I PUT THERE FOR AN EXIT FOR AN EXCEPTION. THE OTHER PART IS IT ONLY CAN BE FOR JOBS THAT ARE ABOVE THE MEDIAN WAGE. THEY CAN'T EXCEED THAT $2,000 PER QUALIFYING JOB BUT THE CONVERSION BEEN VERY GOOD ABOUT NOT EVEN GETTING TO THAT NUMBER IN MOST CASES THE BOARD HAS TO APPROVE THEM AND THERE HAS TO BE A 3 TO 5 YEAR CLAWBACK PERIOD TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY PERFORMED AND MAINTAIN THESE. AND I CAN TELL YOU I THINK SEVERAL OF YOU HAVE BEEN TO THE MEETINGS OVER THE PAST WHERE SOME OF THESE FUNDS HAVE BEEN CLAWED BACK. SO THAT IS A GOOD SIGN THAT IT HAS BEEN MONITORED AND H.

[00:30:01]

COMFORT TO THE BOARD THAT THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY CAN CAN'T HEAR REQUESTS FOR.

IT'S GOING TO LIMIT SOME REQUESTS FOR FUNDING BECAUSE IT'S MORE CLEARLY DELINEATED BY THE COUNTY AND COMFORT TO THE PUBLIC BECAUSE THEN THEY ALSO KNOW WHAT THESE ARE FOR AGREE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR THEM I HAVE GO AHEAD. SO THIS NEW RESOLUTION IS GOING TO COVER A SITE JOB ON HOW ABOUT THE GRANTS? THAT IS FROM WHAT THE GRANTS ARE PAID. SO THIS IS THE FUNDING THAT WOULD DO THAT FOR MONEYS EXCEPT OPERATING? YES, MA'AM. AND WHEN YOU SAY BOARD MEAN THE BE FOR FUNDING ANY SEE BOARD ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT COUNCIL RELIGION EXPEND CERTAIN FUNDS IF THEY FOLLOW THESE RULES ANYTHING THESE RULES WOULD HAVE TO COME TO COUNTY COUNCIL.

OH ALL RIGHT. SO THE ONLY ONE THAT'S MANDATED TO OF COUNTY COUNCIL IS SITE ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT OF SO THEY CAN DO THE DUE DILIGENCE ON THE FRONT SIDE WHICH IS SPENDING MONEY FOR KNOWING IF A PROJECT IS WORTH MOVING FORWARD TO PURCHASE BUT THE EXPENDITURE IS WE HAD THE RESOLUTION THAT WE PASSED LAST YEAR AS ANY OF THIS WHICH IS CURRENTLY POINT THREE MILLS PER YEAR THAT'S USED FOR THE ACQUISITION OF OR IMPROVEMENT OF SO THAT WOULD BE RUNNING A WATERLINE, BUILDING A PAD, SPENDING THAT MONEY ON PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS WOULD COME BACK TO COUNCIL. WELL I THOUGHT I KNOW I BROUGHT UP AT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE WE TALKED ABOUT THE BUDGET HAVING CLOSER OVERSIGHT EVEN OF JOB RETENTION FUNDS AND THAT'S NOT IN HERE. THIS SAYS THE BOARD CAN APPROVE GRANTS AND WE HAVE ANY IMPACT. THIS IS STILL PUBLIC MONEY AND THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION.

THIS IS JUST A IF YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE TO PUT SOMETHING THAT IN THERE WE CAN ADJUST THIS THIS IS JUST WHAT WAS BEFORE TO DEFINE THE SECTORS IN WHICH IT CAN BE DONE AND AT THE PAY LEVEL THAT IT SHOULD BE DONE SO THAT IT'S NOT AS WAS SAID IN PUBLIC COMMENT INCENTIVIZING LOW PAYING JOBS IN OUTSIDE THE SECTOR. SO THESE ARE WITHIN THE SECTORS AND ABOVE AREA MEDIAN MEDIAN WAGES. SO MR. CHAIRMAN HUNTSMAN I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS LOOKING FOR IS THAT ANY USE OF SITE DEVELOPMENT FUNDS WOULD COME BEFORE COUNTY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL BECAUSE I HAVE NOW SAID IN FOUR OR FIVE MEETINGS WHERE I WAS NOT IN AGREEMENT SOME OF THE GRANTS THAT WERE PUSHED FORWARD WHEN COUNTY COUNCIL DENIES A GRANT THEN THEY GO TO EDC AND THEY GIVE THE GRANT.

I HAVE ANGST THAT SO I WAS HOPING ALL OF THIS WOULD COME HERE THAT.

GRANT YOU'RE MENTIONING WOULD NOT BE ELIGIBLE UNDER THESE RULES THIS IS FOR DIRECTLY INCENTIVIZING A COMPANY TO ASK WHY WOULDN'T EVERYTHING COME TO COUNTY COUNCIL FOR REVIEW? IT'S STILL PUBLIC MONEY THAT'S A LONG COMPLICATED QUESTION. THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO LONG TERM IF YOU GUYS WANTED TO WORK THROUGH A WORKSHOP OF HOW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPERATES. BUT CURRENTLY THE WAY THAT IT'S SET UP IS THAT THE BOARD IS SET UP TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. THAT'S JUST THE WAY THAT'S CURRENTLY SET UP.

YEAH. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS WHEN I SAID WE HAVE TWO OPTIONS TWO OPTIONS IN IS ONE IS TO TABLE THIS AND THEN HAVE MORE DISCUSSIONS OVER WHAT GOES IN THIS AGREEMENT OR WE GO AHEAD AND MOVE THIS TO COUNTY COUNCIL AS A KNOWING THAT WE WILL THEN ADD TO THIS THIS IS NOT AN AGREEMENT THIS IS ESTABLISHING A POLICY THIS IS A POLICY STILL RESOLUTION NO RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A POLICY OF HOW WE SPEND THIS MONEY. SO WHAT WHAT WOULD OUR THE CHARTER IF IF IF IF THE ORGANIZATION WOULD AS THROUGHOUT A WORKSHOP PROCESS THAT WOULD THE WAY THAT THE ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION WERE SET UP THE COUNTY GARY KUBIAK SIGNED THOSE I THINK IT WAS IN 2017 TO ESTABLISH THE CORPORATION AS IT TODAY IT WAS AMENDED TO ADD SOME SECTOR SEATS TO THE BOARD ITSELF BUT THAT WAS SET UP BY THE COUNTY BACK IN 2015 2017 AND SO I GUESS BRIAN OR MIKE SO WHAT'S WHAT'S A BETTER PLAN OF ACTION FOR US? I THAT'S EVEN MORE GOOD. MY RECOMMENDATION IS YOU PASS A RESOLUTION THAT AT LEAST PUTS THE GUIDELINES IF YOU WOULD LIKE US TO START TO GO BACK AND START TO RELOOK AT THE ARTICLES BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO TAKE COORDINATION I BELIEVE WITH THE OTHER PARTIES THAT ARE PART OF THE AGREEMENT. WE COULD ALSO BE DIRECTED TO DO THAT AS WELL AND SO ESTABLISHING SECTORS AND COUNCILS ESTABLISHING WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS A TERM THAT CAN BE DEFINED VERY, VERY BROADLY. RIGHT. AND THIS MAY SOUND CORNY BUT IT'S LIKE ICE CREAM EVERYBODY LIKES ICE CREAM. RIGHT.

[00:35:03]

ALL RIGHT SO THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION IS THERE ANY OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR? NO, NO NO. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO US DOING WHAT WE CURRENTLY IN FRONT OF US TO COUNTY COUNCIL AS A RESOLUTION? I'M GOING TO VOTE NO ON IT BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE HAVE OTHER THINGS THAT NEED TO BE PUT IN HERE.

BUT I'M ALSO COGNIZANT OF THE FACT THAT WE HAVE FOUR MUNICIPALITIES THERE THAT ARE PARTNERS AND THIS IS PUBLIC FUNDING AND MAYBE POSSIBLY WHEN THEIR AUDIT COMES BACK WE WOULD REVISIT SOME OTHER THINGS. SO MY VOTE'S GOING TO BE NO. ALL RIGHT.

I DON'T NEED TO HAVE A I AGREE WITH WOULD HAVE SAID A FEW MINUTES AGO THAT THERE WAS OTHER ENTITIES INVOLVED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT I CAME FORWARD OF THE YEAR THAT THIS WAS CREATED BUT I DO KNOW THAT I WAS AND THIS IS ALSO THE BUSINESS COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE ERIE COUNTY WAS THE CHALLENGING UNTIL ALL THE ENTITIES GOT TOGETHER AND SAID THIS IS HOW WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD. SO ANYTHING THAT IS HERE SHOULD HAVE THE FLAVOR OF ALL THE ENTITIES AS WE MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE WE DON'T ACTUALLY LEAVE ANYBODY OUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS IN AGREEMENT. I UNDERSTAND I DON'T THINK THAT THESE ARE THEY CAN HAPPEN SEPARATELY THE GREATER DISCUSSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THIS IS SIMPLY SAY IT'S NOT STATING WHAT THE CORPORATION CAN AND CAN'T DO RIGHT THIS ONLY SAYING WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO WITH THIS SPECIFIC ACCOUNT.

THAT'S ALL THAT'S AT THE SAME TIME YOU YOU YOU DO HAVE I WAS OBVIOUSLY AN OVERSIGHT BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE BOARD THAT'S FOR YOU GUYS. ALL RIGHT.

WE DO HAVE ONE OBJECTION. IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL OBJECTIONS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A A ROLL CALL VOTE? I THINK I'M GOING TO AGREE WITH CHAIRWOMAN SO OBJECTIONS AND ANY REASON FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE SO? EVERYONE ELSE IS IN AGREEMENT EXCEPT FOR MISS BROWN AND THE SUBJECT. SO THIS WILL MOVE TO COUNTY AS A RESOLUTION AND OBVIOUSLY YOU'LL HEAR FROM US ON AN ADDITIONAL THINGS WHEN WE KNOW WHAT WE ON SEPTEMBER 8TH THAT'S THE NEXT MEETING AS PRESIDENT. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD. LET'S LET'S MOVE ON THEN THEN THERE'S A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER IN A MEMORANDUM WITH LOWCOUNTRY REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY TO FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT THE FUSCHIA ISLAND CLARION QUALIFIED RIDER PASSES FOR FISCAL YEAR 26 AND THIS IS FISCAL IMPACT AND $28,119 IS FOR FISCAL YEAR 26 AND MR. MUNSON PROPERLY INTRODUCE YOU BEFORE WE ALL KNOW WHO YOU ARE WHICH ONE UP YOUR MARK SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR SO I NEED TO HAVE A MOTION PLEASE. I MAKE THE MOTION ALL RIGHT.

AND THOSE ARE SECOND SECOND. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

AND THIS OPEN IS UP FOR DISCUSSION THEN A PRESENTATION BY HANK.

GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN. WHAT IS BEFORE YOU HERE IS A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT.

THIS IS NOT NEW THAT WE DO THIS MATTER BREEZE HAS A STAFF PERSON THAT HANDLES ALL OF THE INQUIRIES FOR THE QUALIFIED DISCOUNT RIDER IT USED TO BE CALLED PALMETTO WAS PASSED BUT IT'S NOT REALLY A SERVICE SO WE RENAMED IT A QUALITY QUALIFIED DISCOUNT RIDER.

ALL THE INFORMATION IS GATHERED THROUGH OUR I.T DEPARTMENT SENT TO THIS PERSON THEY VET THEY COLLECT WHETHER THAT'S A ONE YEAR LEASE A DEED TO PROPERTY OTHER PROOF PROVIDING AND THEN ISSUE THESE CARDS TO THE INDIVIDUALS AT THEIR LEVEL DISCOUNT THE DIFFERENCE THIS YEAR IS THAT THEY'VE ATTACHED MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT TO KIND OF MORE SPECIFICALLY SAY IN THE PAST WE JUST GET AN INVOICE AND IT WAS PART OF THE THERE'S A NEW PERSON THIS YEAR AND I SEE BRIAN IN THE BACK ADDITIONALLY THE PERSON WHO DID IT IN-HOUSE BEFORE WAS NAMED LINDA NORTON.

SHE'S NOT THERE NOW BUT I STILL WANT TO SING HER PRAISES BECAUSE SHE WORKS VERY HARD AND DOES A GOOD JOB MAKING SURE THAT THE INDIVIDUALS RECEIVING DISCOUNTS ARE QUALIFIED AND THIS IS JUST A SPELLING OUT OF WHAT THE RESPONSIBILITIES ARE THAT WE'RE PAYING FOR.

SO NOTHING HAS CHANGED. THIS IS JUST A SPECIAL MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH WITH THE RTA. YEAH SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE FROM LAST YEAR TO THIS YEAR IS

[00:40:04]

I SEE NO OBJECTIONS. SO THIS HAS BEEN APPROVED AND THIS ALSO IS A RESOLUTION THAT WILL GO TO COUNCIL, SIR, I THINK MR. JOHNSON, WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

LET'S MOVE ON TO E AND THIS IS A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE B FOR COUNTY PERSONNEL HANDBOOK POLICY SECTION 3.3 REMOTE WORK SLASH TELECOMMUTING TO A-9 COUNTY EMERGENCY DISASTER POLICY AND A DASH TEN B FOR COUNTY EMERGENCY ATTENDANCE AND PAY POLICY.

THIS HAS NO FISCAL IMPACT AND WE HAVE OUR HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR MISS ME CATHERINE BUT COME FORWARD TO THE MOTION FOR US TO DISCUSS THIS. I'LL BE HAPPY TO MAKE THE MOTION TO OBSERVE SECOND PLEASE A SECOND. GLOVER WILL NOW OPEN THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION AND MISSPEAK RATES. THANK YOU ALL.

I'M GOING TO TRY TO BE VERY RESPECTFUL OF YOUR TIME AND, YOUR BACKUP YOU'VE HAD TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF BOTH ARE ALL THREE OF THE POLICIES WE'LL DISCUSS.

WE HAD A TRACKING VERSION AND CLEAN VERSION AND SO I'M JUST GOING TO KIND OF GIVE YOU THE HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW. AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY IMPLEMENTED A TELEWORK POLICY BACK IN 2020 DURING THE PANDEMIC AND IT PROVED TO BE VERY HELPFUL FOR TO KEEP OPERATIONS MOVING FORWARD SINCE THEN THE COUNTY HAS ALLOWED DEPARTMENTS TO CONTINUE REMOTE WORK AT THEIR DISCRETION AS OUR OPERATIONS CONTINUE TO EVOLVE AND WE REMAIN TO EXCELLENCE AND SERVICE DELIVERY WE HAVE CLOSELY REVIEWED THE IMPACTS REMOTE WORK WHILE THERE HAVE CERTAINLY BEEN THE BENEFITS WITH THE FLEXIBILITY TO REDUCE COMMUTING TIME FOR OUR EMPLOYEES AND WE HAVE TO SEE SOME CHALLENGES ACROSS THE COUNTY WITH THAT PARTICULARLY IN COLLABORATION SUBNETS AND COLLABORATION. TO THAT END WE ARE PROPOSING A REVISION TO THIS POLICY TO REMOTE WORK TO ONE DAY OR SHIFT PER WEEK STILL AT THE DISCRETION OF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD EXEMPTIONS WILL APPLY TO THIS WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT HERE SHORTLY SPECIFICALLY WHENEVER WE ARE UNDER A DECLARATION EMERGENCY A NEW CRITERIA THAT WE'LL PUT IN PLACE IS THAT THE EMPLOYEE MUST HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED FOR AT LEAST 12 MONTHS. THEY MUST HAVE A SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND THEY MUST NOT BE IN A CURRENT PIP PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN. WE'LL ALSO IMPLEMENT A FORMAL APPLICATION PROCESS IN WHICH THERE WILL BE A FORM THAT WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT HEAD OR THE ELECTED OFFICIAL. IT ARE THEN GO TO THE ACA IF APPLICABLE H.R.

AND THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR SO WE ARE ASKING THAT WE ARE ABLE TO MOVE THIS FORWARD TO COUNCIL THROUGH A RESOLUTION BEFORE I MOVE ON TO THE OTHER TWO POLICIES, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS WITH REMOTE WORK OF QUESTION? SURE.

YES MA'AM. SO PEOPLE WHO MIGHT HAVE BEEN HIRED PRIOR TO THIS AND APPROVED TO WORK REMOTELY THAN ONE DAY A WEEK SHOULD NOT GRANDFATHERED IN TO PROVIDE 6090 DAY NOTICE TO FOUR DEPARTMENTS TO MAKE THE TRANSITIONS AND CHANGE SCHEDULES TO. BRING OUR FOLKS BACK TO WORK. OKAY, BUT THAT WAS A GLIMMER OF HOPE THAT SOME OF TERMINOLOGY USED A TERM OF KIESLOWSKI THE BASIS IS SIMPLY BY CASE BY CASE PLEASE. BUT YOU WHICH SECTION ARE YOU IN EXHIBITING IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH YOU USE FIRST SAID ELIGIBILITY WILL BE SO BASED ON DIFFICULT SO IF YOU GO DOWN FURTHER TO THAT APPROVAL PROCESS THAT'S GOING TO BE YOUR ELECTED OFFICIAL OR DEPARTMENT HEAD YOUR ACA EDITOR AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR THEN SPEAKER WELL IN TERMS OF THIS DEFINITION, YES, WE'RE SURE IT DOES SEE THAT LATER ON BUT WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S EVEN CAN AND IN TERMS OF THIS POLICY YES, THERE'S BEEN A HUNDRED AND THEN YOU HAVE AN EMPLOYEE WHO'S IT WAS ONE I WANT TO I WANT YOU TO EXPLAIN TO ME JUST SO THAT I UNDERSTAND IT THING THINK UNDERSTAND THAT BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M IN EXHIBIT B OKAY ? YES, SIR, I HAVE THAT'S I HAVEN'T GOTTEN ON THAT ONE YET. YOU HAVE BUT I WILL GO THERE AND JUST PUSH IT. OKAY. WELL MOST MOST EMPLOYERS PREFER THE STAFF BEING IN PLACE. SURE. YOU KNOW BUT YOU KNOW, IN THIS DAY AND TIME I CAN SEE WE'RE ALSO WORKING FROM HOME. SO SO THOSE AND SO AND YOU CAN

[00:45:02]

THANK YOU. YOU HAVE TO RESPOND TO THAT OKAY.

I'LL WAIT FOR THE EXCEPTION. OKAY. OKAY.

ARE ANY MORE QUESTIONS IN THE FIRST SECTION? YEAH ONE QUESTION I'M SORRY I CAN SEE WE'RE UP ON IT'S GREAT. GOOD. OKAY.

HEY, CATHERINE, WOULD YOU REPEAT THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION THAT THE CHAIR ASKED ABOUT GRANDFATHERED EMPLOYEES? YES THERE IS SO WE WILL NOT GRANDFATHER ANY EMPLOYEES IN BUT WE WILL ALLOW A 60 TO 90 DAY GRACE PERIOD TO ALLOW DEPARTMENTS TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO BRING EMPLOYEES BACK TO THE OFFICE THAT THAT SO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY WORKING MORE ONE DAY A WEEK REMOTELY WILL HAVE SOME TIME AVAILABLE TO RETURN TO THE OFFICE FULL TIME. YES SIR. WE'RE LOOKING AT 60 TO 90 DAYS SO THE THE GOAL IS TO HAVE THE ENTIRE WORKFORCE COME BACK TO WORK IN THE OFFICE EXCEPT UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT YOU SHOWED WHERE THEY WOULD BE LIMITED TO ONE DAY A WEEK IF THAT WAS DEEMED TO BE NECESSARY CORRECT, EMPLOYEES WOULD STILL BE ELIGIBLE.

THEY GO THROUGH AN APPLICATION PROCESS TO WORK REMOTELY BUT LIMITED ONE DAY OR SHIFT PER WEEK. RIGHT. SO THERE'LL BE NO FIVE DAYS AT HOME UNLESS THERE'S CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD ALLOW THAT CORRECT.

OKAY. GOT IT. THANK YOU.

ONE MORE QUESTION JUST QUICKLY. MY MY COMMENT ABOUT 95 AND THAT WAS BASED ON FIVE DAYS THAT'S WHAT WAS GOING ON. YEAH. WHAT IF THERE'S A THAT IS ALREADY DESIGNED AS A REMOTE POSITION COMMUNICATION OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE OR SERVICES. I AM NOT AWARE ANY POSITIONS THAT'S DESIGNED STRICTLY TO BE REMOTE THAT WE HAVE WITH THE COUNTY AT THIS TIME. SURE I'M JUST CURIOUS.

YEAH THANK YOU. LET'S KEEP GOING UNTIL WE GET THIS MEETING SO NEXT TWO POLICIES IN EXHIBIT B AGAIN YOU HAD A REVISED VERSION AND A CLEAN VERSION.

OUR TEAM HAS BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY THE DISASTER RECOVERY MANAGER MIKE CROUSE WHO I BROUGHT ALONG IN CASE THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS THAT COME FOR HIM ALONG WITH PAM COBB, THE EXECUTIVE TEAM AND EVEN STAFF WITH THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIVISION WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE ON THIS THE MAIN GOAL THAT WE WANT TO ENSURE WE ARE CLARIFYING IN THIS POLICY IS OUR EMERGENCY OPERATIONS TEAM SHOULD CONSIST OF EMPLOYEES THAT ARE DIRECTLY SUPPORTING EMERGENCY EVENTS OR PROVIDING SERVICES. THE C WHICH IS THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER I ROSTER CURRENTLY HAS AROUND 500 EMPLOYEES PLUS THE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE. THAT IS NOT MEAN THAT ALL 500 EMPLOYEES WILL BE CALLED IN TO WORK DURING ANY GIVEN EVENT BUT THAT DOES PROVIDE MR. MOORE AND ADMINISTRATION TEAM A LARGE ENOUGH POOL TO BRING IN THOSE RESOURCES. IF WE WERE TO HAVE A CAT ONE CAT TWO STORM EXCUSE ME THE POLICY ALSO NOW INCLUDES A STATEMENT WHERE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR THE RIGHT TO AMEND THIS EOT AT ANY TIME THROUGHOUT THE YEAR IF WE WERE TO HAVE A CAT FOUR OR FIVE WE MIGHT AT SOME POINT THE ENTIRE BACK TO WORK.

SO AS WE JUST MENTIONED WE DID LEARN HOW TO DO REMOTE WORK DURING COVID SO WITH CHANGES THAT WE'RE HEARING ABOUT THAT COULD BE COMING DOWN THE PIPELINE FROM WE WANTED TO TEAR THIS DOTTIE ROSTER INTO TWO TIERS TIER ONE WILL BE EMPLOYEES THAT WILL BE REQUIRED TO WORK ONSITE TO PROVIDE THOSE RESPONSES TO THE STORM. SO EXAMPLES OF THAT WOULD BE PUBLIC WORKS YOUR FIRST RESPONDERS PUBLIC SAFETY TIER TWO EMPLOYEES COULD BE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE PROVIDING SUPPORT TO THE STORM OR WHATEVER THE EMERGENCY EVENT IS. BUT THEY COULD POSSIBLY BE DOING IT FROM HOME.

SO PROCUREMENT IF THEY'RE NEEDING THIS NON-EMERGENCY CONTRACT TO PROCURE SERVICES WE DON'T NEED THE PROCUREMENT STAFF TO DRIVE INTO THE OFFICE TO DO THAT.

SO WE WANTED RESERVE OUR DISASTER PAY TO THOSE THAT ARE PUTTING THEMSELVES IN HAZARDOUS

[00:50:03]

OKAY. IT'S BASICALLY MAKING EMPLOYEE WHOLE A THREE HOUR WORKWEEK IF THEY EVEN IF THEY CAN'T TO WORK BECAUSE OF CONDITIONS THAT WOULD PRECLUDE THEM COMING TO WORK OR WE'RE GOING TO CALL IT A GIFT IN OUR POLICY BUT IT'S NOT REQUIRED BY ANY LABOR LAWS TO GIVE THAT ADMIN PAY IF COUNCIL DECIDED YOU DON'T WANT TO PAY THEM IF THEY DON'T HAVE ANY PAID LEAVE ACCRUED THEN THEY WOULD BE ON LEAVE WITHOUT PAY THAT'S CONTROLLED BY THE MINISTRY YES SIR IN THAT COMMENT IS THOSE ARE THE SUIT REMEMBER MATTHEW COULDN'T GET BACK IN THE COUNTY. A LOT OF PEOPLE DIDN'T WHEN THEY COULD GET BACK IN THEY DIDN'T HAVE ELECTRICITY SO THAT MAKE THOSE PEOPLE WHOLE IT'S UNDER THOSE BAD CIRCUMSTANCES.

THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S IT. AND THEN I STORM THE AND THAT POLICY IS NOT COSTING US ANYTHING BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR EMPLOYEE FOR SALARY. SO AGAIN IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS NOT AN ADDITIONAL COST.

IT'S JUST YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE WORK DONE BUT IT'S NOT ADDITIONAL COSTS.

RIGHT. THE WHAT SHE MENTIONED WITH DISASTER PAY THAT IS ADDITIONAL COSTS FOR THE TIER ONE RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO BRING THOSE RAINS A LITTLE BIT. SO IT'S THE DISASTER PAY WILL ONLY BE ELIGIBLE FORWARD IF THIS IS ADOPTED FOR EMPLOYEES THAT ARE CALLED IN TO WORK ON SITE WITH THE BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE PUTTING THEMSELVES AT HAZARDS WAY THEY'RE LEAVING THEIR HOMES AND THEIR FAMILIES BEHIND. THEY DON'T HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO THEIR JOBS FROM HOME.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE DISASTER PAY FOR THAT TIER OF EMPLOYEES JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THAT THAT COINCIDES WITH ACTIVATION OF THE EOC EITHER PARTIAL OR FULL ACTIVATION IS WHEN THAT WOULD KICK EFFECT AND CORRECT ACTIVATION BY WAS JUST DISCUSSED AT THE CAC CONFERENCE CRISIS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAD THIS IN SO YOU'RE A JUMP AHEAD OF SOME OF THE COUNTIES. WELL, THANK YOU.

I WAS BROUGHT UP IT WAS A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT SO ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS NOW I'VE GOT ALL THIS IS THIS MORNING THE THE COUNTY MAGISTRATE AS YOU SAID I'M SORRY SAY THAT AGAIN THE ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION IS ESSENTIAL. YES.

THAT YOU SAID EXEMPT. SO IT'S FOR THIS PURPOSE? YES, THAT'S OKAY.

IF ALL RIGHT JASON AND IT WAS THE COMES BACK I WAS GOING TO SAY IF I'M VACATION I'M TO DESIGNATE SOMEBODY TO ACT IN MY STEAD WHICH I HAVE IN THE PAST. THAT'S YOUR QUESTION? MM HMM. YEAH. SO YOU'LL SEE A LOT OF LANGUAGE IN HERE OR. DESIGNEE IS GATHERED OVER. OH, LEAVE IT ALONE.

I KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. OKAY, JASON, SOMEBODY ELSE IS IN CHARGE SINCE OR WE COULD CALL THEM BACK. HAVE YOU CALL THEM BACK? DO WE HAVE THE PEOPLE COMING BACK FROM THE PLANNING MINISTRY IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT? IT'S ACTUALLY A VERY GOOD QUESTION BECAUSE WE HAVE AN EMPLOYEE WHO IS LAST EVACUATED BUT HAD MR. MOORE HAD TO GO BACK AND REVISE THIS LIST AND NOW WE NEED TO CALL YOU BACK WE WOULD PAY THEM THEIR TRAVEL TIME TO COME BACK. BUT MR. MOORE IS A CONTRACTED IN PLACE THAT'S SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT. OKAY. WELL I GOTCHA.

LET'S LET'S MOVE FORWARD IN ANY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF SO I'VE SEEN NO QUESTIONS WE WILL THIS IS A RESOLUTION GOING TO COUNCIL IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO THIS? NO SEEING NO OBJECTION IN HERE CHAMBERS ARE ON LINE. THIS WILL BE APPROVED WITHOUT

[00:55:02]

OKAY. THANK YOU AGAIN. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

ALL RIGHT. LET'S WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF TIME HERE SO LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH FOLLOWING OUR AGENDA RECOMMENDATION OF A CONTRACT AWARD RFP 05202 FOR COMPUTER ASSISTED MASS APPRAISAL AND THIS IS THE CAM I SEE AND A TAX SYSTEM SOFTWARE BEFORE COMING TO HARRIS GOVERNANCE AND THREE THROUGH ALL THOSE WE'VE GOT THERE LET ME JUST GET DOWN THIS PROJECT IS A TOTAL COST SINCE IT IS COST WITH CONTINGENCY IS $3,062,043 THIS PROJECT IS FUNDED RIGHT NOW THE CURRENT OF $3,686,000 AND OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE MR. DAVE THOMAS OUR PROCUREMENT SERVICE DIRECTOR AND AGAIN THIS ALL SEEMS STRAIGHTFORWARD BUT GO AND MAKE A MOTION FOR THIS ACTION. GET SO MOVED BY HUMAN RESOURCE SECOND SECOND.

ALL RIGHT THANK YOU WILL BE UP FOR DISCUSSION AND WE HAVE MR. THOMAS HERE WHO IS OUR PROCUREMENT SERVICE DIRECTOR I'M GOING TO THANK MR. CHAIRMAN AND FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS AND STAFF AND THE PUBLIC I'M JUST THANKFUL IT'S NOT RAINING TODAY IS NOT THIS AND I'LL TRY TO MAKE THIS BRIEF FIRST THING I LIKE TO DO BEFORE I GET INTO THE BACKGROUND IS JUST THANK THE EVALUATION TEAM WHO WAS COMPRISED OF A LOT OF OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS OUR TREASURER MARY WALLS AND THE WHO ARE HERE THEY'RE HERE AND THEY SAT IN THE BACK AND THE ASSESSOR SHE'S NOT ELECTED BUT SHE'S VERY INVOLVED IN WHAT'S GOING TO GO ON WITH THIS NEW CAMERA SOFTWARE. I ALSO WANTED TO INTRODUCE CHANGE IN NEWS WITH THE ACTUAL HAIRS COMPANY. HE'S THEIR DIRECTOR OF VICE PRESIDENT FOR SALES AND MARKETING BUT HE'S HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AFTER WE GET THEM WITH US HAVE QUESTION FOR THE ACTUAL PROCESS TO TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS TO INCLUDE THE TIMELINE WE STARTED OUT 14 MONTHS AGO WE PUT OUT AN RFP IN APRIL BUT UNFORTUNATELY UNFORTUNATELY BUT UNFORTUNATELY IT TAKES A LOT OF TIME WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO BUY A NEW SOFTWARE THAT'S GOING TO CAPTURE A LOT OF THE DATA THAT WE NEED TO TRANSFER AND CAPTURE ITEMS THAT WE'RE GOING TO COLLECT TAXES ON ANYWAY. WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH INITIAL ADVERTISING AND WE DID THE RIGHT THINGS OF ADVERTISING IN AND BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES OR FOUND A WEBSITE AND VENDOR REGISTRY AND THE SECOND LINE OF BUSINESS MAGAZINE WE ACTUALLY HAD A PRE PROPOSAL MEETING WHERE WE HAD A LOT OF INTEREST IN THAT THE ACTUAL PROPOSAL WAS DUE ON MAY SHE MAY CLOSED ON MAY 20TH. WE HAD TO EXTEND A LITTLE BIT BUT WE HAD SEVEN RESPONSES SO WE HAD A LOT A LOT OF COMPETITION EVALUATION TEAM ACTUALLY MET AND REVIEWED THE THE SEVEN RESPONSES AND NARROWED IT DOWN TO THE TOP THREE AND THOSE BEING ON MINIMUM WHO'S OUR INCUMBENT CATALYSTS AND HERE'S I WENT THROUGH SOME INITIAL INTERVIEWS WITH THEM AND I WISH THE TEAM MET AGAIN AND FOLLOWING DAY IN OCTOBER AND NARROWED IT DOWN TO THE TOP TWO WHICH WERE HARES AND CATALYSTS THEY ACTUALLY WENT OUT AND GOT DEMOS FROM THOSE TWO COMPANIES AND THAT THEY MET AND MET ADDITIONALLY WITH A COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WE WORKED THROUGH SOME ISSUES AND BOTTOM LINE IS LIKE THE HAS THE ACTUAL SELECTION FOR THE SOFTWARE DURING THAT TIME WE MET AND WORKED OUT A NEGOTIATED CONTRACT.

WE GOT THAT CONTRACT READY AS SOON AS WE ALL DECIDE TO APPROVE THIS WE CAN BRING IT FORWARD TO COUNTY COUNCIL FOR THE FINAL APPROVAL AND THEN START OF THIS PROCESS IN SEPTEMBER ACTUALLY PUTTING THE SOFTWARE IMPLEMENTATION TOGETHER.

NOW IT DOES TAKE A LOT OF TIMES ABOUT 18 MONTHS TO GET EVERYTHING DONE.

THE FINAL COST IS I THINK WAS IN YOUR PACKET IS 3.3 MILLION AND SOME CHANGE WITH THE CONTINGENCY WE DO HAVE SOME POTENTIALLY MONEY IN THERE TO COVER IF WE NEED ANY TESTING FOR THE DIFFERENT MODULES THAT ARE GOING TO BE PRESENTED PRESENTED.

IF YOU WANT TO ASK WHO ELSE IS IS USING HERE AS WELL WE'VE GOT WE FOUND OUT THROUGH OUR RESEARCH ORANGE COUNTY DORCHESTER PICKENS AND RICHLAND ARE CURRENTLY USING THEIR SOFTWARE AND DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES THAT WE KNOW OF AND THEY'RE ALSO IMPLEMENTING FLORENCE AND ABBEVILLE COUNTIES NOW SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS AND THE SUBJECT TO YOUR QUESTIONS BUT WE RECOMMEND THAT WE APPROVE THIS CONTRACT AND MOVE FORWARD OR COUNTY COUNCIL ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? MR. THOMAS NO ONE ONLINE, NO ONE HERE THE CHAMBERS WE WILL THEN SHOULD YOUR NAME SIR. THAT QUESTION IS THE DEAL HERE

[01:00:06]

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ARE A IS HERE ARE THEY BOTH HERE TO COMMENT ON IT AS WELL IF THEY WANT TO. YEAH. OUR TREASURER AND OUR ASSESSOR SENDS THEM AS WELL AS A BOARD. THERE IS A TEAM OF US AT THE ASSESSOR TREASURER'S OFFICE.

EXCUSE ME I MEMORIALIZED OUR DISAGREEMENT IN HOW THE PAST 14/9 AND REALLY 18 MONTHS HAVE BEEN HANDLED PREDATED MR. MOORE JOINING THE TEAM AND. FROM MY RECOLLECTION WE DID NOT MAKE A FINAL VOTE IN THE LAST BUT WE THINK YOU'RE THIS POINT AND YOU HAVE THIS DECISION BEFORE YOU BUT DAVE COULD YOU PLEASE CORRECT IF I'M WRONG THE PRODUCT BEING USED BY THOSE COUNTIES IS NOT THE PRODUCT THAT WE WOULD BE RECEIVING IN ITS ENTIRETY.

IT'S JUST THE FORMER ASPECT IS THAT FIRMS ARE THEY USING THE COLLECTION PIECE AS WELL IN THE COUNTIES YOU MENTIONED I'M UNDERSTANDING AND ASK THAT SO IN RICHLAND COUNTY OR ANY COUNTY DORCHESTER COUNTY, PICKENS COUNTY THEY'RE ALL LIVE THE CAYMAN SYSTEM OR ARE COUNTIES CURRENTLY GOING THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HONOR IN THE TREASURY SYSTEM ALONG WITH ABBEVILLE AND SO THOSE COUNTIES ARE ALSO GOING THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION FOR THE AUDIT TREASURY SO BUT IT WILL BE THE SAME SYSTEM THAT WILL IMPLEMENTED HERE IN BEAUFORT EXCEPT THAT IF A COUNTY RECORD BASED VERSUS ON PRINT THEY APPEAR TO BE A GOOD PRODUCT. I JUST WE WERE ONLY CONSIDERING FINISHED PRODUCTS AND I DID HAVE A CONCERN THAT WE HAD DON'T KNOW WE DON'T KNOW OF AN ORGANIZATION IN SOUTH CAROLINA USING THEIR TREASURIES OFFICE PAGE WHICH IS THE LIMIT OF MY CONCERN.

DAVE MY CONCERN IS GOING TO BE THE WHOLE PRODUCT BUT WE DID NOT MAKE A VOTE IN THAT FINAL ROUND. YOU I CANNOT SUPPORT PURCHASE BECAUSE I DON'T AGREE WITH HOW THE PURCHASE DECISION WAS MADE AND THE SERIES OF STEPS THAT WENT THROUGH TO COMPLETE RFP NOT BECAUSE I CAN'T SPEAK AS TO WHETHER THE PRODUCT IS DEFICIENT OR NOT IT'S NOT EFFICIENT AND BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T SEEN A FULL FINISHED PRODUCT BUT THIS GOT TO COUNCIL AND THEY HAVE TO MAKE THE DECISION SOMETHING ELSE TO GET TO THE COMMITTEE.

I HAVE MEMORIALIZED MY COMMENTS AND I DON'T HAVE OTHERS THAN WHAT I'VE ALREADY SHARED.

YOU CAN OF COURSE YOU DO THAT THESE GOING TO BE A QUESTION FOR US, NOT FOR HIM.

SO WHAT THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR US IF THERE'S SOMETHING WE CAN DO I WAS NOT MR. ALREADY BUT MADE MY SUGGESTIONS IN IN MY MEMO DIDN'T RECEIVE A RESPONSE SO RIGHT NOW I JUST NEEDED TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WE DIDN'T WE DID NOT CHOOSE THIS PRODUCT WE DIDN'T MAKE ANY BECAUSE I THINK HOW YOU COME TO A DECISION IS BASED ON MAKING SURE YOU ARE EDUCATED WITH EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW FROM THE BEGINNING THE COUNTY YOUR ADMINISTRATION FEELS THEY HAVE THAT THEN THIS IS YOUR DECISION TO FROM THE TREASURER'S OFFICE STANDPOINT I WOULD HAVE HANDLED THIS DIFFERENTLY. I EXPRESSED THAT AND NOW YOU NEED TO DECIDE WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO BE SOLID OR NOT. THIS IS NOT MY PRODUCT WHERE A USER OF YOUR THE PRODUCT YOU SELECT OR THE MEMO YOU'RE REFERRING TO AND I APOLOGIZE IF YOU DID SEND IT TO US AND I CAN'T REMEMBER IT BUT CAN YOU SEND THAT TO US? SURE. GOOD. THANK YOU.

AND IF NOTHING CLOSELY YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU'RE AGAINST THE PRODUCT, YOU'RE JUST AGAINST THE WAY THAT WAS HANDLED, IS THAT CORRECT? ABSOLUTELY.

OKAY. I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT I HAD RESERVATIONS THAT I'M CONCERNED WHETHER THIS IS GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL. BUT THIS IS NOT MY POSITION.

I EXPRESSED MY CONCERN AND IT WAS MENTIONED THAT WE WERE IN AGREEMENT A HIGH MENTIONED I

[01:05:01]

THEY VOTED TO MOVE FORWARD BUT THE OTHER ENTITIES THAT ARE PART OF THE PROCESS IN THE EVALUATION TEAM VOTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH HARRIS SO WE'RE RIGHT IN THAT RIGHT SO OKAY FOR US TO SELECT IT BASED THE EVALUATION PROCESS THE CRITERIA WE HAD ENOUGH MEMBERS TO MOVE FORWARD. WAS THERE A PERSON IN HER DEPARTMENT ON THAT TEAM? YES, SIR. AND THAT COULD THAT PERSON VOTE YES NO.

YES IT IS IS THE EVALUATION IS DETERMINED BY POINTS AND YOU ADD ALL THE POINTS HARRIS CAME OUT ON TOP AND THAT'S WHO WE ALWAYS ADDED UP ALL THE POINTS. WAS THERE ANOTHER MEETING AFTERWARDS DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ALL OF THOSE MEMBERS? THERE WAS A MEETING WITH EVERYBODY WE HAD THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND THEN WE CAME BACK AND WAS A MEETING OF THE TEAM. WE CAME BACK TOGETHER.

WE ALL DECIDED ASKED THEM IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS WHERE WE NEEDED TO MOVE FORWARD OR NOT.

EVERYBODY NOT TO MOVE FORWARD AND NOBODY SAID ANYTHING. MR. CHAIRMAN, I AM FOLLOWING MR. CUNNINGHAM'S COMMENTS IS STILL I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT THE THREE ENTITIES AND SEVERAL YEARS AGO THERE WAS ONE ENTITY TOO IN ORDER TREASURE AND IT WAS THIS THAT DID NOT JUST BECAUSE OF WHO RAISED SO IF WE HAVE BEEN PROBLEMATIC FOR THE SYSTEM OR WHATEVER WE DO THE I MEAN LIKE APPLES I MEAN QUESTION COGNITION CRYSTAL WATER AND SOMEBODY LIKE DUPONT THAT'S CORRECT. YOU KNOW THIS IS WAR SO AND I'M VOTING ON WILL VOTE FOR DUPONT ALL DAY LONG BUT IF YOU GET CRYSTAL YES, SIR.

I'M SORRY THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE USERS WILL BE SATISFIED WITH THE COMMENTS.

I WILL MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS ON IT. EVERYBODY GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE AND IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE VOTE AND ROUND UP ALL THE SCORING IT CAME OUT OF HARRIS BEING ON TOP AND KEEP IN MIND HARRIS AND ALL MENEM IS WHO WE'RE CURRENTLY USING.

AMENTUM IS THE SISTER COMPANY OF HARRIS SO THEY KNOW EACH OTHER.

IN FACT SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR HARRIS WORK FOR R.M. NOW VISE VERSA BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY AS FAR AS THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS WE FOLLOW THE RULES WE GAVE EVERYBODY A CHANCE TO VOTE AND AT ALL THE VALUE EVALUATORS IT CAME OUT HARRIS BEING ON TOP WE ALL WERE IN THE SAME DISCUSSION, THE SAME ROOM WE ALL DECIDED TO MOVE FORWARD, ALLOW PURCHASING AND IT AND LEGAL COUNSEL TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE COMPANY WHO WAS HARRIS WE NEGOTIATED THE PRICE DOWN TO THE TWO WITHIN OUR BUDGET SO WE CAN MOVE THIS FORWARD.

SO OTHER THAN THAT I'M STUBBORN TO YOUR QUESTIONS IF YOU WANT I FEEL I DON'T WANT TO AWARD THAT'S FINE. WE CAN MOVE ON BUT THE ONLY OTHER OPTIONS WE HAVE IS TO GO BACK AWARDED ON ALUMINUM AND THEN WHAT WOULD YOUR REASONING BE FOR THAT BOTH OF YOU HERE AND THEN ARE YOU THERE FOR ME? RIGHT. OKAY.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL HAVE THE INFORMATION IS VERY TRANSPARENT AND THAT WE FOLLOW THE PROCUREMENT RULES TO MAKE SURE FOR ME 63 INSTITUTES AND IF THE TREASURY'S NOT HAPPY DON'T HAVE TO GO WITH HER MODULE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD CAN YOU AND COUNCILMAN GLOVER WE'RE A COUNTY. WE NEED TO BE ON THE SAME SYSTEM.

YES, WE MADE THE DECISION THAT AFTER OVER A YEAR AND A HALF OF VERY SLOW IF ANY PROGRESS THAT WE DID NOT AGREE WITH HOW THE PROCESS WAS HANDLED AND WHILE IT SEEMS EVERY I'M SURE EVERY RULE WAS FOLLOWED I DIDN'T APPRECIATE LEARNING THE PRODUCT WAS INCOMPLETE THREE THREE ITERATION IS INTO THE SELECTION PROCESS THERE WERE THINGS LIKE I SAID THAT WE WOULD HAVE DONE DIFFERENTLY AND BECAUSE OF THAT WE DID NOT SCORE THIS PROVIDER OR THE OTHER ONES ACTUALLY IN THAT ROUND WE NEED A NEW SOFTWARE. SO WHILE I DON'T AGREE WITH THE PROCESS AND I, I WOULD NOT PROBABLY HAVE SELECTED THIS FINALIST WE NEED A UNIFIED AND WE DO NEED A REPLACEMENT SOFTWARE FOR WHAT WE HAVE. WE KNOW YOU ASKED FOR OUR

[01:10:01]

I MEAN WE ALREADY WITHIN 18 MONTHS SO I DON'T SEE ANOTHER MONTH DELAY ENOUGH JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S DONE PROPERLY AND IT VERY WELL MIGHT BE 100% ABOVE AH THAT'S GOOD I JUST DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANY I I WANT TO MAKE THE MOTION WE MOVE IT OR THE REASON FOR US WILL GET ALL INFORMATION SO EVERYBODY IS CLEARED TO MOVE FORWARD THE RIGHT PRETEXTS SO IF THERE IS A SECOND THEN SO BE IT IF NOT THE SECOND ON THAT FIRST BUT HANG ON I NEED A SECOND AND MR. CUNNINGHAM SAID THIS SECOND ACCESS THE SECOND SO NOW THAT IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION MR..

ROBERT CUNNINGHAM I WOULD BEGIN WITH FOR THIS MOTION MOVING FORWARD AND IN THE MEANTIME THERE'S TIME FOR THE ALL OF THE PLAYERS TO GET TOGETHER BEFORE WE MAKE A FINAL DECISION BUT IT WILL BE OUT OF COMMITTEE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IN ORDER TO GET THE PRODUCT HERE IS GOING TO TAKE MONTHS OR SO. SO YOU KNOW WE CAN MOVE THIS FORWARD THEN JUST THIS TIME THAT WE HAVE TO KEEP IT IN BUT IT CAN STILL BE AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL.

LET ME KNOW TIME IS AS YOU SAY SOMETHING IS IT SOMETHING CAN BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE OR IS IT SOMETHING CLOSE TO 3 MILLION OF THAT THAT MEANS THAT EVERYBODY ELSE WILL GET A FULL COUNCIL ASSESSMENT. ALL RIGHT.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION WE WILL DELAY THIS. YES.

YOU SAY THAT I LISTENED TO YOUR DOCTOR'S DIAGNOSIS BEFORE YOU CALL.

OF COURSE MS. WOULD ANSWER THAT SHE SHE HAS SOME CONCERNS, SOME THINGS YOU WOULD HAVE DONE.

I LIKE TO HEAR HER POSITION AS WELL. SHE WOULD HAVE DONE DIFFERENT FROM THE PROCESS THAT THAT BILL THAT THEY WENT THROUGH AND I'D LIKE TO HEAR THAT VERBALLY FROM HER. OKAY. LOOKING AT THAT THAT BEING NOW, IS THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION? YEAH. BEFORE BEFORE WE GO SHE SHE MADE THE STATEMENT THAT SHE WOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING DIFFERENT SOME THINGS DIFFERENT I'M AS TO EXACTLY WHAT THAT IS I'D LIKE TO HEAR WE'RE ALREADY OVER OUR TIME BUT THAT'S THAT'S YOU DON'T HAVE DISCUSSION WITH MS. WALLS YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT TODAY THAT'S WHAT GOT TO REALIZE I'M. HAPPY TO BRING IN MY MEMO IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO COME TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE DO YOU HAVE A DATE ON THAT MEMO SO I WILL I WILL PROVIDE IT TO YOU. THAT'S ONE. ALL RIGHT.

OCTOBER 18TH, 2024 THE SUBJECT IS A TAX SOFTWARE RFP PLEASE FIND YOU INCREASE MY BRIGHTNESS PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED THE SCORING SHEETS FOR THE THIRD ROUND OF THE TAX SOFTWARE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS RFP PROCESS AMONG THE MANY TECHNOLOGIES AND SOFTWARE BY THE COUNTY THE TAMAR TAX SOFTWARE IS UNIQUE IN THAT IT AFFECTS IT APPLIES TO EVERY SINGLE TAXPAYING CITIZEN IN THE COUNTY AND IS RELIED UPON ENTIRELY FOR THE GENERATION COLLECTION AND RECORDING OF THE VAST MAJORITY GOVERNMENT REVENUE IN FOR COUNTY CONSIDERING THIS DOLLAR PRICE TAG THE TAXPAYER TIME AND RESOURCES THAT WILL BE SPENT ON EXECUTING THIS PROJECT AND THE LENGTHY DURATION THE CONTRACT THE INTENT OF THIS LETTER IS TO

[01:15:02]

IT IS NOT TO SELECT ONE PARTICULAR VENDOR OVER ANOTHER IT IS WE IT WAS EXPRESSED MULTIPLE OCCASIONS THAT WE WANT A FINISHED PRODUCT. WE NOT WANT TO BE GUINEA PIGS AND I WAS SHOCKED TO FIND OUT THAT THIS WE DID NOT WE WERE NOT ENTERTAINING FINISHED PRODUCTS MOVING FORWARD WITH EITHER COMMITS THE COUNTY TO A PROMISE NOT A PRODUCT A PROMISE TO DELIVER A PRODUCT THAT MAY BE COMPLETED ON TIME MAY MEET NEEDS AND MAY FUNCTION EFFECTIVELY FOR OUR CITIZENS IS NOT WHAT THE COUNTY SHOULD SPEND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON IF THESE PROMISES NOT COME TO FRUITION I MUST ASSUME THE COUNTY WILL BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW THE CONTRACT HAVING ASSISTED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOFTWARE PRODUCTS IS A GRAVE RISK THAT SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN LIGHTLY EVEN IN A SEAMLESS PROCESS WITH COMPLETELY DEVELOPED PRODUCTS. THIS PROJECT WILL REQUIRE HUNDREDS OF HOURS OF TAXPAYER FUNDED TIME AND RESOURCES AS IT SHOULD BE EXPECTED THAT MORE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR AN INCOMPLETE PRODUCT THAT AT ITS CONCLUSION MAY RESULT IN SOMETHING THAT SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK FOR BEFORE COUNTY MAY NOT FOR SURE DOESN'T I AM AND WILL ALWAYS BE COMMITTED TO THE SUCCESS OF OUR TAXPAYERS AND MY TEAM. IT IS FOR THIS REASON THAT I CANNOT NOT SUBMIT MY TEAM TO THE UNKNOWN REQUIREMENTS AND DIRECTION THAT AN INCOMPLETE PRODUCT ENTAILS NEITHER THE COUNTY'S TWO FINALISTS HAVE COMPLETED PRODUCTS IN BOTH FIELDS CLEARLY DISCLOSED THIS IN THEIR PROPOSALS. AS YOU NOTED IN A RECENT THERE WERE NOTICEABLE SCORING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EACH ROUND OF SELECTIONS.

THE SCORING SHEETS DID NOT CHANGE BETWEEN EACH ROUND OF SELECTIONS.

YOU KNOW WHAT YOU WERE GRADED ON IN THE FIRST ROUND WAS THE EXACT SAME CRITERIA EVERY SINGLE ONE. ONE OF THOSE CRITERIA WAS DO THEY SERVE AS SOUTH CAROLINA JURISDICTION? FOR OUR PRODUCT THE IS NO. HOW CAN I ANSWER THAT DIFFERENTLY? THREE TIMES OVER. THE CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE NOT CHANGED. I REQUESTED THAT EACH PROPOSER SHOW US WHERE WAS COMMUNICATED IN THEIR INITIAL PROPOSALS AND NEITHER HAVE DONE SO. THE PROPOSERS DID NOT SHARE WITH THE SELECTION COMMITTEE THAT SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF THE PRODUCTS WERE STILL IN UNTIL THE SECOND AND THIRD ROUNDS. THE GOAL OF THE RFP IS NOT TO SELECT THE PROPOSER THAT HAD THE MOST FINISHED PRODUCT. THE RFP PROJECT PURPOSE IN QUOTES IS TO PURCHASE A STATE OF THE ART COMMERCIAL OFF THE SHELF SYSTEM.

AT NO TIME DID WE INTERPRET OUR TEAM DID WE INTERPRET THIS TO MEAN AN INCOMPLETE.

IN FACT, WHILE PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS REPEATEDLY EXPRESSED NEED TO SELECT A PRODUCT BEING USED IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND AVOID BEING A BETA SITUATION, THE RFP SOLICITATION REQUIREMENT GOES ON TO STATE PROPOSALS SHOULD BE COMPLETE AND CAREFULLY WORDED AND MUST CONVEY ALL OF THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BY THE COUNTY HAD THE FINALIST PROPOSALS THAT THE PRODUCTS WERE IN COMPLETE. THE SCORING WOULD HAVE CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY IN DIFFERENT PROPOSERS MOVING FORWARD TO THE SECOND ROUND AND POTENTIALLY THE TWO CURRENT FINALISTS.

THE COUNTY BEEN AWARE FOR QUITE SOME TIME THAT OUR CURRENT SOFTWARE IS OLD AND IN NEED OF REPLACEMENT. THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN FOR 2025 APPROVED BY ME FOR COUNTY APPEARED PLANNED FOR AN UPGRADE OF OUR CURRENT SOFTWARE.

IN A JANUARY 2024 MEETING WHICH WAS CALLED TO DISCUSS THIS, IT WAS LATER DETERMINED THAT AN UPGRADE WOULD NOT BE PERFORMED BUT INSTEAD COUNTY WOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH AN RFP.

OUR TEAM WAS OPEN TO RFP PROCESS BUT EXPRESSED CONCERN OVER THE MANNER WHICH IT WAS BEING EXECUTED. THERE IS NO CLEAR LEADER OF THE PROJECT A VERY SHORT IMPLEMENTATION DEADLINE AND A TIMELINE THAT WAS UNACHIEVABLE IF A THOROUGH PROCESS WAS TO BE HAD. ADDITIONALLY THE IDENTIFIED PROJECT LEADER NEVER ATTENDED PARTICIPATED IN ANY SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS EXCEPT FOR THE INITIAL .

AS AN INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR HIS ROLE WAS TEMPORARY AND AT ITS CONCLUSION HE WOULD HAVE NO INTERACTION OR INVOLVEMENT WITH THIS PROJECT WITH TEAMS AFFECTED.

BELOW IS THE TIMELINE MENTIONED WHICH ULTIMATELY UNACHIEVABLE. INCLUDED A SCREENSHOT THAT WAS SHARED. DESPITE THESE CONCERNS THE COMMITTEE WAS EMAILED A COPY OF CHARLESTON COUNTY'S RFP DOCUMENTS TO BE ADAPTED FOR BEFORE COUNTY'S NEEDS AND A FEW WEEKS NOTICE TO DO SO. THE SELECTION COMMITTEE IS MADE UP OF FOUR DEPARTMENTS ASSESSOR'S OFFICE AUDITOR'S TREASURER'S OFFICE AND IT DEPARTMENT.

THERE HAVE BEEN TWO ROUNDS OF SCORING THUS FAR AT THE DATE OF THAT LETTER BUT THIS LETTER

[01:20:03]

WE ASK THAT CONSISTENCY BE MAINTAINED. THEY SUBMIT SCORES AS THEY HAVE IN EACH OF THE PRIOR ROUNDS. THEY CAN DECIDES TO PROCEED WITH AWARDING A CONTRACT DESPITE THE ABOVE CONCERNS, OUR TEAM IS FACED WITH ONLY INCOMPLETE PRODUCTS TO CHOOSE FROM BECAUSE. AS DAVE MENTIONED, THAT IS THE FINAL LIST.

OKAY. OKAY AND READING THE LAST SENTENCE THAT YOU ASKED ME TO READ IT THE TREASURER'S OFFICE WOULD SELECT CATALYSTS. HOWEVER OUR DESIRED SOLUTION IS TO RESTART THE RFP PROCESS WITH THE ABOVE ISSUES ADDRESSED AND RECTIFIED.

OR TO UPDATE OUR CURRENT SOFTWARE. THANK YOU, JIM.

OKAY. AND AS WELL AS QUICKLY START SAYING TEN 2424.

SURE. THAT WAS AFTER IS WHEN YOU JANUARY OF 2018 ETC. IS FROM OCTOBER 28TH 2024. I WILL EMAIL YOU ALL A COPY. OUR INITIAL MEETING WAS JANUARY 2024 AND SO THAT WAS A YEAR AND A AGO AND THEN THIS WAS FROM TEN MONTHS AGO.

OKAY, THANK YOU. WE GET THE ASSESSOR AND THE AUDITOR BECAUSE THEY'RE VERY FIRM. THIS IS WHAT THEY WENT THROUGH. THAT SEEMS TO BE VERY VERY IMPORTANT. WE DO WANT TO HEAR FROM EVERYBODY THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD. BUT THANK YOU ALL FOR ALLOWING ME TO COME UP AND SAY A FEW FEW COMMENTS. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT THE RFP PROCESS OR THE ENTIRE PROCESS DID TAKE 18 MONTHS AND IN MY PERSPECTIVE THAT'S ONE IN CLOSE TO OUR REASSESSMENT THAT WE ARE ABOUT TO ENGAGE IN IN ORDER TO GET THIS SOFTWARE UP AND GOING NOT THAT WE'RE RUSHING BECAUSE THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT INITIALLY IS THAT WE GET A GOOD PRODUCT THAT'S GOING TO LAST ALMOST YEARS THE ONE THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY WAS IMPLEMENTED IN 2006 OR 2008 BETWEEN THAT TIMEFRAME AND WE'RE STILL HERE US BUT THE CONCERN WITH THE CURRENT PRODUCT THAT WE HAVE THAT IS SHELF LIFE IS COME TO AN END IS IT STAND ALONE EACH ONE OF THE TERMINALS AND IT IS NOT A COMPLETE PRODUCT CHARLESTON COUNTY LET ME GO BACKWARDS. THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAD ONCE WAS THE PREMIER OR THE DOMINANT RUNNER IN THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA WENT NOW THE OTHER COUNTIES MOVED AWAY FROM THAT. OUR CURRENT PRODUCT WE'RE DOWN TO BEAUFORT IN CHARLESTON.

CHARLESTON IS CURRENTLY GOING THROUGH THEIR IMPLEMENTATION. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT PROCESS NOT A COMPLETE PRODUCT AS WELL. THE RFP COMMENT ON THE RFP PROCESS FROM MY PERSPECTIVE SAT IN THOSE MEETINGS I SCORED I MADE A EFFORT PARTICIPATE AS WELL AS MY TWO ELECTED OFFICIALS. THEY MADE A PROCESS THAT THEY PARTICIPATED AS WELL BUT NOT ALL MEMBERS SCORED WHEN WE NEEDED SCORES.

THERE WERE THERE WERE ZERO SCORES GIVEN FOR WHATEVER REASON EVEN IF IT WAS SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS COST EFFECTIVENESS. IT WAS A ZERO SCORE.

SO THAT'S NOT A FORM OF PARTICIPATION TO THE LADIES TO SAY THAT THEY'RE ALL INCOMPLETE. WELL, I THINK I DISAGREE WITH THAT.

FLORENCE COUNTY COUNTY'S IMPLEMENTABLE TO IMPLEMENT OR TO IMPLEMENT THEY HAVE AN ENTIRE SUITE APART THEIR PRODUCT EVEN COVERS A PORTION IS SIMILAR MUNIS.

SO WHAT THEY BOUGHT THEIR WHOLE PACKAGE NOW I'M NOT HERE CHEERLEADING HARRIS THAT WAS NOT BE HONEST WITH YOU THAT WAS NOT MY FIRST CHOICE AND BUT I AM HERE TO SAY THAT THE RFP PROCESS IN MY OPINION WAS DONE EFFECTIVELY. IT WAS DONE IT WAS DONE THE PROPER STAGES. NOW PARTICIPATING OR NOT PARTICIPATING I CAN'T COMMENT ON IT I KNOW WHAT THE CENSUS DID WITH REGARDS TO THE BALLOT .

THERE WAS THERE WAS SOME MISCOMMUNICATION WITH REGARD A NUMBER OF WHO WOULD WANT TO SCORE IN THE END WAS GOING TO BE THE TOP THREE USERS THE AUDITOR ASSESSOR, THE TREASURER . BUT COME TO FIND OUT THAT IT WAS I.T. THAT WAS GOING TO SCORE WITH THIS WITH US AS. WELL. SO THERE WERE FOUR AT THAT POINT PROCUREMENT I'M NOT SURE IF YOU OR NOT BUT I'M NOT REMEMBER THIS TIME IT'S IT'S JUST BEEN. I ASK THAT WHILE YOU ARE INVESTIGATING ALLOW IT TO CONTINUE FORWARD BECAUSE 18 MONTHS HAS PASSED 18 MONTHS THAT WE'RE GOING INTO OUR REASSESSMENT YEARS AND IT IS KNOWN BY THE COMMITTEE MEMBER OR THE MEMBERS OF THIS TEAM THAT IF THIS BLEED OVER INTO THE REASSESSMENT PERIOD THIS WILL BE DELAYED EVEN FURTHER.

THIS PRODUCT THAT WE HAVE IS NOT SUPPORTED IN THE WAY IT SHOULD BE.

THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF BETWEEN THE THREE DIFFERENT OPINIONS ABOUT WHICH

[01:25:05]

BUT WE WANT TO GET WHAT WE NEED BECAUSE WE ALL HAD A CHANCE TO VOTE AND THAT'S ALL HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. SANDERS THANK YOU, SIR.

ASSESSOR AND YOU CAN GET AFTERNOON I THINK IT WAS MOST IMPORTANT IN A LOT OF THINGS THAT EVERY EVERYTHING THAT WE SAID WAS CORRECT IS WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE OF RECENT PROBLEMS AND STUFF GOING ON THAT WE FOUND THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS TO THE TEE.

THAT'S WHAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE AND THAT'S WHAT WE DID. WE FOLLOWED IT STEP BY STEP BY STEP ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO ENSURE THAT THERE WAS NOT GOING TO BE ANY QUESTIONS OF , YOU KNOW, IS THIS THE RIGHT THING? IS THIS THE WRONG THING OR? YOU KNOW, OTHER VENDORS THAT YOU CHOSE AND COME BACK AND SAY OH, WHY WAS IT I CHOSE IT AND WE COULDN'T DO IT.

BUT THE PROOF IS ALL THERE IN THE PLACE VOTED FOR IT. IT'S ALL THERE.

THE PROGRAM THAT WE NOW LIKE YOU SAID IS ANCIENT. I GOT OVER 30 OPEN CASES THAT THEY CAN'T SOLVE INCLUDE TWO LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORTS I CAN'T EVEN DO INSIDE THE SYSTEM AND OTHER PROBLEMS WE'RE HAVING ALONG WITH THAT THERE'S A LOT OF THE ISSUES WE ASKED THEM IF THEY COULD FIX. THEY SAID WELL THEY WOULDN'T FIX THE CURRENT VENDOR SAID THEY COULDN'T FIX WE WOULD JUST HAVE TO DO IT. OTHER COLLEAGUES DID IT.

I SAID WELL, YOU KNOW, EVERY COUNTY IS DIFFERENT. WE TRIED TO DO STUFF YOU KNOW HOW OUR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WHAT WE NEED TO DO FOR Y'ALL TO GET WORK DONE.

SO I THINK IF YOU WANT TO LOOK INTO IT YOU COULD BUT AS A RESULT YOU PROBABLY SHOULD MOVE THIS FORWARD BECAUSE WE THE PROCESS WE ALL DO IT WE ALL DO WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO AND NOW YOU HAVE A PERSON THAT'S A WINNER BUT NOW GOING TO SAY WELL WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AGAIN AFTER WE JUST FOUND THE PROCESS IT DOESN'T. TO ME IT JUST LIKE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE AND OPENS UP THE COUNTY FOR EVEN MORE ISSUES OR MORE PROBLEMS BECAUSE IF WE DID EVERYTHING WAS SUPPOSED TO DO WE ENDED UP HERE WITH HARRIS NOW WE'RE SAYING HEY, WE'RE NOT SURE IF WE WANT HARRIS BUT I KNOW NOBODY SAID SHE VOTED FOR HIM.

I VOTED FOR HIM. I THINK IT'S A GOOD PRODUCT I LIKE ABOUT HIM IS NOT EVERYTHING MAY BE COMPLETE BUT WE CAN BUILD IT OUT TO OURSELVES.

WE CAN GET IT HOW WE WANT. SO MODULE WORKS BEST FOR OUR OFFICE WITH CURRENT SYSTEM WE GOT NOW WHEN THOSE THAT WERE HERE AND VOTED ON IT IT WASN'T COMPLETE BECAUSE I WAS EMBEDDED I WAS A BETA PROGRAM IN THAT SYSTEM SO IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT WE HAD TO DO THIS AND WALK FORWARD WITH IT. YES, WE'RE BEEN GREAT. WE HAD SOMETHING OFF THE SHELF RIGHT THE OFF THE SHELF ONES WERE SUPPORTING EVERYBODY IN EVERY NEED AND WE WERE THE BEST ON THE MARKET. SO WE WENT WITH WHAT WE COULD TO FIND IT WAS THE BEST IN THE MARKET TO HELP ALL THAT'S WHAT WE PICK. ALL RIGHT.

I'M GOING TO CALL THE QUESTION THE ORDER WHICH IS WHETHER WE DEFER THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THAT ONE. SO SIR.

YES, SIR. COMMITTEE VICE-CHAIR CUNNINGHAM .

YES. COUNCILMEMBER TAVERNER. YES.

COUNCILMEMBER PASSING IT YOU'RE ON MUTE JOE. SORRY.

HIT IT. THOUGHT I DID. NO.

COUNCILMEMBER MCGOWAN YOUR NAME? MS. MCCALLUM.

I THINK YOU SAID NO. I DID SAY NO THANKS. OKAY.

COUNCILMEMBER GLOVER KNOW CHAIR HOWARD NO. COUNCILMEMBER DODSON NO.

COUNCILMEMBER BROWN YES. COMMITTEE CHAIR LAWSON NO. THE MOTION FAILS.

ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO BRING THE ORIGINAL MOTION TO 2 TO 2 CALLS.

WELL, CALL THAT QUESTION TWO ORDERED AND THIS IS TO MOVE IT TO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING FOR A VOTE. AND AGAIN IN THE MEANTIME, WE'RE HOPING THAT IF THIS DOES PASS THAT THERE'LL BE SOME RESOLUTION OR SOMETHING THAT WORKS OUT A MORE DISCUSSION.

BUT SO AGAIN, THE QUESTION OF OF PASSING THIS AND SENDING IT TO COUNCIL FOR A A RESOLUTION PLEASE REITERATE TO THE REST OF THE COUNCIL HOW MANY VOTES IT'LL TAKE ON IT IS IT'S A RESOLUTION JUST BE ONE MAJORITY VOTE ON THE NEXT COUNCIL ONE VOTE.

[01:30:05]

CHAIR HOWARD YES TO ME. COUNCILMEMBER PASSING IT YES. COUNCILMEMBER MCGOWAN YES.

COUNCILMEMBER GLOVER VICE-CHAIR TAVERNER YES. COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON YES.

COUNCILMEMBER BROWN YES. COMMITTEE CHAIR LAWSON. LAWSON YES.

OCEAN PASSES. THANK YOU. AND LET'S MOVE ON THEN TO OUR FINAL ITEM AND THIS IS REAPPOINTMENT OF MR. RICH SELLS AND JAMES STARNES TO THE AIRPORTS BOARD FOR A TWO YEAR TERM WITH AN EXPIRATION DATE AUGUST 2027.

THANK YOU FOR TAKING THIS VOTE AT THE SAME TIME UNLESS SOMEONE HAS OBJECTION BECAUSE THEY ARE SECOND PLACE. THANK YOU. AND AGAIN WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE BOTH OF THESE WITHOUT OBJECTION. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION SEEING NO OBJECTION HAS BEEN APPROVED AND THERE'S NOTHING ELSE THAT COMES OUT OF ITS ANNOUNCEMENT.

WE ARE ADJOURNED OR OR THREE WAY BUT BEFORE WE THAT THREE 2345 31 DO YOU KNOW

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.